[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 208 (Friday, October 26, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 65398-65401]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-26169]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-2012-N220; FF08E00000-FXES11120800000-134]
Tehachapi Uplands Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan;
Kern County, CA; Final Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces the availability
for public review of a final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS),
Tehachapi Uplands Multiple Species habitat Conservation Plan (TU
MSHCP), and Implementing Agreement (IA), related to an application by
Tejon Ranchcorp (Tejon or applicant) for an Incidental Take Permit (ITP
or permit) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act (Act). The final
documents reflect changes made to the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS and
TU MSHCP/IA resulting from comments received during the 90-day public
comment period. Responses to comments from the 2011 comment period are
included in the EIS. This notice provides an opportunity for the public
to review the final documents and responses to comments. The proposed
50-year ITP would authorize incidental take of 27 species associated
with plan-wide activities and limited development activities on
portions of Tejon Ranch.
DATES: Written comments must be received by 5 p.m. Pacific Time,
November 26, 2012.
[[Page 65399]]
ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You may download copies of the EIS, TU
MSHCP, and IA on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/ventura/.
Alternatively, you may use one of the methods below to request hard
copies or a CD-ROM of the documents.
Submitting Comments: You may submit comments or requests for copies
or more information by one of the following methods.
Email: fw8tumshcp@fws.gov. Include ``Tehachapi Uplands
MSHCP/EIS Comments'' in the subject line of the message.
U.S. Mail: Roger Root, Assistant Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA
93003.
In-Person Drop-off, Viewing, or Pickup: Call (805) 644-
1766 to make an appointment during regular business hours at the above
address.
Fax: Roger Root, Assistant Field Supervisor, (805) 644-
3958, Attn.: Tehachapi Uplands MSHCP/EIS Comments.
Hard bound copies of the EIS, TU MSHCP, and IA are available for
viewing at the following locations:
1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B,
Ventura, CA 93003.
2. Kern County Library, Frazier Park Branch, 3732 Park Drive,
Frazier Park, CA 93225.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Simmons, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at 805-644-1766.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
We have received an application for an incidental take permit
covering 27 listed and unlisted species that may be taken or otherwise
affected by plan-wide activities and future low-density residential and
commercial development activities on a portion of the Tejon Ranch
(Ranch). The applicant has prepared the TU MSHCP to satisfy the
requirements for a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit under the Act (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). The permit is requested to authorize the incidental take
of species that could potentially result from plan-wide activities
occurring throughout the 141,886 acres of lands proposed to be covered
by the permit (``covered lands''), and from approximately 5,533 acres
of mountain resort and other development within and adjacent to the
Interstate-5 corridor and Lebec community within the covered lands in
Kern County, California. The TU MSHCP proposes a conservation strategy
to minimize and mitigate to the maximum extent practicable the impacts
of any incidental taking that could occur to covered species as the
result of the covered activities.
Background
Section 9 of the Act and Federal regulations prohibit the ``take''
of wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened (16 U.S.C.
1538). The Act defines the term ``take'' as to harass, harm, pursue,
hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect listed species, or
to attempt to engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532). Harm includes
significant habitat modification or degradation that actually kills or
injures listed wildlife by significantly impairing essential behavioral
patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering [50 CFR 17.3(c)].
Pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, the Service may issue
permits to authorize ``incidental take'' of listed animal species.
``Incidental take'' is defined by the Act as take that is incidental
to, and not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity.
Regulations governing permits for threatened species and endangered
species, respectively, are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50 CFR 17.22.
Although take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the
Act, and therefore cannot be authorized by an incidental take permit,
plant species may be included on a permit in recognition of the
conservation benefits provided to them by a habitat conservation plan.
All species included on an incidental take permit would receive
assurances under the Service's ``No Surprises'' regulation [50 CFR
17.22(b)(5) and 17.32(b)(5)].
The applicant seeks a 50-year incidental take permit for covered
activities within 141,886 acres of covered lands on Tejon Ranch in Kern
County, California. Proposed covered activities include plan-wide
activities, which consist of both ongoing activities that have
historically occurred at the Ranch, such as grazing and film
production, and new activities, including limited public access for
passive recreational purposes. Up to 200 acres could be disturbed to
facilitate plan-wide activities. Proposed covered activities also
include planned future community development of approximately 5,533
acres within and adjacent to the Interstate-5 corridor in the Tejon
Mountain Village Planning Area and the Lebec/Existing Headquarters
Area. The permit would also cover take minimization, mitigation and
conservation measures provided under the TU MSHCP and intended to
minimize and mitigate the effect of take to the maximum extent
practicable. The permit would not cover hunting or mineral extraction.
