[Federal Register: August 26, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 166)]
[
Rules and Regulations]
[Page 50405-50452]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr26au08-13]
[[Page 50405]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for the Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis);
Final Rule
[[Page 50406]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2008-0034; 92210-1117-0000-B4]
RIN 1018-AV24
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of
Critical Habitat for the Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha
bayensis)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are
designating revised critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly
(Euphydryas editha bayensis) under the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act). In total, approximately 18,293 acres (ac) (7,403
hectares (ha)) fall within the boundaries of the revised critical
habitat designation for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. The revision to
critical habitat is located in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties,
California. This final revised designation therefore constitutes a
reduction of 1,453 ac (588 ha) from our 19,746 ac (7,990 ha) proposed
revised designation of critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly published on August 22, 2007.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on September 25, 2008.
ADDRESSES: The final rule, final economic analysis, and map of critical
habitat will be available on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
and http://www.fws.gov/sacramento. Comments and materials received, as
well as supporting documentation used in the preparation of this final
rule, are available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours, at the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800
Cottage Way, Suite W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825; telephone 916-414-
6600.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605, Sacramento, CA 95825;
telephone 916-414-6600; facsimile 916-414-6712. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
This final rule addresses revised critical habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. For additional information on the taxonomy,
biology, and ecology of the Bay checkerspot butterfly, refer to the
final listing rule and revised proposed critical habitat rule published
in the Federal Register on September 18, 1987 (52 FR 35366) and August
22, 2007 (72 FR 48178), respectively. It is our intention to discuss
only those topics directly relevant to the revised designation of
critical habitat in this final rule.
Previous Federal Actions
On April 30, 2001 (66 FR 21450), we published a final rule
designating approximately 23,903 ac (9,673 ha) of critical habitat for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties,
California. On March 30, 2005, the Home Builders Association of
Northern California filed suit against the Service challenging critical
habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly and other species (Home
Builders Association of Northern California v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service cv-01363-LKK-JFM.). On February 24, 2006, a settlement
agreement was reached that requires the Service to reevaluate the final
critical habitat rule in light of the standards for designating
critical habitat set forth in Home Builders Association of Northern
California v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 268 F. Supp. 2d 1197
(E.D. Cal 2002) and any applicable law. In addition, the settlement
stipulated that a revised proposed rule be submitted for publication on
or before August 14, 2007, and a final revised rule be submitted for
publication on or before August 14, 2008. This final designation is
being completed and published in the Federal Register in compliance
with that settlement agreement. On August 22, 2007 (72 FR 48178), we
published a revised proposed rule to designate approximately 19,746 ac
(7,990 ha) in San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, California. On April
15, 2008 (73 FR 20237), we published a draft economic analysis (DEA)
for the proposed rule to revise critical habitat.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We requested written comments from the public on the proposed rule
to revise critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly and the
associated DEA. During the comment period, we requested all interested
parties to submit comments or information related to the proposed
revision to the critical habitat designation, including, but not
limited to, the following: information regarding dispersal areas,
species occurrence information (specifically recent occupancy of the
Pulgas Ridge Unit) and distribution, land use designations that may
affect critical habitat, potential economic effects of the proposed
designation, benefits associated with critical habitat designation,
areas considered for exclusion, and the inclusion of water sources as a
primary constituent element (PCE).
We also contacted appropriate Federal, State, and local agencies;
scientific organizations; and other interested parties and invited them
to comment on the revised proposed rule and the associated DEA. The
comment period for the revised proposed rule opened on August 22, 2007,
and closed on October 22, 2007. During the comment period for the
revised proposed rule, we received eight comment letters on the
proposed revised critical habitat designation and DEA: three from peer
reviewers, two from local governments, and three from organizations or
individuals. We received no comments from State or Federal agencies.
The comment period for the DEA opened on April 15, 2008, and closed on
May 15, 2008. We received two comment letters and no requests for
public hearings.
Comments and new information received in response to the revised
proposed rule that were relevant to the final designation were
incorporated in the final rule as appropriate and are summarized below.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinions from seven knowledgeable
individuals with scientific expertise that included familiarity with
the species, the geographic region in which the species occurs, and
conservation biology principles. We received responses from three of
the peer reviewers. The peer reviewers were generally supportive of the
designation of critical habitat.
We reviewed all comments received from the peer reviewers and the
public for substantive issues and new information regarding critical
habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. All comments received were
grouped into general issue categories relating to the proposed rule to
revise critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly and are
addressed in the following summary and incorporated into this final
revised rule as appropriate.
Peer Reviewer Comments
In general, all three peer reviewers supported the revised critical
habitat designation. However, two peer reviewers questioned whether
some
[[Page 50407]]
units were ``critical.'' One peer reviewer stated that the background
information was comprehensive and reflected the decade's worth of
research on the butterfly and that the accounts on nitrogen deposition
and topographic effects are good summaries. One peer reviewer felt that
using both currently occupied and historically occupied habitats was a
good inclusive decision and effectively covered any remaining suitable
habitat. Individual peer comments are listed below.
Comment 1: One peer review suggested that the designation of
``primary'' and ``secondary'' host plants implies that eggs are always
laid on Plantago erecta. The reviewer indicated that their work on the
Bay checkerspot butterfly suggests that this is true in some places
such as at Jasper Ridge; however, at Edgewood approximately 70 percent
of oviposition occurred on Castilleja and that in the 1980s,
approximately 20 percent of oviposition at Kirby Canyon (the southern
portion of Coyote Ridge) occurred on Castilleja.
Our Response: The comment is noted and clarification has been
provided to indicate that ``primary'' refers to the host plant species
that is used most frequently for oviposition, although not exclusively.
Please see the ``Primary Constituent Elements'' section under ``Food''
for more information.
Comment 2: One peer reviewer noted that the evidence for repeat
diapause is more robust than is noted in the literature. The commenter
stated that several persons had observed repeat diapause by this
insect, although he was not aware if larvae were capable of multiyear
diapause without the opportunity to feed in-between years.
Our Response: We have added the peer reviewer's personal
observations of multiple diapauses to this final rule in the ``Primary
Constituent Elements'' section under ``Cover.''
Comment 3: One peer reviewer confirmed the use of water or
``puddling'' behavior described by Launer et al. (1993) in the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. The peer reviewer also noted having observed
puddling by both sexes of other Edith's checkerspots (Euphydryas editha
spp.). However, he also noted that while puddling could extend an
adult's lifespan, female Bay checkerspot butterflies were still likely
to be able to lay most of their eggs under dry conditions if they still
had access to nectar sources.
A second reviewer stated that while he had documented ``puddling''
in the Bay checkerspot butterfly and the use of water was interesting,
it was not a significant finding. Further, the peer reviewer stated
that water should not be considered when evaluating habitat quality for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
A third peer reviewer stated the need for aquatic features is too
strong and that the Bay checkerspot butterfly will use water when
needed and available during drought years.
Our Response: Based on the above comments from peer reviewers, the
Service has removed aquatic features as a PCE in this final rule. For
more information, see the ``Primary Constituent Elements'' section of
this final rule. Because all of the units designated contain all of the
remaining PCEs identified in the proposed rule, the removal of aquatic
features as a PCE did not affect the overall designation of critical
habitat.
Comment 4: One peer reviewer questioned the utility of providing a
list of grassland plant species and noted that an attempt to do so
would likely result in a long list. However, he noted that, if a list
is to be provided, that Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum) should be
included.
Our Response: The Service attempted to provide a list of plant
species commonly found in open grasslands in California. The list of
grassland species was not meant to be exhaustive or to represent
species that the Bay checkerspot butterfly depends on. Since Italian
ryegrass is commonly found in grasslands in California, the Service
will add it to the list of species that commonly occur in grassland
habitats in California.
Comment 5: One peer reviewer provided the following information
regarding fire and prescribed burns: (1) Late spring burns reduce
annual grass and increase native forbs for 1 to 2 years post burn, and
in Santa Clara County grass reinvades quickly in the absence of grazing
such that 3 to 4 years post burn the habitat is again dominated by
annual grass; (2) fall burns reduce grass thatch but are not effective
in reducing annual grass in subsequent years; (3) diapausing larvae can
survive fire (in winter of 2007 and 2008, larvae were found in areas
burned the previous spring and summer); (4) spring fires to control
barbed goatgrass will be an essential management tool; (5) thatch
removal by spring and fall burns are effective initially but must be
followed by grazing to be effective in the long term; and (6) positive
effects from burns will likely last longer in areas with lower nitrogen
deposition (San Mateo County).
Our Response: The Service has incorporated the information provided
regarding fire (from the Metcalf Center Energy reports CH2M Hill 2005,
2006, and 2008) into this final rule. Please see the ``Special
Management Considerations or Protections'' section below for more
information.
Comment 6: One peer reviewer provided the following comments
regarding potential adverse modification of critical habitat: (1) Small
scale disturbances in serpentine grasslands generally do not pose a
risk to Bay checkerspot butterfly populations; (2) the section
regarding short-term mortality from grazing and fire should be
clarified to state that the negative effects of fire and grazing are
significantly outweighed by the positive benefit to the Bay checkerspot
butterfly; (3) removal of grazing provides one of the biggest threats
to the subspecies; (4) nitrogen disposition is the current greatest
threat; and (5) pesticides inappropriately applied could cause local
negative effects.
Our Response: We have provided clarification in this final rule
regarding the beneficial effects of grazing and fire to the Bay
checkerspot butterfly's habitat. Please see the ``Special Management
Considerations or Protections'' section below for more information.
Comment 7: One peer reviewer stated that data regarding host plant
density might be available from The Howard Mooney Lab at Stanford
University.
Our Response: The Service attempted to contact researchers with the
Howard Mooney Lab but did not receive a reply.
Comment 8: One peer reviewer stated that while he was part of the
group that promoted the Bay checkerspot butterfly as a metapopulation
species, much of the information necessary to characterize the species
as such is not well known. As an example, the peer reviewer stated that
extinction and recolonization events, rates of long-distance dispersal,
and the number of individuals required to establish new populations are
not well known. Finally, the peer reviewer stated that the Bay
checkerspot butterfly's metapopulation is ``not well known or as
elucidated as it is sometimes portrayed (Launer 2008 p. 1).''
Our Response: The Service is aware that the exact nature of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly's population dynamics is highly complex and that
long-distance dispersal, extinction or recolonization rates, and the
threshold of individuals required to establish or re-establish a
population is not well documented. The Service took a conservative
approach in designating critical habitat partly because of the lack of
data available regarding dispersal and recolonization rates. We only
designated areas that had documented occurrences
[[Page 50408]]
of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. We did not designate all areas within
the range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly that could support the
species, partly because of lack of data regarding the dispersal
capabilities of the subspecies, number of individuals required to
establish new populations, and the minimum size necessary to support a
population. For additional information, please see the ``Criteria Used
to Identify Critical Habitat'' section of this rule. In addition, we
lacked occurrence data for sites outside those we designated as
critical habitat; sites that were not occupied at the time of listing
or since listing did not meet our criteria for designating critical
habitat.
Comment 9: One peer reviewer believes that all conservation
planning in the region (including critical habitat designations) should
be aware of the unstable nature of the habitat in these areas. The
conditions present today may not persist into the next quarter and half
century; this is particularly true of the distribution of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly and the apparent acceleration of climate change.
The reviewer also stated that as much topographic diversity and
geographic range should be included in the designation as possible.
Our Response: A current trend in conservation biology is the use of
adaptive management. Adaptive management is a mechanism by which
resource managers acknowledge the uncertainty of the effects of various
management actions in addition to the often rapidly changing nature of
the resource they are trying to manage. The Service is aware of the
ongoing and often rapid changes in the environment that occur
throughout the range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. Because of the
uncertainty in managing lands in the foreseeable future, many lands
that have been set aside for the conservation of listed species,
including the Bay checkerspot butterfly, now include an adaptive
management component. While the amount of land within individual
conservation areas is generally static, adaptive management should
provide resource managers with the framework required to cope with a
changing landscape. In addition, if the Service determines in the
future that the designated area no longer meets the definition of
critical habitat, we will consider proposing a revision to the critical
habitat designation at that time or when our resources allow.
Please see the ``Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat''
section in regards to the comment that topographic diversity and
geographic range should be included in the designation where possible,
The Service only designated areas that had documented occurrences of
the Bay checkerspot butterfly. We did not designate all areas within
the range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly that could support the
species, partly because of lack of data regarding the dispersal
capabilities of the subspecies, number of individuals required to
establish new populations, and the minimum size necessary to support a
population.
Comment 10: One peer reviewer reiterated the fact that Bay
checkerspot butterfly population levels fluctuate widely from one year
to the next. In addition, the reviewer stated that while interesting,
the number of individuals present at a given site in a given year is
misleading and that multi-year trends are useful in conservation
planning, but are much less available.
