[Federal Register: October 7, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 194)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 62191-62255]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07oc10-11]
[[Page 62191]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia); Final Rule
[[Page 62192]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R8-ES-2009-0038]
[MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AW22
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical
Habitat for Navarretia fossalis (Spreading Navarretia)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate
final revised critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis (spreading
navarretia) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. In
total, approximately 6,720 acres (ac) (2,720 hectares (ha)) of habitat
in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Diego Counties, California, fall
within the boundaries of the critical habitat designation. This final
rule constitutes an overall increase of approximately 6,068 ac (2,456
ha) from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on November 8, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule and the associated economic analysis are
available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and http://
www.fws.gov/carlsbad/. Comments and materials received, as well as
supporting documentation used in preparing this final rule are
available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA
92011; telephone 760-431-9440; facsimile 760-431-5901.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, 6010
Hidden Valley Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011 (telephone 760-431-
9440; facsimile 760-431-5901). If you use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS)
at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the development of the revised designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), in this final rule. For more
information on the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of N. fossalis, refer
to the final listing rule published in the Federal Register (FR) on
October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975), the final designation of critical
habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal Register on October
18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), the proposed revised designation of critical
habitat published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR
27588), and the document announcing the availability of the draft
economic analysis (DEA) published in the Federal Register on April 15,
2010 (75 FR 19575). Additionally, information on this species can be
found in the Recovery Plan for the Vernal Pools of Southern California
(Recovery Plan) finalized on September 3, 1998 (Service 1998).
New Information on Subspecies' Description, Life History, Ecology,
Habitat, and Range
We did not receive any new information pertaining to the
description, life history, or ecology of Navarretia fossalis following
the 2009 proposed rule to revise critical habitat (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009). However, the following paragraphs discuss new information
that we received regarding the species' habitat, geographic range and
status, and the areas needed for N. fossalis conservation.
Habitat
Navarretia fossalis habitat was discussed in detail in the proposed
revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). One
commenter provided information during the first public comment period
on the proposed rule, noting several habitat characteristics they felt
we should have discussed (see Comment 15 below); therefore, we are
providing additional discussion and clarification here. Navarretia
fossalis grows in vernal pool habitat, seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat (a habitat that includes alkali playa, alkali scrub,
alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland communities), and
irrigation ditches and detention basins (Bramlet 1993a, pp. 10, 14, 21-
23; Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127; Spencer 1997, pp. 8, 13).
Within alkali annual grasslands, this species is restricted to small
vernal pools or other depressions (Bramlet 2009, p. 3). Researchers
have also described ``riverine pools'' where N. fossalis occurs as
having unique floristic elements, such as Trichocoronis wrightii var.
wrightii (limestone bugheal or Wright's trichocoronis); N. fossalis and
T. wrightii are only known to co-occur in the San Jacinto River
(Bramlet 2009, p. 7). Suitability of hydrological conditions for the
germination of this species varies on an annual basis; therefore, N.
fossalis can be undetectable for a number of years and the number of
plants varies depending on the timing, duration, and extent of ponding
(Bramlet 2009, p. 3). For more habitat information, please see the
Habitat section in the proposed revised critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas
In the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009), we discussed the areas that represent core habitat areas and
satellite habitat areas for Navarretia fossalis. During the first
public comment period, one peer reviewer expressed concern regarding
our use of the word ``core'' and the biological connotation of such
terminology. The terms ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat
area'' are descriptive terms defined for the purpose of this rulemaking
and are not intended to be synonymous with similar terms used in other
documents, or to describe a population distribution. We defined these
terms in the proposed revised critical habitat designation published in
the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588). Core habitat is
defined as areas that contain the highest concentrations of N. fossalis
and the largest contiguous blocks of habitat for this species.
Satellite areas are defined as habitat areas that support occurrences
that are smaller than those supported by the ``core habitat areas,''
but provide the means to significantly contribute to the recovery of N.
fossalis (for further discussion of this issue see Comment 4 in the
Summary of Comments and Recommendations section and our response). For
more information on ``core habitat area'' and ``satellite habitat
area,'' please see the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and
Satellite Habitat Areas section in the proposed revised critical
habitat designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009
(74 FR 27588).
Previous Federal Actions
On October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), we published our final
designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. On December
19, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a complaint in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California challenging
our
[[Page 62193]]
designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia
(Center for Biological Diversity v. United States Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., Case No. 07-CV-02379-W-NLS). This lawsuit challenged
the validity of the information and reasoning we used to exclude areas
from the 2005 critical habitat designation for N. fossalis. On July 25,
2008, we reached a settlement agreement in which we agreed to submit a
proposed revised critical habitat designation for N. fossalis to the
Federal Register for publication by May 29, 2009, and a final revised
critical habitat designation for publication by May 28, 2010. By order
dated January 21, 2010, the district court approved a modification to
the settlement agreement that extends to September 30, 2010, the
deadline for submission of a final revised critical habitat designation
to the Federal Register. The proposed revised critical habitat
designation published in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR
27588).
Summary of Changes From the Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous
Critical Habitat Designation
The areas designated as critical habitat in this final rule
constitute a revision of the critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
we designated on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). For this revised
rulemaking process we:
(1) Refined the primary constituent elements (PCEs) to more
accurately define the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis;
(2) Revised criteria to more accurately identify critical habitat;
(3) Improved mapping methodology to more accurately define critical
habitat boundaries and better represent areas that contain PCEs;
(4) Evaluated areas considered for exclusion from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, including identifying
whether or not areas are conserved and managed for the benefit of N.
fossalis;
(5) Reanalyzed the economic impacts to identify baseline and
incremental costs associated with critical habitat designation; and
(6) Added, subtracted, and revised areas that do or do not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Table 1 provides an overview of the
differences between critical habitat rules for N. fossalis at the unit
level.
Table 1. Changes between the October 18, 2005, critical habitat designation; the June 10, 2009, proposed critical habitat designation; the April 15,
2010, changes to the June 10, 2009 proposal (availability of the DEA); and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
April 2010 changes to
Critical habitat unit in this final October 2005 critical June 2009 proposed proposed revised September 2010
rule County habitat designation revised critical critical habitat revised critical
habitat designation designation habitat designation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Los Angeles 326 ac 161 ac 176 ac 176 ac
Management Area (132 ha).............. (65 ha).............. (71 ha).............. (71 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal San Diego 22 ac 9 ac 9 ac 9 ac
Mesa Management Area (9 ha)................ (4 ha)............... (4 ha)............... (4 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
;Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal San Diego 0 ac 110 ac 108 ac 103 ac
Mesa Management Area (0 ha)................ (45 ha).............. (44 ha).............. (42 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland San Diego 159 ac 206 ac 206 ac 206 ac
Management Area (64 ha)............... (83 ha).............. (83 ha).............. (83 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal San Diego 145 ac 711 ac 753 ac 749 ac
Mesa Management Area (59 ha)............... (288 ha)............. (305 ha)............. (303 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area Riverside 0 ac 5,675 ac 6,356 ac 5,477 ac
(0 ha)................ (2,297 ha)........... (2,572 ha)........... (2,217 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Totals* 652 ac 6,872 ac 7,608 ac 6,720 ac
(264 ha).............. (2,781 ha)........... (3,079 ha)........... (2,720 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
In 2005, we designated approximately 652 ac (264 ha) as critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis in 4 units with 10 subunits (70 FR
60658; October 18, 2005). In our 2009 proposed revised critical
habitat, we proposed approximately 6,872 ac (2,781 ha) as critical
habitat in 6 units with 22 subunits (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009). In
response to information received as public comments on our 2009
proposed revised critical habitat, we changed the 2009 proposed revised
rule to propose approximately 7,608 ac (3,079 ha) as critical habitat
in 6 units with 23 subunits (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). In this
revised critical habitat rule, we are designating approximately 6,720
ac (2,720 ha) as critical habitat in 6 units with 19 subunits,
reflecting exclusion of approximately 871 ac (353 ha) in all or
portions of 2 units (3 subunits) based on consideration of relevant
impacts under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Lands that contain the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis on Marine Corps Air Station
[[Page 62194]]
(MCAS) Miramar and Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton are exempt
from this critical habitat designation based on section 4(a)(3)(B) of
the Act. All lands designated as critical habitat in this revised rule
were included in the 2009 proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588) or the
document that made available the DEA (75 FR 19575). Table 2 provides
detailed information about differences between the 2005 final critical
habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat
designation, and this revised critical habitat designation for N.
fossalis. The changes between the 2005 final designation, the 2009
proposed revisions, and this final designation are described below.
Table 2. A comparison of the areas identified as containing the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis in
the 2005 critical habitat designation, the 2009 proposed revised critical habitat designation, and this revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2005 Critical Habitat Designation 2009 Proposed Revised Critical 2010 Revised Critical Habitat
---------------------------------------- Habitat Designation
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location* Area Containing Area Containing Area Containing
Subunit Essential Subunit Essential Subunit Essential
Features Features Features
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cruzan Mesa 1A 294 ac 1A 129 ac 1A 156 ac
(119 ha).......... (52 ha)........... (63 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plum Canyon 1B 32 ac 1B 32 ac 1B 20 ac
(13 ha)........... (13 ha)........... (8 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCB Camp Pendleton 4(a)(3) exemption 67 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 145 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 145 ac
(27 ha)........... (59 ha)........... (59 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station 2; partially 22 ac 2 9 ac 2 9 ac
excluded under (9 ha)............ (4 ha)............ (4 ha)
section 4(b)(2).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley Proposed as -- Not proposed -- Not proposed --
Unit 3, but.......
determined not
essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) -- -- 3A 5 ac Excluded under 5 ac
(2 ha)............ section 4(b)(2) (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carroll Canyon -- -- 3B 20 ac 3B 18 ac
(8 ha)............ (7 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Drive -- -- 3C 37 ac 3C 37 ac
(15 ha)........... (15 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MCAS Miramar 4(a)(3) exemption 61 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 69 ac 4(a)(3) exemption 69 ac
(25 ha)........... (28 ha)........... (28 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montgomery Field Excluded under 38 ac 3D 48 ac 3D 48 ac
section 4(b)(2) (16 ha)........... (20 ha)........... (20 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Upham) 4C1 34 ac 4C1 34 ac 4C1 34 ac
(14 ha)........... (14 ha)........... (14 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Universal Boot) 4C2 32 ac 4C2 32 ac 4C2 32 ac
(13 ha)........... (13 ha)........... (13 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Bent Avenue) 4D 7 ac 4D 5 ac 4D 5 ac
(3 ha)............ (2 ha)............ (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona 4E 86 ac 4E 135 ac 4E 135 ac
(35 ha)........... (55 ha)........... (55 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62195]]
Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3) 5A; partially 89 ac 5A 95 ac 5A 95 ac
excluded under (36 ha)........... (38 ha)........... (38 ha)
section 4(b)(2). Excluded..........
74 ac.............
(30 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (K1 and K2) Excluded under 57 ac Not proposed, -- Not proposed, --
section 4(b)(2) (23 ha)........... determined not determined not
essential. essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (M2) 5B and excluded 42 ac 5B 24 ac 5B 24 ac
under section (17 ha)........... (10 ha)........... (10 ha)
4(b)(2) Excluded..........
67 ac.............
(27 ha)...........
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Mesa (J26) 5C and excluded 14 ac Not proposed, -- 5C*** 42 ac
under section (6 ha)............ determined not (17 ha)
4(b)(2) essential.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Arnie's Point Proposed as -- Not proposed -- Not proposed --
Subunit 5D, but
determined not
essential
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proctor Valley (R1-2) -- -- 5F 88 ac 5F 88 ac
(36 ha)........... (36 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Lakes (K3-5) -- -- 5G 140 ac 5G 140 ac
(57 ha)........... (57 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool Excluded under 117 ac 5H 143 ac 5H 143 ac
complexes section 4(b)(2) (47 ha)........... (58ha)............ (58ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool Excluded under 277 ac 5I 221 ac 5I 221 ac
complexes section 4(b)(2) (112 ha).......... (89 ha)........... (89 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Jacinto River Excluded under 10,774 ac 6A 3,550 ac 6A*** 4,312 ac
section 4(b)(2) (4,360 ha)........ (1,437 ha)........ (1,745 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Excluded under 2,233 ac 6B 1,054 ac 6B 930 ac
Alkali Plain section 4(b)(2) (904 ha).......... (427 ha).......... (376 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wickerd Road and Scott Road Excluded under 275 ac 6C 205 ac 6C*** 235 ac
Pools section 4(b)(2) (111 ha).......... (83 ha)........... (95 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skunk Hollow Excluded under 306 ac 6D 158 ac Excluded under 158 ac
section 4(b)(2) (124 ha).......... (64 ha)........... section 4(b)(2) (64 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesa de Burro Excluded under 4,396 ac 6E 708 ac Excluded under 708 ac
section 4(b)(2) (1,779 ha)........ (287 ha).......... section 4(b)(2) (287 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Essential for the -- 19,399 ac -- 7,086 ac -- 7,804 ac
Conservation of Navarretia (7,851 ha)........ (2,868 ha)........ (3,158 ha)
fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62196]]
Total Area Exempt Under Section -- 128 ac -- 213 ac -- 213 ac
4(a)(3)** (52 ha)........... (86 ha)........... (86 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Excluded Under -- 18,619 ac -- 0 ac -- 871 ac
Section 4(b)(2)** (7,535 ha)........ (0 ha)............ (353 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Area Designated as -- 652 ac -- N/A -- 6,720 ac
Critical Habitat for Navarretia (264 ha).......... (2,720 ha)
fossalis**
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were designated as critical
habitat in 2005 or proposed in 2009 or discussed in this critical habitat rule.
**Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
***Acreage added in 75 FR 19575 (June 10, 2009) revision.
Summary of Changes From the 2005 Final Designation of Critical Habitat
In the 2005 final rule, we did not designate areas containing
essential habitat features if those habitat features were already
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis because we
concluded that the areas did not meet the second part of the definition
of critical habitat under section 3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have
reconsidered our approach in light of subsequent court decisions and
have decided that areas containing essential habitat features that
``may require'' special management considerations or protection do meet
the definition of critical habitat irrespective of whether the habitat
features are currently receiving special management or protection.
Current protection or management does not disqualify an area from
meeting the definition of critical habitat, rather it is a relevant
factor to consider under section 4(b)(2) of the Act when we weigh the
benefits of including a particular area in critical habitat against the
benefits of excluding the area. In this rule we identified essential
areas that are conserved and managed for the benefit of the species,
determined they meet the definition of critical habitat, and then
analyzed whether the benefits of exclusion from critical habitat
designation outweigh the benefits of including these areas under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
This rule also uses a new economic analysis to identify and
estimate the potential economic effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of conservation actions associated with
the proposed revision of critical habitat. The analysis focuses on the
estimated incremental impacts associated with critical habitat
designation.
Of the 652 ac (264 ha) of land included in the 2005 final critical
habitat rule, approximately 469 ac (190 ha) are included in this
revised critical habitat designation. Some areas designated in 2005 are
not designated in this final rule because we used a grid of 2.47-ac (1-
ha) cells (100 m grid) to identify essential habitat in our GIS
analysis in 2005. In this revised critical habitat, we identified
essential habitat with heads-up digitizing at various scales using
imagery of 1-meter resolution, resulting in a more precise
identification.
Additionally, we are designating as critical habitat 6,251 ac
(2,530 ha) of land identified as meeting the definition of critical
habitat that were not designated in 2005. The primary reason revised
designated critical habitat is greater than the 2005 designated area is
that we included several areas that were excluded from the 2005
critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A
summary of specific changes from the 2005 critical habitat designation
is provided below. In addition to revisions to specific subunits, we
also revised the PCEs, the criteria used to identify critical habitat,
the economic impacts to include incremental impacts, and the mapping
methodology for this revised critical habitat designation. For a
detailed discussion of the changes between the 2005 critical habitat
rule and the 2009 proposed revision, please see the Summary of Changes
From Previously Designated Critical Habitat section in the proposed
revised rule (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009).
In this revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia
fossalis, comparisons to the 2005 critical habitat designation are
described below using three categories:
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule,
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule, and
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule.
(1) Areas designated in 2005 and also designated in this rule are
found in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4C1, 4C2, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, and 5C. We
analyzed each of these areas and determined these areas are not
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis and the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion.
(2) Areas designated in 2005 but not designated in this rule
include land in Subunits 1A, 1B, 2, 4D, 5A, and 5B as described in the
2005 designation. The difference of these subunits between the previous
rule and this final rule is mostly due to our discontinued use of a
100-m grid to map critical habitat,
[[Page 62197]]
which captured areas that we determined in this rule did not meet the
definition of critical habitat. Additionally, the difference in Subunit
1B was due to more precise Navarretia fossalis habitat location data in
the vicinity of Plum Canyon.
(3) Areas not designated in 2005 that are designated in this rule
include areas within Subunits 1B, 3B, 3C, 3D, 4D, 4E, 5A, 5B, 5F, 5G,
5H, 5I, 6A, 6B, and 6C, and part of 5C. Some of these subunits meet the
definition of critical habitat based on new information. Subunits 1B,
4D, 4E, and 5B include new areas due to mapping refinements made to
better capture local watersheds. Subunits 3B, 3D, 5F, 5G, 5H, and 5I
include vernal pool complexes that provide habitat for Navarretia
fossalis that were not included in the 2005 final rule, but meet the
definition of critical habitat for this species (see the 2009 proposed
rule for details (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009)). Other subunits have
been designated based on our determination under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act that the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion
of these areas because they are not currently conserved and managed for
the benefit of N. fossalis. All or portions of Subunits 3D, 5A, 5B, 5H,
5I, 6A, and 6C are the same as areas that met the definition of
critical habitat in 2005, but were excluded from the 2005 designation
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The only areas excluded from critical
habitat in the current rule under section 4(b)(2) of the Act are those
that are conserved and managed for the benefit of N. fossalis, and
where the exclusion would not result in extinction of the species (see
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section of this rule).
Summary of Changes From the 2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical
Habitat
We evaluated lands considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act to determine if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. We excluded 871 ac (353 ha) of lands under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act that are conserved and managed for the
benefit of Navarretia fossalis We excluded certain lands under two
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), summarized below and discussed in
detail in the Exclusions section.
(1) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands covered by the Carlsbad Habitat
Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) under the San Diego Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program (MHCP). In this revised rule, we determined the
benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of exclusion for all of the
lands covered by the Carlsbad HMP because these lands are not both
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis. However,
we recognize the efforts made by permittees of the Carlsbad HMP to
assist in the conservation of N. fossalis and other listed species. We
look forward to continuing to work with these partners to assure that
long-term conservation and management is assured for N. fossalis. See
the Exclusions section below for a summary evaluation of lands
considered for exclusion under the Carlsbad HMP and our rationale for
including these lands in this revised critical habitat designation.
(2) In the proposed revised rule, we considered lands proposed as
critical habitat within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP; County of San
Diego Subarea Plan) for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. In
this revised rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion for a portion (5 ac (2 ha) in Subunit 3A) of
lands under the County of San Diego Subarea Plan that are both
conserved and managed for the benefit of Navarretia fossalis, and
determined exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of
the species. However, we determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh
the benefits of exclusion for 81 ac (33 ha) of lands within the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan. As a result, we excluded approximately 5 ac
(2 ha) of these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included
approximately 81 ac (33 ha) within the revised critical habitat
designation. For a complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and
exclusion for all lands within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan,
see the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.
(3) In the proposed revised rule, we considered for exclusion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of
the permittees of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat
Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County MSHCP). In this revised
rule, we determined the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion for 866 ac (351 ha) of the lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
that are conserved and managed (Subunits 6D and 6E), and determined
exclusion of these lands will not result in extinction of the species.
We determined the benefits of inclusion outweigh the benefits of
exclusion for 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
As a result, we excluded approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of these lands
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and included approximately 5,477 ac
(2,217 ha) within the revised critical habitat designation. For a
complete discussion of the benefits of inclusion and exclusion for all
lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP, see the Application of
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section below.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(I) essential to the conservation of the species and
(II) which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means the use
of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring any
endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided under the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, transplantation, and in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot otherwise be
relieved, regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding,
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires consultation on Federal
actions that may affect critical habitat. The designation of critical
habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge,
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such
designation does not allow the
[[Page 62198]]
government or public to access private lands. Such designation does not
require implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement
measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests
Federal agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a
listed species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of
section 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but in the event of a
destruction or adverse modification finding, the Federal action
agency's and the applicant's obligation is not to restore or recover
the species, but to implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to
avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, and be included if those features may
require special management considerations or protection. Critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide
essential life cycle needs of the species (areas on which are found the
physical and biological features laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species). Under the
Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate critical habitat
in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time it is listed only when we determine that those areas are essential
for the conservation of the species and that designation limited to the
geographical area occupied at the time of listing would be inadequate
to ensure the conservation of the species.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines
provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure
that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available.
They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and
with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and
original sources of information as the basis for recommendations to
designate critical habitat.
When determining which areas should be designated as critical
habitat, our primary source of information is generally the information
developed during the listing process for the species. Additional
information sources may include the recovery plan for the species,
articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by
States and counties, scientific status surveys and studies, biological
assessments, or other unpublished materials and expert opinion or
personal knowledge.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to
another over time. Climate change will be a particular challenge for
biodiversity because the interaction of additional stressors associated
with climate change and current stressors may push species beyond their
ability to survive (Lovejoy 2005, pp. 325-326). The synergistic
implications of climate change and habitat fragmentation are the most
threatening facet of climate change for biodiversity (Hannah et al.
2005, p.4). Current climate change predictions for terrestrial areas in
the Northern Hemisphere indicate warmer air temperatures, more intense
precipitation events, and increased summer continental drying (Field et
al. 1999, pp. 1-3; Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Cayan et al. 2005, p.
6; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2007, p. 1181).
Climate change may also affect the duration and frequency of drought
and these climatic changes may even more dramatic and intense (Graham
1997). Documentation of climate-related changes that have already
occurred in California (Croke et al. 1998, pp. 2128, 2130; Brashears et
al. 2005, p. 15144), and future drought predictions for California
(such as Field et al. 1999, pp. 8-10; Lenihen et al. 2003, p. 1667;
Hayhoe et al. 2004, p. 12422; Brashears et al. 2005, p. 15144; Seager
et al. 2007, p. 1181) and North America (IPCC 2007, p. 9) indicate
prolonged drought and other climate-related changes will continue in
the foreseeable future.
We anticipate these changes could affect a number of native plants,
including Navarretia fossalis occurrences and habitat. If the amount
and timing of precipitation or the average temperature increases in
southern California, the long term viability of N. fossalis may be
affected in several ways, including the following: (1) Drier conditions
may result in a lower germination rate and smaller population sizes;
(2) a shift in the timing of annual rainfall may favor nonnative
species that impact the quality of habitat for this species; or (3)
drier conditions may result in increased fire frequency, making the
ecosystems in which N. fossalis currently grows more vulnerable to the
threats of subsequent erosion and nonnative plant invasion.
At this time, we are unable to identify the specific ways that
climate change may impact Navarretia fossalis; therefore, we are unable
to determine if any additional areas may be appropriate to include in
this final critical habitat rule to address the effects of climate
change. Additionally, we recognize that critical habitat designated at
a particular point in time may not include all of the habitat areas
that we may later determine are necessary for the recovery of the
species. For these reasons, a critical habitat designation does not
signal that habitat outside the designated area is unimportant or may
not be required for recovery of the species.
Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but
are outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be
subject to conservation actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act. Areas that support populations are also subject to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available scientific
and commercial information at the time of the agency action. Federally
funded or permitted projects affecting listed species outside their
designated critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings
in some cases. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the
basis of the best available information at the time of designation will
not control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, HCPs,
or other species conservation planning efforts if new information
available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different
outcome.
Physical and Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas within the
geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing to
designate as critical habitat, we consider the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species and which may
require special management considerations or protection. These include,
but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
[[Page 62199]]
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historic, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
We consider the specific physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species and laid out in the appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species.
We derive those specific essential physical and biological features for
Navarretia fossalis from the biological needs of this species as
described in the Critical Habitat section of the proposed rule to
designate critical habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal
Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
The area designated as final revised critical habitat consists of
ephemeral wetland habitat for the reproduction and growth of Navarretia
fossalis, intermixed wetland and upland habitats that comprise the
local watershed to support ephemeral wetland habitat, and the
topography and soils required for ponding during winter and spring
months. The methods of dispersal and pollination for N. fossalis are
not well understood; therefore, elements required for these processes
may not be geographically captured by this revised critical habitat
designation. Likewise, delineating larger watershed areas that support
ephemeral wetland habitat may require hydrological data and modeling
that are not available; therefore, areas beyond the local watershed are
not included in this revised critical habitat designation. The physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis
are derived from studies of this species' habitat, ecology, and life
history as described below, in the Background section of the proposed
revised critical habitat designation published in the Federal Register
on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588), the critical habitat designation
published in the Federal Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658),
and the final listing rule published in the Federal Register on October
13, 1998 (63 FR 54975).
Habitats That Are Representative of the Historical, Geographical, and
Ecological Distribution of Navarretia fossalis
Navarretia fossalis is restricted to ephemeral wetlands in southern
California and northwestern Baja California, Mexico (Moran 1977, pp.
155-156; Oberbauer 1992, p. 7; Day 1993, p. 847; California Natural
Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2008, pp. 1-44), and primarily associated
with vernal pools and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats
(Moran 1977, pp. 155-156; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Day 1993, p. 847;
Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126-127). In Los Angeles County, N.
fossalis is known to occur in vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa and the
associated drainage of Plum Canyon (such as CNDDB 2008, Element
Occurrence (EO) 31, 32, and 41). In Riverside County, N. fossalis is
known to occur in large vernal pools with basins that range in size
from 0.5 ac (0.2 ha) to 10.0 ac (4.0 ha) (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 42,
43, and 44), and in temporary wetlands that are described as seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat along the San Jacinto River and
near Salt Creek/Stowe Pool in Hemet (such as CNDDB 2008, EO 22, 23, and
24). In San Diego County, N. fossalis is found in vernal pools that are
smaller than those in Riverside County, ranging in size from 0.01 ac
(0.005 ha) to 0.2 ac (0.09 ha) and are often found in clusters of
several vernal pools typically referred to as vernal pool complexes
(such as CNDDB 2008, EO 4, 14, and 19). In Mexico, N. fossalis is known
from fewer than 12 occurrences, most of which are clustered in three
areas of Baja California: along the international border, on the
plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe, and on the San Quintin coastal
plain (Moran 1977, p. 156).
Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
Despite variation in the types of habitat where Navarretia fossalis
is found (i.e., vernal pool habitat and seasonally flooded alkali
vernal plain habitat), these ephemeral wetlands all share the same
temporary nature (i.e., areas fill with water during the winter and
spring and dry completely during summer and fall). Navarretia fossalis
depends on both the inundation and drying of its habitat for survival.
This type of ephemerally wet habitat excludes upland plants that live
in a dry environment year round, or wetland plants that require year-
round moisture to become established (Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998).
Navarretia fossalis primarily occurs in ephemeral wetland habitat,
more specifically, vernal pool and seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat (Moran 1977, pp. 156-157; Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Bramlet
1993b, p. 14; Day 1993, p. 847). Vernal pools form during the winter
rains in depressions that are part of a gently sloping and undulating
landscape, where soil mounds are interspersed with basins (mima-mound
topography; Cox 1984, pp. 1397-1398). Water ponds in vernal pools in
part due to an underlying impervious soil layer (hard pan or clay pan).