Species proposed for coverage in the TU MSHCP are species that are
currently listed as federally threatened or endangered or have the
potential to become listed during the term of the permit and have some
likelihood to occur within the covered lands. Should any of the
unlisted covered wildlife species become listed under the Act during
the term of the permit, take authorization for those species would
become effective upon listing. Twenty-one animal species and six plant
species known to occur or having the potential to occur within the
covered lands are proposed to be covered by the permit (Covered
Species). The permit would include the following federally listed
animal species: California condor (Gymnogyps californianus--federally
listed as endangered and State listed as endangered and fully
protected), least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus--federally listed
as endangered), southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii
extimus--federally listed as endangered), and Valley elderberry
longhorn beetle (Democerus californicus dimorphus--federally listed as
threatened). The permit would also include the following species
currently unlisted under the Act: western yellow-billed cuckoo
(Coccyzus americanus occidentalis- Federal candidate for listing);
Tehachapi slender salamander (Batrachoseps stebbinsi), bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus
anatum), little willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii brewsteri),
golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos), white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus),
ringtail (Bassariscus astutus), tricolored blackbird (Agelaius
tricolor), Tehachapi pocket mouse (Perognathus alticola inexpectatus),
burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia), yellow-blotched salamander
(Ensatina eschscholtzii croceater), western spadefoot (Spea hammondii),
purple martin (Progne subis), yellow warbler (Dendroica petechia
brewsteri), coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma coronatum (both frontale
and blainvillii populations)), two-striped garter snake (Thamnophis
hammondii), round-leaved filaree (Erodium macrophyllum), Fort Tejon
woolly sunflower (Eriophyllum lanatum var. hallii), Kusche's sandwort
(Arenaria macradenia var. kuschei), Tehachapi buckwheat (Eriogonum
callistum), striped adobe lily (Fritillaria striata), and Tejon poppy
(Eschscholzia lemmonii ssp. kernensis).
The TU MSHCP includes a conservation strategy intended to avoid,
[[Page 65400]]
minimize, and mitigate to the maximum extent practicable any impacts
that would occur to covered species as the result of the covered
activities. Under the TU MSHCP, and consistent with the Tejon Ranch
Conservation and Land Use Agreement between Tejon and the Sierra Club,
National Audubon Society, Natural Resources Defense Council, Endangered
Habitats League, and Planning and Conservation League (Ranchwide
Agreement), no land development would be allowed within approximately
93,522 acres of the covered lands that constitute the mitigation lands,
including the approximately 37,100-acre Tunis and Winters ridge area.
The Tunis and Winters ridge area is designated as the Condor Study Area
under the TU MSHCP and is the area of the ranch most likely to be
frequented by condors. An additional 23,001 acres would be preserved as
mitigation lands within the open space within the Tejon Mountain
Village Planning Area, resulting in the permanent conservation of
approximately 82 percent of the covered lands. In addition to the TU
MSHCP mitigation lands, approximately 12,795 acres of covered lands are
subject to existing conservation easements acquired pursuant to the
Ranchwide Agreement and are required to be managed in accordance with
the TU MSHCP. In total, approximately 91 percent of the covered lands
would be permanently conserved under the TU MSHCP and Ranchwide
Agreement.
Upon initiation of construction of the Tejon Mountain Village
development, the TU MSCHP requires that the TU MSHCP mitigation lands
be permanently protected by phased recordation of conservation
easements or equivalent legal restrictions over all such lands by the
end of the permit term. The TU MSCHP also requires implementation of
general and species-specific take avoidance, minimization, and
mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to the covered species.
With regard to the California condor, the TU MSHCP requires the ongoing
monitoring of covered activities by a qualified biologist to reduce the
potential for any human/condor interactions and the permanent
enforcement of covenants, conditions, and restrictions on residential
development to minimize any impacts to condors. The TU MSHCP also
provides funding for condor capture, care, and relocation in the
unlikely event that a condor becomes habituated to human activities. No
lethal take of condors would be authorized under the permit.
National Environmental Policy Act Compliance
The Service's proposed issuance of an incidental take permit is a
Federal action and triggers the need for compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The Service
has prepared an EIS that evaluates the impacts of proposed issuance of
the permit and implementation of the TU MSHCP, and also evaluates the
impacts of a reasonable range of alternatives. The Final EIS analyzes
four alternatives in addition to the proposed TU MSHCP, summarized
above. The Service has identified the proposed TU MSHCP as the
preferred alternative. The proposed TU MSHCP alternative and the
remaining four alternatives are summarized below.
The proposed TU MSHCP alternative, described above, generally
remains the same as described in the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS. It
has been updated to reflect approved mitigation measures required by
the county and the State; to reflect clarifications made to the covered
species mitigation measures proposed in the applicant's revised TU
MSHCP; to reflect information related to the final location of two
communication towers; to clarify the number of hunting cabins allowed
on covered lands; and to update various acreages associated with the
revised TU MSHCP. Where appropriate, we added information and required
mitigation measures associated with the TMV project approvals to the
Supplemental Draft EIS.
The no-action alternative, for the purposes of analysis, remains
the same as described in the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS and assumes
that the Ranchwide Agreement would remain in effect, that development
of the TMV project and other future commercial or residential
development allowed within the covered lands under the Ranchwide
Agreement would not occur, and that existing ranch uses would continue
at current levels into the future.