Our Response: The Service recognizes that the number of individuals
in a single year does not adequately reflect the overall health of the
population within a given unit due to the population dynamics of the
species and its tendency towards wide swings in number of individuals.
However, when evaluating the population status of a species, it is
incumbent on the Service to use the best data available. While the
reviewer correctly pointed out that long multi-year population data for
this species are not available for many of the units, multi-year
population trends are available for some of the units (i.e., those
along Coyote Ridge). In other units, only single year assessments are
available. Our designation of critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly is based on the best scientific information available.
Comment 11: One peer reviewer noted that almost all of the units
include some area of nonserpentine soil and that these areas should
probably be expanded in several units. The commenter also noted that,
while these areas of nonserpentine soils do not support host plant
densities sufficient to support checkerspot larvae, the adults do fly
through these areas and it is important not to disrupt dispersal
routes. The peer reviewer noted that while dispersal routes are not
well documented for the Bay checkerspot butterflies, they are known to
fly through nonserpentine areas, along ridgelines, and between close
patches of suitable habitat if intervening habitats have not been
overly modified.
Our Response: All units support all the PCEs, although each PCE is
not evenly distributed throughout each unit. For example, within each
unit all PCEs are present, but PCE 2 (larval host plants) may only be
present in scattered patches and the exact distribution of PCE 2 (and
PCE 3, adult nectar plants) changes from one year to the next. The
fluctuation in host plant distribution made it impossible to base unit
boundaries solely on PCE 2 or PCE 3. Larger areas of grassland habitat
around larval host and adult nectar plants were included within unit
boundaries, because they support PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 5. Therefore,
independent of facilitating dispersal between patches of larval host
and adult nectar plants, grasslands within units provide features
essential to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. As the
peer reviewer noted, specific dispersal corridors have not been well
documented (either within units or between units) for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. Since exact routes between units are unknown,
the Service selected units occupied at listing or currently occupied
with PCEs that were within the known dispersal distance of the species.
Comment 12: One peer reviewer stated that even though the San Bruno
Mt. Unit (Unit 1) is potentially a valuable site, very little habitat
for the species remains (in part due to succession of plant communities
and continued invasion by nonnative species) in the unit and it is not
within ``easy butterfly dispersal distance'' (Launer 2008) or other
recently occupied habitat. In light of this information the peer
reviewer felt a re-evaluation of what is possible with respect to Bay
checkerspot butterfly habitat in San Mateo County should be conducted
and that it is possible attention should focus on the other three units
in the County.
A second reviewer stated the current distribution of habitat on San
Bruno Mt. is poorly known and detailed surveys should be done. The peer
reviewer also stated that dispersal between the Pulgas Ridge Unit and
San Bruno Mt. is unlikely and should not be counted on as part of the
population-metapopulation process. Finally, the peer reviewer stated
that the exclusion of San Bruno Mt. appeared reasonable, although the
site should be explored for potential reintroductions.
Our Response: The Service proposed the San Bruno Mt. Unit (Unit 1)
for exclusion for several reasons, including: (1) The large distance
between the unit and the other units in San Mateo County and the lack
of adequate information regarding suitable intervening habitat; (2) the
Bay checkerspot butterfly has not been observed on San Bruno Mt. since
the mid 1980s despite repeated surveys; (3) much of San Bruno Mt. is
protected under a habitat conservation plan
[[Page 50409]]
(HCP); and (4) Amendment 5 of the San Bruno Mountain Habitat
Conservation Plan (SBMHCP) would add the Bay checkerspot as a covered
species and provide an endowment for continued management actions
within the HCP boundaries. Furthermore, the unit is occupied by the
endangered Callippe silverspot butterfly (Speyeria callippe callippe),
endangered Mission blue butterfly (Icaricia icarioides missionensis),
and the endangered San Bruno elfin (Callophyrs mossii bayensis), and
management of the unit for these species would likely be the same as
for the Bay checkerspot butterfly; there would not likely be any
additional benefits of designating the area as critical habitat for the
Bay checkerspot butterfly.
At the time of the publication of the proposed rule, we expected
Amendment 5 to the SBMHCP, which would include coverage specific to the
Bay checkerspot butterfly, to have been finalized prior to the
publication of this final designation of critical habitat. As this
amendment is not yet finalized as of the writing of the final rule, we
re-evaluated the proposed exclusion of the SBMHCP from critical habitat
and determined that not to exclude this area based on the record before
us. (See ``Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act'').
In addition, we disagree with the peer reviewers that very little
habitat remains for the Bay checkerspot butterfly on San Bruno Mt. or
that the distribution of that habitat is unknown. According to the San
Bruno Mountain Habitat Management Plan (2008 p. VIII-6), the host
plants for the Bay checkerspot butterfly are still abundant on the
mountain in isolated patches within and outside the 2001 designation of
critical habitat.
Comment 13: One peer reviewer stated that the Pulgas Ridge Unit
(Unit 2) was marginal habitat, but prior to fragmentation, encroachment
of surrounding development, and continued invasion by nonnative plant
species, the unit and surrounding area supported a large population of
Bay checkerspot butterflies. The peer reviewer also stated that the
Pulgas Unit, in conjunction with the Edgewood Park Unit (Unit 3) and
the Jasper Ridge Unit (Unit 4), could be useful as a complex of
habitat.
A second peer reviewer stated that little is known about the Pulgas
Ridge Unit, except that it contains all the PCEs, is extensive, and has
topography similar to the Edgewood Park Unit. The peer reviewer also
reiterated his earlier comment that dispersal between Pulgas Ridge and
San Bruno Mt. was unlikely given the dispersal tendencies of the
subspecies and the lack of intervening habitat (high level of
urbanization and lack of grasslands).
Our Response: The Service is aware that the Pulgas Ridge Unit will
require restoration and management in order to reduce non-native plant
species. However, all the units are assumed to require ongoing
restoration and management activities in order to restore and maintain
sufficient habitat to support the Bay checkerspot butterfly, primarily
due to the continued threat of nonnative plant species. The Service
included the Pulgas Ridge Unit because the unit historically supported
the subspecies, is in close proximity to the Edgewood Park Unit, where
the subspecies was reintroduced in early 2007, and because a core
population outside Santa Clara County is essential to the recovery of
the subspecies. The viability of a population in San Mateo County is
dependent on the population being self-sustaining. A single unit in San
Mateo County is unlikely to support the metapopulation dynamics of the
species and would likely ultimately fail.
Comment 14: With regard to the Edgewood Park Unit one peer reviewer
said it should be viewed as essential to the recovery of the species
because of its multiple subunits, topographic diversity, and ``ample
expanse,'' but that the unit will need ongoing restoration to benefit
the species.
A second peer reviewer stated that the Edgewood Park Unit was
correctly identified in the proposed rule as the only potential core
habitat remaining in San Mateo County, but the unit would need to be
managed through rotational mowing for the time being. The reviewer also
said that the reintroduction of the Bay checkerspot butterfly in 2007
was not as successful as anticipated (likely due to the extremely dry
conditions in 2007). More precise information regarding the success of
the introduction will be available after the 2008 flight season.
Our Response: Because the Edgewood Park Unit was occupied at the
time of listing and continues to contain the PCEs essential to the
conservation of the species, we agree with these peer reviewers that
this unit should be designated as critical habitat.
Comment 15: One peer reviewer stated that there were two main
problems with the Jasper Ridge Unit: (1) The serpentine grasslands
within the biological preserve are relatively small, and (2) the
preserve is managed by non-intervention. The reviewer also commented
that the serpentine grassland present within the unit was in general in
fair condition, with a few smaller sites of excellent quality habitat,
but they are within a matrix of poor to marginal quality habitat. The
peer reviewer believed that with active management Units 2, 3, and 4
could be essential to the recovery of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
A second peer reviewer stated that the designation includes all
suitable Bay checkerspot butterfly habitat within the unit, although it
also includes surrounding woodlands, chaparral, and nonnative
grasslands. Regarding dispersal to this unit from the Santa Clara
County units, the peer reviewer stated the likelihood was extremely
low.
Our Response: The Service agrees that the patches of serpentine
soils within the unit are relatively small. However, the area of
similar soil types within the unit encompasses the majority of the
grasslands within the Biological Preserve. The unit supported multiple
independent populations for several decades and we believe that in
conjunction with Units 2 and 3, this unit is capable of supporting the
subspecies again. In addition, we believe the unit is essential to
maintaining a core population in San Mateo County, partly due to the
low likelihood that individual Bay checkerspot butterflies would
disperse from Santa Clara County.
The Service acknowledges that the primary focus of the Jasper Ridge
Biological Preserve (JRBP), which encompasses Unit 3, is research and
the preserve is not currently managed for any species, including
protection of the Bay checkerspot butterfly; however, according to the
2004 draft Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve Strategic Plan (JRBP 2008,
p. 1), species and habitat conservation is being proposed and these
conservation efforts should be designed to include protection of
habitat or individual species. Further, most units are not currently
managed to benefit the Bay checkerspot butterfly, but still provide
features essential to the conservation of the subspecies; Also, as
noted above, the Service believes Unit 3 is necessary to support the
metapopulation dynamics of the subspecies and to maintain a core
population in San Mateo County independent of the Santa Clara County
core population.
Comment 16: One peer reviewer noted that Unit 5 had only recently
been referred to as ``Coyote Ridge'' and that historically it was known
by many names. The peer reviewer recommended a more appropriate name
for the unit be used. In addition, the reviewer stated the entire ridge
from the northwest corner (Silver Creek Hills) to Anderson Reservoir
Dam in the southeast, including the nonserpentine areas, is
[[Page 50410]]
essential for the continued persistence of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly and that without it the subspecies would cease to exist. The
reviewer supported the designation of this unit as critical habitat.
The reviewer also believed that the unit should be expanded to include
all nonserpentine areas along the ridge and an adequate buffer along
the sides of the ridge.
The peer reviewer also noted there are likely more than four
populations on Coyote Ridge 5 as indicated in the proposed rule and
that the four mentioned represent the centers of classic study areas,
but that multiple subpopulations or populations exist in each of the
four historical centers.
A second peer reviewer also stated the unit was ``absolutely
essential'' to the persistence of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. In
addition, the reviewer believed the unit could be separated into
multiple units, because some areas are separated by several kilometers
of non-habitat. The reviewer also commented that the reduction in
numbers of individuals in the Silver Creek population after 1992 was
the result of removing grazing for a number of years. The reduction of
the overall unit's population resulted from the combination of a series
of poor weather and over-population of larvae in key areas, but that
this likely represents natural fluctuations.
Our Response: The Service recognizes that proposed Unit 5 (final
Units 5 and 13) has historically been identified by a variety of names,
several of which were noted in the Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil
Species of the San Francisco Bay Area (Service 2001, p. II-178). We
clarify the naming in this final rule by separating the unit into two
units, based on a natural break in the habitat between the two. We have
also added information in the unit descriptions stating that the four
historical population centers are likely not the only populations that
occur along the ridge.
The Service agrees with the peer reviewers regarding the importance
of the entire ridge line. However, we disagree with one of the peer
reviewers that additional areas should be designated as a buffer. The
Service included almost all of the grassland on the southwest portion
of the ridge up to U.S. Highway 101, with only a few exceptions (where
there was existing development). On the north side of the ridge, the
Service included all of the areas with serpentine or serpentine-like
soils, with the exception of a few areas that were separated from the
main ridgeline and were not grasslands (they were other habitat types).
We did not include certain areas on the north side of the ridge, as
explained below, based on specific information we received during
preparation of the 2001 final critical habitat rule (i.e., information
regarding lands owned by United Technology Corporation) as well as from
numerous site visits to this unit.
We did not include grassland areas on nonserpentine or similar
soils on the north side of the ridge because we believe these areas
lack sufficient PCEs to support the Bay checkerspot butterfly. The Act
defines critical habitat as (1) the specific areas within the
geographic area occupied by a species, at the time of listing in
accordance with the Act, on which are found those physical or
biological features (a) essential to the conservation of the species
and (b) that may require special management considerations or
protection; and (2) specific areas outside the geographic area occupied
by a species at the time it is listed in accordance with section 4 of
the Act, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species. Buffer areas may serve
to protect critical habitat units from encroachment by development, but
these lands do not contain PCEs laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species and
therefore do not meet the regulatory definition of occupied critical
habitat, nor have we concluded that such unoccupied buffer lands are
essential to the conservation of the species. In addition, buffers were
not a criterion used to designate critical habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly.
Comment 17: One peer reviewer stated that the Tulare Hill Unit
(Unit 6) is valuable and provides a natural location for between ridge
dispersal and he supported designation of the unit as critical habitat.
In addition, the commenter stated that while habitat quality within the
unit declined in the 1980s and 1990s, it has recently improved due to
increased management and that unit wide management should be
undertaken.