Navarretia fossalis can also occur in ditches and other artificial
depressions associated with degraded vernal pool habitat (Moran 1977,
p. 155).
Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat includes alkali
playa, alkali scrub, alkali vernal pool, and alkali annual grassland
vegetation types. The hydrologic regime for this habitat involves
sporadic seasonal flooding (as described above) combined with slow
drainage of the alkaline soils. Large-scale inundation of flood plains
occur approximately every 20 to 50 years, which is necessary for long-
term maintenance of the habitat by removing scrub vegetation (Roberts
2004, p. 4). During a typical seasonal flooding cycle dry period,
alkali scrub vegetation expands its distribution into the seasonally
flooded areas of alkali vernal plains habitat and crowds out the
species associated more with ephemeral wetlands. During a large-scale
flood, standing and slow-draining waters remain for weeks or months and
kill alkali scrub vegetation, resulting in favorable conditions for
annual ephemeral wetland-associated species (such as Navarretia
fossalis) to expand their range (Bramlet 2004, p. 8; Roberts 2004, p.
4). Although uncommon, large-scale flooding events maintain N. fossalis
habitat and likely provide a species dispersal mechanism (Bramlet 2009,
p. 3). Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain can also persist in
lightly to moderately disturbed habitat that may obscure or suppress
expression of PCEs, especially when disturbance consists of soil
amendments or dryland farming activities (Roberts 2009, p. 2).
Subsurface Water Flow That Creates A Local Watershed of Intermixed
Wetland and Upland Habitats
Vernal pools within a complex are hydrologically connected by
subsurface water, which creates a landscape that is intermixed with
wetland and upland habitats. This entire area comprises a local
watershed and provides the appropriate physical and biological features
necessary to maintain vernal pools within each complex. Seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitats are also hydrologically connected
by flowing water when it flows over the surface from one vernal pool to
another or across the seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain. Due to an
impervious hard pan, water flows and collects below ground as the soil
becomes saturated. Movement of the water through vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain systems results in pools
[[Page 62200]]
filling and holding water continuously for a number of days (Hanes et
al. 1990, p. 51). For this reason, these ephemeral wetlands are best
described from a watershed perspective. The local watershed associated
with a vernal pool complex or seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain
includes all surfaces in the surrounding area from which water flows
into the complex or plain habitat. Some ephemeral wetlands included in
this rule (such as the San Jacinto River and the Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain) have large watersheds where the overland flow of
water contributes to the ponding that supports Navarretia fossalis,
while other ephemeral wetlands have comparatively small watersheds
(such as Carroll Canyon and Nobel Drive) and fill almost entirely from
direct rainfall (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998, p.
38). It is also possible that subsurface flow occurs within a watershed
and contributes water to some vernal pools and seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plains (Hanes et al. 1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg
1998, p. 48). In summary, N. fossalis depends on an entire local
watershed that includes subsurface water flow over an area that is
comprised of intermixed wetland and upland habitats.
Topography and Soils That Support Ponding During Winter and Spring
Topography and soils support ponding that occurs during winter and
spring months. Impervious subsurface layers combined with flat to
gently sloping topography serve to inhibit rapid infiltration of
rainwater, resulting in ponding of vernal pools and seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plains (Bramlet 1993a, p. 1; Bauder and McMillian 1998,
pp. 57-59). Soils also function to moderate water chemistry and rate of
water loss to evaporation (Zedler 1987, pp. 17-30). In Los Angeles
County, vernal pools that support Navarretia fossalis are found on
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca676. In western Riverside
County, seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitats that support N.
fossalis are found on Domino, Traver, Waukena, Chino, (Bramlet 1993a,
pp. 1, 10) (59 FR 64812; December 15, 1994) and Willows soils (Bramlet
2009, p. 4). In San Diego County, vernal pool habitats that support N.
fossalis are found on Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and
Redding soils (NRCS SSURGO, ca073).
Primary Constituent Elements for Navarretia Fossalis
Under the Act and its implementing regulations, we are required to
identify the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis. The physical and biological
features are the primary constituent elements (PCEs) laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement essential to the
conservation of the species. Areas designated as critical habitat for
N. fossalis were occupied at the time of listing (see the Geographic
Range and Status section of the proposed revised rule for a more
detailed explanation), are currently occupied, are within the species'
historic geographical range, and contain sufficient PCEs to support N.
fossalis.
Based on our current knowledge of the life history, biology, and
ecology of Navarretia fossalis, and habitat characteristics required to
sustain the essential life history functions of the species, we
determined that the PCEs specific to N. fossalis are:
(1) PCE 1--Ephemeral wetland habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4
ha)) and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that become inundated
by winter rains and hold water or have saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6
months during a year with average rainfall (i.e., years where average
rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the rainy
season (between October and May)). This period of inundation is long
enough to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for
Navarretia fossalis and other native species typical of vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat, but not so long that
true wetland species inhabit the areas.
(2) PCE 2--Intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the
local watershed. Areas characterized by mounds, swales, and depressions
within a matrix of upland habitat that result in intermittently flowing
surface and subsurface water in swales, drainages, and pools described
in PCE 1.
(3) PCE 3--Soils that support ponding during winter and spring.
Soils found in areas characterized in PCEs 1 and 2 that have a clay
component or other property that creates an impermeable surface or
subsurface layer. These soil types include, but are not limited to:
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles County; Domino, Traver,
Waukena, Chino, and Willows soils in Riverside County; and Huerhuero,
Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and Redding soils in San Diego County.
With this revised designation of critical habitat, we intend to
conserve the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, through the identification of the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to
support the life-history functions of the species. For Navarretia
fossalis, the size of the ephemeral wetland habitat can vary a great
deal, but the most important factor (i.e., the appropriate quantity and
spatial arrangement of the PCEs) in any of the subunits designated as
critical habitat is that the vernal pool or alkali playa habitat has
intact and functioning hydrology and intact adjacent upland areas that
ensure a functioning ecosystem. All units and subunits designated as
critical habitat contain the PCEs in the appropriate quantity and
spatial arrangement essential to the conservation of this species and
are currently occupied by N. fossalis.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the areas
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing contain the features that are essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection.
Researchers estimate that greater than 90 percent of the vernal
pool habitat in southern California has been converted as a result of
past human activities (Bauder and McMillian 1998, pp. 56-67; Keeler-
Wolf et al. 1998, pp. 10, 60-61, 63-64). A detailed discussion of
threats to Navarretia fossalis and its habitat can be found in the
final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13, 1998), the previous
critical habitat designation (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005), and the
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of Southern California (Service 1998,
pp. 1-113, appendices). The features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis may require special management considerations or protection
to reduce the following threats: habitat destruction and fragmentation
from urban and agricultural development; pipeline construction;
alteration of hydrology and floodplain dynamics; excessive flooding;
channelization; water diversions; off-road vehicle (OHV) activity;
trampling by cattle and sheep; weed abatement; fire suppression
practices (including discing and plowing to remove weeds and create
fire breaks); competition from nonnative plant species; direct and
indirect impacts from some human recreational activities (63 FR 54975,
October 13, 1998; Service 1998, p. 7); and manure dumping (Roberts
2009, pp. 2-14).
In particular, manure dumping on private property along the San
Jacinto River area is impacting habitat within the Western Riverside
County MSHCP
[[Page 62201]]
area. These impacts are occurring despite identification of these areas
as important for the survival and recovery of Navarretia fossalis and
other sensitive species (such as Brodiaea filifolia) addressed in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP. Dumping of manure and sewage sludge
should be avoided in all areas containing populations of N. fossalis.
As outlined in the Western Riverside County MSHCP, we have been working
with permittees to implement additional ordinances that will help to
control activities (such as manure dumping) that may impact the
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP conservation
objectives. To date, the City of Hemet is the only Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittee that has addressed the negative impacts that
manure dumping has on species such as N. fossalis and B. filifolia and
their habitat trough the enactment of Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the
ordinance that prevents manure dumping activities and educates its
citizens). We will continue to work with Riverside County and
permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP to address activities
that may impact the species within this plan area, as well as other
HCPs and plan areas that may have other activities that impact N.
fossalis and its habitat.
Special management considerations or protection are required within
critical habitat areas to address these threats. Management activities
that could ameliorate these threats include (but are not limited to)
fencing Navarretia fossalis occurrences to prevent soil compaction and
providing signage to discourage encroachment by hikers, cattle, sheep,
and OHV activity; control of nonnative plants using methods shown to be
effective; guiding the design of development projects to avoid impacts
to N. fossalis habitat; enacting local ordinances to prohibit manure
dumping; and restoring and maintaining natural hydrology and floodplain
dynamics of watersheds associated with N. fossalis occurrences where
feasible. These management activities will protect the PCEs for the
species by reducing soil compaction to help maintain an impermeable
surface (PCE 3) that supports ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), which
is needed to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for N.
fossalis. Additionally, management of critical habitat lands will help
maintain both the wetland and upland habitat that acts as the local
watershed and provides intermittent flowing water on the surface and
subsurface (PCEs 2 and 3).
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b) of the Act, we used the best scientific
and commercial data available to designate critical habitat. We only
designate areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species
when a designation limited to its present range would be inadequate to
ensure the conservation of the species (50 CFR 424.12 (e)). We are not
designating any areas outside the geographical area occupied by
Navarretia fossalis because occupied areas are sufficient for the
conservation of the species.
This revised rule updates our 2005 final designation of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis with the best available scientific
information. For some areas analyzed in 2005, we have new information
from survey reports and public comments that led us to either add or
remove areas from critical habitat designation.
This section provides details of the process and criteria we used
to delineate a final revised critical habitat designation for
Navarretia fossalis. This revised rule is based largely on areas that
are identified as required for the conservation of N. fossalis in the
Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of Southern California (Service 1998,
pp.1-113, appendices), the 2005 final critical habitat designation, and
new information obtained since that designation. Table 3 in this rule
depicts the areas essential for N. fossalis conservation; it does not
include all locations occupied by N. fossalis. It includes only those
locations that were:
(1) Included in Appendix F or G of the Recovery Plan;
(2) designated, excluded, or exempt in the 2005 final critical
habitat designation;
(3) proposed as critical habitat in the 2009 rule or proposed as
critical habitat in the Federal Register notice published on April 15,
2010 (75 FR 19575); or
(4) designated, excluded, or exempt in this final revised critical
habitat designation.
The unit names used in this revised critical habitat for N.
fossalis are based on those used for management areas in the 1998
Recovery Plan. The specific changes made to the 2005 final critical
habitat designation are summarized in the Summary of Changes From
Previously Designated Critical Habitat section of this rule.
We analyzed the biology, life history, ecology, and distribution
(historical, at the time of listing, and current) of Navarretia
fossalis. Based on this information, we are designating revised
critical habitat in areas within the geographical area occupied by N.
fossalis at the time of listing and currently occupied that contain the
PCEs in the quantity and spatial arrangement to support life-history
functions essential to the conservation of the species (see the
Geographic Range and Status section in the proposed revised rule (74 FR
27588; June 10, 2009) for more information). We are not designating any
areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time
of listing. All units and subunits contain the PCEs in the appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis.
Table 3. Areas necessary for Navarretia fossalis conservation as described in the 1998 Recovery Plan, 2005 final
critical habitat designation, 2009 proposed revised critical habitat designation, 2010 revisions proposed in the
availability of the DEA, and this 2010 final revised critical habitat designation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proposed Revised
Critical Habitat
Recovery Plan Final Critical Subunits (based on Final Revised
Location* Appendix Habitat Subunits 2009 proposal and Critical Habitat
(2005) 2010 availability Subunits (2010)
of the DEA)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cruzan Mesa F 1A 1A 1A
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Plum Canyon N/A 1B 1B 1B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62202]]
Stuart Mesa, Marine Corps Base F 4(a)(3) exemption 4(a)(3) exemption 4(a)(3) exemption
(MCB) Camp PendletonRecovery
plan (RP)** name: Stuart Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wire Mountain, MCB Camp F -- 4(a)(3) exemption 4(a)(3) exemption
Pendleton RP name: Wire
Mountain
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station F 2 (partially 2 2
RP name: JJ 2 Poinsettia Lane excluded under
section 4(b)(2))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) N/A -- 3A Excluded under
section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carroll Canyon (D 5-8) -- -- 3B 3B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nobel Drive (X 5) -- -- 3C 3C
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Large Pool northwest of runway, N/A -- 4(a)(3) exemption 4(a)(3) exemption
MCAS Miramar
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EE1-2, MCAS Miramar RP name: EE1- F 4(a)(3) exemption -- --
2, Miramar Interior
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kearny Mesa (U 19) N/A 4(a)(3) exemption -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
New Century (BB 2)RP name: BB 2 G -- -- --
New Century
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montgomery Field RP name: N1-4, F Excluded under 3D 3D
6 Montgomery Field section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (North L 15)RP name: G -- -- --
L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (Northwest L 14)RP G -- -- --
name: L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 1-6)RP name: L 1- F 4C1 4C1 4C1
6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 9-10)RP name: L 1- F 4C2 4C2 4C2
6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Marcos (L 11-13)RP name: L 1- F 4D 4D 4D
6, 9-13 San Marcos
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62203]]
San Marcos (North L 15)RP name: G -- -- --
L 7, 8, 14-20
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona RP name: Ramona F -- -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ramona RP name: Ramona T G 4E 4E 4E
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3)RP F 5A ( partially 5A 5A
name: Sweetwater Lake excluded under
section 4(b)(2))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay River Valley (M2) -- 5B 5B 5B
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Mesa (J26)RP name: J 26 F 5C 5C 5C
Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proctor Valley (R1)RP name: R F -- 5F 5F
Proctor Valley
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Otay Reservoir (K3-5)RP name: K3- F -- 5G 5G
5 Otay River
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K1, 2 RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7 Otay G Excluded under Does not meet the --
River section 4(b)(2) definition of
Critical.
Habitat...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
K 6, 7 RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7 G -- -- --
Otay River
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool F / G Excluded under 5H / 5I 5H / 5I
complexes RP name: J 2, 5, 7, section 4(b)(2)
11-21, 23-30 Otay Mesa / J 3
Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Otay Mesa vernal pool N/A -- 5H 5H
complexes (J 32 (West Otay A +
B), J 33 (Sweetwater High
School))
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool F / G Excluded under 5H / 5I 5H / 5I
complexes RP name: 23-30 Otay section 4(b)(2)
Mesa / J 22 Otay Mesa
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool -- Excluded under Does not meet the --
complexes RP name: J 19, 27, section 4(b)(2) definition of
28E, 28W Otay Mesa Critical.
Habitat...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RP name: J (undescribed) G -- -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
San Jacinto River RP name: San F Excluded under 6A 6A
Jacinto section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62204]]
Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded F Excluded under 6B 6B
Alkali Plain RP name: Hemet/ section 4(b)(2)
Salt Creek
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wickerd Road and Scott Road N/A -- 6C 6C
Pools
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skunk Hollow RP name: Skunk -- Excluded under 6D Excluded under
Hollow section 4(b)(2) Section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RP name: Temecula F -- -- --
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mesa de Burro RP name: Santa F Excluded under 6E Excluded under
Rosa Plateau section 4(b)(2) Section 4(b)(2)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Areas (out of 39 areas 27 22 28 28
listed in this table)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*This table does not include all locations occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations
included in Appendix F or G of the Recovery Plan (``RP'' in above table); designated, excluded, or exempt in
2005; proposed as critical habitat in the 2009 rule; proposed as revisions to proposed rule as identified in
the document making available the DEA; or designated, excluded, or exempt in this final rule. Note: The alpha-
numeric vernal pool labels were applied in the Recovery Plan.
**RP name = Name in Recovery Plan, if different from the current rule.
Appendices F and G of the Recovery Plan provide information on the
areas needed to stabilize (prevent extinction of) Navarretia fossalis
(Appendix F) and the areas that should be conserved and managed to
reclassify or recover N. fossalis (Appendix G). In Table 3, we
summarized the data from the Recovery Plan. According to this summary,
27 locations were highlighted as areas that should be conserved and
managed to recover N. fossalis. Our 2005 final rule to designate
critical habitat (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) used the Recovery Plan
as the basis for designating critical habitat; however, the rule
included some additions to and subtractions from those areas deemed
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis in the Recovery Plan. Nine
areas that the Recovery Plan identified as necessary for recovery were
not identified in the 2005 final rule as essential to the conservation
of N. fossalis, and four areas not in the Recovery Plan were added.
These nine areas were sites where we did not have specific occurrence
data or areas where recent surveys had not found N. fossalis. The four
areas added to the 2005 final rule were locations where occurrence data
indicated that these areas contained the features essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis. A total of 22 areas were identified in the
2005 final rule as essential to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis
(see Table 3).
We did not include seven occurrences of N. fossalis highlighted in
the Recovery Plan in the proposed revised critical habitat designation
or this final rule. We do not have detailed information on these
occurrences, and N. fossalis has not been observed during recent
surveys at some of these sites. Additionally, we included areas in this
revised critical habitat (based on new data) that were not identified
as necessary for recovery in the Recovery Plan. While some of the areas
are different, non-inclusion of some areas in the Recovery Plan and
inclusion of other areas for which we have better data will achieve the
overall goal of the Recovery Plan for N. fossalis and provide for
conservation of this species.
In this revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia
fossalis, using the best scientific and commercial information, we
selected areas that possess those physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, and which may require
special management considerations or protection. We took into account
past conservation planning for N. fossalis in the Recovery Plan and in
the 2005 critical habitat designation. For this revised rule, we
completed the following steps to delineate critical habitat:
(1) Compiled all available data on N. fossalis into a GIS database;
(2) Reviewed data to ensure accuracy;
(3) Determined which occurrences were known to occur at the time of
listing;
(4) Determined which areas are currently occupied;
(5) Defined the areas containing the features essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis in terms of core habitat areas and
satellite habitat areas;
(6) Determined if each occupied area represents core habitat or
satellite habitat and, therefore, should be designated as critical
habitat; and
(7) For both core and satellite habitat areas, mapped the specific
locations that contain the essential physical and biological features
(PCEs in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement needed to
support life-history functions essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis).
These steps are described in detail below.
(1) We compiled all available data on Navarretia fossalis into a
GIS database. Data on locations where N. fossalis occurs were based on
collections and
[[Page 62205]]
observations made by botanists (both amateur and professional),
biological consultants, and academic researchers. We compiled data from
the following sources to create our GIS database for N. fossalis: (a)
Data used in the Recovery Plan and in the 2005 final critical habitat
rule for N. fossalis (70 FR 60658); (b) the CNDDB data report for N.
fossalis and accompanying GIS records (CNDDB 2008, pp. 1-44); (c) data
presented in the City of San Diego's Vernal Pool Inventory for 2002-
2003 (City of San Diego 2004, pp. 1-125, appendices); (d) the data
report for N. fossalis from the California Consortium of Herbaria and
accompanying Berkeley Mapper GIS records (Consortium of California
Herbaria 2008, pp. 1-17); (e) the Western Riverside County MSHCP
species GIS database; and (f) the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office's
internal species GIS database, which includes the species data used for
the San Diego MSCP and the San Diego MHCP, reports from section 7
consultations, and Service observations of N. fossalis (Carlsbad Fish
and Wildlife Office's internal species GIS database).
(2) We reviewed the Navarretia fossalis data that we compiled to
ensure its accuracy. We checked each data point in our database to
ensure that it represented an original collection or observation of N.
fossalis. Data that did not represent an original collection or
observation were removed from our database. We checked each data point
to ensure that it was mapped in the correct location. Data points that
did not match the description for the original collection or
observation were remapped in the correct location or removed from our
database.
(3) We determined which Navarretia fossalis occurrences existed at
the time of listing. We concluded that all known occurrences, except
for a single occurrence translocated after this species was listed,
were extant at the time of listing. We drew this conclusion because N.
fossalis has limited dispersal capabilities. We believe the
documentation of additional occurrences after the species was listed
was due to an increased effort to survey for this species. In other
words, we do not believe this species has naturally colonized any new
areas since it was listed.
(4) We determined which areas are currently occupied by Navarretia
fossalis. For areas where we had past occupancy data for the species,
we assumed the area is currently occupied unless: (a) Two or more rare
plant surveys conducted during the past 10 years did not find N.
fossalis (providing the surveys were conducted in years with average
rainfall (i.e., years where average rainfall amounts for a particular
area are reached during the rainy season between October and May)) and
during the appropriate months to find this species (i.e., March, April,
and May); or (b) the site was significantly disturbed since the last
observation of the species at that location.
(5) We defined the areas necessary for conservation of Navarretia
fossalis in terms of ``core habitat areas'' and ``satellite habitat
areas.'' See the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite
Habitat Areas section in this rule for definitions of these areas.
(6) We determined if each occupied area represents core habitat or
satellite habitat. In the final listing rule (63 FR 54975; October 13,
1998), we stated that 60 percent of the known Navarretia fossalis
occurrences are concentrated in three locations: Otay Mesa in southern
San Diego County, along the San Jacinto River in western Riverside
County, and near Hemet in Riverside County (referred to as the Salt
Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain in this final critical habitat
rule). These three areas represent core habitat for N. fossalis. In
addition to these three core habitat areas, Mesa de Burro in Riverside
County represents core habitat for this species due to the large
species abundance observed there in 2008, and the large amount of
intact vernal pool habitat on this mesa. In total, we identified four
core habitat areas for N. fossalis. Large populations of N. fossalis
are currently present in these four areas, but there have been
significant impacts to these areas in the form of habitat
fragmentation, nonnative plant invasion, agricultural activities, and
unauthorized recreational use. Because these four areas represent
large, interconnected ephemeral wetland areas and large N. fossalis
populations, they are essential to, and will serve as anchors for, the
overall conservation effort for this species. Additionally, the
conservation of these four areas will sustain the largest populations
of N. fossalis, allowing the species to persist where it will be less
constrained by the threats that negatively impact its essential habitat
features (PCEs).
Habitat areas outside the four core habitat areas also support
stable, intact occurrences of Navarretia fossalis. These satellite
areas represent unique habitat within this species' range that also
contain the PCEs laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement essential to the conservation of the species. The satellite
habitat areas occur over a wide range of soils and at various
elevations that include several occurrences over a range of
environmental variables, the preservation of which will help maintain
the genetic diversity of N. fossalis. The satellite habitat areas are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis because they allow for
connections between existing occurrences of the species, and together
with the core habitat areas, will create a sustainable matrix of
habitat for N. fossalis that will enable it to evolve and potentially
respond to future environmental changes.
Areas of essential habitat that are smaller than core habitat areas
were selected as satellite habitat areas if Navarretia fossalis
persists from year to year (i.e., areas that may be isolated and likely
to be genetically unique), and are: (a) on the periphery of this
species' geographical distribution; (b) geographically isolated from
other occurrences; or (c) provide connections between other satellite
or core habitat areas. Additional discussion about exceptions to the
assignment of satellite areas is found below in the Critical Habitat
Units section of this rule.
(7) For the core and satellite habitat areas, we mapped the
specific areas that contain the physical and biological features (the
PCEs) in the quantity and spatial arrangement needed to support life
history functions essential to Navarretia fossalis. We first mapped the
ephemeral wetland habitat in the occupied area using occurrence data,
aerial imagery, and 1:24,000 topographic maps. We then mapped the
intermixed wetland and upland habitats that make up the local
watersheds and the topography and soils that support the occupied
ephemeral wetland habitat. We identified the gently sloping area
associated with ephemeral wetland habitat and any adjacent areas that
slope toward and contribute to the hydrology of the ephemeral wetland
habitat. In most cases, we delineated the border of revised critical
habitat around the occupied ephemeral wetlands and associated local
watershed areas to follow natural breaks in the terrain such as
ridgelines, mesa edges, and steep canyon slopes.
When determining the revised critical habitat boundaries, we made
every effort to map precisely only the areas that contain the PCEs and
provide for the conservation of Navarretia fossalis. However, due to
the mapping scale that we use to draft critical habitat boundaries, we
cannot guarantee that every fraction of revised critical habitat
contains the PCEs. Additionally, we made every attempt to avoid
including developed areas such as lands underlying buildings, paved
areas, and other structures that lack PCEs for N.
[[Page 62206]]
fossalis. The scale of the maps we prepared under the parameters for
publication within the Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the
exclusion of such developed areas. Any developed structures and the
land under them inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries
shown on the maps of this revised critical habitat designation are
excluded by text in this rule and are not designated as critical
habitat. Therefore, Federal actions involving these lands would not
trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific actions may
affect the species or PCEs in adjacent critical habitat.
Revised Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating 6 units that include 19 subunits as critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis. Table 4 identifies the approximate
area of each critical habitat subunit by land ownership. These
subunits, which generally correspond to the geographic area of the
subunits delineated in the 2005 designation, replace the current
critical habitat designation for N. fossalis in 50 CFR 17.96(a). The
critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our best assessment
of areas determined to be occupied at the time of listing that contain
the primary constituent elements in the appropriate quantity and
spatial arrangement (i.e., essential features) which may require
special management considerations or protection. We are not designating
any unoccupied areas or areas outside of the species' historical range
because we determined that occupied lands within the species'
historical range are sufficient for the conservation of N. fossalis
provided that these lands are protected or receive special management
considerations for N. fossalis.
Table 4. Area and ownership for lands included in the Navarretia fossalis revised critical habitat designation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Location Federal State Government Local Government Private Total
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A. Cruzan Mesa -- -- -- 156 ac 156 ac
(63 ha).............. (63 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B. Plum Canyon -- -- -- 20 ac 20 ac
(8 ha)............... (8 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station -- -- 6 ac 3 ac 9 ac
(3 ha)............... (1 ha)............... (4 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B. Carroll Canyon -- -- 17 ac 1 ac 18 ac
(7 ha)............... (< 1 ha)............. (7 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3C. Nobel Drive -- 37 ac -- 37 ac
(15 ha).............. (15 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3D. Montgomery Field -- -- 48 ac -- 48 ac
(20 ha).............. (20 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C1. San Marcos (Upham) -- -- -- 34 ac 34 ac
(14 ha).............. (14 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4C2. San Marcos (Universal Boot) -- -- 15 ac 17 ac 32 ac
(6 ha)............... (7 ha)............... (13 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4D. San Marcos (Bent Avenue) -- -- -- 5 ac 5 ac
(2 ha)............... (2 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4E. Ramona -- -- 3 ac 132 ac 135 ac
(1 ha)............... (53 ha).............. (55 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5A. Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1-3) 23 ac 1 ac 71 ac -- 95 ac
(9 ha)................ (<1 ha)............... (29 ha).............. (38 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5B. Otay River Valley (M2) -- -- -- 24 ac 24 ac
(10 ha).............. (10 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5C. Otay Mesa (J26) -- 2 ac 24 ac 16 ac 42 ac
(1 ha)................ (10 ha).............. (7 ha)............... (17 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5F. Proctor Valley (R1-2) -- -- 51 ac 37 ac 88 ac
(21 ha).............. (15 ha).............. (36 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 62207]]
5G. Otay Lakes (K3-5) -- -- 140 ac -- 140 ac
(57 ha).............. (57 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5H. Western Otay Mesa vernal pool -- -- 41 ac 98 ac 139 ac
complexes (17 ha).............. (40 ha).............. (56 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5I. Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool -- -- -- 221 ac 221 ac
complexes (89 ha).............. (89 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6A. San Jacinto River -- 1,504 ac -- 2,808 ac 4,312 ac
(608 ha).............. (1,136 ha)........... (1,745 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6B. Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded -- -- -- 930 ac 930 ac
Alkali Plain (376 ha)............. (376 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6C. Wickerd Road and Scott Road -- -- -- 235 ac 235 ac
Pools (95 ha).............. (95 ha)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 23 ac 1,507 ac 453 ac 4,737 ac 6,720 ac
(9 ha)................ (610 ha).............. (183 ha)............. (1,917 ha)........... (2,720 ha)*
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
Critical Habitat Units
Presented below are brief descriptions of all subunits included in
the Navarretia fossalis revised critical habitat designation and
reasons why they meet the definition of critical habitat for the
species. The units in this revised critical habitat correspond to the
management areas described in the 1998 Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools
of Southern California. Each subunit contains either: (1) A core
habitat area; or (2) a satellite habitat area that provides
connectivity between core habitat areas or other satellite habitat
areas. Areas identified as subunits that harbor satellite habitat areas
were identified as containing features essential to the conservation of
the species (compared to other areas not identified as essential
habitat) due to a combination of their geographic proximity to core
habitat areas, their status as an area that supports a stable
occurrence (representing occurrences that continue to persist within a
given geographic area), and the likelihood that these particular
habitat areas support genetically unique occurrences. Other areas not
qualifying as satellite areas are occurrences that are represented by
one or more of the following characteristics: Occurrence consisting of
few individuals; no detailed information on occurrence; lack of
observations during recent surveys; locations not identified in the
Recovery Plan; or areas have low likelihood of persistence due to
fragmentation or enclosure by developed areas.
Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin--Orange Management Area
Unit 1 is located in northwestern Los Angeles County and consists
of two subunits totaling 176 ac (71 ha) of private land.
Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa
Subunit 1A is located near the City of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles
County. This subunit is on Cruzan Mesa, northwest of Forest Park and
the Sierra Highway and southwest of Vasquez Canyon Road. Subunit 1A
consists of 156 ac (63 ha) of private land and meets our selection
criteria as satellite habitat. Cruzan Mesa is one of the only areas in
Los Angeles County that supports mesa-top vernal pools. As satellite
habitat, this subunit supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia
fossalis, provides potential connectivity with Subunit 1B, and likely
supports a genetically distinct occurrence because of the separation of
these two northern occurrences from other occurrences of N. fossalis.
This subunit and Subunit 1B (described below) represent the most
northern occurrences of this species. Subunit 1A contains the physical
and biological features that are essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as mowing or grading) that
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon
Subunit 1B is located near the City of Santa Clarita in Los Angeles
County. This subunit is in Plum Canyon, west of Forest Park and the
Sierra Highway and north of Plum Canyon Road. Subunit 1B consists of 20
ac (8 ha) of private land and meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis, provides potential connectivity with
Subunit 1A, and likely supports a genetically distinct occurrence
because of the separation of these two northern occurrences from other
occurrences of N. fossalis. The Plum Canyon vernal pool habitat occurs
on a flat area down-slope from the
[[Page 62208]]
vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa. The vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa (Subunit
1A) and Plum Canyon represent the only habitat for N. fossalis in Los
Angeles County and the most northern occurrences of this species.
Subunit 1B contains the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat
(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit
may require special management considerations or protection to address
threats from nonnative plant species within this subunit. Please see
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Unit 2: San Diego--Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station
Unit 2 is located in the City of Carlsbad in San Diego County and
contains 6 ac (3 ha) of land owned by the North County Transit District
and 3 ac (1 ha) of private land. This unit is loosely bounded by
Avenida Encinas on the north, a housing development on the east,
Poinsettia Lane on the south, and train tracks on the west. Unit 2
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences on MCB Camp Pendleton and Subunits
4C1, 4C2, and 4D. The Poinsettia Lane vernal pool complex consists of a
series of vernal pools that run parallel to a berm created by the train
tracks. Unit 2 contains the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in
this unit may require special management considerations or protection
to address threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as
unauthorized recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins.
Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section
of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Unit 3: San Diego--Central Coastal Mesa Management Area
Unit 3 is located in central coastal San Diego County and consists
of three subunits totaling 103 ac (42 ha). This unit contains 102 ac
(42 ha) owned by State and local governments, and approximately 1 ac
(less than 1 ha) of private land.
Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon
Subunit 3B is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County.
This subunit is located to the southwest of the intersection of
Parkdale Avenue and Osgood Way, and is loosely bounded by residential
development on the north, open space to the east, and a quarry to the
south and west. Subunit 3B consists of approximately 18 ac (7 ha) that
includes 17 ac (7 ha) of land owned by State or local governments and 1
ac (less than 1 ha) of private land. Subunit 3B meets our selection
criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a stable occurrence
of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity between
occurrences in Subunits 3A and 3C. The Carroll Canyon vernal pool
complex consists of a group of vernal pools on the edge of a mesa north
of Carroll Canyon. Historically, there may have been more habitat for
this species; however, the majority of vernal pool habitat in the
vicinity of this subunit has been developed. Subunit 3B contains the
physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation
of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as trespass or illegal
trash dumping) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive
Subunit 3C is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County.
This subunit is loosely bounded by the 805 interstate on the northeast,
train tracks on the south, and Nobel Drive on the northwest. Subunit 3C
consists of 37 ac (15 ha) of land owned by local government and meets
our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences in Subunits 3B and 3D. The Nobel Drive
vernal pool complex consists of a group of vernal pools on a mesa-top
north of Rose Canyon. Subunit 3C contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field
Subunit 3D is located in the City of San Diego in San Diego County.
This subunit is located at Montgomery Field (airport) to the northeast
of the runway area. Subunit 3D consists of 48 ac (20 ha) of land owned
by the City of San Diego and meets our selection criteria as satellite
habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity
with the occurrence in Subunit 3C. The Montgomery Field vernal pool
complex consists of a large group of vernal pools east of the runway
area at Montgomery Field, although only the northeastern portion of
this vernal pool complex is being designated as critical habitat
because the southeastern portion of this vernal pool complex has been
hydrologically disconnected from other vernal pools by past
development, is now isolated, and does not meet the definition of
essential habitat. Navarretia fossalis has not been documented in the
southeastern portion of this vernal pool complex. Subunit 3D contains
the physical and biological features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2),
[[Page 62209]]
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Unit 4: San Diego--Inland Management Area
Unit 4 is located within inland San Diego County and consists of
four subunits totaling 206 ac (83 ha). This unit contains 18 ac (7 ha)
owned by State and local governments, and 188 ac (76 ha) of private
land.
Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D: San Marcos
Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D are located in the City of San Marcos in
San Diego County. These three subunits consist of three separate vernal
pool complexes. The first (Subunit 4C1) is loosely bounded by La Mirada
Drive on the northeast, Las Posas Road on the southeast, Linda Vista
Drive on the southwest, and South Pacific Street on the northwest. The
second (Subunit 4C2) is loosely bounded by Linda Vista Drive on the
northeast, Las Posas Road on the east, West San Marcos Boulevard on the
south, and South Pacific Street on the west. The third (Subunit 4D) is
loosely bounded by South Bent Avenue on the northeast, commercial
development on the southeast and southwest, and Linda Vista Drive on
the northwest. Subunit 4C1 consists of 34 ac (14 ha) of private land,
Subunit 4C2 consists of 15 ac (6 ha) of land owned by local government
and 17 ac (7 ha) of private land, and Subunit 4D consists of 5 ac (2
ha) of private land. These three subunits meet our selection criteria
as satellite habitat areas because they support stable occurrences of
Navarretia fossalis and provide potential connectivity between
occurrences in Unit 2 and Subunit 4E. We grouped these vernal pool
complexes because of the clustered nature of these occurrences. These
subunits have separate subunit numbers to be consistent with the
numbering identified in the 2005 critical habitat designation. Subunits
4C1, 4C2, and 4D contain the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in
these subunits may require special management considerations or
protection to address threats from nonnative plant species and
activities (such as commercial development, trespass, or OHV use) that
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 4E: Ramona
Subunit 4E is located in the unincorporated community of Ramona.
This subunit is loosely bounded by the Ramona Airport and Ramona
Airport Road on the north, Sawday Road on the east, Santa Maria Creek
on the south, and a series of rock outcrops on the west. Subunit 4E
consists of approximately 135 ac (55 ha) that includes 3 ac (1 ha) of
land owned by State or local governments and 132 ac (53 ha) of private
land. Subunit 4E meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat
because it supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity with occurrences in Subunits 4C1, 4C2,
and 4D. The vernal pools in this subunit occur in gently sloping
grassland habitat and are at the highest elevation where N. fossalis is
known to occur. Subunit 4E contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as agricultural activities
or recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Unit 5: San Diego--Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area
Unit 5 is located in southern San Diego County and consists of six
subunits totaling 748 ac (303 ha). This unit contains 28 ac (11 ha) of
federally owned land, 330 ac (134 ha) of land owned by State and local
governments, and 390 ac (158 ha) of private land.
Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools
Subunit 5A is located southwest of the Sweetwater Reservoir. This
subunit is loosely bounded by the Sweetwater Reservoir on the north,
steeply sloping topography on the east, State Route 125 on the south,
and an unnamed drainage on the west. Subunit 5A consists of
approximately 95 ac (38 ha) and includes 23 ac (9 ha) of Federal land
that is part of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 ac
(less than 1ha) of land owned by the State, and 71 ac (29 ha) of land
owned by local government. This subunit meets our selection criteria as
satellite habitat. This satellite habitat subunit supports a stable
occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity
between occurrences in Subunits 5B and 5F. Some of the area occupied by
N. fossalis was lost during the construction of State Route 125. The
soil from that area was salvaged and is being used to restore other
vernal pools in this subunit. Subunit 5A contains the physical and
biological features that are essential to the conservation of N.
fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley
Subunit 5B is located in the City of Chula Vista and unincorporated
San Diego County. This subunit is loosely bounded by Olympic Parkway on
the north, a housing development on the east, and a landfill to the
southwest. Subunit 5B consists of 24 ac (10 ha) of private land and
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 5A and 5H.
Subunit 5B contains the
[[Page 62210]]
physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation
of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed
wetland and upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2),
and the topography and soils that support ponding during winter and
spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized
recreational use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the
Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule
for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Subunit 5C: Otay Mesa
Subunit 5C is located on the eastern portion of Otay Mesa, directly
northwest of and adjacent to the George F. Bailey Detention Facility at
the terminus of Alta Road. Subunit 5C consists of 26 ac (11 ha) of
State and local government-owned land, and 16 ac (7 ha) of private
land, and it meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because
it supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides
potential connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits
5G and 5I. Subunit 5C contains the physical and biological features
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3).
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
the species in this subunit may require special management
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant
species and activities (such as unauthorized recreational use) that
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley
Subunit 5F is located between the unincorporated communities of
Eastlake and Jamul in San Diego County. This subunit is located along
Proctor Valley Road in Proctor Valley. Subunit 5F consists of
approximately 88 ac (36 ha) and includes 51 ac (21 ha) of land owned by
the City of San Diego and 37 ac (15 ha) of private land. Subunit 5F
meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat because it supports a
stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 5A and 5G.
The vernal pools in this subunit occur in Proctor Valley on a flat area
that is slightly elevated from the stream channel that runs through
this valley. The vernal pools in this subunit to the west of Proctor
Valley Road are severely impacted by OHV use, but the vernal pools to
the east of Proctor Valley road remain relatively intact. Subunit 5F
contains the physical and biological features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit
may require special management considerations or protection to address
threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as
unauthorized recreational use or OHV use) that occur in the vernal pool
basins. Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection
section of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis
habitat and potential management considerations.
Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes
Subunit 5G is located east of the City of Chula Vista in San Diego
County. This subunit is loosely bounded by Lower Otay Reservoir to the
north and west and by the slopes of Otay Mountain to the southeast.
Subunit 5G consists of 140 ac (57 ha) of land owned by State or local
governments and meets our selection criteria as satellite habitat
because this location supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia
fossalis and provides potential connectivity between occurrences of N.
fossalis in Subunits 5F and 5I. The vernal pool complexes in this
subunit are located on the flat areas to the south of Lower Otay
Reservoir. Subunit 5G contains the physical and biological features
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3).
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
the species in this subunit may require special management
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant
species and activities (such as unauthorized recreational use) that
occur in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes
Subunit 5H is located within the Otay Mesa Community planning area
of the City of San Diego. Subunit 5H consists of approximately 139 ac
(56 ha) that includes 41 ac (17 ha) of land owned by local governments
and 98 ac (40 ha) of private land. Subunit 5H and Subunit 5I encompass
the core habitat on Otay Mesa. As core habitat, this subunit contains a
large area of habitat that supports sizable occurrences of Navarretia
fossalis and provides potential connectivity between occurrences in
Subunits 5G and 5I. This subunit contains several mesa-top vernal pool
complexes on western Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J 2N, J
2S, J 2W, J 4, J 13N, J 13S, J 14, J 33, J 34 as in Appendix D of City
of San Diego, 2004). Subunit 5H contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as unauthorized
recreational use or residential and commercial development) that occur
in the vernal pool basins. Please see the Special Management
Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a discussion of
the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential management
considerations.
Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes
Subunit 5I is located in the City of San Diego. This subunit
contains several mesa top vernal pool complexes on eastern Otay Mesa.
Subunit 5I consists of 221 ac (89 ha) of private land. Subunit 5I and
Subunit 5H encompass the core habitat on Otay Mesa. As core habitat,
Subunit 5I contains a large area of habitat that supports sizable
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity
between occurrences in Subunits 5B and 5H.
[[Page 62211]]
This subunit contains several mesa-top vernal pool complexes on
eastern Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal pool complexes J 22, J 29, J 30, J
31N, J 31S as in Appendix D of City of San Diego, 2004 and Service
GIS). Subunit 5I contains the physical and biological features that are
essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral
wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that
act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that
support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species in
this subunit may require special management considerations or
protection to address threats from nonnative plant species and
activities (such as unauthorized recreational use or residential and
commercial development) that occur in the vernal pool basins. Please
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Unit 6: Riverside Management Area
Unit 6 is located in western Riverside County and consists of three
subunits totaling 5,477 ac (2,217 ha). This unit contains 1,504 ac (609
ha) of land owned by the State of California's Department of Fish and
Game and 3,973 ac (1,608 ha) of private land.
Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River
Subunit 6A is generally located along the San Jacinto River near
the cities of Hemet and Perris in Riverside County. This subunit is
loosely bounded by Mystic Lake on the northeast and by the Perris
Airport on the southwest. Subunit 6A consists of approximately 4,312 ac
(1,745 ha), including 1,504 ac (609 ha) of land owned by State or local
governments and 2,808 ac (1,136 ha) of private land. Subunit 6A
encompasses core habitat along the San Jacinto River. As core habitat,
this subunit contains a large area of habitat that supports sizable
occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity
between occurrences in Subunits 6B and 6C. This subunit consists of
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that occur along the San
Jacinto River. Subunit 6A contains the physical and biological features
that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis, including
ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland
habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the topography
and soils that support ponding during winter and spring months (PCE 3).
The physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
the species in this subunit may require special management
considerations or protection to address threats from nonnative plant
species and activities (such as manure dumping or flood control) that
occur in the vernal pool basins and associated watershed area. Please
see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain
Subunit 6B is located near the City of Hemet and west of the Hemet-
Ryan Airport in Riverside County. This subunit is loosely bounded by
Devonshire Avenue on the north, the boundary for the City of Hemet on
the east, train tracks on the south, and low-lying hills on the west.
Subunit 6B consists of 930 ac (376 ha) of private land that encompasses
the core habitat along the Upper Salt Creek drainage west of the City
of Hemet. As core habitat, this subunit contains a large area of
habitat that supports sizable occurrences of Navarretia fossalis and
provides potential connectivity between occurrences in Subunits 6A and
6C. This subunit consists of seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains
not subject to U.S. Army Corps of Engineer jurisdiction. Subunit 6B
contains the physical and biological features that are essential to the
conservation of N. fossalis, including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE
1), intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the local
watershed (PCE 2), and the topography and soils that support ponding
during winter and spring months (PCE 3). The physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species in this subunit
may require special management considerations or protection to address
threats from nonnative plant species and activities (such as manure
dumping, grazing, flood control, or discing for vegetation control)
that occur in the vernal pool basins and associated watershed area.
Please see the Special Management Considerations or Protection section
of this rule for a discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and
potential management considerations.
Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road Pools
Subunit 6C is located in the City of Menifee in Riverside County,
California. This subunit is loosely bounded by low lying hills north of
Garbani Road on the north, Briggs Road on the east, Scott Road on the
south, and Menifee Road on the west. Subunit 6C consists of 235 ac (95
ha) of private land. This subunit meets our selection criteria as
satellite habitat because this location supports a stable occurrence of
Navarretia fossalis and provides potential connectivity among
occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 6A, 6B, and with Subunit 6D that
we are excluding under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Application
Section 4(b)(2) of the Action section). This subunit consists of two
large vernal pools. Subunit 6C contains the physical and biological
features that are essential to the conservation of N. fossalis,
including ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and
upland habitats that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), and the
topography and soils that support ponding during winter and spring
months (PCE 3). The physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this subunit may require special
management considerations or protection to address threats from
nonnative plant species and activities (such as manure dumping,
residential or agricultural development, discing for vegetation
control, or maintenance of existing pipelines) that occur in the vernal
pool basins and associated watershed area. Please see the Special
Management Considerations or Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to N. fossalis habitat and potential
management considerations.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out are
not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Decisions
by the Fifth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
definition of ``destruction or adverse modification'' (50 CFR 402.02)
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378
F. 3d 1059 (9\th\ Cir 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5\th\ Cir 2001)), and we do not
rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is
likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain
functional (or retain those physical and biological features that
relate to the ability of the
[[Page 62212]]
area to periodically support the species) to serve its intended
conservation role for the species (Service 2004a, p. 3).
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species or to destroy or adversely modify
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency)
must enter into consultation with us. As a result of this consultation,
we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through
our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or designated
critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that are likely to
adversely affect listed species or designated critical habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable. We define ``Reasonable and prudent alternatives'' at 50
CFR 402.02 as alternative actions identified during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of the listed species or destroying or adversely
modifying critical habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where we have
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal
agencies may need to request reinitiation of consultation with us on
actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if those
actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
Federal activities that may affect Navarretia fossalis or its
designated critical habitat require section 7 consultation under the
Act. Activities on State, Tribal, local, or private lands requiring a
Federal permit (such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(Corps) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et
seq.) or a permit from us under section 10 of the Act) or involving
some other Federal action (such as funding from the Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or the Federal
Emergency Management Agency) are subject to the section 7 consultation
process. Federal actions not affecting listed species or critical
habitat, and actions on State, Tribal, local, or private lands that are
not federally funded, authorized, or permitted, do not require section
7 consultations.
Application of the ``Adverse Modification'' Standard
The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is
whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the
affected critical habitat would remain functional to serve its intended
conservation role for the species. Activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat are those that alter the physical and
biological features to an extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation value of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. As
discussed above, the role of critical habitat is to support the life
history needs of the species and provide for the conservation of the
species. For N. fossalis, this includes supporting viable occurrences
and recovery of the species in core habitat areas and satellite habitat
areas.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.
Activities that, when carried out, funded, or authorized by a
Federal agency, may affect critical habitat and, therefore, should
result in consultation for Navarretia fossalis include, but are not
limited to (please see Special Management Considerations or Protection
section for a more detailed discussion on the impacts of these actions
to the listed species):
(1) Actions that would impact the ability of an ephemeral wetland
to continue to provide habitat for Navarretia fossalis and other native
species that require this specialized habitat type. Such activities
could include, but are not limited to, water impoundment, stream
channelization, water diversion, water withdrawal, and development
activities. These activities could alter the biological and physical
features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis that provide the
appropriate habitat for the species by eliminating ponding habitat;
changing the duration and frequency of the ponding events on which this
species relies; making the habitat too wet, thus allowing obligate
wetland species to become established; making the habitat too dry, thus
allowing upland species to become established; causing large amounts of
sediment or manure to be deposited in N. fossalis habitat; or causing
increased erosion and incising of waterways.
(2) Actions that would impact the soil and topography that cause
water to pond during the winter and spring months. Such activities
could include, but are not limited to, deep ripping of soils,
trenching, soil compaction, and development activities. These
activities could alter the biological and physical features essential
to the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that provide the appropriate
habitat for the species by eliminating ponding habitat, impacting the
impervious nature of the soil layer, or making the soil so impervious
that water pools for an extended period that is detrimental to N.
fossalis (as described in the PCEs).
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
(1) An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
(2) A statement of goals and priorities;
(3) A detailed description of management actions to be implemented
[[Page 62213]]
to provide for these ecological needs; and
(4) A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ``The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas
owned or controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its
use, that are subject to an integrated natural resources management
plan prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if
the Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit
to the species for which critical habitat is proposed for
designation.''
We consult with the military on the development and implementation
of INRMPs for installations with federally listed species. Any INRMPs
developed by military installations located within the range of
Navarretia fossalis and that contain those features essential to the
species' conservation were analyzed for exemption under the authority
of section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act.
Both MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS Miramar have approved INRMPs that
address Navarretia fossalis, and the Marine Corps (on both
installations) has committed to work closely with us, California
Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and California Department of Parks
and Recreation to continually refine the existing INRMPs as part of the
Sikes Act's INRMP review process. In accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we determined that conservation efforts
identified in the INRMPs will provide a benefit to N. fossalis
occurring in habitats within or adjacent to MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS
Miramar (see the following sections that detail this determination for
each installation). Therefore, 213 ac (86 ha) of habitat on MCB Camp
Pendleton and MCAS Miramar are exempt from this revised critical
habitat for N. fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act.
Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (MCB Camp Pendleton)
In the previous final critical habitat designation for Navarretia
fossalis (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the proposed revised
critical habitat designation (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009), we exempted
MCB Camp Pendleton from the designation of critical habitat. We based
this decision on the conservation benefits to N. fossalis identified in
the INRMP developed by MCB Camp Pendleton in November 2001 and the
updated INRMP that was prepared by MCB Camp Pendleton in March 2007
(Marine Corp Base Camp Pendleton 2007). We determined that conservation
efforts identified in the INRMP provide a benefit to the occurrences of
N. fossalis and vernal pool habitat occurring on MCB Camp Pendleton
(Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 2007, Section 4, pp. 51-76). This
conservation protects the 145 ac (59 ha) of habitat that we believe to
be essential for the conservation of N. fossalis on Stuart Mesa and
near the Wire Mountain Housing Complex. Therefore, lands containing
features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis on this
installation are exempt from this revised critical habitat for N.
fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For more information on the
conservation benefits afforded to N. fossalis at MCB Camp Pendleton,
please see the Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section in
the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27610).
Marine Corps Air Station Miramar (MCAS Miramar)
In the previous final critical habitat designation for Navarretia
fossalis (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) and the proposed revised
critical habitat designation (74 FR 27588; June 10, 2009), we exempted
MCAS Miramar from the designation of critical habitat (70 FR 60658;
October 18, 2005). We based this decision on the conservation benefits
to N. fossalis identified in the INRMP developed by MCAS Miramar in May
2000 and the updated INRMP prepared by MCAS Miramar in October 2006
(Gene Stout and Associates et al. 2006). We determined that
conservation efforts identified in the INRMP provide a benefit to the
occurrences of N. fossalis and vernal pool habitat on the 69 ac (28 ha)
of habitat on the western portion of MCAS Miramar (Gene Stout and
Associates et al. 2006, Section 7, pp. 17-23). Therefore, lands
containing features essential to the conservation of N. fossalis on
this installation are exempt from the revised critical habitat for N.
fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For more information on the
conservation benefits afforded to N. fossalis at MCAS Miramar, please
see the Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section in the
proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27610).
Exclusions
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must designate
and revise critical habitat on the basis of the best available
scientific data after taking into consideration the economic impact,
national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying
any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an
area from critical habitat if he determines that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the best scientific
data available, that the failure to designate such area as critical
habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making that
determination, the legislative history is clear that the Secretary has
broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight
to give to any factor.
In the following paragraphs, we address a number of general issues
that are relevant to our analysis under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, national
security impacts, or any other relevant impacts. In considering whether
to exclude a particular area from the designation, we must identify the
benefits of including the area in the designation, identify the
benefits of excluding the area from the designation, and determine
whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion.
If based on this analysis, we make this determination, then we can
exclude the area only if such exclusion would not result in the
extinction of the species.
When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits that area would receive from the
protection from adverse modification or destruction as a result of
actions with a Federal nexus; the educational benefits of mapping
essential habitat for recovery of the listed species; and any benefits
that may result from a designation due to State or Federal laws that
may apply to critical habitat.
When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among
other things, whether exclusion of a specific
[[Page 62214]]
area is likely to result in long-term conservation; the continuation,
strengthening, or encouragement of partnerships that result in
conservation of listed species; or implementation of a management plan
that provides equal to or more conservation than a critical habitat
designation would provide. Specifically, when evaluating a conservation
plan we consider, among other factors: whether the plan is finalized;
how it provides for the conservation of the essential physical and
biological features; whether the conservation management strategies and
actions contained in a management plan are in place and there is a
strong likelihood they will be implemented into the future; whether the
conservation strategies in the plan are likely to be effective; and
whether the plan contains a monitoring program or adaptive management
to ensure that the conservation measures are effective and can be
adapted in the future in response to new information.
After evaluating the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of
exclusion, we carefully weigh the two sides to determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If we determine that
they do, we then determine whether exclusion would result in
extinction. If exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result
in extinction, we will not exclude it from the designation.
In the case of Navarretia fossalis, the revised critical habitat
designation does not include any Tribal lands or trust resources.
However, this revised critical habitat designation does include some
lands covered by three completed HCPs for N. fossalis. No new HCP or
conservation plan covering the distribution of this species has been
approved since the proposed revised designation that published in the
Federal Register on June 10, 2009 (74 FR 27588).
Based on the information provided by entities seeking exclusion, as
well as other comments we received, we evaluated whether certain lands
in the proposed critical habitat Units 3 and 6 were appropriate for
exclusion from this final designation.
After considering the following areas under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, we are excluding them from the critical habitat designation for
Navarretia fossalis: Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan under the MSCP, and Subunits 6D and 6E within the Western
Riverside County MSHCP (see Table 5 below). As described in the
following exclusion analyses for the two HCPs, we made this
determination because we believe that:
(1) Their value for N. fossalis conservation will be preserved for
the foreseeable future by existing protective actions, and
(2) They are appropriate for exclusion under the ``other relevant
factor'' provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Table 5. Areas being excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act from this
revised critical habitat designation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subunit Area excluded
------------------------------------------------------------------------
County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the San Diego MSCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A. Santa Fe Valley: Crosby Estates 5 ac (2 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal County of San Diego Subarea Plan 5 ac (2 ha)
under the San Diego MSCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Western Riverside County MSHCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6D. Skunk Hollow 158 ac (64 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
6E. Mesa de Burro 708 ac (287 ha)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subtotal for Western Riverside County 866 ac (351 ha)
MSHCP
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 871 ac (353 ha)*
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.
Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Factors Habitat Conservation Plans
We believe that the benefits of excluding from critical habitat
portions of the essential habitat we identified within the County of
San Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP and the Western Riverside County
MSHCP outweigh the benefits of including these areas; therefore, we are
excluding these areas from this revised critical habitat designation.
Lands covered by the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP, and portions of the
lands covered by the County of San Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP,
and the Western Riverside County MSHCP do not result in the benefits of
exclusion outweighing the benefits of inclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act, as described in detail below.
Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP)-- San Diego Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program (MHCP).