The condor-only HCP alternative generally remains the same as
described in the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS and continues to represent
a species management approach that addresses only the California
condor. Take of other federally listed species would be avoided under
this alternative through project-specific review and approvals, and by
siting development in a manner that avoids occurrences of the species.
Development and open space preservation would be consistent with those
elements described in the Proposed TU MSHCP Alternative. Plan-wide
activities would also be the same as those described in the proposed TU
MSHCP alternative, except that all management and mitigation elements
would be limited to California condor-related measures as set forth in
the proposed TU MSHCP alternative. Similarly, the conservation measures
and adaptive management elements of the condor-only HCP alternative
would be limited solely to those for the California condor set forth in
the proposed TU MSHCP alternative.
The condor critical habitat (CCH) avoidance MSHCP alternative
remains the same as described in the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS. Plan-
wide activities would continue and the proposed development areas avoid
federally designed critical habitat for California condor. Under this
alternative, no commercial or residential development would occur in
any designated critical habitat for California condor. The TMV project
would not occur, as that project would extend into California condor
critical habitat. Instead, development would follow Kern County General
Plan designations and would cluster most commercial and residential
development in the southwestern portion of the covered lands, in the
portion of the TMV planning area nearest to Interstate 5, and in other
areas outside condor critical habitat. The CCH avoidance MSHCP
alternative also assumes implementation of the Ranchwide Agreement,
where development boundaries outside critical habitat conform to the
development setbacks and general boundaries provided in that agreement.
The Kern County General Plan Buildout alternative remains the same
as presented in the 2011 Supplemental Draft EIS. While the Ranchwide
Agreement has resulted in the recordation of conservation easements on
12,795 acres of the covered lands (existing conservation easement
areas), the remainder of the covered lands to be precluded from
development under the Ranchwide Agreement do not currently have
conservation easements recorded. As noted above, because the Ranchwide
Agreement is a private agreement between parties, and Service is not a
party to and has no contractual standing under the agreement, the
agreement can be amended (or even terminated) by mutual agreement of
the parties such that the land preservation outcome of the Ranchwide
Agreement on covered lands may not be realized. While the Service
considers remote the likelihood that the Ranchwide Agreement would be
terminated, for purposes of comprehensive NEPA analysis, this
[[Page 65401]]
alternative does not assume continuation of the Ranchwide Agreement
except for the permanent protection of the already-recorded
conservation easements on the existing conservation easement lands.
Under the Kern County General Plan buildout alternative,
development is assumed to proceed in accordance with the Kern County
General Plan, including implementation of the TMV project (per the TMV
project approvals). Development of the covered lands would require
additional Kern County approval, and the EIS analysis assumes that
development would proceed on a project-by-project basis and that the
Service would issue incidental take authorization as appropriate
through either section 7 of the Act or the section 10 process under the
Act.
Public Involvement
We published a Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS for a
California Condor Habitat Conservation Plan (Condor HCP) in the Federal
Register on June 25, 2004 (69 FR 35663). The NOI announced a
30[hyphen]day public scoping period that ended on July 26, 2004. On
March 26, 2008, a NOI to prepare an EIS for the TU MSHCP was published
in the Federal Register (73 FR 16052). The NOI announced a
30[hyphen]day public scoping period that ended on April 25, 2008. We
published a revised notice of intent (NOI) to prepare an EIS for this
project in the Federal Register on June 4, 2008 (73 FR 31876); this NOI
clarified the proposed action and corrected a posting error in the
March 2008 NOI. On February 4, 2009, we published a notice of
availability of the Draft Plan, EIS, and IA in the Federal Register (74
FR 6050). The Draft documents were initially available for a 90-day
public comment period, which was extended, with a Notice of a
60[hyphen]day Extension issued on May 5, 2009. On February 3, 2012, we
published a notice of availability of the Supplemental Draft EIS, Plan
and IA in the Federal Register (77 FR 5564). The Supplemental Draft
documents were available for a 90-day public comment period, which
concluded on May 3, 2012.
Public Review
Copies of the Final EIS, TU MSHCP, and IA are available for review
(see ADDRESSES). Any comments we receive will become part of the
administrative record and will be available to the public. Before
including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal
identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your
entire comment--including your personal identifying information--may be
made publicly available at any time. If you wish us to withhold your
name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning
of your comment. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your
personal identifying information from public review, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
Decision
We will evaluate the application, associated documents, and
comments submitted to determine whether the application meets the
requirements of section 10(a) of the Act. A permit decision will be
made no sooner than 30 days after the publication of the Environmental
Protection Agency's notice of the EIS in the Federal Register and
completion of a Record of Decision.
This notice is provided pursuant to section 10(a) of the Act and
pursuant to implementing regulations for NEPA (40 CFR 1506.6).
Dated: October 16, 2012.
Alexandra Pitts,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento,
California.
[FR Doc. 2012-26169 Filed 10-25-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P