A second peer reviewer identified this unit as a key link across
the Santa Clara Valley and its value in previous assessments has been
underemphasized. The reviewer stated that, if managed properly, the
unit would support a population in the thousands or more; however,
habitat on the northern portion of the unit has been degraded due to
lack of grazing, which underscores the importance of an adequate
grazing plan.
Our Response: The Service agrees that the Tulare Hill Unit provides
an essential link between the east and west portions of the valley and
serves as the most likely location for between ridge transfers of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly. Without this unit Bay checkerspot
butterflies' between-ridge movements are still possible, but would
likely occur with much lower frequency. For species with a
metapopulation dynamic, the successful colonization or recolonization
of a site partly depends on the rate of colonization vs. the rate of
extinction. Colonization must occur more often than extinction events
for a site to remain occupied. Therefore, the inclusion of the Tulare
Hill Unit in this final designation of critical habitat is necessary to
maintain populations on the western side of the valley.
The northern portion of the Tulare Hill Unit will soon be managed
to benefit the Bay checkerspot butterfly as a result of the
finalization of a Safe Harbor Agreement with Pacific Gas and Electric,
which will enable grazing of the northern portion of the unit; this
safe harbor agreement is expected to result in an increase in the
population of Bay checkerspot butterflies within the unit by
facilitating grazing in the northern portion of the unit, which is not
currently grazed and only supports low numbers of the subspecies.
Comment 18: One peer reviewer stated that designation of the Santa
Teresa Hills Unit (Unit 7) was reasonable, but that an extensive
management plan would need to be established, since much of the unit is
within Santa Teresa County Park and has not been managed for the
benefit of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. In addition, the peer
reviewer stated that with proper management this unit could
significantly contribute to the recovery of the subspecies. The peer
reviewer made similar comments regarding the Calero Reservoir Unit
(Unit 8) with the additional comment that the unit's location, its
topographic diversity, and large size make the unit very valuable for
long-term conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
A second peer reviewer stated the Calero Reservoir Unit (Unit 8)
has high potential because of its topographic diversity and large size,
but that occupancy is unclear (according to casual surveys) as the
habitat has been degraded due to lack of grazing, although effects from
air pollution may be somewhat less than areas to the east. In addition,
the reviewer stated that emphasis should be on the serpentine grassland
and it should be made clear effects of activities outside of these
grasslands are only a small concern.
[[Page 50411]]
Our Response: The Service agrees that the Santa Teresa Hills Unit
(Unit 7) will require restoration and management in order to reduce
non-native plant species. However, as noted above, all the units are
assumed to require ongoing restoration activities in order to restore
and maintain adequate habitat to support the Bay checkerspot butterfly
over time, due to the continued threat of nonnative plant species.
The Service does not completely agree with the peer reviewer who
commented that effects to nonserpentine grasslands are of minor
concern. Nonserpentine grasslands within a unit between serpentine and
serpentine-like grasslands likely play an important role in dispersal
of adult butterflies from one habitat patch to another. Development in
intervening nonserpentine areas within a unit will likely reduce
movement of adults between more suitable patches. However, based on the
peer reviewer's comments, we have revised the northwestern portion of
the unit boundary. Much of the area removed was heavily interspersed
with woodland habitat and did not support many of the PCEs, such as the
presence of serpentine or serpentine-like grasslands.
Comment 19: One peer reviewer stated that the series of small hills
that make up the Kalana Hills Unit (Unit 9A and 9B) individually are
not valuable to the subspecies; however, along with the intervening
nonserpentine grasslands, they provide a significant resource for the
Bay checkerspot butterfly. The peer reviewer supported the unit's
inclusion as critical habitat. The peer reviewer recommended inclusion
of more of the nonserpentine areas between the units.
A second peer reviewer stated that the unit was well described and
the four small serpentine outcrops can be regularly occupied.
Our Response: The Service did not include all of the intervening
nonserpentine areas between the large hill (subunit A) and the three
smaller hills (subunit B) because they are separated by a disked
agricultural field, which does not support the PCEs and does not meet
our criteria for designating critical habitat. We did not include all
areas between each of the three smaller hills because they are
separated by a small network of local and private roads and at least
two residences and do not support PCE 1, 2, 3, or 5. We did revise the
unit boundaries slightly to reflect better resolution from vegetation
data.
Comment 20: One peer reviewer stated that the Morgan Hill Unit
(Unit 10) has historically been referred to as Hale or Falcon Crest.
The peer reviewer also noted the unit is extensive and topographically
diverse and that with proper management the unit is important for the
long-term conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly and the peer
reviewer supported this unit's inclusion as critical habitat.
Another peer reviewer commented that this area was one of the most
important outlying areas from Coyote Ridge.
Our Response: The Service has renamed Unit 10 from Morgan Hill to
Hale in order to prevent confusion with final Units 5 and 13 (which
historically have been referred to as Morgan Hill).
Comment 21: One peer reviewer stated that the Bear Ranch Unit (Unit
11) consists of a series of small serpentine grasslands and that, prior
to their inclusion into the Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation
system, they were grazed and the habitat was in good condition. The
reviewer expressed support that Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation
has continued to graze the site. In addition, the reviewer stated that
the nonserpentine grasslands between the patches were of great
important to the Bay checkerspot butterfly at this site, and public
structures (trails, parking facilities, etc.) should not be located
between the small patches of serpentine grasslands. However, the peer
reviewer questioned whether the site should be included as critical
habitat because overall he believed the site was of less importance
than the other units in Santa Clara County.
A second peer reviewer simply noted the unit encompassed the
serpentine grassland within the park.
Our Response: We included this unit as critical habitat because it,
along with Unit 12, represents the two southernmost known occurrences
of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. As such, we believe they may provide
an important role in the survival of the subspecies. However, the
Service did revise this unit based on information obtained from or
developed for the Santa Clara County HCP to better reflect the known
distribution of serpentine bunchgrass communities within the unit and
so as not to include nonserpentine grasslands to the west of the two
serpentine patches.
Comment 22: One peer reviewer stated that the San Marin Unit (Unit
12) should not be considered critical habitat because the unit is too
small, too hot, and too isolated. In addition, the reviewer stated that
had development not occurred on the northern portion of the site in the
1980s and 1990s, the site may still benefit the Bay checkerspot
butterfly, but that now the site is of marginal value.
A second peer reviewer also noted that the site may provide little
value due to its size and current level of development.
Our Response: The Service requested additional information
regarding development in this unit, but only one peer reviewer
responded. The reviewer noted that the development was a series of
large residential lots in the northern portion of the unit. However,
based on aerial photographs, there are fewer than 10 residences within
the northern portion of the unit. Topographic maps show a variety of
slope aspects (including cool northeast slopes) present within the
unit. The Service acknowledges the most diverse slopes are primarily
located in the southern portion of the unit. However, the presence of
both north and east slopes indicates that the entire unit is not ``too
hot'' as noted by one of the peer reviewers. It does not appear that
the current level of development has significantly degraded the overall
habitat within the unit. In addition, as noted above, we included both
Unit 12 and Unit 11 because they represent the southernmost known
occurrences of the subspecies and as such may represent important
adaptive differences between populations of Bay checkerspots
butterflies in these units and populations in other units. The criteria
we used to designate critical habitat were whether the area was
occupied at listing or since listing and whether the area had
sufficient PCEs to support a population. The unit was occupied at
listing and currently supports all the PCEs; therefore it meets the
criteria for critical habitat.
Comment 23: One peer reviewer supported non-inclusion of
Communications Hill (Unit 6 in the 2001 designation) because, since
development of the quarry, the remaining habitat is too hot and too
limited.
Our Response: Multiple surveys have been conducted at
Communications Hill over the last two decades, including two recent
surveys by Dr. Richard Arnold in 2000 and 2007. According to Arnold
(2007, p. 7), approximately half of the areas that supported the
primary larval host plant in 2000 had been eliminated. Of the sites
that still supported the primary host plant, most did not support
either of the two secondary host plants. In addition, adult nectar
sources were ``almost entirely lacking'' (Arnold 2007, p. 7). We
believe the information presented in the 2000 and 2007 surveys by Dr.
Richard Arnold in addition to aerial photographs and vegetation maps
[[Page 50412]]
supports the conclusion that much of Communications Hill has been
developed and what little habitat remains does not provide PCEs in
sufficient quantities to meet one or more life history requirements of
the Bay checkerspot butterfly. In addition, there is only one
unconfirmed record of a single Bay checkerspot butterfly on
Communications Hill. Given the lack of confirmed records, the current
developed state of the area, and lack of many of the PCEs, the area did
not meet the criteria for designation as critical habitat.
Public Comments
Comment 24: One commenter recommended adding an area proposed as a
conservation bank in southern Santa Clara County for inclusion within
the critical habitat designation and noted that a small portion of the
conservation bank is located within an area historically documented to
support Bay checkerspot butterflies.
Our Response: The proposed conservation bank is located in the
southern portion of Santa Clara County and is approximately 0.5 miles
(mi) (0.80 kilometers (km)) southwest of the San Martin Unit. According
to the commenter, the entire site is 1,685 acres with 43.3 ac (17.52
ha) of serpentine or serpentine-like grasslands scattered across three
areas that includes all six PCEs. The Service agrees that portions of
the proposed bank likely support all the PCEs; however, the overall
amount of habitat that the butterfly could occupy at the site is low.
According to the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB), the
Bay checkerspot occurrence (CNDDB occurrence 19) that includes a small
portion of the proposed bank is ``nonspecific'' and includes large
areas of forest, agriculture, and residential areas (including a golf
course) that do not support the PCEs. The observation was made by Dr.
Richard Arnold in 1985, but the exact location is not clear and may
have been part of the serpentine grasslands within the San Martin Unit.
The commenter did not provide any information regarding larvae or
adult surveys at the proposed conservation bank or if any individual
Bay checkerspot butterflies have been observed at the site. A review of
the literature indicates that apart from the CNDDB's nonspecific
occurrence by Dr. Richard Arnold, the site has not been identified as
supporting Bay checkerspot butterflies in the past. At this time the
Service has insufficient information regarding the ability of the site
to support Bay checkerspot butterflies to include it in critical
habitat.
Comment 25: Two commenters supported non-inclusion of
Communications Hill in the revised critical habitat designation. One
commenter provided additional information in the form of vegetative
surveys by Dr. Richard Arnold in 2000 and 2007.
Our Response: According to the information provided by one of the
commenters, additional surveys have been conducted on Communications
Hill by Dr. Richard Arnold in 2000 and 2007. According to Arnold (2007
p. 7) approximately half of the areas that supported the primary larval
host plant in 2000 had been eliminated. Of the sites that still
supported the primary host plant, most did not support either of the
two secondary host plants. In addition, adult nectar sources were
``almost entirely lacking'' (Arnold 2007, p. 7). We believe the
information presented by the commenters supports the conclusion that
much of Communications Hill has been developed and what little habitat
remains does not provide PCEs in sufficient quantities to meet one or
more life history requirements of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Comment 26: One commenter stated that based on their evaluation of
their property within the Metcalf Unit (northern portion of proposed
Unit 5; final Unit 4) that large portions of the site do not include
serpentine soils or any of the known host plants for the species.
Furthermore the commenter stated that the soils appear to be thicker
than serpentine soils and are clay-like. In addition, the commenter
stated the Service should obtain more detailed and accurate information
regarding soil and vegetation before designating critical habitat.
Our Response: The Service reviewed soil and geological data from
multiple sources over multiple years, including geographic information
system (GIS) data from Jones and Stokes (the primary consultant writing
the Habitat Conservation Plan for Santa Clara County). All of the
information the Service has obtained regarding soil type indicates that
large tracks of serpentine or serpentine-like soils occur throughout
the majority of the Metcalf Unit. The Service reevaluated the soil
types present north of Metcalf Road, and based on our review of land
ownership data and the most conservative soil maps, there are
approximately 2,547 acres of serpentine soils in the area in question.
While the analysis shows there are patches of nonserpentine soils
present within the area, our data indicate that the vast majority of
the site is comprised of soils from the Montara soil series.
Additionally, the commenter did not provide the results of any surveys
they may have conducted regarding soil types or vegetation that is
currently found on their property, nor did they provide a map of their
property.
It is incumbent on the Service to use the best available
information when making critical habitat determinations; however, the
Service does not have adequate resources to undertake site-specific
surveys throughout each critical habitat unit. If site-specific surveys
are available that the Service was unaware of, the public comment
period should be used to provide the Service with that information. In
this case, the commenter noted that their own evaluation of the site
indicated serpentine soils were not present over large portions of the
site, but did not provide those evaluations (surveys) to the Service.
Therefore, the area in Unit 4 referred to by the commenter has not been
removed from this final designation of critical habitat.