We considered exclusion of a portion of essential habitat covered
by the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP for exclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act. The lands that were under consideration for exclusion
within the City of Carlsbad include a portion of one vernal pool
complex located east of the railroad tracks at the Poinsettia Lane
Commuter Station. The vernal pool complex is partially on land that is
covered by the Carlsbad HMP (i.e., the 3 ac (1 ha) considered for
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act) and partially on land that
is owned by the North County Transportation District (6 ac (2 ha)),
which is not a participating entity to the Carlsbad HMP and was not
considered for exclusion. We determined that the benefits of inclusion
for 3 ac (1 ha) of Unit 2 lands within the Carlsbad HMP area are
greater than the benefits of exclusion. In making our final decision
with regard to these HMP-covered lands, we considered several factors,
including our relationship with the City of Carlsbad, our relationship
with other MHCP stakeholders, existing consultations, conservation
measures in place on these lands that benefit Navarretia fossalis,
implementation of long-term management strategies, and impacts to
current and future
[[Page 62215]]
partnerships. We recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined
in the Carlsbad HMP will be implemented eventually on covered lands as
the plan is carried out regardless of critical habitat designation.
This vernal pool complex in Unit 2 is also benefiting from conservation
efforts as a result of actions associated with four other federally
listed vernal pool species (i.e., San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta
sandiegonensis) and its designated critical habitat, and Riverside
fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus woottoni) and its designated critical
habitat, and Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii (San Diego button-
celery), and Orcuttia californica (California Orcutt grass)). However,
the 3 ac (1 ha) portion considered for exclusion under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act is not conserved and managed for the long-term protection of
the species and its habitat at this time. Once this area is conserved
and managed, it will help with the long-term protection of this vernal
pool complex, not only for N. fossalis, but also the four other
federally endangered vernal pool species that already receive
protection under the plan.
Protection of this vernal pool area is particularly important
considering the surrounding area has already been developed.
Conservation measures for lands within the Carlsbad HMP are outlined in
the Carlsbad HMP biological opinion (Service 2004c, pp. 312-316). We
recognize that these lands have been avoided by development associated
with the Water's End housing project and have been identified as open
space for the protection of the vernal pool habitat, as outlined in a
consultation conducted with the Corps (Service 1994) prior to the
development of the Carlsbad HMP. The developer of the Water's End
project agreed to grant a conservation easement over the Navarretia
fossalis habitat to CDFG and provide a management plan with an
endowment ($100,000) to the City of Carlsbad for management and
monitoring in perpetuity. Additionally, the land-owners recently
completed a 5-year restoration of the upland portion of the vernal pool
complex with coastal sage scrub vegetation (City of Carlsbad 2009, p.
7). However, a conservation easement has not yet been placed over the
property and long-term management of the property is not yet in place.
Thus, we made the determination that the benefits of inclusion outweigh
the benefits of exclusion and have included all lands in this area
(i.e., 9 ac (4 ha in Unit 2)) as critical habitat for N. fossalis. We
recognize and appreciate the conservation actions taken to date at this
location, such as the $100,000 provided by the Water's End project
along with an additional $50,000 from the North Coast Transit District
that are being held by CDFG and will be used to develop and implement
long-term management to benefit vernal pool species occurring at this
site, including N. fossalis. We look forward to working with the North
Coast Transit District and CDFG in the near future to ensure that both
conservation and long-term management are implemented for N. fossalis
and its essential habitat at this location.
San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)--County of San
Diego Subarea Plan.
We determined approximately 86 ac (35 ha) of habitat in Subunits
3A, 5B, 5F, and 5I within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan of the
MSCP contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may require special management
considerations or protection and therefore, these lands meet the
definition of critical habitat under the Act. In making our final
decision with regard to lands within the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan, we considered several factors, including our relationship with
the participating MSCP jurisdiction, our relationship with other MSCP
stakeholders, non-covered activities, existing consultations, long-term
conservation measures management in place on these lands that benefit
N. fossalis, and impacts to current and future partnerships. We
recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined in the County of
San Diego Subarea Plan will be implemented as the plan is carried out
regardless of whether covered areas are designated as critical habitat.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are excluding 5 ac (2 ha) of land
in Subunit 3A covered by the County of San Diego Subarea Plan from this
revised critical habitat designation that are currently assured of
long-term conservation and management. The remaining 81 ac (33 ha) of
land in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I covered by the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan are not excluded, and we have designated these areas as
critical habitat for N. fossalis.
The MSCP is a subregional HCP made up of several subarea plans that
has been in place for more than a decade. The subregional plan area
encompasses approximately 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) (County of San Diego
1997, p. 1-1; MSCP 1998, pp. 2-1, and 4-2 to 4-4) and provides for
conservation of 85 federally listed and sensitive species (``covered
species'') through the establishment and management of approximately
171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of preserve lands within the Multi-Habitat
Planning Area (MHPA) (City of San Diego) and Pre-Approved Mitigation
Areas (PAMA) (County of San Diego). The MSCP was developed in support
of applications for incidental take permits for several federally
listed species by 12 participating jurisdictions and many other
stakeholders in southwestern San Diego County. Under the umbrella of
the MSCP, each of the 12 participating jurisdictions is required to
prepare a subarea plan that implements the goals of the MSCP within
that particular jurisdiction. Navarretia fossalis was evaluated in the
subregional plan as well as the permitted subarea plans.
Upon completion of the plan that identifies where mitigation
activities should be focused, approximately 171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of
the 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) MSCP plan area will be preserved (MSCP
1998, pp. 2-1 and 4-2 to 4-4). San Diego County Subarea Plan identifies
areas where mitigation activities should be focused to assemble its
preserve areas (i.e., PAMA). Those areas of the MSCP preserve that are
already conserved, as well as those areas that are designated for
inclusion in the preserve under the plan, are referred to as the
``preserve area'' in this revised critical habitat designation. When
the preserve is completed, the public sector (i.e., Federal, State, and
local governments, and general public) will have contributed 108,750 ac
(44,010 ha) (63.3 percent) to the preserve, of which 81,750 ac (33,083
ha) (48 percent) was existing public land when the MSCP was established
and 27,000 ac (10,927 ha) (16 percent) will have been acquired. At
completion, the private sector will have contributed 63,170 ac (25,564
ha) (37 percent) to the preserve as part of the development process,
either through avoidance of impacts or as compensatory mitigation for
impacts to biological resources outside the preserve. Currently and in
the future, Federal and State governments, local jurisdictions, special
districts, and managers of privately owned lands will manage and
monitor their lands in the preserve for species and habitat protection
(MSCP 1998, pp. 2-1 and 4-2 to 4-4).
We considered excluding lands within the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan. After reviewing the areas covered by the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan, we are excluding approximately 5 ac (2 ha) in
Subunit 3A that are currently conserved and managed. The areas within
the plan boundaries of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan in
[[Page 62216]]
Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I were not excluded because we do not believe
that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion at
this time. The lands in these subunits are not currently conserved
under this HCP, and non-covered activities (such as illegal OHV use)
that could adversely affect Navarretia fossalis and its essential
habitat are occurring on these lands. Therefore, we believe the
conservation benefit of including these areas as critical habitat for
N. fossalis may be significant. Additionally, portions of Subunits 5B
and 5I are designated as major/minor Amendment Areas under the subarea
plan and their conservation depends upon the approval of future
amendments to the plan. Therefore, we did not consider these major/
minor amendment areas for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
The County of San Diego Subarea Plan provides additional
conservation for the Navarretia fossalis habitat in Subunit 3A (Crosby
Estates) beyond what occurred when the area was initially developed and
conserved (i.e., in 1995 prior to the Subarea Plan development).
Subunit 3A consists of 5 ac (2 ha) of private land within the northern
portion of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan. This area was set
aside in 1995 when the surrounding area was developed, and the vernal
pool habitat area was restored and managed for a 5-year period to
ensure the conservation of N. fossalis and other vernal pool species.
Under the County of San Diego Subarea Plan, the area will continue to
receive periodic monitoring beyond the initial 5-year period. The long-
term management requirements applicable for this area are explained in
the ``The Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe, Habitat Management Plan, Annual
Report, 2008'' (Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2008, pp. 1-6). Such
management will include monitoring and management of invasive species,
implementing erosion control measures, monitoring and removal of trash/
debris, creating natural fencing barriers to address unauthorized off-
trail activity, installing signage, and developing educational website
and materials (Rincon Consultants, Inc. 2008, pp. 4-15).
Benefits of Inclusion--County of San Diego Subarea Plan
The principle benefit of including an area in a critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to ensure actions
they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of any designated critical habitat,
the regulatory standard of section 7 of the Act under which
consultation is completed. Federal agencies must consult with the
Service on actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid
destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. Federal agencies
must also consult with us on actions that may affect a listed species
and refrain from undertaking actions that are likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of such species. The analysis of effects to
critical habitat is a separate and different analysis from that of the
effects to the species. Therefore, the difference in outcomes of these
two analyses represents the regulatory benefit of critical habitat. For
some species (including Navarretia fossalis), and in some locations,
the outcome of these analyses will be similar, because effects to
habitat will often also result in effects to the species. However, the
regulatory standard is different, as the jeopardy analysis investigates
the action's impact to survival and recovery of the species, while the
adverse modification analysis investigates the action's effects to the
designated habitat's contribution to conservation. This will, in many
instances, lead to different results and different regulatory
requirements. Thus, critical habitat designations may provide greater
benefits to the recovery of a species than would listing alone.
Critical habitat may provide a regulatory benefit for Navarretia
fossalis when there is a Federal nexus present for a project that might
adversely modify critical habitat. Also, where federally listed animal
species, such as the Riverside fairy shrimp or San Diego fairy shrimp
co-occur with N. fossalis and are likely to be taken by a proposed
action that otherwise lacks a Federal nexus, the project proponent
would be required to obtain an incidental take permit under section 10
of the Act, thus resulting an intra-Service section 7 consultation that
would also include N. fossalis. In the areas that we considered for
exclusion within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan, Riverside fairy
shrimp or San Diego fairy shrimp are present in Subunits 3A, 5F, and
5I. In this context, we anticipate that projects that meet the
definition of critical habitat within Subunits 3A, 5F, and 5I will
require a consultation with the Service regardless of whether critical
habitat is designated. It is possible that in Subunit 5B (where no
federally listed fairy shrimp are known to exist) the designation of
critical habitat will result in an increase in the likelihood that
consultations with the Service will occur. It is also possible that the
number of consultations that occur in the local watershed areas of
Subunits 5F and 5I would increase by approximately 20 percent as a
result of critical habitat designation for N. fossalis within the non-
ponded/watershed areas (Service 2009, p. 2). Therefore, for Subunit 5B
and to a certain extent Subunits 5F and 5I, it is probable that
conservation achieved under the Act would increase if the areas are
designated as critical habitat for N. fossalis, resulting in a small
regulatory benefit associated with the designation of critical habitat
in these subunits.
When consulting under section 7 of the Act in designated critical
habitat, we conduct independent analyses for jeopardy and adverse
modification. However, with regard to vernal pool species such as
Navarretia fossalis, the outcomes of those analyses (in terms of
potential restrictions on development) are almost always the same. In
general, a properly functioning hydrologic regime is critical to
sustain listed vernal pool species and their immediate vernal pool
habitat (i.e., local watershed). Avoidance or adequate minimization of
impacts to the wetland area and its associated watershed (which
collectively creates the hydrologic regime necessary to support N.
fossalis) is important not only to enable the critical habitat unit to
carry out its conservation function (i.e., to avoid adverse
modification), but also to avoid jeopardy to the listed species.
Navarretia fossalis is completely dependent on a properly functioning
vernal pool system for its survival; therefore, it is not possible to
differentiate conservation measures needed to avoid adverse
modification of critical habitat from those needed to avoid jeopardy to
the species. Impacts to both wetland features where N. fossalis occurs
and to the associated local watershed necessary to maintain those
wetland features should generally be avoided to prevent jeopardy to N.
fossalis or to prevent adverse modification to N. fossalis critical
habitat. Service biologists regularly negotiate with project proponents
to avoid impacts to vernal pool and ephemeral wetland habitat. Whenever
possible; these negotiations include conservation measures that would
avoid impacts to both the pools and the associated local watershed
area. Therefore, we do not believe conservation achieved under the Act
would differ greatly whether or not the areas are designated as
critical habitat for N. fossalis. However, while the outcome of
individual section 7 consultation may not differ, we believe
designation of lands in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I as critical habitat may
provide a small regulatory benefit by increasing
[[Page 62217]]
the likelihood and number of consultations in these areas and thereby
increase the overall level of conservation for N. fossalis.
Another possible benefit of including lands in a critical habitat
designation is the educational value of the designation to landowners
and the public regarding the potential conservation value of an area.
For example, a critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis may
help local governments or the public focus conservation efforts on
areas of high conservation value for this species. Past efforts have
highlighted the importance of the essential habitat for N. fossalis
within the jurisdiction of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan. These
past efforts include public meetings and opportunities for public
comment that occurred during the process of creating the HCP, the
development of the Habitat Management Plan for the Crosby at Rancho
Santa Fe, and development of our Recovery Plan for Southern California
Vernal Pool Species (Service 1998). While these efforts have helped to
identify important conservation areas for N. fossalis in the County of
San Diego Subarea Plan, some of these areas (i.e., Subunits 5B, 5F, and
5I) still suffer impacts from activities such as grazing on non-
agricultural lands (an activity covered by the plan), and illegal off-
highway vehicle (OHV) use. By designating critical habitat in these
areas that continue to receive impacts, we will better educate the
public regarding these and other threats to N. fossalis and the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the
species. The educational information provided in this revised rule and
the 2005 final rule (70 FR 60658; October 18, 2005) can be used by the
public to learn about N. fossalis priority conservation areas. The
inclusion in revised critical habitat of the approximately 81 ac (33
ha) of lands in subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I that are not currently
protected and managed would formally identify these areas as essential
for the conservation and recovery of N. fossalis and in doing so
provide a significant educational benefit to the conservation of N.
fossalis. In contrast, we believe the educational benefit of
designating Subunit 3A would be insignificant because this area is
already conserved.
We considered that the designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis may strengthen or reinforce some of the provisions
in other State and Federal laws, such as the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) or National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). These
laws analyze the potential for projects to significantly affect aspects
of the environment. In this case for N. fossalis, vernal pools and
vernal pool species have been a focus of conservation in San Diego
County for more than 20 years and have been addressed in CEQA and NEPA
throughout this time period; therefore, we do not believe designation
of critical habitat for N. fossalis will provide a significant
additional benefit to analyses conducted under these laws.
In summary, we believe designating Subunits 3A, 5B, 5F, and 5I as
revised critical habitat may provide some regulatory benefits under
section 7 of the Act, particularly in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I, where
designation may increase the likelihood and number of consultations and
thus the overall level of conservation for this species and its
essential habitat, but we do not believe that the outcome of these
consultations will change greatly with the designation of critical
habitat. Additionally, we believe that there may be a significant
benefit associated with the designation of critical habitat due to the
educational component provided by critical habitat in areas that are
not currently conserved; specifically, we believe that these benefits
are significant in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I.
Benefits of Exclusion--County of San Diego Subarea Plan
We believe significant benefits would be realized by forgoing
designation of critical habitat on lands covered by the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan including:
(1) Continuance and strengthening of our effective working
relationships with all MSCP jurisdictions and stakeholders to promote
conservation of Navarretia fossalis and its habitat;
(2) Allowance for continued meaningful collaboration and
cooperation in working toward recovering this species, including
conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur;
(3) Encouragement for other jurisdictions to complete subarea plans
under the MSCP (including the City of Santee); and
(4) Encouragement of additional HCP and other conservation plan
development in the future on other private lands for this and other
federally listed and sensitive species.
The County of San Diego Subarea Plan provides substantial
protection and management for Navarretia fossalis and the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the species, and
addresses conservation issues from a coordinated, integrated
perspective rather than a piecemeal, project-by-project approach (as
would occur under sections 7 and 9 of the Act). Many landowners
perceive critical habitat as an unfair and unnecessary regulatory
burden given the expense and time involved in developing and
implementing complex regional and jurisdiction-wide HCPs, such as the
MSCP. Exclusion of these lands from critical habitat could help
preserve the partnerships we developed with the County of San Diego in
the development of the MSCP and County of San Diego Subarea Plan, and
foster future partnerships and development of future HCPs.
The primary benefit of excluding lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the County of San Diego Subarea Plan permittees from
critical habitat under the MSCP is strengthening of our existing
partnership with the County of San Diego. The County of San Diego
requested that we exclude lands covered by their subarea plan during
the public comment period. If the County of San Diego believes that a
revised critical habitat designation will impact its ability to
implement their subarea plan, then designating County of San Diego
lands may affect our partnership with them.
In summary, we believe that excluding lands covered by the County
of San Diego Subarea Plan from critical habitat provides the
significant benefit of maintaining existing regional HCP partnerships
and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against Benefits of Inclusion--County of
San Diego Subarea Plan
We reviewed and evaluated the benefits of inclusion and benefits of
exclusion for all lands within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan
under the MSCP proposed as critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis.
The benefits of including lands currently conserved under the MSCP in
the critical habitat designation are small. All of the approximately 5
ac (2 ha) of land in Subunit 3A are already conserved and managed for
the preservation of vernal pool species, including N. fossalis.
Therefore, designating this area as critical habitat is unlikely to
provide significant regulatory or educational benefits. This area is
currently being managed under a habitat management plan developed in
part because the area is covered by the County of San Diego Subarea
Plan. The exclusion of conserved areas of Subunit 3A will benefit the
partnership that we have with the County of San Diego and encourage the
conservation of lands associated with the development and
implementation of future HCPs.
[[Page 62218]]
Including lands in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I in the critical habitat
designation for Navarretia fossalis that are not currently conserved or
protected from activities such as illegal OHV use and unregulated
grazing in critical habitat will provide additional regulatory
protection for N. fossalis and its essential habitat under section 7(a)
of the Act when there is a Federal nexus, and designation will act as
an educational tool for the public regarding the conservation of N.
fossalis. Therefore, designating these areas as critical habitat for N.
fossalis is likely to provide additional regulatory benefits as well as
a significant educational benefit to the species. We believe that
excluding these areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act would provide a
significant benefit to the partnership that we have with the County of
San Diego, but we believe that the conservation benefits of including
these lands as critical habitat outweighs the benefit of exclusion.
In summary, we find that the benefits of excluding lands in areas
that are conserved and managed for the purpose of protecting Navarretia
fossalis (Subunit 3A) outweigh the benefits of including those lands as
critical habitat for N. fossalis. We find that the benefits of
including lands that are being impacted by activities covered under the
County of San Diego Subarea Plan and are not yet conserved and managed
(Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I) outweigh the benefits of excluding those
lands as critical habitat for N. fossalis.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--County of San
Diego Subarea Plan
We determined that the exclusion of approximately 5 ac (2 ha) of
habitat in Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego Subarea Plan from
the revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis
will not result in extinction of the species. The County of San Diego
Subarea Plan and ``The Crosby at Rancho Santa Fe Habitat Management
Plan'' provide protection and long-term management of lands that meet
the definition of critical habitat for N. fossalis in Subunit 3A.
Additionally, the jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act for N.
fossalis in Subunit 3A provides assurances that the species will not go
extinct as a result of exclusion from critical habitat designation. The
consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2) and the attendant
requirement to avoid jeopardy to N. fossalis for projects with a
Federal nexus will provide significant protection to the species.
Therefore, based on the above discussion we are excluding approximately
5 ac (2 ha) of habitat in Subunit 3A within the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan from this revised critical habitat designation.
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(Western Riverside County MSHCP)
We determined that approximately 6,343 ac (2,567 ha) of land owned
by or under the jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP contain the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may require special
management considerations or protection, and therefore, these lands
meet the definition of critical habitat under the Act. In making our
final decision with regard to these lands, we considered several
factors including our relationships with participating jurisdictions,
our relationships with other stakeholders, existing consultations,
conservation measures and management in place on these lands that
benefit N. fossalis, and impacts to current and future partnerships. We
recognize N. fossalis conservation measures outlined in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP will be implemented as the plan is carried out
regardless if covered areas are designated as revised critical habitat.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are excluding 866 ac (351 ha) of
land meeting the definition of critical habitat owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees within
Unit 6 (Subunits 6D and 6E) from this revised critical habitat
designation. We are including 5,477 ac (2,217 ha) of land that meets
the definition of critical habitat owned by or under the jurisdiction
of Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees within Unit 6 (Subunits
6A, 6B, and 6C) in this revised critical habitat designation. As
described in our section 4(b)(2) analysis below, we reached this
determination in consideration of the benefits associated with the
designation of each area in revised critical habitat balanced against
the benefits of excluding the area in the final critical habitat
designation, including such factors as (but not limited to) the
existence of co-occurring listed species (such as the San Diego and
Riverside fairy shrimp species) resulting in redundant conservation
measures, implementation of conservation measures, and non-covered
activities.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a large-scale, multi-
jurisdictional HCP encompassing approximately 1.26 million ac (510,000
ha) of land in western Riverside County. The Western Riverside County
MSHCP addresses 146 listed and unlisted ``covered species,'' including
Navarretia fossalis. Participants in the Western Riverside County MSHCP
include 14 cities; the County of Riverside, including the Riverside
County Flood Control and Water Conservation Agency (County Flood
Control), Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside County
Parks and Open Space District, and Riverside County Waste Department;
California Department of Parks and Recreation; and the California
Department of Transportation. The Western Riverside County MSHCP is a
multi-species conservation program that minimizes and mitigates the
expected loss of habitat and associated incidental take of covered
species. On June 22, 2004, the Service issued a single incidental take
permit (Service 2004b, TE-088609-0) under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act to 22 permittees under the Western Riverside County MSHCP for a
period of 75 years.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP will establish approximately
153,000 ac (61,917 ha) of new conservation lands (Additional Reserve
Lands) to complement the approximate 347,000 ac (140,426 ha) of pre-
existing natural and open space areas (Public/Quasi-Public (PQP) lands)
in the plan area. These PQP lands include those under Federal
ownership, primarily managed by the United States Forest Service (USFS)
and Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and also permittee-owned or
controlled open-space areas, primarily managed by the State and
Riverside County. Collectively, the Additional Reserve Lands and PQP
lands form the overall Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation
Area. The configuration of the 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of Additional
Reserve Lands is not mapped or precisely identified (``hard-lined'') in
the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Rather, it is based on textual
descriptions of habitat conservation necessary to meet the conservation
goals for all covered species within the bounds of the approximately
310,000 ac (125,453 ha) Criteria Area and is interpreted as
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP takes place.
Specific conservation objectives in the Western Riverside County
MSHCP for Navarretia fossalis include providing 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of
occupied or suitable habitat for the species in the MSHCP Conservation
Area. This acreage goal can be attained through acquisition or other
dedications of land assembled from within the Criteria Area (i.e., the
Additional Reserve Lands) or Narrow Endemic Plan Species Survey Area
and
[[Page 62219]]
through coordinated management of existing PQP lands. We internally
mapped a ``Conceptual Reserve Design,'' which illustrates existing PQP
lands and predicts the geographic distribution of the Additional
Reserve Lands based on our interpretation of the textual descriptions
of habitat conservation necessary to meet conservation goals. Our
Conceptual Reserve Design was intended to predict one possible future
configuration of the eventual approximately 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of
Additional Reserve Lands. The Western Riverside County MSHCP states
that at least 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of vernal pool and playa habitat
suitable for N. fossalis within the San Jacinto River, Mystic Lake, and
Salt Creek areas will be included within the MSHCP Conservation Area
(Service 2004b, p. 376; FWS-WRIV-870.19).
Preservation and management of approximately 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of
Navarretia fossalis habitat under the Western Riverside County MSHCP
will contribute to the conservation and ultimate recovery of this
species. Navarretia fossalis is threatened primarily by agricultural
activities, development, manure dumping (Roberts 2009, pp. 2-14), and
fuel modification actions within the plan area (Service 2004b, pp. 369-
378). The Western Riverside County MSHCP will remove and reduce threats
to N. fossalis and the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the species as the plan is implemented by placing
large blocks of occupied and unoccupied habitat into preservation
throughout the Conservation Area. Areas identified for preservation and
conservation include 13 of the known locations of the species at Skunk
Hollow, the Santa Rosa Plateau, the San Jacinto Wildlife Area,
floodplains of the San Jacinto River from the Ramona Expressway to
Railroad Canyon, and upper Salt Creek west of Hemet.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP Conservation Area will maintain
floodplain processes along the San Jacinto River and along Salt Creek
to provide for the distribution of Navarretia fossalis to shift over
time as hydrologic conditions and seed bank sources change.
Additionally, the Western Riverside County MSHCP requires surveys for
N. fossalis as part of the project review process for public and
private projects where suitable habitat is present within a defined
narrow endemic species survey area (see Narrow Endemic Species Survey
Area Map, Figure 6-1 of the Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume I,
in Dudek 2003). For locations with positive survey results for N.
fossalis, 90 percent of those portions of the property that provide
long-term conservation value for the species will be avoided until it
is demonstrated that the conservation objectives for the species are
met. Once the objectives are met, avoided areas would be evaluated to
determine whether they should be released for development or included
in the MSHCP Conservation Area (see Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant
Species; Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.3, in
Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003).
The survey requirements, avoidance and minimization measures, and
management for Navarretia fossalis and its PCEs provided for in the
Western Riverside County MSHCP are expected to benefit this species on
public and private lands covered by the plan. We determined that
approximately 6,343 ac (2,567 ha) of private and permittee-owned or
controlled PQP lands in Unit 6 (Subunits 6A through 6E), within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area, meet the definition of
critical habitat for N. fossalis. Projects in areas meeting the
definition of critical habitat for N. fossalis conducted or approved by
Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees are subject to the
conservation requirements of the MSHCP. For projects that may impact N.
fossalis, various HCP policies (i.e., Narrow Endemic Plant Species
Policy, and the Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool Policy in Dudek and
Associates, Inc. 2003) provide additional conservation requirements.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP incorporates several processes
that allow for Service oversight and participation in program
implementation. These processes include:
(1) Consultation with the Service on a long-term management and
monitoring plan;
(2) Submission of annual monitoring reports;
(3) Annual status meetings with the Service; and
(4) Submission of annual implementation reports to the Service
(Service 2004b, pp. 9-10).
Below, we provide a brief analysis of the lands in Unit 6 that we
are excluding under section 4(b)(2) of the Act and lands we are
including in the revised critical habitat designation, and how each
area is covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP or other
conservation measures.
Two of the subunits, Subunit 6D (Skunk Hollow) and Subunit 6E (Mesa
de Burro), consist of lands that are managed and already in permanent
conservation. The majority of Subunit 6D was conserved as a result of
the Rancho Bella Vista HCP (Rancho Bella Vista 1999, p. 2; CNLM 2009a,
p. 1) and the remainder of the land in Subunit 6D was conserved as a
result of the Assessment District 161 HCP (CNLM 2009b, p. 1), both HCPs
of which were incorporated into the larger, subregional Western
Riverside County MSHCP upon its completion. In total, 100 percent of
the lands in Subunit 6D are conserved and managed specifically for the
purpose of preserving the vernal pool habitat. Subunit 6E is conserved
as part of the Santa Rosa Plateau Ecological Reserve. This Reserve has
four landowners: the CDFG, the County of Riverside, the Metropolitan
Water District of Southern California, and The Nature Conservancy. The
landowners and the Service (which owns no land on the Plateau) signed a
cooperative management agreement on April 16, 1991 (Dangermond and
Associates, Inc. 1991), and meet regularly to implement management of
the Reserve (Riverside County Parks 2009, p. 2). The vernal pools
within Subunit 6E are managed and monitored to preserve the unique
vernal pool plants and animals that occur on the Santa Rosa Plateau.