Comment 27: One commenter stated that the Service should not treat
critical habitat designations as dispositive for consultations under
the Act and that while conducting section 7 reviews, the Service should
not use the critical habitat designation as conclusive.
Our Response: The Service reviews the baseline information for each
section 7 consultation. If site-specific habitat assessments have not
been submitted with the initial consultation package, the Service
typically requests an assessment be prepared. If a project is within a
critical habitat designation, and the site assessment indicates the
PCEs are not present within the action area or will not be adversely
affected by the proposed action, then additional consultation with the
Service is not required. The presence of the PCEs and the effects of
the project on those PCEs determine whether formal consultation with
respect to adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat is
necessary.
Comment 28: One commenter stated that according to their records
they were not contacted regarding the proposed critical habitat
designation, which included portions of their property. The commenter
requested a 60-day extension on the comment period or reopening of the
comment period due to lack of notification.
Our Response: According to Service records, two attempts were made
to contact the commenter by telephone and voice messages were left both
times, but no response was received. In addition, the Service conducted
[[Page 50413]]
outreach by notifying appropriate elected officials, local
jurisdictions, interested groups, and property owners. We conducted
much of this outreach through legal notices in regional newspapers,
telephone calls, letters, and news releases faxed or mailed to
appropriate officials, local jurisdictions, and interest groups, and
publication of the proposed determination and associated material on
our Internet page. A second public comment period was opened for the
draft economic analysis, and the Service contacted the commenter for a
third time regarding the opportunity to provide comments. We believe we
have provided sufficient time for public comment with two open comment
periods totaling 90 days. Additionally, we are under a court-mandated
due date to submit a final rule to the Federal Register by August 14,
2008. In order to meet this date, we cannot open an additional comment
period.
Comment 29: The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
stated they owned 203 ac (82.15 ha) within the Pulgas Ridge Unit (final
Unit 1) and 130 ac (52.61 ha) within proposed the Edgewood Park Unit
(final Unit 2).
Our Response: According to the proposed and this final rule the
Pulgas Ridge Unit is approximately 179 ac (72 ha) total in size, all of
which is owned by the SFPUC. A review of GIS data indicates that more
of the Edgewood Park Unit is owned by the SFPUC than stated in the
proposed rule. According to our information the SFPUC owns
approximately 140 ac (57 ha) within the Edgewood Park Unit. We have
corrected the land ownership amount in this final rule.
Comment 30: One commenter questioned whether the Pulgas Ridge Unit
still supports all the PCEs.
Our Response: It is not a requirement that each unit contain all
the PCEs in order to be designated as critical habitat. However, a
review of the vegetation data and soils and geology data indicate the
unit has all the PCEs. In addition, site-specific information (i.e.,
surveys) was not provided by the commenter to support whether the unit
contained all the PCEs or not, and two peer reviewers indicated that
the unit is extensive and has topography similar to the Edgewood Park
Unit, where Bay checkerspot butterflies were introduced in Spring 2007.
The unit was occupied at the time of listing and contains all the
features essential for the conservation of the subspecies; therefore,
it meets the definition of critical habitat.
Comment 31: One commenter stated they were in the early stages of
preparing a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) for the Peninsula Watershed
Management Plan, which includes portions of the Pulgas Ridge and
Edgewood Park Units and that they are working to protect serpentine-
endemic species.
Our Response: The Service supports actions taken by local
governments and the general public to protect and enhance habitat for
listed species through a variety of programs including Safe Harbor
Agreements, Habitat Conservation Plans, our Partners for Fish and
Wildlife Program, and other programs. The Service looks forward to
working with the commenter in the preparation of an HCP in order to
benefit serpentine species in the San Francisco Bay area.
Comment 32: Two commenters stated that the purpose of designating
critical habitat is to facilitate species recovery and that the Service
should designate additional areas of unoccupied serpentine and
nonserpentine habitat to ensure the recovery of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly and sustain the metapopulation dynamics of the species.
Our Response: In our revised proposed designation of critical
habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly, we selected areas based on
the best scientific data available that possess those physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the subspecies,
and that may require special management considerations or protection.
We included in the revised proposed designation areas that were
occupied at the time of listing as well as one area occupied since the
time of listing. However, the Service lacked specific information to
indicate which, if any, unoccupied areas outside those we proposed are
essential for the conservation of the species. The Service cannot
designate as critical habitat areas occupied at the time of listing
that we are unable to determine have the features essential to the
conservation of the subspecies, or unoccupied areas that we are unable
to determine are essential for the conservation of the species.
Further, under section 3(5)(C) of the Act, critical habitat shall not
include the entire geographical area that can be occupied by the
species except in those circumstances determined by the Secretary of
the Interior. Thus, in this rule, we only designate those areas we have
determined meet the definition of critical habitat. The commenter did
not provide information regarding unoccupied areas outside those we
designated that would allow the Service to evaluate whether those areas
supported the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the subspecies. If such information becomes available
in the future, the Service will consider proposing a revision to the
critical habitat designation at that time or when our resources allow.
Comment 33: Two commenters stated that PCE 1 should be modified.
One commenter recommend PCE 1 be deleted and the other recommended a
modification to remove the list of grass species.
Our Response: All published literature on this species indicates it
is a grassland species with relatively sedentary tendencies and may
avoid areas of nonhabitat, including chaparral and oak woodland;
therefore the Service believes the presence of grasslands is an
essential component of Bay checkerspot butterfly habitat, although a
list of specific grass species is not. In this final revised critical
habitat rule, PCE 1 is ``The presence of annual or perennial grasslands
with little to no overstory that provide north-south and east-west
slopes with a tilt of more than 7 degrees for larval host plant
survival during periods of atypical weather (for example, drought).''
We then list grassland species as examples of species common to
grasslands in California, and since nonnative grasses are more common
than native species, we include nonnative species in the example. The
presence of any specific grass or grasses listed in the PCE is not
required, and is not provided as a means to measure habitat quality,
but merely as an indicator of grassland habitat; we clarify this in
this final rule.
Comment 34: Two commenters stated that the PCEs should include
features that facilitate dispersal of the Bay checkerspot butterfly
since dispersal between habitat patches is essential for
recolonization, metapopulation persistence, and recovery. These
commenters further stated that the Service did not designate sufficient
critical habitat to allow for successful dispersal and that the Service
should secure these areas and restore them.
Our Response: PCE 1 includes both perennial and annual grasslands
in order allow for dispersal. All of the units include some amount of
nonserpentine grasslands interspersed with areas of serpentine and
serpentine-like grasslands in order to enhance dispersal between the
more suitable patches both within a unit and among units. In this way
the Service has attempted to designate as many small patches within the
boundaries of individual units, such as with the Metcalf and Kirby
units, which support numerous populations and
[[Page 50414]]
subpopulations scattered over the entire eastern ridgeline in Santa
Clara County. The Santa Teresa Hills Unit includes an area next to the
Tulare Hill Unit that was specifically included in order to facilitate
the dispersal of Bay checkerspot butterflies from the core population
along Coyote Ridge on the eastern side of Santa Clara Valley, to the
ridges on the western side of the valley. In addition, the Kalana Unit
(Unit 9a and 9b) is also considered important for dispersing Bay
checkerspot butterflies to the southernmost units (Units 10, 11, and
12) in Santa Clara County. Based on the current occupancy of the
majority of the units, the Service believes that dispersal between
small populations within each unit, as well as between units, is
occurring. For additional information please see the ``Criteria Used to
Identify Critical Habitat'' section of this rule.
Regarding the acquisition of land, the purchase and restoration of
land for the benefit of the Bay checkerspot butterfly is beyond the
scope of this rule.
Comment 35: One commenter stated that PCE 5 (in the proposed rule
and PCE 4 in this final rule) should include restored native grassland
on nonserpentine soils and that researchers have suggested the Bay
checkerspot butterfly's historic habitat included native grasslands on
nonserpentine soils.
Our Response: The Service agrees that some researchers have
hypothesized that the range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly once
included nonserpentine grasslands, which we noted in the proposed rule.
The Service is not aware of any data that support the hypothesis.
However, as noted in our response to comment 34, the Service included
both perennial and annual grassland habitats as part of PCE 1. The
presence of all PCEs was not a criterion used to designate critical
habitat, and all units include areas of nonserpentine grasslands. In
addition, the Service cannot predict where nonserpentine grassland
habitats that will be restored in the future will be located, nor are
we able to predict whether these areas would support other PCEs
sufficient to support populations of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Comment 36: One commenter stated that proposed PCE 6 (final rule
PCE 5) should be revised to state that stable holes and cracks in the
soil and surface rock outcrops, while beneficial and in need of
protection, are not required for the habitat to have value.
Our Response: The Service disagrees with the commenter regarding
the importance of PCE 5 in this final rule. As stated in the proposed
rule, White (1986, p. 58) observed that pupal mortality rates, as well
as cause of mortality (i.e., predation, parasitism, crushing, or
disease), varied significantly depending on location. For example,
crushing was most likely in areas of bare ground, whereas pupae in
areas with dense vegetation had a higher rate of mortality due to mold
and viruses. Since pre-diapause larval mortality is the most
significant factor influencing population size, a variety of diapause
sites are necessary to ensure adequate numbers of larvae survive
diapause. Further, because prescribed burns are an important management
tool to control nonnative and invasive vegetation, diapause locations
that are not at risk due to fire are important.
Comment 37: One commenter stated that adopting PCEs 2 and 3 (larval
host plants and adult nectar plants) risk causing temporary low-quality
or degraded areas to be treated as non-habitat, which would allow their
destruction or adverse modification.
Our Response: Critical habitat designations are not required to
support all PCEs over the entire extent of the critical habitat unit;
as defined in section 3(5)(A) of the Act, critical habitat is defined
as (1) the specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a
species, at the time of listing in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features (a) essential to the
conservation of the species and (b) that may require special management
considerations or protection; and (2) specific areas outside the
geographic area occupied by a species at the time it is listed in
accordance with section 4 of the Act, upon a determination by the
Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the
species. This definition does not require all PCEs to be present
throughout the entire unit. Further, section 7 consultations on
critical habitat also do not require all PCEs to be present in order to
determine adverse modification. An adverse modification includes when
an action impairs a unit's ability to continue to provide those
features essential for the conservation of the species. For example,
areas of open grasslands may not support the larval host or adult host
plants, but would still provide open grasslands for dispersal of adults
between patches of more suitable habitat. In this case, the absence of
the larval host plants or adult nectar plants would not negate the
importance of the grassland habitat, which is PCE 1.
Comment 38: One commenter stated the principle PCE should be the
presence of suitable soils and that the order of the PCE should be
rearranged to indicate this.
Our Response: The order that the PCEs appear is not an indicator of
their importance. The Service does not believe ranking the PCEs is
appropriate because the presence of any one of the PCEs may not
adequately reflect habitat quality or the presence of the species. For
example, serpentine soils occur throughout California (and the world),
but the Bay checkerspot butterfly does not. Similarly both the larval
host plants and adult nectar plants also have ranges that extend beyond
the historical range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Comment 39: One commenter stated that populations of pollinators of
the larval and adult host plants should be a PCE and that if they are
as poorly known as we indicated in the proposed rule the commenter
would undertake a project to identify them for the Service. Further the
commenter stated that our assumption regarding the presence of host
plants implying their successful reproduction is erroneous and a
serious error.
Our Response: According to Home Builders Association of Northern
California v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 268 F. Supp. 2d (1197)
2003, the Service must describe the PCEs with a certain degree of
specificity. In order to establish pollinators as a PCE, the Service
would need detailed life history data of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly's larval host and adult nectar plants and list their
pollinators. The Service has general data regarding insect pollinators,
but we lacked data specific enough on the pollinators for the majority
of larval host and nectar plants to designate pollinators as a PCE. In
addition, since the Service is under a court-ordered deadline for
publishing this final rule, there was insufficient time to undertake a
study designed to determine the pollinators of the larval host and
adult nectar plants.
Comment 40: One commenter supported aquatic features as a PCE and
stated they had observed ``puddling'' in early April 2002 and the
weather had not been particularly hot or dry. The commenter believes
that puddling may occur more frequently than previously believed for
this species.
Our Response: All three peer reviewers, while acknowledging aquatic
features have been used by this subspecies, stated the Bay checkerspot
butterfly was capable of surviving without access to these features.
Murphy et al. (1983, p. 261) observed that egg production varied with
diet (no food; water; water with 20 percent sugar; water with amino
acids; nectar; and nectar with amino acids), but that
[[Page 50415]]
water alone had no direct role on female fitness. Therefore, based on
expert opinion, we have removed aquatic features as a PCE.
Comment 41: One commenter stated that mean rainfall should also be
considered when designating critical habitat and additional units
should be designated to include a wide variation of annual rainfall.