The other three units (Subunit 6A, 6B, and 6C) are not conserved or
managed for Navarretia fossalis at this time; however, as the Western
Riverside County MSHCP is implemented, we believe that additional areas
in these subunits may be conserved. Subunit 6A is 99 percent within the
Narrow Endemic Plant Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), and Subunits 6B and
6C are entirely within the NEPSSA. Therefore, biological surveys for N.
fossalis will occur prior to development of any suitable habitat within
these subunits. Furthermore, Subunits 6A and 6B have additional
protections in place either from past conservation efforts (such as the
establishment of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area and the Metropolitan
Water District Upper Salt Creek Wetland Preserve), or through
additional project review requirements within the Criteria Area (Joint
Project/Acquisition Review Process as described in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP (Service 2004b, pp. 23, 25; Western Riverside
County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.6.2 in Dudek and Associates, Inc.
2003, pp. 6-82-6-84)). We anticipate that these areas will receive
management that would benefit N. fossalis at some point in the near
future; however, at this time these areas do not receive active
management that would benefit N. fossalis, as described further below.
A large portion of Subunit 6A (1,504 ac (609 ha), or approximately
35 percent) is within the San Jacinto
[[Page 62220]]
Wildlife Area, a wildlife area owned and operated by CDFG. This area
consists of restored wetlands that provide habitat for waterfowl and
wading birds, and seasonally flooded vernal plain habitat along the San
Jacinto River north of the Ramona Expressway that supports Navarretia
fossalis. Though conserved from development, the CDFG has not
implemented a management plan that is beneficial to N. fossalis (E.
Konno, CDFG Biologist, pers. comm. 2010) . In addition to the portion
of Subunit 6A owned by CDFG, 68 percent (2,919 ac (1,181 ha)) of the
remaining land is within the Criteria Area. Projects in this area will
be implemented through the Joint Project Review Process to ensure that
the requirements of the MSHCP permit and the Implementing Agreement are
properly met (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.6.2
in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-82); however, these areas are
not currently conserved and managed to benefit N. fossalis.
The majority of Subunit 6B is within the Criteria Area (56 percent;
525 ac (212 ha) out of a total 943 ac (382 ha)) and projects in this
area will be implemented through the Joint Project Review Process. A
portion of this subunit is in the area referred to as West Hemet, which
is under the jurisdiction of the City of Hemet. Although the West Hemet
area is not conserved, the City is actively working on addressing
issues on sensitive vernal pool resources (such as updating the general
plan), and recently implemented an ordinance against manure dumping,
which is a threat to the species in this subunit (see the Special
Management Considerations and Protection section).
Subunit 6C is not within the Criteria Area for the Western
Riverside County MSHCP; however, impacts to the pools in this subunit
should be avoided, minimized, or offset through implementation of the
Protection of Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and
Vernal Pools guidelines and NEPSSA guidelines. For example, the NEPSSA
guidelines include protection measures that require surveys in suitable
habitat for narrow endemic species in an attempt to find areas that
should be considered as priorities for Western Riverside County MSHCP
Conservation Area acquisition (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume
1, section 6.0 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003). Additionally, for
populations identified in NEPSSA surveys, impacts to 90 percent of
those portions of the property that provide for long-term conservation
value of the identified Narrow Endemic Plant Species shall be avoided
until it is demonstrated that Conservation goals for the particular
species are met (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section
6.1.3 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-39). The Protection of
Species Associated with Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools
guidelines require assessments of potentially significant project
effects as required by CEQA (Western Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1,
section 6.1.2 in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003, p. 6-20).
The Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP
The principle benefit of including an area in a critical habitat
designation is the requirement of Federal agencies to ensure actions
they fund, authorize, or carry out are not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of any designated critical habitat,
the regulatory standard of section 7(a)(2) of the Act under which
consultation is completed. Federal agencies must consult with the
Service on actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid
destroying or adversely modifying critical habitat. Federal agencies
must also consult with us on actions that may affect a listed species
and refrain from undertaking actions that are likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of such species. The analysis of effects to
critical habitat is a separate and different analysis from that of the
effects to the species. Therefore, the difference in outcomes of these
two analyses represents the regulatory benefit of critical habitat. For
some species (including Navarretia fossalis), and in some locations,
the outcome of these analyses will be similar, because effects to
habitat will often also result in effects to the species. However, the
regulatory standard is different, as the jeopardy analysis investigates
the action's impact to survival and recovery of the species, while the
adverse modification analysis investigates the action's effects to the
designated habitat's contribution to conservation. This will, in many
instances, lead to different results and different regulatory
requirements. Thus, critical habitat designations may provide greater
benefits to the recovery of a species than would listing alone.
Federal agencies must consult with us on actions that may affect
critical habitat and must avoid destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat. Critical habitat may provide a regulatory benefit for
Navarretia fossalis when there is a Federal nexus present for a project
that might adversely modify critical habitat. However, all of the
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of land we are excluding within Units 6
(Subunits 6D and 6E) are protected open space or on private property,
with no expected Federal nexus, including no areas connected to
navigable waters that would typically result in a U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers' Federal nexus. For N. fossalis critical habitat where no
federally listed fairy shrimp occur, we believe it is unlikely there
will be Federal nexus because projects that will adversely modify
critical habitat should not occur in areas conserved under the Western
Riverside County MSHCP, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps)
typically does not assume jurisdiction under section 404 of the Clean
Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) when vernal pool complexes are not
hydrologically connected to navigable waters of the United States.
Furthermore, two federally listed fairy shrimp species, Riverside fairy
shrimp and vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchii), are also
present in some of the vernal pool habitat managed under the Western
Riverside County MSHCP, and the terms and conditions of the biological
opinion (USFWS 2004b, pp. 11441153) would also conserve N. fossalis.
Therefore, we believe there will be indirect benefits to N. fossalis in
excluded areas covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP based on
conservation actions achieved under the Act in habitat also occupied by
a federally listed fairy shrimp species.
The consultation provisions under section 7(a) of the Act
constitute the regulatory benefits of designating lands as critical
habitat. As discussed above, Federal agencies must consult with us on
actions that may affect critical habitat and must avoid destroying or
adversely modifying critical habitat. Critical habitat may provide a
regulatory benefit for Navarretia fossalis when there is a Federal
nexus present for a project that might adversely modify critical
habitat. Specifically, we expect projects along the San Jacinto River
would require a 404 permit under the Clean Water Act from the Corps.
Therefore, critical habitat designation in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C will
provide an additional regulatory benefit to the conservation of N.
fossalis by prohibiting adverse modification of habitat essential for
the conservation of this species.
As discussed above, the Western Riverside County MSHCP mandates
protection of Navarretia fossalis habitat considered necessary for
survival and recovery of the species. For locations with positive
survey results, impacts to 90 percent of portions of the property that
provide long-term conservation
[[Page 62221]]
value for the species will be avoided (referring to the ephemeral
wetland habitat that supports N. fossalis and the local watershed area
that allows the ephemeral wetland habitat to function properly) until
it is demonstrated that the conservation objectives for the species
have been met (see Protection of Narrow Endemic Plant Species; Western
Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, section 6.1.3, in Dudek and
Associates, Inc. 2003). However, the MSHCP does not prohibit manure
dumping and other soil amendments in habitat that has not yet been
conserved. As discussed in Comments 6, 13, and 22 below, this threat is
significant and ongoing within the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan
area (specifically in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C) in habitat that has not
been conserved and managed to benefit the species. Manure dumping is
not a covered activity under the plan. Therefore, for activities
covered under the plan, we believe that protections provided by the
designation of critical habitat will be partially redundant with
protections provided by the HCP; however, additional regulatory
protection from manure dumping and other soil amendments is needed in
Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C.
Local ordinances may address activities not covered by an HCP that
impact threatened or endangered species, particularly if they accompany
permanent conservation and management of an area. For example, the City
of Hemet enacted local Ordinance No. 1666 on April 9, 2002, to control
the practice of dumping manure on biologically sensitive sites such as
the vernal pool complex along Salt Creek (Subunit 6B). Although
Ordinance No. 1666 provides an added level of protection above and
beyond that provided by the Western Riverside County MSHCP (because
manure dumping is not a covered activity under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP), and complements the regulatory protection that would be
provided by critical habitat designation, these lands are not yet
conserved and managed for N. fossalis.
Another possible benefit of including lands in critical habitat is
public education regarding the potential conservation value of an area
that may help focus conservation efforts on areas of high conservation
value for certain species. Any information about Navarretia fossalis
and its habitat that reaches a wide audience, including parties engaged
in conservation activities, is valuable. The inclusion of lands in the
N. fossalis critical habitat designation that are owned by or under the
jurisdiction of the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
could be beneficial to the species because while the plan establishes
conservation goals for N. fossalis and identifies criteria for
identifying habitat to be conserved, the critical habitat designation
specifically identifies those lands essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require special management considerations or
protection. The process of proposing revised critical habitat provided
an opportunity for peer review and public comment on habitat we
determined meets the definition of critical habitat. This process is
valuable to land owners and managers in prioritizing conservation and
management of identified areas. Information on N. fossalis and its
habitat also has been provided to the public in the past, through
meetings, educational materials provided by the County of Riverside,
and recommendations provided in our Recovery Plan for Southern
California Vernal Pool Species (Service 1998). In general, we believe
the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis will provide
additional information for the public concerning the importance of
essential habitat in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C that has not already been
available.
The benefit of educating the public about Navarretia fossalis
habitat is significant because the distribution of vernal pool and
alkali playa habitat in Riverside County is not well known and the
importance of these habitat areas may not be known to the public.
Activities that harm habitat where N. fossalis occurs (including the
associated local watershed areas) are taking place in Riverside County
possibly due to the lack of public awareness. For example, manure
dumping on private property along the San Jacinto River and in the
vicinity of the Wicker Road Pool is adversely affecting habitat within
the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan area (Roberts 2009, pp. 2-14).
We have been working with permittees to implement ordinances that will
help to control activities (such as manure dumping) that may impact the
implementation of the Western Riverside County MSHCP conservation
objectives. To date, the City of Hemet is the only Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittee that has addressed the negative impacts (alters
the physical and biological features essential to the conservation of
N. fossalis) that manure dumping has on N. fossalis and its habitat
through the enactment of Ordinance 1666 (i.e., the ordinance that
prevents manure dumping activities, thereby educating its citizens and
reducing the educational benefits of including this land as critical
habitat). We believe including areas in the N. fossalis revised
critical habitat designation where manure dumping still occurs on non-
conserved and non-managed lands will provide information to the public
and local jurisdictions regarding the importance of addressing this
threat throughout the areas where manure dumping occurs. Therefore, we
believe there is an overall significant educational conservation
benefit of critical habitat designation of essential habitat within
Subunits 6A, 6B and 6C in the Western Riverside County MSHCP because
designation will specifically identify for the public and plan
participants those areas essential for conservation of the species that
are not currently protected and managed under the plan, and
particularly for areas outside of the City of Hemet where Ordinance
1666 has been enacted, will help educate the public about the threats
to these areas posed by manure dumping.
The designation of Navarretia fossalis critical habitat may also
strengthen or reinforce some of the provisions in other State and
Federal laws, such as CEQA or NEPA. These laws analyze the potential
for projects to significantly affect the environment. In Riverside
County, the additional protections associated with critical habitat may
be beneficial in areas not currently conserved. Critical habitat may
signal the presence of habitat that is not conserved or protected that
could otherwise be missed in the review process for these other
environmental laws.
In summary, we believe that designating critical habitat is
unlikely to provide regulatory benefits under the Act in essential
habitat areas that are currently conserved and managed. In areas that
are not currently conserved and managed, we believe that there are
significant regulatory and educational benefits that would result from
critical habitat designation. The educational benefits of designation
are somewhat reduced in the non-conserved portion of Subunit 6B within
the City of Hemit where an ordinance exists to protect N. fossalis
habitat from manure dumping.
Benefits of Exclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP
We believe benefits would be realized by forgoing designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis on lands covered by the
Western Riverside County MSHCP including:
(1) Continuance and strengthening of our effective working
relationships with all Western Riverside County MSHCP
[[Page 62222]]
jurisdictions and stakeholders to promote conservation of N. fossalis
and its habitat;
(2) Allowance for continued meaningful collaboration and
cooperation in working toward recovering this species, including
conservation benefits that might not otherwise occur;
(3) Encouragement for local jurisdictions to fully participate in
the Western Riverside County MSHCP; and
(4) Encouragement of additional HCP and other conservation plan
development in the future on other private lands for this and other
federally listed and sensitive species.
The Western Riverside County MSHCP provides substantial protection
and management for Navarretia fossalis and the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species, and addresses
conservation issues from a coordinated, integrated perspective rather
than a piecemeal, project-by-project approach (as would occur under
sections 7 and 9 of the Act or smaller HCPs). Many landowners perceive
critical habitat as an unfair and unnecessary regulatory burden given
the expense and time involved in developing and implementing complex
regional and jurisdiction-wide HCPs, such as the Western Riverside
County MSHCP (as discussed further in Comment 22 below in the Summary
of Comments and Recommendations section of this rule). Exclusion of the
Western Riverside County MSHCP lands from critical habitat would help
preserve the partnerships we developed with the County of Riverside,
the City of Hemet, and other local jurisdictions in the development of
the Western Riverside County MSHCP, and foster future partnerships and
development of future HCPs.
In summary, we believe excluding land covered by the Western
Riverside County MSHCP from critical habitat could provide the
significant benefit of maintaining existing regional HCP partnerships
and fostering new ones.
Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against Benefits of Inclusion--Western
Riverside County MSHCP
We reviewed and evaluated the benefits of inclusion and benefits of
exclusion for all lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees as critical habitat for Navarretia
fossalis. The benefits of including conserved and managed lands in the
critical habitat designation are small. All of the approximately 158 ac
(64 ha) of land in Subunit 6D at Skunk Hollow and all of the
approximately 708 ac (287 ha) of land in Subunit 6E at Mesa de Burro
are already managed and conserved, and provide a benefit to N.
fossalis. It is also unlikely that a project with a Federal nexus will
occur in Subunits 6D, and 6E; therefore, designating these areas as
critical habitat is unlikely to provide significant regulatory benefit.
Additionally, the educational benefits of critical habitat
designation and the potential benefits designation may confer under
other statutes (such as CEQA and NEPA) are also small in Subunits 6D
and 6E because these areas are already conserved and managed in
perpetuity. Therefore, designation of N. fossalis critical habitat in
Subunits 6D or 6E will not provide a substantial educational benefit.
In summary, we find that excluding lands from critical habitat in
areas that are receiving long-term conservation and management for the
purpose of protecting Navarretia fossalis (Subunits 6D and 6E) will
help preserve our partnership with the County of Riverside and other
permittees in the Western Riverside County MSHCP and encourage the
conservation of lands associated with development and implementation of
future HCPs. These partnership benefits are significant and outweigh
the small potential regulatory and educational benefits of including
these already conserved and managed lands as critical habitat for N.
fossalis. With regards to lands within the City of Hemet, we
acknowledge the City's proactive efforts to protect N. fossalis through
enactment of Ordinance 1666 prohibiting manure dumping in essential N.
fossalis habitat. This effort somewhat reduces the regulatory and
educational benefits of designation of that portion of Subunit 6B
within the City of Hemit. However, these lands are not receiving long-
term conservation and management to benefit N. fossalis. We find that
including City of Hemet lands (Subunit 6B) and other non-conserved and
non-managed lands within the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Subunits
6A and 6C) as critical habitat outweigh the benefits of exclusion. We
believe that critical habitat designation in these areas will provide
additional regulatory protection under section 7(a) of the Act when
there is a Federal nexus, and act as an educational tool for the public
to lead to conservation and management of N. fossalis and its essential
habitat. Therefore, designating these areas as critical habitat for N.
fossalis is likely to provide a regulatory as well as educational
benefit to the species. While we acknowledge that excluding these areas
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act would provide a significant benefit to
the partnership that we have with the Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees (including the City of Hemet), we believe that the
conservation value of including these non-conserved, non-managed lands
as critical habitat outweighs the benefit of exclusion.
Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction of the Species--Subunits 6D and
6E, Western Riverside County MSHCP
We determined that the exclusion of 866 ac (351 ha) of land in Unit
6 (Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees from the revised designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis will not result in extinction
of the species. These areas are permanently conserved and managed to
provide a benefit to N. fossalis and its habitat. Additionally, the
jeopardy standard of section 7 of the Act provides assurances the
species will not go extinct as a result of exclusion from critical
habitat designation. The consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2)
and the attendant requirement to avoid jeopardy to N. fossalis for
projects with a Federal nexus will provide significant protection to
the species. Therefore, based on the above discussion, we are excluding
approximately 866 ac (351 ha) of conserved and managed land in Unit 6
(Subunits 6D and 6E) owned by or under the jurisdiction of Western
Riverside County MSHCP permittees from this revised critical habitat
designation.
Economics
An analysis of the economic impacts for the previous proposed
critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis was conducted and
made available to the public on August 31, 2005 (70 FR 51742). That
economic analysis was finalized for the final rule to designate
critical habitat for N. fossalis published in the Federal Register on
October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658). The analysis determined that the costs
associated with critical habitat for N. fossalis across the entire area
considered for designation (across designated and excluded areas) were
primarily a result of the potential effects of critical habitat
designation on land development, flood control, and transportation.
After excluding land in Riverside and San Diego Counties from the 2004
proposed critical habitat (69 FR 60110; October 7, 2004), the economic
impact was estimated to be between $13.9 and $32.1 million over the
next 20 years. Based on the 2005 economic analysis, we concluded that
[[Page 62223]]
the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis, as proposed in
2004, would not result in significant small business impacts. This
analysis is presented in the document making available the economic
analysis published in the Federal Register on August 31, 2005 (70 FR
51742).
We prepared a new economic impact analysis associated with this
revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis. In the
revised DEA, we evaluated the potential economic effects on small
business entities resulting from implementation of conservation actions
related to the proposed revision to critical habitat for N. fossalis.
The analysis is based on the estimated incremental impacts associated
with the proposed rulemaking as described in sections 3 through 10 of
the analysis. We announced the availability of the draft economic
analysis in the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575).
The final economics analysis determined that the costs associated
with critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis, across the entire area
considered for designation (both designated and excluded areas), are
primarily a result of the potential effects of critical habitat
designation on transportation, land development, and flood control. The
incremental economic impact of designating critical habitat was
estimated to be between $846,000 and $1.2 million over the next 20
years using a 7 percent discount rate ($70,000 and $100,000 annualized)
(Entrix 2010, p. ES-3). The difference between the economic impacts
projected with this designation compared to those in the 2005
designation are due to the use of an incremental analysis in this
designation rather than the broader coextensive analysis used in the
2005 designation. Additionally, the economic analysis for the 2005
designation included all 31,086 ac (12,580 ha) of essential habitat
while the 2010 analysis included only the 7,609 ac (3,079 ha) that were
proposed for designation. Based on the 2010 final economic analysis, we
concluded that the designation of critical habitat for N. fossalis, as
proposed in 2009, would not result in significant small business
impacts. This analysis is presented in the Final Economic Analysis of
Proposed Revised Critical Habitat Designation for Spreading Navarretia
(FEA)(Entrix 2010).
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We requested written comments from the public on the proposed rule
to revise critical habitat for the Navarretia fossalis during two
comment periods. The first comment period opened with the publication
of the proposed revised rule in the Federal Register on June 10, 2009
(74 FR 27588), and closed on August 10, 2009. The second comment period
opened with the publication of the availability of the DEA published in
the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575) and closed on May
17, 2010. During both public comment periods, we contacted appropriate
Federal, State, and local agencies; scientific organizations; and other
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposed rule to
revise critical habitat for this species and the associated DEA. During
the comment periods, we requested all interested parties submit
comments or information related to the proposed revisions to critical
habitat, including (but not limited to) the following: unit boundaries;
species occurrence information and distribution; land use designations
that may affect critical habitat; potential economic effects of the
proposed designation; benefits associated with critical habitat
designation; areas proposed for designation and associated rationale
for the non-inclusion or considered exclusion of these areas; and
methods used to designate critical habitat.
During the first comment period, we received 12 comments directly
addressing the proposed revised critical habitat designation, 4 from
peer reviewers and 8 from public organizations or individuals. During
the second comment period, we received one comment from local
government addressing the proposed critical habitat designation and the
DEA. We did not receive any requests for a public hearing.
Peer Review
In accordance with our peer review policy published on July 1, 1994
(59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions from four knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
the species, the geographic region in which it occurs, and conservation
biology principles pertinent to the species. We received responses from
all four peer reviewers who provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions that we incorporated into the rule to
improve the revised critical habitat designation.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers and the
public for substantive issues and new information regarding the
designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. All comments
are addressed in the following summary and incorporated into the final
rule as appropriate.
Peer Reviewer Comments
Comment 1: One peer reviewer was supportive of the proposed revised
critical habitat rule. The reviewer stated the proposed rule was well
thought-out, based on sound data, and presented a thorough analysis.
The reviewer further stated that Navarretia fossalis' specific needs
for ephemerally wet habitats and limited dispersal ability were
appropriately analyzed and considered in the proposed revised rule. The
reviewer concluded our revised methods were thorough, logical and
biologically supported, and limited the proposed designation to areas
necessary for maintaining N. fossalis persistence.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review.
Comment 2: One peer reviewer stated that large, well-established
Navarretia fossalis populations need to be protected; therefore, the
reviewer believe the definition of ``core habitat areas'' as relatively
large areas of intact habitat with existing populations in the proposed
revised rule was reasonable. The reviewer further stated that limited
gene flow among populations and the range of soil and water conditions
among habitats suggest significant range-wide genetic variability of N.
fossalis; therefore, the reviewer believes populations on the periphery
of the geographical range and those that occupy unique non-core
habitats are important to species preservation. The reviewer stated
that designating only relatively large intact habitat areas as critical
habitat could lead to significant loss of genetic diversity and
preclude species' survival and recovery and therefore, agreed with our
inclusion of both large and smaller areas for N. fossalis.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review and
have incorporated their comments into the rule as appropriate.
Comment 3: One peer reviewer offered technical and organizational
comments. The reviewer stated the proposal writing style was
professional and understandable. The reviewer noted the proposal was
better organized than past critical habitat proposals on Navarretia
fossalis, as well as other critical habitat designations for listed
species that occur in similar habitat, and the use of tables to help
explain
[[Page 62224]]
differences between the 2005 and 2009 proposals was helpful. The
reviewer further stated the usefulness of maps in the printed rule for
public review of specific units was limited, and the lack of UTM
coordinates and a 100-m grid made it difficult for the public to
reproduce maps at different scales, overlay features with mapping
programs, and confirm map accuracy.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's comments and will
consider this advice when publishing future proposed critical habitat
designations.
Comment 4: One peer reviewer commented on text in the Areas Needed
for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas section of the
proposed rule. The reviewer stated since the Service clearly based
these proposed areas on new information, there should have been a
citation or explanation as to why Mesa de Burro was considered a ``core
population.'' The reviewer stated they were able to verify reports of
large populations qualifying Mesa de Burro as a ``core population,''
but the Mesa de Burro site may not be biologically equivalent with the
other ``core population complexes.'' The reviewer defined ``core
population complexes'' as numerous vernal pools and argued the Mesa de
Burro occurrence appears to be restricted to a small number of pools.
The reviewer suggested it was probably best to describe Mesa de Burro
as a ``large and important population,'' since it is not really a
complex of populations or occurrences.
Our Response: We understand the peer reviewer's concern regarding
the ecological connotation of terms used for the Navarretia fossalis
critical habitat designation; however, we never used the terms ``core
population'' or ``core population complexes'' in the proposed rule. The
only term used in the proposed revised rule and in this document with
the word ``core'' is ``core habitat area,'' which is a descriptive term
of convenience. As described in the proposed revised rule (74 FR 27588)
and the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite Habitat Areas
section of this rule, ``core habitat area'' denotes those areas that
contain the highest concentrations of N. fossalis and the largest
contiguous blocks of habitat for this species and are therefore the
most critical areas for conservation of this species. The term was not
intended to be synonymous with similar terms used in other documents.
The term ``vernal pool complex'' is used in Table 3 to refer to more
than one geographically proximal pool, but was not further defined.
Regarding the peer reviewer's suggested description of Mesa de
Burro as a ``large important population,'' we do not share this
opinion. We are not aware of any formal definition of ``occurrences''
or descriptions of associated pools in a biologically delineated
population. Mesa de Burro contains a relatively large abundance of
observed individuals occupying multiple vernal pools, and we believe
this description appropriately describes the current level of
scientific knowledge. In general, we are conservative with use of the
term ``population'' because of the term's frequent misapplication in
gray literature. We refrain from using the term ``population'' to
describe a geographically specific occupied area unless data indicate
appropriate rates of genetic exchange exist among spatially clustered
individuals and a geographical population distribution has been
delineated. Therefore, we believe the peer reviewer's concerns
regarding our use of inappropriate terminology are not well founded. We
have edited the Areas Needed for Conservation: Core and Satellite
Habitat Areas section to clarify the above issues.
Comment 5: Regarding the discussion of the PCEs in the proposed
rule, one peer reviewer recommended changing, ``During a typical
seasonal flooding period, alkali scrub vegetation expands its
distribution into deeper areas of the seasonally flooded alkali vernal
plain habitat and crowds out the more ephemeral wetland species'' to
``During a typical seasonal flooding cycle, alkali scrub vegetation
expands its distribution during the dry periods into deeper areas of
the seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains habitat...'' The peer
reviewer also stated that light to moderate disturbance can mask or
suppress some PCEs within seasonally flooded vernal alkali plains
habitat. Therefore, the reviewer recommended the final rule include the
following qualification regarding habitat quality: ``Seasonally flooded
alkali vernal plain can persist in light to moderately disturbed
habitat that may obscure or suppress expression of PCEs, especially
soil amendments and dryland farming activities. Reasonably restorable
habitat is considered to have the applicable PCEs within the San
Jacinto River flood plain and at Old Salt Creek. Many of these sites,
although currently in degraded condition, are restorable and may be
necessary to the recovery of the species.'' The peer reviewer also
noted an apparent omission of the species' occurrence within the alkali
Chino series soils at Old Salt Creek.
Our Response: We considered the suggested edits provided by the
peer reviewer and made changes to the text above as appropriate (see
Primary Constituent Elements section).
Comment 6: Regarding the Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of the proposed rule, one peer reviewer recommended
adding soil chemistry alteration and manure dumping to the list of
threats for Navarretia fossalis. The reviewer stated manure dumping has
reduced or eliminated alkali vernal pools over large portions of the
San Jacinto River flood plain and may now be the most significant
immediate threat to N. fossalis. The reviewer cited numerous
communications with the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office in which the
reviewer had documented manure dumping in vernal pool habitat.
Our Response: We considered the suggested text edits to this
revised critical habitat rule and made changes as appropriate (see
Special Management Considerations or Protection section). We agree that
manure dumping is a significant threat to Navarretia fossalis, and we
agree that this activity is ongoing. We are in the process of working
with local jurisdictions in Western Riverside County (including the
County of Riverside) to address manure dumping through initiatives like
Ordinance No. 1666 that was enacted by the City of Hemet. We hope to
work further with our partners in Riverside County to reduce the threat
of manure dumping (see also responses to Comments 12 and 13 below, and
the Special Management Considerations or Protection section of this
rule).