Our Response: The Service agrees with the commenter regarding the
importance of annual rainfall. Variations in amount and timing of
rainfall play a significant role in determining when host plants become
senescent which in turn influences larval mortality and ultimately is
the key factor in population size (Singer 1972, p. 77; Weiss et al.
1988, p. 1486), as we noted in the proposed rule in the section titled
``Distribution and Population Trends.'' Variable topography (i.e.,
different slope aspects) was included as a PCE (PCE 1) in order to
support the life cycle of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. In addition,
we included three unoccupied units in San Mateo County, because we
recognized that units in close proximity to one another (i.e., many of
the units in Santa Clara County) would likely experience similar
environmental conditions.
Comment 42: One commenter stated that the rule should be revised to
state that only structures present at the time of this rulemaking
within critical habitat are excluded by text and are not designated as
critical habitat and that areas developed after the rule making should
not be automatically excluded by the language of the text.
Our Response: When determining critical habitat boundaries for this
rule, we made every effort to avoid including developed areas such as
lands covered by buildings, paved areas, and other structures that lack
PCEs for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. The scale of the maps prepared
under the parameters for publication within the Code of Federal
Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of such developed areas. Any
such structures and the land under them inadvertently left inside
critical habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this final rule have
been excluded by text in the final rule and are not designated as
critical habitat. Therefore, on the effective date of this rule,
Federal actions limited to these areas would not trigger section 7
consultation, unless they may affect the species or PCEs in adjacent
critical habitat.
The Service does not believe it would be appropriate to state that
only areas that are developed at the time of this rulemaking would not
be designated as critical habitat. Any area that is developed in the
future, with or without consultation with the Service, would then still
be considered critical habitat, even though it would not contain any of
the PCEs and no longer support any of the species life history
requirements.
Comment 43: Two commenters stated that San Bruno Mountain Unit
should be retained as a critical habitat unit and that the proposed
rule was confusing regarding whether the unit was proposed for
inclusion or for exclusion. In addition, both commenters stated that
HCPs exist for the purpose of taking listed species and that HCPs
include actions that are harmful to listed species. One of these
commenters also stated the current San Bruno Mountain HCP does not
provide adequate management or protection because it does not cover the
Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Our Response: We proposed the San Bruno Mountain unit for exclusion
because the existing San Bruno Mountain HCP covers all remaining
habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly on the mountain, three other
listed butterflies with some similarities in life histories and habitat
requirements occur on San Bruno Mountain, and management of the habitat
on the mountain for the three other listed butterflies is expected to
benefit the Bay checkerspot butterfly. Additionally, at the time of the
publication of the proposed rule, we expected Amendment 5 to the San
Bruno Mountain HCP, which would include coverage specific to the Bay
checkerspot butterfly, to have been finalized prior to the publication
of this final designation of critical habitat. As this amendment is not
yet finalized as of the writing of the final rule, we re-evaluated the
proposed exclusion of the San Bruno Mountain HCP from critical habitat
and determined on the basis of the record before us not to exclude this
area (See ``Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act'').
Comment 44: One commenter stated that by retaining four units on
Coyote Ridge, the effects of projects consulted on under section 7 of
the Act would be analyzed at the unit level and that combining the
units would dilute or obscure the analysis of effects.
Our Response: When analyzing the effects of a proposed project on
critical habitat, the Service analyzes the effects of the action and
whether the action will result in adverse modification or destruction
of critical habitat on all units that have been designated. The Service
does not typically limit its analysis regarding adverse modification or
destruction of critical habitat to only the critical habitat unit in
which the action is occurring. The Service does review the baseline
information for the unit; however, baseline information will be the
same for a given area regardless of whether the area has been
identified as one unit or multiple units.
Comment 45: One commenter stated that the Service did not designate
habitat patches of sufficient number, quality, or proximity to ensure
the survival and recovery of the Bay checkerspot butterfly, and at a
minimum the Service should designate as critical habitat the number of
habitat patches that the Recovery Plan specifies as necessary for the
recovery of the species.
A second commenter recommended clarification in the final rule
regarding the Service's statement in the proposed rule that the
designation of critical habitat may not include all habitat areas that
we may eventually determine necessary for recovery.
Our Response: Each unit is capable of supporting multiple
populations; we do not believe it is necessary to match the number of
critical habitat units with the number of populations identified in the
Recovery Plan. In addition, the Service lacked specific information to
indicate if any particular areas outside those we proposed to designate
are essential for the conservation of the species. Since occupancy at
the time of listing or since listing was a criterion for determining
which areas were to be designated as critical habitat, additional areas
outside of those we are designating would not meet our criteria. We
recognize areas other than those we are designating as critical
habitat, such as those defined in the Recovery Plan, may be important
for the eventual recovery of the Bay checkerspot butterfly; however,
these areas did not meet our criteria for being essential to the
conservation of this butterfly. If such information becomes available
in the future, the Service will consider proposing a revision to the
critical habitat designation at that time or when our resources allow.
Comment 46: One commenter stated the revised PCEs are problematic
and would result in a reduced protection of the species habitat within
(and potentially that outside of) designated units, because the PCEs
are hyper-specific, lack any expression for the need for dispersal, and
may be used during section 7 consultations outside of critical habitat
to determine if a site has appropriate habitat or not. The commenter
recommended revising the PCEs.
Our Response: As noted above in our response to Comment 39,
according to Home Builders Association of Northern California v. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service 268 F. Supp. 2d (1197) 2003, the
[[Page 50416]]
Service must describe the PCEs with a certain degree of specificity. We
revised the list of PCEs from the 2001 rule (66 FR 21450), in an
attempt to comply with the requirements as set forth in the above
mentioned case.
As noted in our response to Comment 34, PCE 1 includes both
perennial and annual grasslands, which in part is to facilitate
dispersal within units and between units. The Santa Teresa Hills Unit
(Unit 7) includes an area next to the Tulare Hill Unit (Unit 6) that
was specifically included in order to facilitate the dispersal of Bay
checkerspot butterflies from the core population along Coyote Ridge on
the eastern side of Santa Clara Valley, to the ridges on the western
side of the valley. In addition, Unit 9a, 9b, and 10 are also
considered important for dispersing Bay checkerspot butterflies to the
southern most units (Units 11 and 12) in Santa Clara County.
The Service does not specifically use the presence or absence of
PCEs outside of critical habitat designations to determine whether or
not an area provides habitat for a given species. PCEs are only
considered when a proposed project is within or may affect a designated
critical habitat unit. The presence of all PCEs is not required in
order to initiate consultation under section 7 of the Act. The presence
of a single PCE within the boundaries of critical habitat and the
potential effects of a proposed project on that PCE is sufficient. PCE
4, soils derived from serpentinite ultramafic rock (Montara, Climara,
Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo soil series) or similar soils (Inks,
Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and Barnabe soil series), are present
throughout the majority of the units, and the presence of this PCE
alone would result in consultation for proposed projects with a Federal
nexus.
Comment 47: One commenter stated that the Service should undertake
the establishment of experimental populations of the species outside
its historically known range.
Our Response: The establishment of experimental populations is
outside the scope of this critical habitat rule.
Comment 48: One commenter stated that given the species' continued
decline, the species should be uplisted to endangered.
Our Response: The Service will initiate a 5-year review on this
species in 2008. Recommendations regarding the status of a species,
including whether to uplist, downlist, or delist, will be made upon
completion of the 5-year review.
Comment 49: One commenter stated that annual rainfall should be
considered in the designation of critical habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly, that the Service should designate areas that
encompass a wide range of mean annual rainfall to buffer against
climate variability and global warming, and that ongoing climate change
is a threat to the species.
Our Response: See response to Comment 41 regarding rainfall.
Current climate model forecasts vary in their predicted outcomes, and
range from cooler and drier to warmer and wetter (Miller et al. 2003;
Deffenbaugh et al. 2005; Leung and Ghan 1999), which makes it difficult
to adequately assess the effects that climate change may have on
populations of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. Further, the Service is
not aware of climate models that have been refined to provide forecasts
at the local scale, or specifically models that have been developed for
areas occupied by the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Despite the lack of a consensus with respect to climate change, we
designated units in both San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, because we
recognized that units in close proximity to one another would likely
experience similar environmental conditions. We designated units in San
Mateo County that were occupied at the time of listing? despite the
fact that all the units, with the possible exception of Edgewood Park,
are currently? unoccupied and are beyond the reported dispersal
capabilities of the species from occupied sites in Santa Clara County.
However, based on information regarding land use, vegetative cover,
soil data, and topography, we believe we have designated all potential
habitats in San Mateo County that could support the species and meet
the definition of critical habitat. Our designation is supported by two
peer reviewers, who also believe that the area designated as critical
habitat covers all remaining suitable habitat.
In addition, as stated above in our response to Comment 45 the
Service lacked specific information to indicate whether particular
areas outside those we are designating are essential to the
conservation of the species. We do not believe it is appropriate to
designate critical habitat in areas where we are lacking adequate
information. In the proposed rule, we specifically requested comments
regarding the amount and distribution of Bay checkerspot butterfly
habitat, but we did not receive specific responses. If such information
becomes available in the future, the Service will consider proposing a
revision to the critical habitat designation at that time or when our
resources allow.
Comments related to the Draft Economic Analysis (DEA)
Comment 50: One commenter stated that specific management actions
for serpentine soil grasslands, such as grazing, had not yet been
determined in the Santa Clara Valley HCP - NCCP (SCVHCP) and therefore
should not be included in the DEA.
Our Response: In order to estimate the costs of future conservation
activities for the butterfly, the DEA must predict the actions most
likely to be taken and estimate the amount of resources / funding
required to implement them. Grazing and prescribed burning are
recommended for serpentine soil management in Section 5.3.3 of the
SCVHCP Working Draft. We recognize that these recommendations may
change as the plan is finalized. However, the plan represents the best
currently-available information regarding likely future conservation
activities. Therefore, the costs of implementing these management
actions are included in the DEA.
Comment 51: One commenter asked for clarification as to how the
economic impacts were determined for ``recreation and public access''
in Table 2-1 of the DEA.
Our Response: The impacts for ``recreation and public access'' in
Table 2-1 are based on the December 2007 SCVHCP Implementation Budget
Preliminary Draft.
Comment 52: A commenter noted that some of the County parks and
recreation activities within those parks were not correctly identified
in Table 1-2. The commenter also pointed out that County parks within
proposed critical habitat were incorrectly identified in Section 2.4.3
of the DEA.
Our Response: Table 1-2 and Section 2.3.1 (which contains former
Section 2.4.3) were revised to state that Unit 5 contains Motorcycle
County Park, Field Sports Park, part of Anderson Lake Park and part of
Coyote Creek Parkway; and Unit 6 contains part of Coyote Creek Parkway.
Table 1-2 was revised to state that Metcalf Park is managed by the City
of San Jose. Table 1-2 now includes off-road vehicle recreation and a
firing range in the land use description for Motorcycle County Park and
Field Sports Park.
Comment 53: A commenter noted that the implementation of the
grazing programs in Santa Teresa County Park and Calero County Park
will occur independently of the implementation program identified in
the SCVHCP.
Our Response: Section 2.3.1 (which contains former Section 2.4.3)
of the DEA was revised to clarify that these
[[Page 50417]]
grazing projects are part of the County's ongoing fire control and
invasive plant species management and will occur independently of the
SCVHCP grazing program. However, the costs of these projects are
retained in the analysis, as they represent part of the baseline
protection provided to the habitat.
Comment 54: A commenter noted that Santa Clara County Parks uses
many methods to manage invasive plant species, including prescribed
fires, herbicide application and manual removal, but that livestock
grazing is the predominant method used. The commenter said that County
Parks conducts prescribed burns infrequently and is cutting back on
herbicide treatment. The commenter noted that County Parks will be
employing more costly methods, such as hand removal and grazing, to
manage invasive plant species in the future.
Our Response: The DEA was revised to qualitatively discuss all
potential invasive species management options, including manual
removal, prescribed burns, and herbicide application. However,
according to the County Parks Department, these alternative options are
very rarely used and are expected to be used less often in the future.
In Section 2.3.1, the DEA quantifies the costs of grazing programs to
manage invasive plant species in serpentine soil habitats because it is
the current predominant method and is expected to be used even more
widely in the future.
Comment 55: A commenter disagreed with the economic analysis'
assessment that livestock grazing is cost effective or that costs of
implementing and managing a grazing program are revenue neutral.
The commenter points out that fencing costs estimated in the DEA
are outdated and underestimated. Additionally, the costs of fencing do
not include the associated costs for surveys, plan development,
administrative costs, or development of other related infrastructure
such as water sources for livestock. The commenter requested that the
economic analysis consider the implementation, administrative, and
management costs associated with the grazing programs in addition to
the fencing construction costs.