Comment 7: Regarding the Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
section of the proposed revised rule, one peer reviewer argued that
based on data for similar species, two or more negative surveys during
the past 10 years is an insufficient effort to confirm extirpation in
lightly disturbed habitat. The reviewer advised that a lack of positive
surveys for a decade suggests a population is declining or scarce, but
without significant habitat disturbance as well, does not mean it is
extirpated. The peer reviewer recommended that in circumstances where
habitat has not been significantly altered, the Service should not
conclude absence based on lack of documentation. In the case of
comprehensive but negative survey results, the peer reviewer believes
20 years would be a more reliable indicator of population extirpation.
The peer reviewer further noted that while this change in methodology
may not change what areas meet the definition of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis, the limitations of current methods should be
considered in future critical habitat analyses.
[[Page 62225]]
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's concerns and have
considered the argument that more than 20 years without positive survey
data in suitable habitat is an appropriate criterion for determining
likely absence of Navarretia fossalis. We would like to reassure the
peer reviewer that we used more complex criteria than two negative
surveys over a period of 10 years to determine occupancy. Negative
surveys must have occurred under appropriate conditions, while habitat
status was also considered. As discussed in the Criteria Used To
Identify Critical Habitat section, we assume an area is currently
occupied for areas where we had past occupancy data unless: (a) Two or
more rare plant surveys conducted during the past 10 years did not find
N. fossalis (providing the surveys were conducted in years where
average rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the
rainy season (between October and May)) and during the appropriate
months to find this species (March, April, and May); or (b) the site
was significantly disturbed since the last observation of the species
at that location. Therefore, we believe our current methodology is
appropriate.
Comment 8: One peer reviewer expressed concerns regarding occupancy
status of specific pools. The reviewer argued the description of a
vernal pool in Subunit 5G (Otay Lakes) as partly unoccupied may be
inappropriate, because Navarretia fossalis is likely still present if
habitat is intact and minimally disturbed. The reviewer stated a better
criterion for occupancy determination would be habitat status within
the vicinity of vernal pools, rather than a lack of occupancy data for
the past 10 years. The peer reviewer stated they were not necessarily
suggesting that the vernal pool ``populations'' at Otay River Valley
and Otay Lakes (Unit 5) be included in critical habitat, only that the
assumption of species' absence may be false.
The peer reviewer also stated that because the vernal pool complex
in Subunit 5C occurs within a core habitat area (Otay Mesa) that has
experienced significant habitat loss, faces significant threats, and is
identified in the Recovery Plan as necessary for recovery, it seems
prudent to include it in critical habitat, or offer a more compelling
argument for non-inclusion.
Our Response: In such a scenario of limited survey periods, we use
the available surveys as the best available science. This situation
underscores the need for us to address new information as it is
received. We understand the peer reviewer's concern and have considered
their argument; however, habitat availability and condition does not
always necessarily equate to occupancy for vernal pools species because
other habitat characteristics such as hydroperiod, pool depth, soil
type and other physical features also play a role. Critical habitat
designations are to use the best available commercial and scientific
data to identify lands that we believe contain the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the species.
Without more site specific investigation on occupancy for Subunit 5G,
we cannot ascertain for certain that all of the areas are occupied
solely on habitat status as recommended by the peer reviewer and have
relied on our criteria for occupancy as stated above. Please see the
response to Comment 7 above for further discussion regarding occupancy
data and criteria used to identify critical habitat.
We agree with the peer reviewer that Subunit 5C meets the
definition of critical habitat. Based on information in our files
inadvertently excluded from our initial Geographic Information System
(GIS) analysis, we determined that the previously proposed Subunit 5C
(69 FR 60110; October 1, 2004) has documented occupancy within the past
10 years and meets the definition of critical habitat. We proposed
designation of subunit 5C in our revision to the 2009 proposed. We
proposed adding subunit 5C in the document that made available the DEA
for the proposed revised critical habitat published in the Federal
Register on April 15, 2010 (72 FR 19575). We are designating subunit 5C
as critical habitat in this final rule. Please see edited Summary of
Changes From the 2009 Proposed Rule To Revise Critical Habitat and
Critical Habitat Units sections for more information.
Comment 9: One peer reviewer noted that although the proposal
stated that slopes facing away from Cruzan Mesa were removed from
Subunit 1A (compared to the 2005 designation), an examination of Google
Earth imagery indicated some of the mesa top was also removed. The
reviewer recommended subunit boundaries be modified to include the full
mesa top.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and revised the designated critical
habitat boundary for Subunit 1A to include those areas containing the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the
species. We explained the revised proposed boundary in the document we
published in the Federal Register on April 15, 2010 (75 FR 19575). The
revision increased the designated total for Subunit 1A by 27 ac (11
ha), reflected in Table 2. For more information, see the Summary of
Changes From Previously Designated and Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat section.
Comment 10: One peer reviewer suggested there may not be sufficient
data to demonstrate the Plum Canyon vernal pool in Subunit 1B meets the
definition of critical habitat. The reviewer noted that although there
are two collection records from 1996 and 2003, the CNDDB notes the
``site requires more field work,'' which usually means there is some
debate on specific location or population status. The peer reviewer
added they were not able to confirm the location of this vernal pool
through examination of aerial photographs. The peer reviewer also
recommended the western portion of Subunit 3B should not be designated
critical habitat because Google Earth imagery indicates this area has
been graded and is unlikely to ever support the PCEs for this species.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and revised this final designation by
removing the western portion of Subunit 3B as discussed in the document
making available the DEA (75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). However, we
believe Subunit 1B (Plum Canyon) meets the definition of critical
habitat because this subunit supports a stable occurrence of Navarretia
fossalis, provides potential connectivity with Subunit 1A, and likely
supports a genetically distinct occurrence. We believe Subunit 3B
(Carroll Canyon) meets the definition of critical habitat because it
supports a stable occurrence of N. fossalis and provides potential
connectivity between occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 3A and 3C.
For more information, see the Critical Habitat Units, Criteria Used To
Identify Critical Habitat, and Summary of Changes From Previously
Designated and Proposed Revised Critical Habitat sections.
Comment 11: One peer reviewer recommended multiple changes to the
boundary of Subunit 6B as follows:
(1) Remove a central section south of Stetson Road that has been
developed or disturbed for many years;
(2) expand the eastern edge boundary to include vernal pools at the
western end of the airport because this site includes the PCEs, has
documented historical occupation, includes pools that are more reliably
filled than pools that were proposed for designation, and
[[Page 62226]]
this land has a likely Federal Aviation Administration Federal nexus;
(3) include vernal pools and wet depressions that form fairly
reliably in the northwest portion of the subunit;
(4) remove the drier area at the northern end just south of
Devonshire Road; and
(5) remove the eastern corner because it either has active
residential development or an approved development proposal and is
heavily degraded.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's critical review. We
considered the suggested changes and revised the final critical habitat
boundary as noticed in the NOA of the DEA (75 FR 19575; April 15,
2010). For more information see the Summary of Changes From the
Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat Designation.
Comment 12: One peer reviewer believes that manure dumping should
be specifically mentioned in the section of this critical habitat
designation that outlines activities that, when carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency, may affect critical habitat and,
therefore, should result in consultation for Navarretia fossalis:
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation section, subsection (2) titled
Application of the `Adverse Modification' Standard section, paragraph
describing ``Actions that would impact soil and topography.'' The peer
reviewer argued that widespread manure dumping along the San Jacinto
River, which alters soil chemistry (reducing alkalinity and clay and
silt composition ratios) and topography (elevates soil surface and
suppresses depressions formation), is a significant threat to the
species.
Our Response: We considered the peer reviewer's suggested edits
when preparing this revised critical habitat rule and made changes to
the Effects of Critical Habitat Designation, Application of the
`Adverse Modification' Standard section. We agree that manure dumping
is a significant threat to Navarretia fossalis and the PCEs require
special management considerations or protection to reduce the threat
(see the Special Management Considerations or Protection). The Western
Riverside County MSHCP does not prohibit permittees from engaging in
manure dumping on non-conserved lands where a Federal nexus is present
and there is no local ordinance to prevent dumping; therefore, we
determined that designation of critical habitat would provide
significant additional habitat protection. We also determined that
education has been inadequate in some areas with regard to the severity
of this threat; therefore, designation of critical habitat where manure
dumping can occur would provide a significant educational conservation
benefit (see also response to Comments 6 and 13, and the Western
Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Western
Riverside County MSHCP) section).
Comment 13: One peer reviewer believes that exclusion of lands
owned under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees should not be excluded from critical habitat based on
partnership benefits. As an example, the peer reviewer stated that
areas along the San Jacinto River and near the city of Hemet have not
been adequately protected. These areas were identified in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP as necessary for the conservation of Navarretia
fossalis and were excluded from the 2005 final critical habitat
designation. The peer reviewer asserted that habitat vandalism and
incidental destruction in all vernal pools within the Western Riverside
County MSHCP plan area have continued, and in some areas increased,
since the Western Riverside County MSHCP was permitted. The peer
reviewer discussed at length and in detail evidence that they believe
suggests land-owners who are aware of the conservation value of vernal
pools are working to eradicate habitat rather than ``partnering with
regulators'' to conserve it. Additionally, the peer reviewer argued
that unlike other approved HCPs, the reviewers believe the Service has
evidence that the Western Riverside County MSHCP is not providing the
benefits ``claimed to justify exclusion in the proposed revised
critical habitat rule.'' The reviewers further hypothesized that should
impacts continue at the rate and magnitude as occurred during the first
5 years of the Western Riverside County MSHCP implementation, there
could be almost no habitat left in 5 years outside the San Jacinto
Wildlife Area and the Metropolitan Water District Vernal Pool Preserve.
Our Response: We appreciate the peer reviewer's concerns regarding
adequate protection of Navarretia fossalis under the Western Riverside
County MSHCP. Although not specifically stated by the peer reviewer,
the comment indicates the reviewer believes:
(1) The benefits of exclusion (based primarily on partnerships
benefits) would be lower than the benefits of inclusion because these
partnerships have provided less benefit to N. fossalis to-date than
anticipated; and
(2) The benefits of inclusion (non-redundant protections and
education provided by critical habitat designation) are greater because
conservation actions mandated by the HCP are not being implemented.
Benefits provided by existing HCPs are not considered a benefit of
exclusion because they would remain in place regardless of critical
habitat designation; however, they do minimize the benefits of
inclusion to the extent they are redundant with protection measures
that would be provided by a critical habitat designation. As described
in the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section, the
likelihood of a project with a Federal nexus occurring in Subunits 6D
(Barry Jones Wetland Mitigation Bank) and 6E (PQP lands) in the Western
Riverside County MSHCP revised critical habitat is small because these
areas are currently conserved and managed; therefore, the regulatory
and educational benefits of inclusion are insignificant. Additionally,
the portion of Subunit 6B that is in the City of Hemet is protected by
an ordinance that addresses illegal manure dumping, an activity that is
not covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP; however, this area
does not receive long-term conservation and management for the benefit
of Navarretia fossalis and its habitat. Due to this additional
protection from manure dumping, the benefits of inclusion of this
portion of Subunit 6B as critical habitat are somewhat lessened.
Regarding the benefits of exclusion, the adequacy of Navarretia
fossalis protection under an HCP is relevant to the value of
partnerships to the extent it demonstrates the overall conservation
value of a regional HCP permit. We believe the Western Riverside County
MSHCP generally incorporates ongoing management and protection that
should benefit the conservation of N. fossalis and its habitat over the
long term. Please refer to the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act section for further discussion on the Western Riverside County
MSHCP, including discussion on areas receiving long-term conservation
and management that we have excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Based on new information, we did find the benefits of inclusion in
critical habitat to be greater in some areas within the Western
Riverside County MSHCP than we estimated in the October 18, 2005,
critical habitat rule (70 FR 60658). We determined that designation of
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis would provide significant
additional habitat protection
[[Page 62227]]
in Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C. We came to this determination because the
Western Riverside County MSHCP does not currently provide for the long-
term conservation and management of N. fossalis in these subunits, and
the HCP does not prohibit permittees from engaging in manure dumping
activities (a significant new threat on non-conserved lands that was
not identified in the HCP or the associated biological opinion (Service
2004b, pp. 369-378)). Therefore, in areas where a Federal nexus exists
(see also Comments 6 and 12 above), we concluded that the significant
regulatory benefit of including the areas in critical habitat outweigh
the partnership benefits of exclusion. We also determined that
education to date has been inadequate in some areas with regard to the
severity of manure dumping; therefore, designation of N. fossalis
critical habitat where manure dumping can occur would provide a
significant educational conservation benefit.
In summary, we found the benefits of exclusion of lands covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the minimal
benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat designation
for those areas that are currently conserved and managed (i.e.,
Subunits 6D and 6E). Alternatively, the benefits of inclusion are
greater for non-conserved, non-managed lands within the plan area
(i.e., Subunit 6A, 6B, and 6C). See the Application of Section 4(b)(2)
of the Act section (particularly the Weighing Benefits of Exclusion
Against Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP section)
for a complete discussion of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
exclusion analysis.
Issues discussed by the peer reviewer, while they may reflect valid
concerns with regard to HCP implementation, do not reduce the benefits
of exclusion for Subunits 6D and 6E. We believe that conservation is
adequate in these areas as a result of the long-term conservation and
management of Subunits 6D and 6E (see Benefits of Exclusion--Western
Riverside County MSHCP and the Weighing Benefits of Exclusion Against
Benefits of Inclusion--Western Riverside County MSHCP sections).
However, we will consider the information submitted by the peer
reviewer in our ongoing assessments of the Western Riverside County
MSHCP, and continue to work with permittees to ensure that the HCP is
properly implemented to benefit Navarretia fossalis and its habitat.
Comment 14: One peer reviewer stated that the Service should not
exclude habitat within the plan area of HCP permits that are not yet
issued. The reviewer stated draft plans provide no guarantee that the
final HCPs will provide adequate species conservation.
Our Response: We did not exclude any habitat from this revised
critical habitat designation that falls within the plan area of an HCP
permit that has not yet been issued.
Other Comments
Comment 15: Two commenters provided biological information for our
consideration.
(1) One commenter provided information about the presence of
Navarretia fossalis at one location in San Marcos, California,
including reference to a website with detailed biological information
about this location. The commenter indicated that they believe the
future of the site is uncertain and N. fossalis grows in the larger
vernal pools onsite.
(2) A second commenter stated that although ``scrub'' habitat
elements may expand into alkali playa, the more common process
currently observed is replacement of alkali playa by alkali grassland
(regarding the Primary Constituent Elements- Ephemeral Wetland Habitat
section of the proposed rule). The second commenter also noted that in
some of the known species' localities, alkali grassland has become
dominated by species less commonly found in the wetter areas of the
alkali playa, possibly due to alteration of hydrology.
(3) The second commenter described distinct ``riverine pools''
characterized by unique floristic elements, such as Trichocoronis
wrightii (limestone bugheal), which only occur with Navarretia fossalis
within the San Jacinto River Unit.
(4) The second commenter stated that ``general anecdotal
observations'' of habitat conditions at the Salt Creek Seasonally
Flooded Alkali Plain indicate a recent decline in Navarretia fossalis
densities, especially at the Stowe vernal pool. The commenter
acknowledged these observations may reflect a response to rainfall
patterns, but stated the habitat does appear to have experienced drying
of the ephemeral wetlands and vernal pools, along with an expansion of
Hordeum marinum subsp. gussoneanum (cheat grass).
(5) The second commenter stated that a number of the larger vernal
pools in the Perris plain region occur on Willows soils.
(6) Finally, the second commenter noted the proposed expansion of
waterfowl ponds and wet soil management in portions of the San Jacinto
Wildlife Area (under the Western Riverside County MSHCP) may negatively
affect Navarretia fossalis. The expansion could benefit N. fossalis by
providing more habitat for this species; however, ponding duration and
exotic plant species used to increase the waterfowl habitat suitability
could conflict with existing or expanded N. fossalis populations within
the San Jacinto Wildlife Area.
Our Response: We appreciate all information provided. We are aware
of the San Marcos vernal pools information, which is identified in
Table 2 as Subunit 4C1 in the San Marcos Upham location. Additionally,
the Service regularly works with CDFG to ensure that the seasonally
flooded alkali vernal plain habitat in the San Jacinto Wildlife Area
continues to function and provide a benefit to Navarretia fossalis and
other sensitive species that use this habitat. We will consider the
information regarding the proposed expansion of waterfowl ponds and wet
soil management in portions of the San Jacinto Wildlife Area in future
conservation recommendations and decisions; however, we do not believe
it is relevant to this revised critical habitat designation for N.
fossalis.
We considered the other information provided and edited this
revised critical habitat rule as appropriate (see Primary Constituent
Elements--Ephemeral Wetland Habitat and Background--Geographic Range
and Status sections above).
Comment 16: One commenter recommended that the total number of
Navarretia fossalis localities be carefully reviewed and possibly
updated (regarding the Background--Geographic Range and Status section
of the proposed rule). The commenter stated that they believe the
section failed to cite some potentially important references, including
Brown's (2003) listing of ephemeral pools in western Riverside County,
and CNDDB collection records from the Elsinore-Murrieta area and from
San Luis Obispo County.
Our Response: Regarding the suggested Background section citations,
the data in Brown's (2003) record table is part of our Service files
and was incorporated in our GIS database, we are not aware of any CNDDB
collection records from the Elsinore-Murrieta area (and none were
provided by the commenter), and the San Luis Obispo County record has
never been verified; therefore, we did not include those suggested
record citations in this final rule.
Comment 17: Two commenters expressed general opposition to revising
[[Page 62228]]
critical habitat because of the resulting costs to taxpayers and
private companies.
Our Response: According to sections 3(5)(A) and 4(b) of the Act and
our implementing regulations under 50 CFR 424.12, we are required to
designate critical habitat for federally listed species. Following the
listing of Navarretia fossalis in 1998 and the subsequent designation
of the species' critical habitat in 2005, the Center for Biological
Diversity filed a complaint on December 19, 2007, in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California challenging the 2005
designation. This lawsuit challenged the validity of the information
and reasoning we used to exclude areas from the 2005 critical habitat
designation for N. fossalis. On July 25, 2008, the parties reached a
settlement agreement, in which we agreed to reconsider the critical
habitat designation for the species. The action of revising the
designation is the result of our following a court order. Therefore,
while we acknowledge the commenters' concern that revising critical
habitat is costly, we do not have discretion with regard to completion
of court-ordered actions (see Previous Federal Actions section above
for more information regarding completion of this revised rule).
Comment 18: Two commenters provided suggestions regarding the
proposed critical habitat designation review process. One commenter
stated that graphics provided in the proposed rule did not allow
detailed review of areas proposed as revised critical habitat and thus
recommended the Service post topographic maps or aerial photographs on
the Internet during open comment periods. A second commenter requested
that no additional areas be proposed as revised critical habitat
without recirculation of the entire rule for notice and comment.
Our Response: We agree it would be advantageous to provide more
detailed graphics for public review and will consider the practicality
of doing so when publishing future proposed critical habitat
designations.
According to section 4(b)(5) of the Act and the Administrative
Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Subchapter II), we are required to provide an
adequate opportunity for the public to comment on any critical habitat
rule. Although it is not fiscally practical for us to recirculate an
entire rule for notice and comment, any areas proposed as revised
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis that are in addition to those
listed in the proposed revised critical habitat rule (74 FR 27588; June
10, 2009) were described in the document that made available the DEA
(75 FR 19575; April 15, 2010). As a result, the opportunity for public
review and comment prior to designation of this revised critical
habitat designation occurred as a result of an initial public comment
period between June 10, 2009, and August 10, 2009, and a second public
comment period between April 15, 2010, and May 17, 2010.
Comment 19: Two commenters recommended adding or removing areas
from the Navarretia fossalis proposed revised critical habitat. The
first commenter recommended proposed revised critical habitat be
expanded at the ``northern and southern boundaries'' of the San Jacinto
River subunit (Subunit 6A). Specifically they recommended proposed
revised critical habitat be expanded at the following locations:
(1) At the northern boundary east to include pond areas within the
San Jacinto Wildlife Area;
(2) Around 13\th\ Street east of the County owned property;
(3) Eastward near Simpson Road in the area of San Jacinto Avenue to
include areas north of Ellis Avenue;
(4) North of the San Jacinto river to near Redlands Avenue;
(5) To include the entire vernal pool found south off Case Road;
(6) South of the San Jacinto River, possibly to the boundary of
Green Valley Parkway;
(7) Westward to include pools in the northwestern corner of the
Hemet Airport within the Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain;
and
(8) At the southern end of the Wickerd Road and Scott Road
locality.
A second commenter asserted that the proposed critical habitat
designation falls short of the Act's ``recovery requirement'' by
focusing solely on species' survival. They asserted in particular that
additional areas need to be proposed to ensure ecological features
required for species' recovery are maintained, such as water quality,
inundation frequency, and habitat connectivity.
Our Response: We considered the changes suggested by the first
commenter and revised this final revised critical habitat designation
as appropriate as discussed in the document making available DEA (75 FR
19575; April 15, 2010). For more information see the Summary of Changes
From the Proposed Revised Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat
Designation section and our response to Comment 11
Regarding the second commenter's assertion that additional critical
habitat areas need to be proposed to meet the ``[Act's] recovery
requirement,'' we believe we have designated all the specific occupied
areas which are found those physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of the species. We recognize that the
designation of critical habitat may not include all of the habitat that
may eventually be determined to be necessary for the recovery of
Navarretia fossalis, and critical habitat designations do not signal
that habitat outside the designation is unimportant or may not
contribute to recovery. Areas outside the revised critical habitat
designation will continue to be subject to conservation actions
implemented under section 7(a)(1) of the Act and regulatory protections
afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard and the prohibitions
of section 9 of the Act if actions occurring in these areas may affect
N. fossalis; these protections and conservation tools will continue to
contribute to recovery of this species. The second commenter did not
suggest specific additional areas for inclusion in the proposed revised
critical habitat designation, and we are not aware of any additional
areas required for species recovery that should be proposed as revised
critical habitat.
Comment 20: One commenter suggested edits to the proposed revised
critical habitat rule text. The commenter stated that more information
could have been included in the Background section of the proposed rule
regarding the different substrates, hydrology, and habitat status of
each core habitat area. The commenter also recommended we expand our
discussion of the extent of protection during the early phase of HCP
implementation and for plant species under the Act. The commenter
specifically recommended the following edits:
(1) Note that Navarretia fossalis is generally restricted to vernal
pools and alkali playas, and that in the alkali grasslands, this
species is restricted to small vernal pools or other depressions within
this community (Background--Habitat subsection);
(2) Note that suitability of hydrological conditions for the
germination of this species vary on an annual basis, which means that
N. fossalis can be absent for a number of years and the total number of
plants can vary depending on the timing, duration, and extent of
ponding (Background--Habitat subsection);
(3) Describe the unique nature of the ephemeral wetlands found
along the San Jacinto River, especially how large scale flooding
events, although uncommon, appear to maintain N. fossalis habitat and
provide a species dispersal mechanism (Primary
[[Page 62229]]
Constituent Elements; Ephemeral Wetland Habitat subsection);
(4) Discuss the importance of specific microtopography required to
provide sufficient ponding duration (hydrology) to support this species
and the threat posed by alteration of microtopography (Primary
Constituent Elements; Ephemeral Wetland Habitat subsection); and
(5) Mention a number of the larger vernal pools in the Perris Plain
region occur on the Willows Soil Series (Primary Constituent Elements:
Topography and Soils that Support Ponding During Winter and Spring
subsection).
With regard to PCEs in general, the commenter stated:
(1) The importance of overland water flow and the size of the local
watershed required to maintain ephemeral wetlands needs to be
emphasized; and
(2) More information should be provided on the current condition of
the PCEs in each subunit.
The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for
the Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat section:
(1) Step 3 should be expanded to note how total proposed area
reductions in essential habitat were determined and the extent of local
watershed inclusion in a unit; and
(2) Step 4 should include notes of any recent field or site
condition observations.
The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for
the Summary of Changes from Previously Designated Critical Habitat
section of the proposed revised rule:
(1) Regarding ``Cruzan Mesa'' subsection, they stated the pools
could not fill by overland flow of water on the mesa, and recommended
we explain how the habitat could be self-sustaining if the watershed
area outside of proposed revised critical habitat boundaries was lost;
(2) Regarding ``Wickerd Road and Scott Road'' subsection, they
stated more information should be provided on the current condition at
this pool complex; and
(3) Regarding the ``Santa Rosa Plateau'' subsection, they
recommended providing a summary of known Mesa de Burro species'
distribution information.
The commenter made the following specific edit recommendations for
the Critical Habitat Units section of the proposed revised rule:
(1) Expand the discussion of current habitat conditions and threats
regarding the ``San Jacinto River'' and ``Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded
Alkali Plain'' subsections;
(2) Discuss what habitat conservation has been or will be achieved
under the Western Riverside County MSHCP at important occupied
localities; and
(3) Note the presence of regionally significant vernal pools in
addition to the areas of alkali playa and grassland; generally these
pools are floristically distinct from these communities.
Our Response: We appreciate these editorial recommendations and
have made changes to the text of this final rule, where appropriate
(see Background, Primary Constituent Elements, Criteria Used to
Identify Critical Habitat, Summary of Changes From the Proposed Revised
Rule and the Previous Critical Habitat Designation, and Critical
Habitat Units sections above). In some cases, the amount of detail
requested by the commenter was not appropriate for the purpose of
designating critical habitat; therefore some information was not
incorporated.
Comment 21: Two commenters stated that they believe lands owned or
under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP permittees
should be excluded from the revised Navarretia fossalis critical
habitat designation. The commenters argued for exclusion because the
HCP already adequately provides for the survival and recovery of the
species, and under section 6.9 of the HCP and section 14.10 of the
associated Implementing Agreement, no critical habitat should be
designated in the HCP Plan Area. The first commenter also argued that
case law (``15 vernal pool species court case'') supports exclusion
where the court upheld the exclusion of the Western Riverside County
MSHCP. The second commenter stated that although the Western Riverside
Flood Control and Water Conservation District is a Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittee whose projects are currently subject to the
provisions of the HCP, critical habitat designation may affect the
continued operation, maintenance, and restoration of existing flood
control facilities as well as the construction of future flood control
improvements along the San Jacinto River and within the Salt Creek
watershed. The second commenter also argued designating critical
habitat within the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan boundaries would
create duplicative regulatory efforts without any additional benefits
to the species.
Our Response: With regard to the commenters' assertions that lands
owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
should be excluded because the HCP adequately provides for the survival
and recovery of the species, or because the HCP is being fully
implemented, we agree that the protection afforded Navarretia fossalis
and its essential habitat under the MSHCP is a relevant consideration
in our section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis. Exclusion is based on our
determination that the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion, and that exclusion of an area will not result in extinction
of a species. We found the benefits of exclusion of lands covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the minimal
benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat designation
in areas that receive long-term conservation and management for the
species and its habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). For more
information, see response to Comment 13 and the Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for a detailed discussion.
After public review and comment on the proposed revision to
critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis, we determined through our
analysis under section 4(b)(2) of the Act that the maximum extent of
allowable exclusions under the Western Riverside County MSHCP was
limited to the exclusion of lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of
the permittees of the Western Riverside County MSHCP in Subunits 6D and
6E where lands are conserved and managed in perpetuity (see Application
of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act--Western Riverside County Multiple
Species Habitat Conservation Plan (Western Riverside County MSHCP)
section above for a detailed discussion of the exclusion analysis.
We do not foresee additional effects of critical habitat
designation on flood control operations along the San Jacinto River and
within the Salt Creek watershed as a result of mandated habitat
conservation actions. We believe any impacts to partnerships (a benefit
of exclusion) would be outweighed by the benefits of inclusion as
explained above. Therefore, the commenter's argument that lands owned
by or under the jurisdiction of Western Riverside County MSHCP
permittees should be excluded because of possible impacts to the flood
control facilities and future flood control improvements is not
adequately supported.