Our Response: Section 2.3.1 of the DEA was revised to better
quantify all the costs of implementing a grazing program, including
costs of all infrastructure, planning, and management. The DEA also
includes the best estimates of revenues from leasing the land to
grazers. The updated cost and revenue information were obtained from
the County of Santa Clara Parks and Recreation Department.
Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule
The areas identified in this final rule constitute a revision from
the areas we proposed as critical habitat for Bay checkerspot butterfly
on August 22, 2007 (72 FR 48178). The primary differences include the
following:
(1) Our proposed rule excluded Unit 1. The final rule includes Unit
1 as designated critical habitat.
(2) The 2007 revised proposed critical habitat rule consisted of 12
units comprising a total of 19,746 ac (7,990 ha). The majority of the
final units correspond to those in the revised proposed rule. However,
we have refined the units to eliminate areas that are unlikely to
support the PCEs such as areas that are forested or areas that were
developed. Proposed rule Unit 5 was split into two individual units,
Unit 5 and Unit 13. This was done to remove intervening areas that did
not contain the features essential to the conservation of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. This final designation of critical habitat
consists of 13 units.
(3) We have clarified the list of specific species in PCE 1 to
state that the list of grassland species is an example of species
common to grasslands in California, and since nonnative grasses are
more common than native species, we include nonnative species in the
example. The presence of any specific grass or grasses listed in the
PCE is not required, and is not provided as a means to measure habitat
quality, but merely as an indicator of grassland habitat.
(4) We have removed PCE 4 from the revised proposed designation, as
well as mention of water in other PCEs. All three peer reviewers stated
the use of water was overemphasized in the revised proposed rule. All
three peer reviewers stated that the Bay checkerspot butterfly is
opportunistic with regard to water and will use it when water is
present and there is a need for water, but that absence of water did
not influence the presence or absence of the subspecies.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by a
species at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(a) essential to the conservation of the species and
(b) that may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the species.
Conservation, 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, may include 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 government or public to access private
lands. Such designation does not require implementation of restoration,
recovery, or enhancement measures by private landowners. Where a
landowner 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) would apply, but even in
the event of a destruction or adverse modification finding, the
landowner'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 of listing
must contain the physical or biological features that are essential to
the conservation of the species, and be included only if those features
may require special management considerations or protection. Critical
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best
scientific data available, habitat areas that provide essential life
cycle needs of the species (areas on which are found the PCEs laid
[[Page 50418]]
out in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement for the
conservation of the species). Under the Act, we can designate critical
habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species
at the time it is listed as critical habitat only when we determine
that those areas are essential for 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 we are 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. Furthermore, 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 promote the recovery of the species.
Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but
are outside the critical habitat designations, will continue to be
subject to conservation actions that we and other Federal agencies
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 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 the best scientific and commercial information available at
the time of these planning efforts calls for a different outcome.
Methods
As required by section 4(b) of the Act, we used the best scientific
data available in determining areas that contain the features essential
to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly, areas unoccupied
at the time of listing that are essential to the conservation of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly, or both. This includes information used to
prepare the 2001 designation of critical habitat (66 FR 21450), the
Recovery Plan for Serpentine Soil Species of the San Francisco Bay
Area, the CNDDB, published and unpublished papers, reports, academic
theses and surveys, Geographic Information System (GIS) data (such as
species occurrence, soil data, land use, topography, and ownership
maps), correspondence to the Service from recognized experts, and other
information as available.
We have also reviewed available information that pertains to the
habitat requirements of this species, including:
Data in reports submitted during section 7 consultations
and submitted by biologists holding section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery
permits;
Research published in peer-reviewed articles and presented
in academic theses and agency reports;
Information from species experts; and
Information gathered during site visits to Bay checkerspot
butterfly habitat in Santa Clara County.
Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs)
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and the
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 or biological
features essential to the conservation of the species that may require
special management considerations or protection. We consider the
physical or biological features to be the PCEs laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of
the species. The PCEs include:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, and 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.
The specific PCEs required for the Bay checkerspot butterfly are
derived from the biological needs of the Bay checkerspot butterfly as
described in the Background sections of the August 22, 2007, proposed
critical habitat rule (72 FR 48178) and in the final listing rule
published in the Federal Register on September 18, 1987 (52 FR 35366).
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
The Bay checkerspot butterfly occurs in open grassland habitats of
the San Francisco Bay in Santa Clara and San Mateo counties. Prior to
European settlement, California grasslands are believed to have been
comprised of perennial bunchgrasses with both annual and perennial
forbs (Jackson 1985, p. 349; Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 478; Corbin and
D'Antonio 2004, p. 1273). Today, grassland habitats in California are
almost entirely composed of Eurasian annual grasses and forbs (Jackson
1985, p. 349; Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 478; Seabloom et al. 2003, p.
13384; Malmstrom et al. 2005, p. 154) where classical succession does
not occur (Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 478; Kie 2005, p. 2). Plant density
in nonnative grasslands is extremely high compared to plant density in
native grasslands (Malmstrom et al. 2005, p. 154). Dyer and Rice (1997,
pp. 484, 490) estimated that pre-settlement densities of some native
species was between 1-7 mature individuals per square meter. This is in
sharp contrast to densities of several nonnative grasses and forbs; a
study by Biswell and Graham (1956, pp. 116-117) found densities of some
nonnative species, such as Bromus hordeaceus, Erodium botrys, and
Festuca megalura, to be 20,000 to 78,000 mature individuals per square
meter. Heady (1958, p. 405) observed somewhat lower densities than
Biswell and Graham (1956) of the same species with densities ranging
from 4,750 to 28,370 mature individuals per square meter. This suggests
that grasslands with
[[Page 50419]]
nonnative species have large numbers of individuals, but few species
(i.e., low diversity). According to Malmstrom et al. (2005, p. 154),
California native grasslands, prior to the introduction of Eurasian
vegetation, were likely a mix of forbs and grasses, but today these
species are out-competed by nonnative grasses.
Serpentine or serpentine-like soils are characterized as shallow,
nutrient poor (typically lacking in nitrogen and calcium), containing
high magnesium (and other heavy metals), and with low water-holding
capacity. All currently occupied habitats of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly occur on serpentine or serpentine-like grasslands that
support at least two of the subspecies' larval host plants. Due to poor
nutrient availability, as well as other soil characteristics,
serpentine and serpentine-like grasslands are, for the most part,
inhospitable to the nonnative grasses and forbs that dominate other
California grassland ecosystems; these areas are essentially isolated
patches where native grassland vegetation is capable of persisting in a
landscape that is otherwise dominated by nonnative and invasive
species. These soils support many rare plant species including
populations of the Bay checkerspot butterfly's larval host plants
Plantago erecta, Castilleja densiflora, and Castilleja exserta.
However, these remnant native grasslands are being invaded and crowded
out by nonnative species and are under increased pressure as a result
of nitrogen deposition primarily caused by air pollution (Weiss 1999,
p. 1477). The enrichment of these soils with nitrogen has allowed
nonnative grasses to invade these traditionally nutrient poor habitats,
and the result is a thick mat of standing vegetation (thatch). Dense
thatch has been reported to inhibit the growth of native forbs
(Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 488). Huenneke et al. (1990, p. 489) found
that treatment areas that were fenced to prevent grazing resulted in an
increase in native perennial and nonnative annual grasses, but in
grazed treatments, forbs continued to represent an important component.
Low and moderate grazing regimes, approximately one cow per 10 acres,
have been implemented on portions of Tulare Hill and Coyote Ridge.
Because cattle tend to select nonnative grasses over native forbs
(Weiss 1999, p. 1484), the result of these grazing regimes has been
local increases of the Bay checkerspot butterfly's larval host plants.
The Bay checkerspot butterfly requires areas with topographic
diversity (warm south and west slopes as well as cool north and east
slopes), because some slopes become unfavorable depending on annual
weather conditions and time of year. Fleishman et al. (2000, p. 34)
defined warm and very warm slopes as south-and west-facing slopes with
a tilt greater than 11 and 17 degrees, respectively, with cool and very
cool slopes defined as those facing north or east with a tilt greater
than 11 and 17 degrees, respectively. Harrison et al. (1988, p. 365)
defined warm slopes as those facing south, southwest, and southeast
with a tilt greater than 7 degrees and cool slopes as those facing
north or northeast with a tilt greater than 7 and 12 degrees,
respectively. In hot, dry years, north-and east-facing slopes remain
cool and moist longer and larval host plants tend to senesce (reach
later maturity; grow old) later than those on other slopes (Weiss et
al. 1988, p. 1493; Fleishman et al. 2000, p. 33). The delayed
senescence of plants on cool, moist slopes allows larvae to reach their
fourth instar (larval development stage or molt) and enter diapause
(dormancy) before host plants become inedible. Larvae that are not able
to enter diapause prior to host plant senescence starve and die (Singer
and Ehrlich 1979, p. 54; White 1987, p. 209; Weiss 1996, p. 6). Because
host plants on cool slopes can flower and senesce 3 or more weeks after
those on warmer slopes (Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1493), cool slopes are
especially important during extremely dry years (i.e., droughts).
However, larval feeding and growth tends to increase on warm slopes
because they receive more solar exposure than other slopes; this allows
post-diapause larvae to grow quickly and pupate earlier than those on
cool slopes. Individuals that pupate earlier have a much greater chance
of reproductive success (Weiss et al. 1988, pp. 1493-94).
In addition to weather, slope is important relative to the timing
of egg laying. As the adult mating season (referred to as the flight
season) progresses, females tend to lay more eggs on cool slopes than
on warm slopes (Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1493). The timing of the adult
flight season varies with weather, but can generally be described as
occurring from late February to early May (Murphy et al. 2004, p. 25).
Larvae that hatch late in the flight season have a greater chance of
reaching diapause on cooler slopes than those laid at the same time on
warm slopes, because host plants mature later on cool slopes. The
pattern of larval survivorship across different slopes changes from one
year to the next as well as within years; therefore, it becomes
important that a variety of slopes and aspects are present to support
the butterfly and its host plants.
Food
The primary larval host plant for the Bay checkerspot butterfly is
a small, annual, native plantain (Plantago erecta). The Bay checkerspot
butterfly also requires the presence of a secondary host plant, either
purple owl's-clover (Castilleja densiflora) or exserted paintbrush
(Castilleja exserta) (Singer 1972, p. 76; Murphy and Ehrlick 1980, p.
316; Fleishman et al. 1997, p. 32; Weiss 1999, p. 1478; Hellman 2002,
pp. 926, 931). The need for a secondary host plant is related to the
timing of senescence of the primary host plant. In many years, the
primary host plant dries up before larvae have reached their fourth
instar and entered diapause. Because purple owl's-clover and exserted
paintbrush tend to senesce later than the plantain, larvae that switch
to these plants may extend their feeding season long enough to reach
their fourth instar. The terms ``primary'' and ``secondary'' also
loosely refers to the host plant that females most commonly oviposit
(lay eggs) on Plantago erecta in some locations, such as Jasper Ridge;
however, at Edgewood approximately 70 percent of oviposition occurred
on Castilleja and that in the 1980s approximately 20 percent of
oviposition at Kirby Canyon (the southern portion of the Kirby Unit)
occurred on Castilleja.
Adult Bay checkerspot butterflies utilize nectar from a variety of
plants associated with serpentine grasslands. Commonly used nectar
plants include desert parsley (Lomatium spp.), California goldfields
(Lasthenia californica), tidy-tips (Layia platyglossa), sea muilla
(Muilla maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium falcifolium), false
babystars (Linanthus androsaceus), and intermediate fiddleneck
(Amsinckia intermedia). Egg production (both size of individual eggs
and number of eggs) significantly increases with the intake of
nutrients (Murphy et al. 1983, p. 261; Boggs 1997a, pp.181, 184).
Murphy et al. (1983, p. 261) observed increased longevity and reduced
weight loss in adult Bay checkerspot butterflies that were fed sugar.
Murphy et al. (1983, p. 261) also observed that amino acid intake
produced heavier eggs and that larvae from these eggs had an increased
likelihood of survival. A study by O'Brien et al. (2004, p. 286), which
examined egg production and adult diet in three species of butterflies
in the family Nymphalidae, found the percent of carbon in eggs, derived
from adult
[[Page 50420]]
diets, increased with time (up to 80 percent in one species). Currently
there is no information regarding nectar usage on adult male longevity
or reproduction.
All of the host plants have ranges greater than that of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly, and the larval plants may be found in areas that
do not meet the life-history requirements of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. For example, Castilleja densiflora historically occurred
throughout California, Plantago erecta occurred throughout California
and Oregon, and Castilleja exserta occurred in California, Arizona, New
Mexico, Hawaii, and Massachusetts (USDA 2007). In addition, the range
of many of the nectar sources is also much greater than the geographic
range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Soils
The Bay checkerspot butterfly inhabits areas with soils derived
from serpentinite ultramafic rock (Montara, Climara, Henneke, Hentine,
and Obispo soil series) or similar nonserpentine soils (such as Inks,
Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and Barnabe soil series). Serpentine
soils are characterized as having low amounts of nutrients (such as
nitrogen and calcium); high concentrations of magnesium; low water-
holding capacity; and patches of heavy metals. These characteristics
create a refuge for many rare native plants, because other plant
species are not capable of surviving in these soils (nitrogen is often
a limiting factor in plant growth). The nonserpentine soils mentioned
above have characteristics that allow them to support grassland
communities similar to those on serpentine soils, such as low water-
holding capacity, slight to moderate acidity (pH 5.8), and varied
topography (slopes ranging from 5 to 75 percent). Together, these soils
provide the last remaining habitat within the geographic range of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly where the larval host plants are capable of
persisting and not be outcompeted or crowded out by introduced annuals.
Some researchers have hypothesized that the Bay checkerspot butterfly
once occurred widely in nonserpentine grasslands throughout the San
Francisco Bay area prior to the invasion of nonnative invasive grasses
and forbs (Murphy and Weiss 1988, p. 197), but has subsequently been
relegated to these fragmented habitats due to plant competition.
Cover
Larval Bay checkerspot butterflies enter diapause in order to
survive the summer dry period, once their host plants senesce. Diapause
is an obligatory dormancy period that begins once larvae reach their
fourth instar, which takes approximately 3 weeks, but may vary
considerably depending on abiotic factors (non-living components of the
biosphere) (Kuussaari, et al. 2004, p. 140). Singer (2008, p. 1)
observed repeat diapause in small post diapause larvae in laboratory
environments. Other researchers (White and Levin 1981, p. 355; Harrison
1989, p. 1242; Kuussaari et al. 2004, pp. 139-140; Mattoni et al. 1997,
p. 106) also provide evidence that larvae are capable of entering
diapause more than once. Diapause continues until the summer dry period
is broken by the onset of the rainy season, generally some time in
November-January (Weiss 1996, p. 6). The larvae pass through diapause
in holes and cracks in the soil and under rocks (White 1987, p. 209;
Weiss 1996, p.7) that provide protection from weather, predation, and
parasitism. White (1986, p. 58) observed that pupal mortality rates, as
well as cause of mortality (i.e., predation, parasitism, crushing, or
disease), varied significantly depending on location, with significant
differences in mortality between microhabitat types. For example,
crushing was most likely in areas of bare ground, whereas pupae in
areas with dense vegetation had a higher rate of mortality due to mold
and viruses.
Primary Constituent Elements for the Bay Checkerspot Butterfly
Based on the above needs and our current knowledge of the life
history, biology, and ecology of the species and the habitat
requirements for sustaining the essential life history functions of the
species, we have determined that Bay checkerspot butterfly PCEs are:
(1) The presence of annual or perennial grasslands with little to
no overstory that provide north-south and east-west slopes with a tilt
of more than 7 degrees for larval host plant survival during periods of
atypical weather (for example, drought).
Common grassland species include wild oats (Avena fatua), soft
chess (Bromus hordeaceus), California oatgrass (Danthonia californica),
Italian ryegrass (Lolium multiflorum), purple needlegrass (Nassella
pulchra), and Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis); less abundant in these
grasslands are annual and perennial forbs such as filaree (Erodium
botrys), true clovers (Trifolium sp.), and dwarf plantain (Plantago
erecta). These species, with the exception of dwarf plantain, are not
required by the Bay checkerspot butterfly, but merely are provided here
as an example of species commonly found in California grasslands.
(2) The presence of the primary larval host plant, dwarf plantain
(Plantago erecta), and at least one of the secondary host plants,
purple owl's-clover (Castilleja densiflora) or exserted paintbrush
(Castilleja exserta), are required for reproduction, feeding, and
larval development.
(3) The presence of adult nectar sources for feeding. Common nectar
sources include desert parsley (Lomatium spp.), California goldfields
(Lasthenia californica), tidy-tips (Layia platyglossa), sea muilla
(Muilla maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium falcifolium), false
babystars (Linanthus androsaceus), and intermediate fiddleneck
(Amsinckia intermedia).
(4) Soils derived from serpentinite ultramafic rock (Montara,
Climara, Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo soil series) or similar soils
(Inks, Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and Barnabe soil series) that
provide areas with fewer aggressive, nonnative plant species for larval
host plant and adult nectar plant survival and reproduction.
(5) The presence of stable holes and cracks in the soil, and
surface rock outcrops that provide shelter for the larval stage of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly during summer diapause.
With this final designation of critical habitat, we intend to
conserve the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, which support the life history functions
of the species, through the identification of the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement of areas containing the PCEs. Some units
contain all of these PCEs and support multiple life processes, while
some units contain only a portion of these PCEs, those necessary to
support the species' particular use of that habitat. Because not all
life history functions require all the PCEs, not all critical habitat
units will contain all the PCEs.
Special Management Considerations or Protections
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the areas
determined to be occupied at the time of listing and to contain the
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the
species may require special management considerations or protection.
Threats to those features we identify as the PCEs laid out in the
appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement for conservation of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly include habitat loss and fragmentation,
invasion of exotic plants, nitrogen deposition (including
NOx and ammonia), pesticide
[[Page 50421]]
application (including drift), illegal collecting, fire, overgrazing,
and gopher control.
We have determined that the essential features in critical habitat
units 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 13 may require special management
considerations or protection due to threats posed by habitat loss and
fragmentation resulting from urban and suburban growth. Development
pressure in Santa Clara County is likely to increase in the foreseeable
future. The City of San Jose has developed a general plan to guide
development in the area into the year 2020. Portions of the general
plan share boundaries with critical habitat units, including Units 4,
5, 6, 7, and 9. Some currently or proposed projects include the Coyote
Valley Research Park, numerous projects currently proposed for
inclusion under the Santa Clara Habitat Conservation Plan, as well as
numerous single family residential units and road grading projects. In
1997, the California Court of Appeals 6th District found that the City
of San Jose's zoning did not have to be consistent with the City's
General Plan (Juarez et al. v. City of San Jose et al. (6th District,
Case No. CV736436 H014755)); this may result in areas not currently
within the urban growth boundary still being proposed for development,
including those areas that are environmentally sensitive such as
critical habitat units. In addition, portions of Unit 10 are within the
planning boundaries of the City of Morgan Hill's general plan.
We have determined that the essential features in all final
critical habitat units may require special management considerations or
protection due to the threats posed by the invasion of nonnative
vegetation that result from air pollution (primarily nitrogen
deposition) (Weiss 1999, p. 1477). Nitrogen deposition enriches
serpentine and serpentine-like soils that are usually nutrient poor.
Increased nitrogen (typically a limiting factor in plant growth) in
these areas has resulted in the accumulation of a thick carpet of
vegetative material (thatch) each year. Dense thatch has been reported
to inhibit the growth of native forbs (Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 488).
The increased density of nonnative vegetation would negatively affect
the Bay checkerspot butterfly's host plant through competition and
crowding (Weiss 1999, p. 1481).
The essential features in all final critical habitat units may
require special management considerations or protection due to the
threats posed by pesticide use. Use of pesticides (for example,
insecticides and herbicides) in or adjacent to critical habitat may
affect populations of butterflies within these units. Populations
adjacent to areas where there is intensive use of pesticides may be at
risk as a result of drift and runoff. In at least one instance, larvae
appeared to have survived a direct application of malathion by the
California Department of Food and Agriculture; however, the application
was conducted in the fall of 1981 when larvae were still in diapause.
We have determined that he essential features in all final critical
habitat units may require special management considerations or
protection due to the threat posed by fire. No Bay checkerspot
butterflies were seen on San Bruno Mountain after a wildfire swept
across portions of the mountain in 1986. However, only about 50 adult
butterflies were observed on the mountain in 1984 (CNDDB 2006), so
their subsequent disappearance may not have been solely related to the
1986 fire. The use of fire as a management regime in serpentine
grasslands has not been well studied. Studies that have been conducted
are primarily monitoring opportunities made possible after wildfires.
Use of prescribed burns may be an effective management tool
depending on timing, intensity, and size of the area burned. Prescribed
burns are widely used as a land management tool to counter the invasion
of nonnative and invasive plant species and to stimulate growth and
reproduction of those species adapted to disturbance. An experimental
prescribed burn was conducted over a small portion of Coyote Ridge
(portions of Unit 13) in 2006 and 2007. A third burn is proposed for
2008, with results available sometime in early 2009. A portion of the
Tulare Hill Unit was burned in late-May 2004 and since that time
vegetative surveys have been conducted at this site. These studies were
established to document differences between grazed-burned, ungrazed-
burned, and ungrazed-unburned treatments. Sites that had grazed-burned
treatments had the highest percentage of Plantago erecta than any other
sites (including several sites within Unit 13). In 2005, Plantago
erecta cover was approximately 16.7 percent at grazed-burned sites
compared to 13.9 percent at ungrazed-unburned sites (CH2M Hill 2006, p.
6-2). Similar results were obtained in 2007, with Plantago erecta cover
being highest at grazed-burned sites (8.6 percent) (CH2M Hill 2008, p.
6-1). Nectar plants on Tulare Hill were also highest in grazed-burned
sites (4.1 percent) and low at ungrazed-unburned sites (1.5 percent)
(CH2M Hill 2006, p. 6-2). Bunchgrass cover and native plant cover was
also highest in grazed-burned sites on Tulare Hill in 2005, 3.5 percent
for bunchgrasses and 58 percent for native plant cover (CH2M Hill p. 6-
2).
We also find that the essential features in all occupied final
critical habitat units may require special management considerations or
protection due to the threat posed by illegal collecting. The
collecting of butterflies as a hobby is well known. The collection and
trade of butterflies, especially rare species, is well documented. The
Bay checkerspot butterfly's rarity and beauty make it a desirable
addition to butterfly collections. Because butterfly numbers are so
low, the collection of even a few individuals could harm the butterfly
population. Collecting is illegal without a permit from the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service. Providing the public information regarding the
detrimental effects of collecting rare species may assist in the
conservation of Bay checkerspot butterfly.
We have determined that the essential features in all final
critical habitat units may require special management considerations or
protection due to the threat posed by overgrazing or undergrazing.
Although grazing is frequently used as a management tool to reduce
standing biomass of nonnative vegetation, overgrazing can be a
potential threat if grazing densities are not appropriately managed.
Huenneke et al. (1990, p. 489) and Weiss (1999, p. 1480) found that
areas that were fenced to prevent grazing or sites where grazing had
been removed resulted in an increase in annual grasses, which crowd out
forbs including those that are essential to the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. Forbs continued to be an important component in areas that
included limited grazing. Therefore, we consider limited grazing to be
primarily beneficial to Bay checkerspot habitat.
We also find that the essential features in all final critical
habitat units may require special management considerations or
protection due to the threats posed by gopher control. Larval host
plants have been observed to stay green and edible longer when located
on or near soils recently tilled by gophers (Thomomys bottae) (Singer
1972, p. 75; Murphy et al. 2004, p. 26). Huenneke et al. (1990, p. 490)
hypothesized that soil disturbance by gophers may limit the performance
of grasses similar to results caused by grazing, with grazers reducing
the standing grass biomass in a system, which allowed the persistence
of small forbs. Larval host plants that stay green longer into the dry
season may allow prediapause larva to reach the fourth instar.
[[Page 50422]]
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
Geospatial datasets were used within ArcGIS/ArcMap 9.2
(Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California) and
analyzed to define the areas that best contain the features that are
essential to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. To
delineate the units of critical habitat, we plotted all occurrence
records of Bay checkerspot butterfly from the time of listing to the
present on maps as polygons. We then examined whether these areas
supported the PCEs.
We have defined critical habitat in this rule as: (1) Those
grasslands on serpentine or serpentine-like soils containing the PCEs
that were occupied by the Bay checkerspot butterfly at the time of
listing in 1987, and (2) those grasslands on serpentine or serpentine-
like soils containing the PCEs that have been occupied since the time
of listing. Units did not have to contain all PCEs. We used information
compiled for the proposed and final listing rules; reports prepared by
San Mateo County Parks, Santa Clara County Parks, the CNDDB,
researchers, and consultants; and published and unpublished literature
to identify the specific locations occupied by the Bay checkerspot
butterfly at the time of listing and currently occupied.
The currently occupied habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly is
highly fragmented and isolated; the majority of all extant occurrences
are within an approximate 9-mile (14.5-kilometer) radius in Santa Clara
County, California. The population estimates in San Mateo County are
extremely small and those in Santa Clara County have declined
significantly in recent years. As a result of population declines and
fragmented habitats, we are designating all areas currently known to
support the Bay checkerspot butterfly as critical habitat.