Comment 22: Two commenters suggested that the Service should not
exclude lands owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside
County MSHCP permittees from the revised Navarretia fossalis critical
habitat designation. The first commenter opposed to exclusion argued
that no biological benefits are achieved by excluding habitat within
HCP Plan areas
[[Page 62230]]
from critical habitat designation because:
(1) Research demonstrates species with designated critical habitat
are less likely to be declining, and twice as likely to be recovering,
than species without critical habitat (cited Taylor et al. 2005);
(2) The Western Riverside County MSHCP fails to address degradation
of habitat inside the reserves, especially the ongoing problem of
manure dumping activities; and
(3) There are nonsignatory agencies that have jurisdiction within
the Western Riverside County MSHCP plan area who conduct activities
outside of the HCP process that require section 7 consultation.
The second commenter opposed to exclusion gave the following
reasons:
(1) Critical habitat designation provides potential for enhanced
protection and recovery of this species within the HCP plan area,
because these areas require ``special management considerations or
protection,'' and it is not a ``hindrance to the conservation
process'';
(2) Habitat continues to be lost due to the common practices of
disking, soil amendment, and hydrology alteration within the plan area
because the Western Riverside County MSHCP does not address these
existing land use practices and did not provide procedures for
conserving specific populations of Navarretia fossalis;
(3) The benefits of critical habitat designation are especially
great along the San Jacinto River, (Upper) Salt Creek, and the Wickerd
Road and Scott Road vernal pools because threats are high and there is
a potential Federal nexus in this area; and
(4) The proposed flood control plan for the San Jacinto River is a
covered activity under the Western Riverside County MSHCP and the loss
of infrequent, major flooding events may negatively affect the
``metapopulation ecology'' (dispersal required to recolonize pools
where subpopulations have been extirpated) of N. fossalis.
Our Response: With regard to the commenters' assertions that lands
owned or under the jurisdiction of the Western Riverside County MSHCP
should not be excluded because the HCP may not adequately provide for
the survival and recovery of the species, or because is not being fully
implemented, we agree that the protection afforded Navarretia fossalis
and its essential habitat under the Western Riverside County MSHCP is a
relevant consideration in our section 4(b)(2) exclusion analysis.
Exclusion is based on our determination that the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of inclusion, and that exclusion of an area will
not result in extinction of a species. We found the benefits of
exclusion of lands covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be
greater than the minimal benefits of including these lands in the
critical habitat designation in areas that are currently receiving
long-term conservation and management to benefit the species (i.e.,
Subunits 6D and 6E). For more information, see response to Comment 13
and the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a
detailed discussion.
We do not agree with the commenter that Taylor et al.'s (2005, pp.
360-367) conclusions compel a finding that lands covered by the Western
Riverside County MSHCP should be included in the revised Navarretia
fossalis critical habitat designation. The results of Taylor et al.
(2005, pp. 360-367) do indicate a significant conservation benefit of
critical habitat designation; however, that study did not analyze or
discuss the effects of HCP-based exclusions or the above-described
exclusion determination process for N. fossalis. The benefits of
excluding lands covered by a particular HCP based on partnerships must
be analyzed independently and balanced against the benefits of
inclusion (based on protections provided by critical habitat that are
not redundant with HCP protections) because HCPs:
(1) Are variable in scope;
(2) Contain variable conservation and management planning efforts;
and
(3) Use species abundance trends that may not be apparent for many
years to determine effects of conservation measures.
Therefore, the general conclusions in the literature cited by the
commenter do not warrant the specific conclusion that all essential
habitat covered by HCPs should be included in critical habitat.
We agree with the commenter that when there are agencies with
jurisdiction in the HCP plan area that are not HCP signatories who may
conduct activities requiring section 7 consultation; the regulatory
benefits of critical habitat designation may be higher in situations
where the likely protections afforded through the section 7
consultation are not redundant with, but would go beyond, those
afforded under the HCP. However the benefits of including or excluding
particular areas may vary even within a specific HCP, and determining
those relative benefits requires an evaluation of the circumstances
affecting each area. The mere fact that a Federal nexus exists does not
mean that regulatory benefits of designation will outweigh the benefits
of exclusion.
Regarding the comment that areas should be included in critical
habitat designation because they require special management
considerations or protection, this language refers to the definition of
critical habitat, not the exclusion process. Section 3(5)(A)(i) of the
Act defines critical habitat, in part, as areas which may require
special management considerations or protection. Section 4(b)(2) of the
Act directs the Secretary to consider the impacts of designating such
areas as critical habitat and provides the Secretary with discretion to
exclude particular areas if the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of inclusion. In this rule, we do not state that areas that
are being adequately managed and protected do not meet the definition
of critical habitat under section 3(5)(A) of the Act. Rather, we
considered the management and protection of particular areas that do
meet the definition of critical habitat in our exclusion analyses under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Please see Critical Habitat and Application
of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act sections above for more detailed
discussions of the definition of critical habitat and exclusion
analyses.
Comment 23: One commenter requested that if we designate new
critical habitat, the revised critical habitat rule should include
clear guidance to other Federal agencies by stating that proof of
Western Riverside County MSHCP compliance will allow the agency to make
a ``no effect'' determination with regard to projects in designated
critical habitat to ensure that section 7 consultations are consistent
with the Western Riverside County MSHCP and are completed in a timely
manner.
Our Response: A ``no effect'' determination is the appropriate
determination when the Federal action agency determines its proposed
action will not affect a listed species or designated critical habitat.
This requires a project (and species-specific) evaluation and analysis
of effects to reach a ``no effect'' determination. Therefore, we are
unable at this time to concur with any ``no effect'' determinations
made by other Federal agencies for any future projects that may occur
in Navarretia fossalis critical habitat.
Comment 24: One commenter requested that we exclude Subunit 4E from
the revised critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis based
on partnership benefits. They stated the Ramona Grasslands Open Space
[[Page 62231]]
Preserve in Subunit 4E is being managed and monitored according to Area
Specific Management Directives built from the scientific framework laid
out in the Framework Management and Monitoring Plan for the Ramona
Grasslands Open Space Preserve: San Diego County. The commenter further
stated that preserve management goals will be revised and updated to
comply with the requirements of the North County MSCP once it is
approved. The commenter provided a list of current management actions
and specific goals for the conservation of N. fossalis.
Our Response: As discussed in the responses to Comments 13 and 21,
exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Act are not based on
partnership benefits alone, but whether the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of inclusion. We reviewed the Area Specific
Management Directives referenced by the commenter and determined that
they do describe and provide beneficial conservation measures for
Navarretia fossalis that are redundant with conservation measures
provided by critical habitat designation, and therefore would reduce
the benefits of inclusion in critical habitat if implementation were
assured into the future. When considering the benefits of exclusion, we
consider a variety of factors, including but not limited to whether the
plan is finalized (i.e., approved by all parties) and there is a
reasonable expectation that conservation management strategies and
actions will be implemented into the future (see Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for further discussion). The HCP under which
these measures will be assured of future implementation is not yet
finalized; therefore, we determined the benefits of exclusion do not
outweigh the benefits of inclusion for lands within the Ramona
Grasslands Open Space Preserve portion of Subunit 4E from N. fossalis
critical habitat designation at this time.
Comment 25: Two commenters expressed concerns regarding the
inclusion or exclusion of lands owned or under the jurisdiction of MSCP
permittees in the Navarretia fossalis final revised critical habitat
designation. The first commenter opposed to exclusion argued that no
biological benefits are achieved by excluding habitat within HCP plan
areas from critical habitat designation because:
(1) Research demonstrates species with designated critical habitat
are less likely to be declining, and twice as likely to be recovering,
than species without critical habitat (cited Taylor et al. 2005);
(2) The MSCP fails to address degradation of habitat inside the
conserved areas, especially where illegal OHV activities have
``severely'' impacted vernal pools; and
(3) There are nonsignatory agencies that have jurisdiction within
the MSCP plan area who conduct activities outside of the HCP process
that require section 7 consultation.
The second commenter stated the MSCP provides for the conservation
of Navarretia fossalis and therefore lands owned by or under the
jurisdiction of permittees should be excluded from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Our Response: A decision to exclude lands from critical habitat is
based on an evaluation of the benefits of exclusion in comparison to
the benefits of inclusion. Please see response to Comment 13 above
regarding arguments for and against exclusion of lands owned by or
under the jurisdiction of regional HCP permittees. We found the
benefits of exclusion of lands covered by the County of San Diego
Subarea Plan under the MSCP outweighed the benefits of inclusion for
areas that are receiving long-term conservation and management (Subunit
3A); however, we found that the benefits of inclusion outweighed the
benefits of exclusion on lands that are currently not conserved and
being impacted by activities that were not covered by the County of San
Diego Subarea Plan because there were potential significant benefits to
the conservation of Navarretia fossalis that may come from the
designation of critical habitat on these lands (Subunits 5B, 5F, and
5I). See response to Comment 13 and 22 and Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section for a complete discussion.
Comment 26: One commenter recommended critical habitat be
designated on military bases where applicable, and stated it is not
appropriate to rely on integrated natural resources management plans
(INRMPs) for protection of Navarretia fossalis.
Our Response: We do not have discretion to designate critical
habitat on the military bases within proposed revised critical habitat
as suggested by the commenter. The National Defense Authorization Act
for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas
eligible for designation as critical habitat. Specifically, section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides:
``The Secretary shall not designate as critical habitat any lands or
other geographical areas owned or controlled by the Department of
Defense, or designated for its use, that are subject to an integrated
natural resources management plan (INRMP) prepared under section 670a
of this title, if the Secretary determines in writing that such plan
provides a benefit to the species for which critical habitat is
proposed for designation.'' (See Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the
Act section above for further discussion). We determined the INRMPs for
MCB Camp Pendleton and MCAS Miramar (Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
2007; Gene Stout and Associates et al. 2006) provide benefits to
Navarretia fossalis; therefore, the Act mandates we exempt these
military bases from critical habitat designation (see Application of
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act section above for further discussion).
Comment 27: One commenter stated that no areas should be excluded
from critical habitat designation based on HCPs that have not been
finalized and implemented because there is no guarantee that proposed
HCPs will be finalized.
Our Response: We did not exclude any habitat from this revised
critical habitat designation within the plan area of an HCP permit that
has not yet been issued (see responses to Comments 14 and 24).
Comment 28: One commenter stated that areas of Unit 6 covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP should be excluded from critical
habitat designation based on the Service's permitting Biological
Opinion for the Western Riverside County MSHCP (Service 2004b) for
several reasons:
(1) The Service's reasoning in the 2005 rule that excluded the same
areas in the 2005 designation;
(2) The proposed designation of these areas covered by the Western
Riverside County MSHCP is not beneficial to the species;
(3) The Western Riverside County MSHCP precludes designation of
critical habitat;
(4) Several species for which critical habitats were not designated
occur on Western Riverside County MSHCP covered lands; and
(5) The idea that designations of critical habitat within the
Western Riverside County MSHCP ultimately function as disincentives to
such planning processes.
Our Response: For lands within the jurisdiction of the Western
Riverside County MSHCP, this rule excludes a portion (Subunits 6D and
6E) and includes the remaining covered lands (Subunits 6A, 6B, and 6C)
as designated critical habitat. When we conduct an exclusion analysis
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, each exclusion is based on weighing
the benefits of exclusion with
[[Page 62232]]
the benefits of inclusion. We found the benefits of exclusion of lands
covered by the Western Riverside County MSHCP to be greater than the
minimal benefits of including these lands in the critical habitat
designation in areas that receive long-term conservation and management
of the species and its habitat (i.e., Subunits 6D and 6E). Please see
the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a detailed
discussion on our exclusion analyses (including why areas covered by
the Western Riverside County MSHCP that are designated as critical
habitat are beneficial to the species) for those areas we considered
for exclusion in the proposed revised critical habitat designation (74
FR 27588), the associated document announcing the DEA (75 FR 19575),
and our response to Comment 13.
With regard to the commenters concern of designating areas in this
rule that were excluded in the 2005 critical habitat designation, we
did not designate areas containing essential habitat features if those
habitat features were already conserved and managed for the benefit of
Navarretia fossalis because we concluded that the areas did not meet
the second part of the definition of critical habitat under section
3(5)(a)(i) of the Act. We have reconsidered our approach in this rule
in light of subsequent court decisions and have decided that areas
containing essential habitat features that ``may require'' special
management considerations or protection do meet the definition of
critical habitat irrespective of whether the habitat features are
currently receiving special management or protection. See the Summary
of Changes From the 2005 Final Designation of Critical Habitat section
for further discussion of why some areas were included as critical
habitat in this rule that were excluded in the 2005 rule.
With regard to the commenter's belief that critical habitat should
not be designated in the Western Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area based
on language in section 6.9 of the HCP and the associated Implementing
Agreement, section 14.10 of the Implementing Agreement does not
preclude critical habitat designation within the plan area (Dudek and
Associates 2003, p. 63). See our response to Comment 20 for a
discussion of why critical habitat is not precluded under an HCP
Implementing Agreement.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this rule under Executive
Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its determination upon the
following four criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
(2) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an agency is required
to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it
must prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory
flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the rule on small
entities (small businesses, small organizations, and small government
jurisdictions), as described below. However, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies the rule will
not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The SBREFA amended RFA to require Federal agencies to provide
a certification statement of the factual basis for certifying that the
rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. In this final rule, we are certifying that
the critical habitat designation for Navarretia fossalis will not have
a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. The following discussion explains our rationale.
According to the Small Business Administration, small entities
include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; and small businesses (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses
include manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500
employees, wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees,
retail and service businesses with less than $5 million in annual
sales, general and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5
million in annual business, special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with
annual sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic
impacts to these small entities are significant, we considered the
types of activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this
rule, as well as types of project modifications that may result. In
general, the term ``significant economic impact'' is meant to apply to
a typical small business firm's business operations.
To determine if the revised designation of critical habitat for
Navarretia fossalis would significantly affect a substantial number of
small entities, we consider the number of small entities affected
within particular types of economic activities, such as residential and
commercial development. We apply the ``substantial number'' test
individually to each industry to determine if certification is
appropriate. However, the SBREFA does not explicitly define
``substantial number'' or ``significant economic impact.''
Consequently, to assess whether a ``substantial number'' of small
entities is affected by this designation, this analysis considers the
relative number of small entities likely to be impacted in an area. In
some circumstances, especially with critical habitat designations of
limited extent, we may aggregate across all industries and consider
whether the total number of small entities affected is substantial. In
estimating the number of small entities potentially affected, we also
consider whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
Designation of critical habitat only affects activities authorized,
funded, or carried out by Federal agencies. Some kinds of activities
are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not be
affected by critical habitat designation. In areas where the Navarretia
fossalis is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult
with us under section 7 of the Act on activities they authorize, fund,
or carry out that may affect the species. Federal agencies also must
consult with us if their activities may affect critical habitat.
Designation of critical habitat, therefore, could result in an
additional economic impact on small entities due to the requirement to
reinitiate
[[Page 62233]]
consultation for ongoing Federal activities (see Application of the
``Adverse Modification'' Standard section).
In our final economic analysis of the critical habitat designation,
we evaluated the potential economic effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the
revised designation of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. The
analysis is based on the estimated impacts associated with the
rulemaking as described in sections 3 through 9 of the analysis and
evaluates the potential for economic impacts related to: residential,
commercial and industrial development; conservation lands management;
transportation; pipeline projects; flood control; agriculture; and fire
management (Entrix 2010, p. A-1). The FEA estimates the total
incremental impacts associated with development as a whole to be
$112,000 to $431,000 over the 20-year timeframe of the FEA. The FEA
identifies incremental impacts to small entities to occur only in the
development sector (Entrix 2010, p. A-2). The other categories of
projects either will have no impacts (conservation land management,
pipeline projects, agriculture, or fire management) or are Federal,
State, or public entities not considered small or exceed the criteria
for small business status (Entrix 2010, pp. A-1-A-2). Of the
approximately 3,143 ac (1,272 ha) land considered developable in the
designation, only 1,130 ac (457 ha) has been forecasted to be developed
over the next 20-year timeframe (Entrix 2010, p. A-3). The FEA equates
this acreage to 38 projects, with one developer per project (Entrix
2010, p. A-3). The FEA summarizes that two developers annually may be
affected by the designation of critical habitat resulting in total
annualized incremental impacts to small entities of $10,565 to $40,644
(Entrix 2010, pp. A-3, A-4). The FEA assumes all developers are
considered small and states that this estimate may overstate impacts if
not all of the developers are small (Entrix 2010, p. A-4). The FEA also
states (Section 3 of the FEA) that where substitute land is readily
available to developers, costs will be passed on to affected landowners
in the form of decreased land value and that under such circumstances
most of the costs will not be borne by developers (Entrix 2010, p. A-
4). Please refer to our final economic analysis of critical habitat
designation for N. fossalis for a more detailed discussion of potential
economic impacts.
In summary, we considered whether this designation would result in
a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small
entities. The total number of small businesses impacted annually by the
designation is estimated to be two, with an annualized impact of
approximately of $10,565 to $40,644. This impact is less than 10
percent of the total incremental impact identified for development
activities and may be an overestimate of the impacts considering that
not all developers will be small and that some of these costs may be
passed on to landowners. Based on the above reasoning and currently
available information, we concluded this rule would not result in a
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities
for transportation, development, and flood control impacts as
identified in the FEA (Entrix 2010, pp. A-1-A-4). Therefore, we are
certifying that the designation of critical habitat for Navarretia
fossalis will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities, and a regulatory flexibility analysis is not
required.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211 (E.O.
13211; ``Actions Concerning Regulations That Significantly Affect
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use'') on regulations that
significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and use. E.O. 13211
requires agencies to prepare Statements of Energy Effects when
undertaking certain actions. OMB has provided guidance for implementing
this Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute
``a significant adverse effect'' when compared to not taking the
regulatory action under consideration. The economic analysis finds that
none of these criteria are relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on
information in the economic analysis, energy-related impacts associated
with Navarretia fossalis conservation activities within critical
habitat are not expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat
is not expected to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution,
or use. Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and
no Statement of Energy Effects is required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, the Service
makes the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or [T]ribal governments'' with
two exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It
also excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing
Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually
to State, local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,''
if the provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of
assistance'' or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government's responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local,
or Tribal governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the
time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to
Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food
Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State
Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living;
Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement.
``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would
impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a
condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive
Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require
approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be
indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. 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
[[Page 62234]]
shift the costs of the large entitlement programs listed above onto
State governments.
(2) As discussed in the FEA of the revised designation of critical
habitat for Navarretia fossalis, we do not believe that this rule would
significantly or uniquely affect small governments because it would not
produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or greater in any year; that
is, it is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act . The FEA concludes incremental impacts may occur
due to administrative costs of section 7 consultations for development,
transportation, and flood control projects activities; however, these
are not expected to significantly affect small governments. Incremental
impacts stemming from various species conservation and development
control activities are expected to be borne by the Federal Government,
California Department of Transportation, CDFG, Riverside County,
Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and
City of Perris, which are not considered small governments.
Consequently, we do not believe that the revised critical habitat
designation would significantly or uniquely affect small government
entities. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not required.
Takings--Executive Order 12630
In accordance with E.O. 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have analyzed the potential takings implications of
designating critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis in a takings
implications assessment. Critical habitat designation does not affect
landowner actions that do not require Federal funding or permits, nor
does it preclude development of habitat conservation programs or
issuance of incidental take permits to permit actions that do require
Federal funding or permits to go forward. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this designation of critical habitat for N.
fossalis does not pose significant takings implications for lands
within or affected by the designation.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), the rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior, we requested
information from, and coordinated development of the proposed critical
habitat designation with appropriate State resource agencies in
California. The designation may have some benefit to these governments
because the areas that contain the features essential to the
conservation of the species are more clearly defined, and the primary
constituent elements of the habitat necessary to the conservation of
the species are specifically identified. This information does not
alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However,
it may assist these local governments in long-range planning (because
these local governments no longer have to wait for case-by-case section
7 consultations to occur).
Where State and local governments require approval or authorization
from a Federal agency for actions that may affect critical habitat,
consultation under section 7(a)(2) would be required. While non-Federal
entities that receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that
otherwise require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for
an action, may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical
habitat, the legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency.
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), this rule
meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in accordance with
the provisions of the Act. This final rule uses standard property
descriptions and identifies the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies within the designated
areas to assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of
Navarretia fossalis.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare
environmental analyses as defined by NEPA in connection with
designating critical habitat under the Act. We published a notice
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was upheld by the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48
F.3d 1495 (9\th\ Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).
Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we have a responsibility to communicate
meaningfully with recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-
government basis. In accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5,
1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act), we readily
acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with Tribes in
developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that tribal
lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make information available
to Tribes.
We determined that there are no tribal lands occupied at the time
of listing that contain the features essential for the conservation of
the species, nor are there any unoccupied tribal lands that are
essential for the conservation of Navarretia fossalis. Therefore, we
are not designating critical habitat for N. fossalis on tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rulemaking is
available on http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section).
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
[[Page 62235]]
Regulation Promulgation
0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
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. 17.96(a), revise the entry for ``Navarretia fossalis
(spreading navarretia)'' under family Polemoniaceae to read as follows:
Sec. 17.96 Critical habitat--plants.
(a) Flowering plants.
* * * * *
Family Polemoniaceae: Navarretia fossalis (spreading navarretia)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Los Angeles, Riverside,
and San Diego Counties, California, on the maps below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements (PCEs) for
Navarretia fossalis consist of three components:
(i) PCE 1--Ephemeral wetland habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4
ha)) and seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains that become inundated
by winter rains and hold water or have saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6
months during a year with average rainfall (i.e., years where average
rainfall amounts for a particular area are reached during the rainy
season (between October and May)). This period of inundation is long
enough to promote germination, flowering, and seed production for
Navarretia fossalis and other native species typical of vernal pool and
seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain habitat, but not so long that
true wetland species inhabit the areas.
(ii) PCE 2--Intermixed wetland and upland habitats that act as the
local watershed. Areas characterized by mounds, swales, and depressions
within a matrix of upland habitat that result in intermittently flowing
surface and subsurface water in swales, drainages, and pools described
in PCE 1.
(iii) PCE 3--Soils that support ponding during winter and spring.
Soils found in areas characterized in PCEs 1 and 2 that have a clay
component or other property that creates an impermeable surface or
subsurface layer. These soil types include, but are not limited to:
Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles County; Domino, Traver,
Waukena, Chino, and Willows soils in Riverside County; and Huerhuero,
Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and Redding soils in San Diego County.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures existing
on the effective date of this rule and not containing one of more of
the primary constituent elements, such as buildings, aqueducts,
airports, and roads, and the land on which such structures are located.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created using a base of U.S. Geological Survey 7.5' quadrangle maps.
Critical habitat units were then mapped using Universal Transverse
Mercator (UTM) zone 11, North American Datum (NAD) 1983 coordinates.
(5) Note: Index Map of critical habitat units for Navarretia
fossalis (spreading navarretia) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 62236]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.002
(6) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area, Los Angeles
County, CA. Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the
following Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) North American Datum of
1983 (NAD83) coordinates (E, N): 367454, 3813696; 367493, 3813876;
367443, 3813933; 367418, 3814003; 367396, 3814159; 367387, 3814304;
367454, 3814474; 367517, 3814549; 367580, 3814651; 367676, 3814752;
367807, 3814866; 367996, 3814923; 368172, 3815075; 368198, 3815107;
368375, 3815036; 368318, 3814957; 368262, 3814889; 368198, 3814795;
368181, 3814768; 368108, 3814754; 368073, 3814710; 367963, 3814624;
367921, 3814549; 367938, 3814421; 368014, 3814343; 368006, 3814230;
368048, 3814134; 368070, 3814110; 368060, 3814070; 368014, 3814065;
367972, 3814041; 367955, 3813970; 367935, 3813962; 367866, 3813938;
367834, 3813913; 367795, 3813849; 367740, 3813818; 367720, 3813762;
367640, 3813619; 367577, 3813595; 367520, 3813592; 367481, 3813628;
367454, 3813696; thence returning to 367454, 3813696.
(ii) Note: Map of Subunit 1A (Cruzan Mesa) is provided at paragraph
(7)(ii) of this entry.
[[Page 62237]]
(7) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area, Los Angeles
County, CA. Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Mint Canyon. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 366405, 3812925; 366364,
3812918; 366339, 3812957; 366287, 3812974; 366266, 3812973; 366271,
3813010; 366295, 3813063; 366333, 3813106; 366370, 3813141; 366424,
3813157; 366448, 3813168; 366505, 3813193; 366585, 3813271; 366601,
3813269; 366600, 3813233; 366619, 3813163; 366628, 3813088; 366619,
3813004; 366612, 3812959; 366602, 3812939; 366532, 3812913; 366490,
3812911; 366441, 3812920; 366405, 3812925; thence returning to 366405,
3812925.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1, Subunits 1A (Cruzan Mesa) and 1B (Plum
Canyon) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.003
[[Page 62238]]
(8) Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area--
Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station, San Diego County, CA.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Encinitas. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 470268, 3663409; 470278,
3663384; 470281, 3663385; 470287, 3663371; 470291, 3663351; 470291,
3663350; 470312, 3663306; 470317, 3663288; 470319, 3663280; 470359,
3663184; 470392, 3663084; 470440, 3662935; 470487, 3662900; 470520,
3662863; 470515, 3662828; 470501, 3662798; 470529, 3662710; 470522,
3662706; 470515, 3662703; 470501, 3662700; 470476, 3662766; 470454,
3662825; 470429, 3662892; 470404, 3662960; 470386, 3663008; 470368,
3663055; 470361, 3663075; 470296, 3663238; 470184, 3663499; 470163,
3663558; 470195, 3663563; 470209, 3663563; 470210, 3663559; 470213,
3663548; 470223, 3663527; 470234, 3663498; 470242, 3663476; 470248,
3663458; 470251, 3663445; 470251, 3663440; 470260, 3663420; 470264,
3663415; thence returning to 470268, 3663409.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 (Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station)
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.004
[[Page 62239]]
(9) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Del Mar. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485008, 3639919; 485017,
3639943; 485017, 3639943; 485018, 3639947; 485035, 3639991; 485533,
3639996; 485537, 3639996; 485537, 3639996; 485525, 3639961; 485476,
3639931; 485440, 3639908; 485440, 3639908; 485338, 3639845; 485223,
3639815; 485221, 3639814; 485179, 3639804; 485179, 3639803; 485158,
3639798; 485086, 3639788; 485070, 3639828; 485008, 3639919; thence
returning to 485008, 3639919.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3B (Carroll Canyon) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.005
[[Page 62240]]
(10) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La Jolla. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481837, 3636331; 481667,
3636273; 481510, 3636284; 481409, 3636370; 481393, 3636384; 481475,
3636442; 481708, 3636763; 481796, 3636699; 481797, 3636697; 481797,
3636697; 481877, 3636570; 481965, 3636407; 481837, 3636331; thence
returning to 481837, 3636331.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3C (Nobel Drive) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.006
[[Page 62241]]
(11) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle La Jolla. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 487573, 3630977; 487591,
3630964; 487627, 3630940; 487619, 3630908; 487617, 3630896; 487645,
3630880; 487577, 3630651; 487447, 3630712; 487233, 3630813; 487194,
3630830; 487232, 3630926; 487248, 3630966; 487260, 3630999; 487281,
3631001; 487306, 3630997; 487327, 3630977; 487330, 3630975; 487334,
3630978; 487336, 3630979; 487341, 3630983; 487343, 3630991; 487359,
3631033; 487363, 3631045; 487361, 3631049; 487357, 3631057; 487377,
3631099; 487386, 3631117; 487376, 3631131; 487375, 3631131; 487326,
3631133; 487336, 3631175; 487340, 3631237; 487346, 3631328; 487347,
3631333; 487384, 3631352; 487437, 3631378; 487571, 3631443; 487594,
3631446; 487598, 3631422; 487598, 3631310; 487575, 3631296; 487573,
3630977; thence returning to 487573, 3630977.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3D (Montgomery Field) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.007
[[Page 62242]]
(12) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4C1: San Marcos (Upham).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481857, 3666532; 481841,
3666524; 481458, 3666685; 481587, 3666988; 481974, 3666823; 481857,
3666532; thence returning to 481857, 3666532.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C1 is provided at paragraph
(14)(ii) of this entry.
(13) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4C2: San Marcos (Universal Boot).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 481373, 3666492; 481676,
3666355; 481700, 3666464; 481813, 3666423; 481809, 3666367; 481877,
3666133; 481805, 3666113; 481825, 3666048; 481669, 3666007; 481641,
3666000; 481639, 3666000; 481639, 3666002; 481618, 3666066; 481555,
3666266; 481317, 3666363; 481373, 3666492; thence returning to 481373,
3666492.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C2 is provided at paragraph
(14)(ii) of this entry.
(14) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4D: San Marcos (Bent Avenue).
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Marcos. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 482781, 3666563; 482772,
3666562; 482716, 3666750; 482842, 3666785; 482865, 3666703; 482781,
3666563; thence returning to 482781, 3666563.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D (San Marcos)
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.008
[[Page 62243]]
(15) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area, San Diego County,
CA. Subunit 4E: Ramona.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle San Pasqual. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 (E, N): 508768, 3654813; 508597, 3654751; 508493,
3654857; 508382, 3654971; 508373, 3654977; 508373, 3654977; 508366,
3654982; 508357, 3654989; 508270, 3655050; 508115, 3655137; 508036,
3655159; 507889, 3655176; 507807, 3655222; 507750, 3655265; 507772,
3655380; 507758, 3655500; 507813, 3655500; 507965, 3655470; 508357,
3655383; 508363, 3655347; 508363, 3655345; 508375, 3655275; 508376,
3655265; 509073, 3655260; 509073, 3655260; 509073, 3655260; 509180,
3655257; 509181, 3655234; 509181, 3655233; 509209, 3654862; 509082,
3654835; 508896, 3654822; 508768, 3654813; thence returning to 508768,
3654813.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4E (Ramona) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.009
[[Page 62244]]
(16) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 501084, 3616605; 501096,
3616520; 501078, 3616418; 501054, 3616382; 501054, 3616382; 501051,
3616377; 501051, 3616376; 501051, 3616376; 501051, 3616376; 501049,
3616374; 501052, 3616122; 501052, 3616122; 501052, 3616121; 501053,
3616099; 501005, 3616101; 501004, 3616101; 501002, 3616102; 500915,
3616106; 500913, 3616107; 500913, 3616107; 500814, 3616112; 500775,
3616112; 500775, 3616112; 500775, 3616112; 500769, 3616112; 500562,
3616233; 500497, 3616288; 500462, 3616334; 500436, 3616380; 500420,
3616409; 500402, 3616428; 500327, 3616508; 500312, 3616524; 500300,
3616596; 500356, 3616639; 500425, 3616639; 500468, 3616628; 500511,
3616617; 500591, 3616596; 500640, 3616597; 500651, 3616619; 500670,
3616713; 500671, 3616718; 500685, 3616767; 500770, 3616826; 500802,
3616841; 500872, 3616836; 500903, 3616834; 500952, 3616822; 501051,
3616760; 501075, 3616669; 501075, 3616667; 501076, 3616663; 501084,
3616607; 501084, 3616605; 501084, 3616605; thence returning to 501084,
3616605.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5A (Sweetwater Vernal Pools)
follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.010
[[Page 62245]]
(17) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499953,
3607783; 499924, 3607743; 499882, 3607749; 499871, 3607775; 499868,
3607814; 499815, 3607834; 499768, 3607839; 499731, 3607866; 499747,
3607899; 499762, 3607949; 499818, 3607996; 499843, 3608025; 499843,
3608079; 499818, 3608100; 499815, 3608107; 499784, 3608170; 499796,
3608236; 499838, 3608323; 499855, 3608364; 499880, 3608400; 499909,
3608415; 499921, 3608415; 499944, 3608404; 499957, 3608370; 499997,
3608238; 499997, 3608196; 499994, 3608161; 499992, 3608144; 499988,
3608082; 499962, 3608026; 499936, 3607993; 499920, 3607960; 499923,
3607916; 499939, 3607872; 499957, 3607827; 499953, 3607783; thence
returning to 499953, 3607783.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5B (Otay River Valley) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.011
[[Page 62246]]
(18) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5C: Otay Mesa.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 506759, 3606253; 506757,
3606201; 506702, 3606219; 506663, 3606258; 506601, 3606362; 506590,
3606382; 506575, 3606411; 506575, 3606411; 506535, 3606490; 506509,
3606580; 506503, 3606601; 506485, 3606661; 506481, 3606693; 506531,
3606734; 506581, 3606748; 506599, 3606760; 506600, 3606760; 506617,
3606771; 506634, 3606848; 506641, 3606869; 506642, 3606870; 506660,
3606918; 506706, 3606936; 506750, 3606885; 506777, 3606855; 506777,
3606854; 506792, 3606837; 506829, 3606785; 506880, 3606730; 506913,
3606679; 506915, 3606602; 506915, 3606597; 506918, 3606535; 506901,
3606523; 506901, 3606523; 506885, 3606512; 506841, 3606510; 506807,
3606502; 506776, 3606485; 506776, 3606485; 506768, 3606480; 506768,
3606473; 506768, 3606473; 506759, 3606253; 506759, 3606253; thence
returning to 506759, 3606253.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5C (Otay Mesa) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.012
[[Page 62247]]
(19) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Jamul Mountains. Land bounded by
the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 507676, 3615007; 507616,
3614943; 507548, 3614930; 507458, 3614918; 507386, 3614907; 507320,
3614907; 507247, 3614939; 507190, 3614947; 507173, 3614947; 507188,
3615018; 507239, 3615163; 507269, 3615226; 507269, 3615275; 507213,
3615335; 507188, 3615393; 507188, 3615433; 507194, 3615465; 507194,
3615465; 507194, 3615465; 507196, 3615476; 507211, 3615508; 507298,
3615529; 507316, 3615587; 507301, 3615676; 507301, 3615723; 507301,
3615800; 507362, 3615808; 507402, 3615865; 507403, 3615866; 507448,
3615906; 507488, 3615906; 507526, 3615872; 507556, 3615806; 507605,
3615706; 507590, 3615601; 507537, 3615580; 507514, 3615518; 507556,
3615510; 507654, 3615493; 507669, 3615405; 507661, 3615318; 507661,
3615220; 507674, 3615164; 507678, 3615148; 507680, 3615073; 507679,
3615062; 507679, 3615062; 507679, 3615062; 507676, 3615007; thence
returning to 507676, 3615007.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5F (Proctor Valley) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.013
[[Page 62248]]
(20) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Jamul Mountains and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 508045,
3609784; 508120, 3609675; 508188, 3609745; 508194, 3609751; 508316,
3609736; 508337, 3609733; 508400, 3609730; 508423, 3609791; 508450,
3609898; 508460, 3609936; 508570, 3609926; 508651, 3609926; 508671,
3609898; 508672, 3609897; 508707, 3609847; 508714, 3609756; 508646,
3609718; 508323, 3609536; 508199, 3609465; 508094, 3609406; 508033,
3609385; 507917, 3609374; 507800, 3609334; 507695, 3609287; 507595,
3609248; 507467, 3609283; 507394, 3609229; 507308, 3609250; 507303,
3609341; 507359, 3609406; 507392, 3609455; 507371, 3609565; 507383,
3609658; 507366, 3609763; 507387, 3609868; 507392, 3609895; 507404,
3609959; 507455, 3609968; 507572, 3609922; 507715, 3609896; 507742,
3609891; 507912, 3609880; 508045, 3609784; thence returning to 508045,
3609784.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5G (Otay Lakes) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.014
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 62249]]
(21) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 498398,
3601961; 498398, 3601927; 498482, 3601937; 498514, 3601914; 498495,
3601822; 498463, 3601742; 498434, 3601651; 498324, 3601579; 498154,
3601581; 498025, 3601666; 498008, 3601765; 498093, 3601864; 498185,
3601904; 498223, 3601940; 498240, 3602001; 498268, 3602119; 498268,
3602251; 498375, 3602256; 498461, 3602258; 498495, 3602211; 498468,
3602159; 498468, 3602158; 498463, 3602148; 498450, 3602119; 498450,
3602119; 498436, 3602087; 498407, 3602039; 498398, 3601961; thence
returning to 498398, 3601961.
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 497444,
3602605; 497382, 3602601; 497311, 3602614; 497263, 3602633; 497255,
3602688; 497270, 3602708; 497270, 3602708; 497287, 3602732; 497379,
3602732; 497424, 3602725; 497443, 3602708; 497443, 3602707; 497447,
3602704; 497529, 3602702; 497546, 3602702; 497545, 3602698; 497545,
3602698; 497529, 3602651; 497518, 3602636; 497515, 3602631; 497455,
3602606; 497444, 3602605; 497444, 3602605; thence returning to 497444,
3602605.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 498002,
3602859; 497981, 3602853; 497930, 3602857; 497929, 3602859; 497911,
3602885; 497934, 3602916; 497946, 3602955; 497985, 3602951; 497981,
3602939; 497985, 3602920; 498000, 3602888; 498012, 3602861; 498002,
3602859; thence returning to 498002, 3602859.
(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499680,
3603156; 499688, 3603148; 499683, 3603090; 499717, 3603078; 499739,
3603039; 499829, 3603005; 499812, 3602945; 499754, 3602867; 499676,
3602836; 499584, 3602794; 499553, 3602833; 499536, 3602889; 499519,
3602920; 499485, 3602983; 499483, 3603035; 499478, 3603172; 499490,
3603173; 499497, 3603173; 499577, 3603174; 499584, 3603178; 499607,
3603175; 499624, 3603162; 499680, 3603156; thence returning to 499680,
3603156.
(v) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499158,
3603493; 499170, 3603456; 499130, 3603457; 499083, 3603458; 499083,
3603495; 499075, 3603541; 499070, 3603572; 499121, 3603582; 499130,
3603565; 499141, 3603546; 499158, 3603493; thence returning to 499158,
3603493.
(vi) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499007,
3603851; 499012, 3603773; 499051, 3603691; 499044, 3603640; 498993,
3603609; 498983, 3603633; 498993, 3603652; 498993, 3603655; 498986,
3603722; 498984, 3603778; 498983, 3603805; 498979, 3603807; 498953,
3603817; 498947, 3603819; 498903, 3603790; 498852, 3603749; 498857,
3603715; 498823, 3603688; 498741, 3603676; 498702, 3603688; 498719,
3603715; 498763, 3603742; 498826, 3603776; 498874, 3603817; 498930,
3603831; 498957, 3603847; 499000, 3603873; 499007, 3603851; thence
returning to 499007, 3603851.
(vii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499259,
3603894; 499303, 3603885; 499344, 3603890; 499383, 3603892; 499384,
3603882; 499390, 3603749; 499393, 3603531; 499431, 3603514; 499458,
3603487; 499461, 3603449; 499189, 3603449; 499221, 3603587; 499233,
3603618; 499247, 3603633; 499267, 3603642; 499269, 3603664; 499267,
3603679; 499209, 3603701; 499182, 3603768; 499184, 3603807; 499177,
3603877; 499186, 3603886; 499206, 3603907; 499259, 3603894; thence
returning to 499259, 3603894.
(viii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499359,
3604115; 499359, 3604025; 499350, 3604018; 499347, 3604016; 499320,
3604033; 499314, 3604043; 499286, 3604091; 499257, 3604115; 499221,
3604110; 499177, 3604098; 499160, 3604125; 499160, 3604197; 499148,
3604270; 499143, 3604287; 499153, 3604292; 499223, 3604309; 499293,
3604299; 499330, 3604270; 499361, 3604239; 499387, 3604214; 499398,
3604205; 499383, 3604178; 499359, 3604159; 499359, 3604122; 499359,
3604115; thence returning to 499359, 3604115.
(ix) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 499618,
3604583; 499662, 3604524; 499662, 3604352; 499620, 3604367; 499541,
3604418; 499504, 3604459; 499475, 3604484; 499446, 3604510; 499436,
3604546; 499451, 3604575; 499475, 3604575; 499475, 3604575; 499528,
3604566; 499562, 3604568; 499618, 3604583; thence returning to 499618,
3604583.
(x) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Imperial Beach and Otay Mesa.
Land bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 500083,
3603092; 500026, 3603130; 499985, 3603143; 499944, 3603149; 499903,
3603164; 499898, 3603164; 499885, 3603170; 499886, 3603218; 499880,
3603221; 499880, 3603325; 499949, 3603340; 499967, 3603344; 499969,
3603407; 500093, 3603400; 500083, 3603092; 500083, 3603092; thence
returning to 500083, 3603092.
(xi) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5H (Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool
Complexes) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 62250]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.015
(22) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area, San
Diego County, CA. Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 505882, 3604195; 505900,
3603953; 505859, 3603974; 505832, 3603989; 505798, 3604009; 505753,
3604040; 505721, 3604065; 505690, 3604091; 505662, 3604118; 505633,
3604147; 505608, 3604176; 505569, 3604222; 505539, 3604260; 505527,
3604287; 505547, 3604326; 505587, 3604372; 505626, 3604399; 505733,
3604393; 505828, 3604330; 505863, 3604289; 505865, 3604259; 505882,
3604195; thence returning to 505882, 3604195.
[[Page 62251]]
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 503223, 3605127; 503429,
3604767; 503325, 3604734; 503153, 3604635; 503028, 3604559; 502978,
3604516; 502955, 3604458; 502942, 3604387; 502909, 3604331; 502856,
3604268; 502838, 3604202; 502733, 3604206; 502719, 3604815; 502735,
3605001; 502742, 3605091; 502788, 3605114; 502833, 3605086; 502840,
3605001; 502847, 3604914; 502930, 3604871; 502988, 3604876; 503021,
3604924; 503050, 3605001; 503061, 3605030; 503092, 3605139; 503130,
3605145; 503160, 3605149; 503223, 3605127; thence returning to 503223,
3605127.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Otay Mesa. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):504614, 3605172; 504617,
3605127; 504583, 3605128; 504550, 3605129; 504519, 3605130; 504519,
3605122; 504540, 3604842; 503733, 3604867; 503681, 3604857; 503658,
3604846; 503624, 3604830; 503406, 3605134; 503467, 3605162; 503530,
3605134; 503588, 3605119; 503598, 3605139; 503598, 3605200; 503672,
3605223; 503753, 3605309; 503847, 3605347; 503912, 3605382; 503925,
3605389; 504011, 3605433; 504067, 3605433; 504096, 3605387; 504102,
3605377; 504186, 3605344; 504240, 3605309; 504283, 3605282; 504358,
3605268; 504475, 3605246; 504552, 3605221; 504561, 3605218; 504587,
3605196; 504614, 3605172; thence returning to 504614, 3605172.
(iv) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5I (Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool
Complexes) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.016
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 62252]]
(23) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside
County, CA. Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 480115, 3736015;
480123, 3736089; 480006, 3736246; 479961, 3736644; 479978, 3736737;
480068, 3736890; 481015, 3736904; 481258, 3737111; 481423, 3736990;
481474, 3736952; 481500, 3736933; 481500, 3736933; 481545, 3736899;
481546, 3736899; 481550, 3736896; 481717, 3736773; 481889, 3736646;
481884, 3736589; 481807, 3736439; 481388, 3735908; 481199, 3735637;
481101, 3735567; 480929, 3735516; 480866, 3735513; 480742, 3735505;
480700, 3735490; 480699, 3735490; 480658, 3735471; 480615, 3735434;
480604, 3735421; 480565, 3735397; 480520, 3735296; 480463, 3735138;
480410, 3735025; 480359, 3734946; 480274, 3734884; 480175, 3734856;
480102, 3734839; 480006, 3734830; 479843, 3734847; 479783, 3734918;
479733, 3735028; 479744, 3735177; 479783, 3735259; 479899, 3735327;
479936, 3735397; 479969, 3735510; 480020, 3735584; 480071, 3735637;
480106, 3735671; 480115, 3736015; thence returning to 480115, 3736015.
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N):482086, 3737103;
481896, 3737158; 481736, 3737152; 481607, 3737005; 481565, 3737040;
481565, 3737040; 481499, 3737095; 481495, 3737098; 481495, 3737098;
481460, 3737128; 481498, 3737171; 481607, 3737294; 481659, 3737308;
481659, 3737308; 481675, 3737312; 481806, 3737364; 481806, 3737365;
481828, 3737373; 481884, 3737410; 482049, 3737423; 482228, 3737521;
482293, 3737565; 482301, 3737570; 482305, 3737714; 482307, 3737840;
482332, 3738252; 482381, 3738399; 482400, 3738519; 482406, 3738559;
482498, 3738780; 482590, 3738989; 482670, 3739143; 482799, 3739259;
483002, 3739302; 483057, 3739329; 483058, 3739329; 483102, 3739351;
483154, 3739376; 483180, 3739388; 483352, 3739505; 483481, 3739579;
483555, 3739659; 483622, 3739714; 483733, 3739714; 483849, 3739726;
483914, 3739777; 483935, 3739794; 483942, 3739923; 483946, 3739994;
483948, 3740021; 483997, 3740083; 484071, 3740101; 484109, 3740101;
484175, 3740101; 484286, 3740101; 484409, 3740101; 484491, 3740101;
484556, 3740101; 484562, 3740101; 484660, 3740101; 484724, 3740101;
484808, 3740101; 484740, 3740015; 484724, 3740003; 484593, 3739911;
484558, 3739876; 484507, 3739825; 484310, 3739634; 484095, 3739438;
484078, 3739426; 483978, 3739358; 483961, 3739335; 483914, 3739275;
483904, 3739263; 483910, 3738133; 483780, 3737932; 483550, 3737726;
483330, 3737413; 483310, 3737372; 483104, 3737308; 483107, 3736913;
482312, 3736913; 482230, 3736937; 482203, 3736962; 482172, 3737005;
482086, 3737103; thence returning to 482086, 3737103.
(iii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485275, 3740138;
484724, 3740131; 484574, 3740129; 484505, 3740129; 484256, 3740126;
484305, 3740158; 484305, 3740158; 484397, 3740217; 484483, 3740273;
484649, 3740476; 484723, 3740618; 484725, 3740623; 484725, 3740623;
484760, 3740691; 484853, 3740957; 484956, 3741250; 485150, 3741749;
485159, 3741772; 485184, 3741895; 485202, 3742006; 485218, 3742268;
485221, 3742307; 485244, 3742361; 485288, 3742466; 485368, 3742554;
485531, 3742733; 485534, 3742737; 485537, 3742748; 485537, 3742748;
485552, 3742804; 485575, 3743092; 485589, 3743271; 485662, 3743360;
485679, 3743380; 485711, 3743419; 485761, 3743480; 485917, 3743485;
485964, 3743486; 486099, 3743615; 486204, 3743695; 486326, 3743781;
486336, 3743800; 486369, 3743867; 486376, 3743928; 486369, 3743936;
486336, 3743974; 486296, 3744021; 486336, 3744125; 486339, 3744131;
486366, 3744163; 486366, 3744163; 486492, 3744315; 486519, 3744332;
486551, 3744352; 486640, 3744408; 486787, 3744549; 486855, 3744586;
487051, 3744586; 487135, 3744567; 487242, 3744543; 487425, 3744461;
487477, 3744437; 487488, 3744432; 487690, 3744377; 487905, 3744309;
487899, 3744260; 487824, 3744168; 487824, 3744168; 487795, 3744131;
487690, 3744039; 487631, 3743972; 487543, 3743873; 487346, 3743928;
487236, 3743799; 487150, 3743627; 487133, 3743609; 487027, 3743486;
486935, 3743418; 486907, 3743363; 486867, 3743283; 486818, 3743136;
486763, 3743062; 486707, 3742964; 486535, 3742804; 486366, 3742612;
486356, 3742601; 486351, 3742595; 486348, 3742590; 486334, 3742565;
486330, 3742557; 486111, 3742165; 486057, 3742013; 486019, 3741907;
486012, 3741890; 486090, 3741855; 485750, 3741117; 486062, 3740960;
485546, 3740143; 485276, 3740138; 485275, 3740138; thence returning to
485275, 3740138.
(iv) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Perris and Lakeview. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 488922, 3746032;
488976, 3746028; 489134, 3746103; 489376, 3746196; 489562, 3746326;
489603, 3746429; 489618, 3746466; 489662, 3746610; 489663, 3746613;
489672, 3746642; 489684, 3746680; 489690, 3746700; 489701, 3746735;
489768, 3746809; 489887, 3746940; 490083, 3747089; 490231, 3747126;
490425, 3747178; 490511, 3747200; 490519, 3747205; 490546, 3747218;
490585, 3747238; 490687, 3747247; 490836, 3747135; 490966, 3746959;
491124, 3746819; 491199, 3746726; 491199, 3746680; 491199, 3746678;
491199, 3746661; 491152, 3746652; 491125, 3746646; 491106, 3746642;
491056, 3746617; 491047, 3746613; 491045, 3746612; 490864, 3746522;
490864, 3746522; 490827, 3746503; 490652, 3746443; 490404, 3746359;
490390, 3746354; 490083, 3746252; 489983, 3746182; 489983, 3746182;
489979, 3746179; 489897, 3746121; 489785, 3745870; 489785, 3745793;
489785, 3745582; 489785, 3745424; 489601, 3745328; 489571, 3745312;
489292, 3745284; 489059, 3745266; 488827, 3745117; 488810, 3745111;
488810, 3745111; 488806, 3745110; 488787, 3745103; 488557, 3745024;
488514, 3745000; 488514, 3745000; 488493, 3744988; 488464, 3744972;
488408, 3744940; 488338, 3744897; 488306, 3744877; 488290, 3744867;
488287, 3744866; 488287, 3744689; 488272, 3744656; 488222, 3744549;
488212, 3744537; 488205, 3744528; 488205, 3744528; 488101, 3744401;
488027, 3744317; 487969, 3744341; 487537, 3744523; 487537, 3744523;
487500, 3744539; 487497, 3744540; 487476, 3744546; 487427, 3744559;
487255, 3744605; 487148, 3744610; 487135, 3744611; 487125, 3744611;
487059, 3744615; 487056, 3744615; 487023, 3744616; 486974, 3744619;
486934, 3744621; 486934, 3744621; 486864, 3744624; 486911, 3744726;
486945, 3744784; 486975, 3744834; 487054, 3744967; 487060, 3744979;
487067, 3744989; 487148, 3745127; 487357, 3745480; 487712, 3746290;
487720, 3746307; 487739, 3746356; 487857, 3746655; 488073, 3747200;
488202, 3747526; 488288, 3747745; 488297, 3747768; 488361, 3747950;
488408, 3748084; 488539, 3748177; 488574, 3748178; 488582, 3748178;
488595, 3748178; 488800, 3748180; 488805, 3748180; 489137, 3748184;
489217, 3748185; 489329, 3748186; 489346, 3748182; 489436, 3748160;
489441, 3748159; 489498, 3748067; 489520, 3748032; 489520, 3748032;
489534, 3748010; 489605, 3747930; 489701, 3747824; 489701, 3747749;
489690,
[[Page 62253]]
3747746; 489608, 3747724; 489608, 3747724; 489605, 3747723; 489497,
3747693; 489391, 3747693; 489293, 3747693; 489279, 3747693; 489255,
3747693; 489240, 3747677; 489217, 3747653; 489134, 3747563; 489133,
3747561; 489067, 3747400; 489032, 3747312; 488911, 3747005; 488873,
3746800; 488881, 3746769; 488887, 3746746; 488901, 3746689; 488994,
3746568; 488966, 3746456; 488920, 3746317; 488855, 3746187; 488845,
3746066; 488845, 3746038; 488922, 3746032; thence returning to 488922,
3746032.
(v) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6A (San Jacinto River) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.017
[[Page 62254]]
(24) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside
County, CA. Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangles Lakeview and Winchester. Land
bounded by the following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 496999, 3734333;
496995, 3733632; 496993, 3733374; 496993, 3733353; 496992, 3733079;
496991, 3733046; 496991, 3732939; 496990, 3732731; 497270, 3732723;
497270, 3732391; 496987, 3732276; 496986, 3732133; 496979, 3732133;
496441, 3732133; 495871, 3732118; 495855, 3732117; 495791, 3731864;
495754, 3731720; 496288, 3731734; 496176, 3731442; 496130, 3731321;
496119, 3731293; 496110, 3731269; 496105, 3731257; 496098, 3731238;
495840, 3731139; 495783, 3731117; 495764, 3731110; 495673, 3731075;
495539, 3731023; 495370, 3730958; 495370, 3730958; 495344, 3730948;
495344, 3731276; 495344, 3731308; 495344, 3731312; 495203, 3731319;
495197, 3731308; 495182, 3731281; 495169, 3731258; 495144, 3731229;
495122, 3731204; 495028, 3731204; 494990, 3731228; 494954, 3731251;
494929, 3731288; 494917, 3731307; 494913, 3731312; 494806, 3731312;
494766, 3731420; 494693, 3731621; 494724, 3731768; 494749, 3731819;
494811, 3731848; 494835, 3731935; 494886, 3732013; 494875, 3732052;
494962, 3732078; 495080, 3732115; 495080, 3732115; 495095, 3732120;
495368, 3732124; 495546, 3732126; 495551, 3732348; 495558, 3732640;
495560, 3732698; 495566, 3732880; 495578, 3732932; 495579, 3732936;
495783, 3732925; 496065, 3733488; 496058, 3733755; 496057, 3733807;
496043, 3734174; 496173, 3734170; 496461, 3734174; 496505, 3734333;
thence returning to 496999, 3734333.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6B (Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded
Alkali Plain) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.018
[[Page 62255]]
(25) Unit 6: Riverside: Riverside Management Area, Riverside
County, CA. Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road Pools.
(i) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Romoland. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485930, 3722429; 485737,
3722429; 485737, 3722611; 485930, 3722611; 485930, 3722429; thence
returning to 485930, 3722429.
(ii) From USGS 1:24,000 quadrangle Romoland. Land bounded by the
following UTM NAD83 coordinates (E, N): 485922, 3723029; 485730,
3723232; 485911, 3723435; 485930, 3724021; 486317, 3724020; 486317,
3723305; 486412, 3723293; 486417, 3723421; 486512, 3723424; 486506,
3723229; 486714, 3723225; 486716, 3723220; 486716, 3723210; 486716,
3723200; 486716, 3723196; 486716, 3723094; 486716, 3723072; 486716,
3723031; 486716, 3722986; 486716, 3722964; 486716, 3722954; 486716,
3722915; 486716, 3722899; 486716, 3722885; 486716, 3722830; 486699,
3722435; 486116, 3722429; 486118, 3722817; 486016, 3722821; 486016,
3722931; 485922, 3723029; thence returning to 485922, 3723029.
(iii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6C (Wickerd and Scott Road
Pools) follows:
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR07OC10.019
* * * * *
Dated: September 23, 2010
Eileen Sobeck,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-24763 Filed 10-6-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C