Several areas occupied by the Bay checkerspot butterfly at the time
of listing are not currently occupied. Some of these areas have been
surveyed since listing and no Bay checkerspot butterflies were
observed; however, not all of the units have been recently surveyed
and, due to the metapopulation dynamics of the subspecies, it is
possible that the subspecies has recolonized some of these areas. The
metapopulation dynamics of the subspecies have shown that population
fluctuations occur and extirpation and recolonization is a normal
occurrence for the Bay checkerspot butterfly (Ehrlich et al. 1975, pp.
221-228; 1980; Harrison 1994, pp. 111-128). The units that have been
surveyed since the time of listing without observations of the
subspecies include Pulgas Ridge and Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve in
San Mateo County, California. We are designating these areas as
critical habitat because they were all occupied at the time of listing
and currently contain the features essential to the conservation of the
species and designation of these units will reduce the likelihood of
extinction by providing source (larger patches of high-quality habitat)
or sink (small patches of marginal habitat) areas and ``stepping
stone'' (often smaller, unconnected areas that bridge the distance
between larger blocks of suitable habitat) habitats for the subspecies.
Since the Bay checkerspot butterfly is susceptible to extreme weather
events these additional units in San Mateo County will also reduce the
risk of extinction from stochastic natural events and extreme weather
conditions, and will help to ensure survival of the subspecies by
providing potential dispersal habitat for individuals that were
reintroduced to Edgewood Park early in 2007.
The distribution of critical habitat areas (occupied and currently
unoccupied) was selected to help reduce the level of habitat
fragmentation associated with a federal agency action within the
geographic range of the Bay checkerspot butterfly by providing
dispersal and recolonization opportunities for the subspecies. The
butterfly is considered relatively sedentary (Ehrlich 1965, p. 333;
Harrison 1989, pp. 50-51; Singer and Hanski 2004, p. 187) and reduced
fragmentation should facilitate movements between habitat patches.
McKechnie et al. (1975, p. 561) observed that, out of several years of
mark recapture studies, only 1.7 percent of males and 4.8 percent of
females moved a distance of approximately 1,600 feet (ft) (500 meter
(m)). These figures are consistent with observations made by Weiss
(1996, p. 93) who reported that adult movement declined with increasing
distance with only about 5 percent moving between 656 to 984 ft (200 to
300 m).
Although the butterfly is considered sedentary, long-distance
movements have been documented. The longest documented movements
observed by Harrison (1989, p. 1239) were 3.5 mi (5.6 km) for one male
and 2 mi (3.2 km) for one female. Murphy (Service 2001, p. 21451)
reported movement of Bay checkerspot butterflies of 4.7 mi (7.6 km).
Harrison et al. (1988, p. 371) hypothesized that habitats greater than
4.3 to 5.0 mi (7 to 8 km) from a source population (Coyote Ridge in the
study) were unlikely to ever sustain populations of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. This hypothesis was based on the presence or absence of
adult Bay checkerspot butterflies in Santa Clara County in apparently
suitable habitat and their relative distance from Coyote Ridge. The
study was not designed to predict the Bay checkerspot butterfly's upper
limit of dispersal. Harrison (1989, p. 371) hypothesized that the rate
of colonization, relative to the rate of extinction, was too low to
maintain populations of the Bay checkerspot butterfly on distant
habitat patches (distant from a source patch; that is, greater than 5.0
mi (8 km)). Harrison et al. (1988) modeled two scenarios: (1) 50-year
extinction (based on patterns of extreme drought in California), and
(2) continuous extinction (based on stepping stone habitat or
population). The continuous model indicated that a small habitat patch
(2.22 ac (0.9 ha)) would experience extinction events once every 1 to
13 years, while larger patches (615.29 ac (249 ha)) would go extinct
once every 12 to 26 years (Harrison et al. 1988, p. 377). The rate of
colonization in Harrison et al. (1988) was variable and depended on
both habitat patch size as well as distance from a source population.
Given the subspecies' historical distribution, its metapopulation
dynamics, and its sedentary tendencies, reducing habitat fragmentation,
by designating occupied and currently unoccupied habitats that provide
quality stepping stone habitat, will increase the likelihood of
recolonization of more distant patches of suitable habitat.
We have determined that, due to the limited availability of habitat
for the subspecies, its limited distribution, and its generally low
dispersal tendencies, the long-term conservation of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly is dependent upon the protection of all habitat that was
occupied at the time of listing as well as additional habitat that is
currently occupied. The presence of all six PCEs was not a requirement
to designating a unit as critical habitat; however, all 12 units
currently support all six PCEs.
When determining the revisions to critical habitat boundaries for
this final rule, we made every effort to avoid including developed
areas such as buildings, paved areas, and other structures that lack
PCEs for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. 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 such structures and the land under them at the time of this
designation and inadvertently left inside critical habitat boundaries
shown on the maps of this
[[Page 50423]]
final critical habitat have been excluded by text in this final rule.
Therefore, Federal actions limited to these areas would not trigger
section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification unless they may affect the
subspecies or primary constituent elements in adjacent critical
habitat.
All final critical habitat units are within areas that we have
determined were occupied at the time of listing or are currently
occupied, and are the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement of
areas containing the PCEs to constitute the physical and biological
features essential to the conservation of the species, which support
the life history functions of the species.
Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act authorizes us to issue permits for
the take of listed animal species incidental to otherwise lawful
activities. An incidental take permit application must be supported by
an HCP that identifies conservation measures that the permittee agrees
to implement to minimize and mitigate the impacts on the species by the
requested incidental take. We often exclude non-Federal public lands
and private lands that are covered by an existing operative HCP and
executed implementation agreement (IA) under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act from designated critical habitat because the benefits of such
exclusions outweigh the benefits of inclusion as discussed in section
4(b)(2) of the Act. To date, two HCPs, Pacific Gas and Electric's
(PG&E) Metcalf Evendale-Monta Vista Line and their Metcalf-El Patio and
Hicks-Vasona Lines, are the only HCPs that have been completed that
include the Bay checkerspot butterfly as a covered species. PG&E's
Evendale-Monta Vista Line HCP was issued in 1998, was in effect for 3
years, and covered approximately 4 ac (1.6 ha). Because this HCP has
expired, we are not excluding lands once covered under this HCP. PG&E's
Metcalf-El Patio and Hicks-Vasona Lines HCP covers temporary effects to
2.4 ac (0.97 ha). The HCP was issued in 2008 and is in effect for a
period of 3 years. Because this HCP covers temporary effects, covers
only a small area, and is in effect for only 3 years, we are not
excluding lands covered under this HCP. We re-evaluated our proposed
exclusion of the San Bruno Mountain HCP and determined not to do so on
the basis of the record before us. Our decision considered the non-
inclusion of the Bay checkerspot butterfly as a covered species under
the current HCP, and the inadequacy of existing funding mechanisms to
implement specific conservation measures to conserve and protect the
features essential to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. (See ``Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act'').
Stanford University is developing an HCP for lands owned by Stanford
University that includes the Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve (Unit 3);
however, as currently proposed, this HCP would not include the Bay
checkerspot butterfly or any other butterfly species, so lands covered
by this HCP are not being excluded. Santa Clara County is currently
developing a regional HCP that would encompass the majority of Santa
Clara County, including all critical habitat units in the county (Units
4 through 13). This HCP is in the early stages of development, and as
proposed would include the Bay checkerspot butterfly. However, the
Santa Clara County HCP is not expected to be finalized until summer of
2010; therefore, we are not excluding lands that may be covered by this
HCP.
Revised Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating 13 units as critical habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. These units, which generally correspond to those
units in the 2007 proposed revised designation, when finalized, would
entirely replace the current critical habitat designation for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly at 50 CFR 17.95(i).
Table 1 and 2 shows the occupancy of each final revised critical
habitat unit and the approximate area encompassed within each final
revised critical habitat unit with land ownership.
TABLE 1. Occupancy of revised critical habitat units for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Occupied at time Currently Acres
Unit of listing occupied (Hectares)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: San Bruno Yes No 775 (314)
Mountain
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: Pulgas Yes No 179 (72)
Ridge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: Edgewood Yes Yes 409 (166)
Park
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: Jasper Yes No 329 (133)
Ridge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: Metcalf Yes Yes 4,503 (1,822)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Tulare Yes Yes 348 (141)
Hill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 7: Santa Yes Yes 3,278 (1,327)
Teresa Hills
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 8: Calero Yes Yes 1,543 (624)
Reservoir
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 9: Kalana
Hills Yes Yes 170 (69)
Subunit 9A Yes Yes 56 (23)
Subunit 9B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 10: Hale Yes Yes 507 (205)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 11: Bear No Yes 283 (114)
Ranch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 12: San Yes Yes 467 (189)
Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 13: Kirby Yes Yes 5,446 (2,204)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 18,293 (7,403)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 50424]]
TABLE 2. Revised critical habitat units for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly.[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit
boundaries in acres (hectares).]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State or Total Area
Unit Federal Local Private Designated
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 1: San 0 577 (234) 198 (80) 775 (314)
Bruno Mt.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 2: Pulgas 0 179 (72) 0 179 (72)
Ridge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 3: 0 309 (165) 0 409 (166)
Edgewood Park
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 4: Jasper 0 0 329 (133) 329 (133)
Ridge
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 5: 0 123 (50) 4,380 (1,772) 4,503
Metcalf (1,822)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 6: Tulare 0 14 (6) 334 (135) 348 (141)
Hill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 7: Santa 0 425 (172) 2,853 (1,155) 3,278
Teresa Hills (1,327)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 8: Calero 0 1,543 (624) 0 1,543
Reservoir (624)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 9: Kalana
Hills 0 0 170 (69) 170 (69)
Subunit 9A 0 0 56 (23) 56 (23)
Subunit 9B
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 10: Hale 0 0 507 (205) 507 (205)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 11: Bear 0 283 (114) 0 283 (114)
Ranch
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 12: San 0 0 467 (189) 467 (189)
Martin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit 13: Kirby 0 90 (37) 5,356 (2,167) 5,446
(2,204)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total 0 3,643 (1,475) 14,650 18,293
(5,928) (7,403)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We present brief descriptions of all units, and reasons why they
meet the definition of critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly, below.
Unit 1: San Bruno Mountain
Unit 1 consists of 775 ac (314 ha) in San Mateo County. The unit is
primarily within San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, and is
entirely within the boundaries of the San Bruno Mountain Area Habitat
Conservation Plan. This unit was occupied at the time of listing and
contains all the features essential for the conservation of the
subspecies; however, the Bay checkerspot butterfly has not been
observed in this unit since a wildfire in 1986 and is currently
unoccupied. Unit 1 represents the most northerly part of the
subspecies' range on the San Francisco peninsula. Unit 1 is necessary
as a supporting element of the San Mateo metapopulation because it
represents the largest area of contiguous native grassland habitat that
can support the Bay checkerspot butterfly's host and nectar plants
within San Mateo County. This unit currently supports populations of
the federally endangered Callippe silverspot butterfly (Speyeria
callippe callippe), endangered San Bruno elfin butterfly (Callophrys
mossii bayensis), and endangered Mission blue butterfly (Icaricia
icarioides missionensis), which share some of the habitat requirements
as the Bay checkerspot butterfly (such as native grasslands). The
majority of this unit, approximately 577 ac (234 ha), is within the
boundaries of the San Bruno Mountain State and County Park, while the
rest of the unit is privately owned (198 ac (80 ha)). The distance
between Unit 1 and the most proximate unit, Unit 2, is greater than the
published dispersal distance of the Bay checkerspot butterfly; however,
numerous small patches of intervening grasslands may serve as
additional stepping stones to potentially allow for movement between
these two units. These patches of grassland habitat are not designated
as critical habitat because the Service has no information regarding
the presence of sufficient PCEs within these areas.
Unit 2: Pulgas Ridge
Unit 2 consists of 179 ac (72 ha) in San Mateo County. The unit is
located north of the intersection of Interstate 280 and Highway 92,
east of Crystal Springs Reservoir. This unit was occupied at the time
of listing and contains all the features essential for the conservation
of the subspecies. Since listing, Bay checkerspot butterflies in this
unit have been extirpated, and the unit is currently unoccupied.
However, the Bay checkerspot butterfly formerly inhabited this unit,
and the unit still contains all the PCEs. The land within this unit is
owned by San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) and is part
of the Peninsula watershed and not subject to development. This unit
provides habitat for the subspecies, especially in years with
particularly favorable weather conditions that support expanding
populations of Bay checkerspot butterflies; represents a stepping stone
location to nearby units; and secures the metapopulation dynamics of
the subspecies by providing adjacent or dispersal habitat for the
subspecies. According to the Peninsula watershed management plan (SFPUC
2002, pp. 2-11), portions of the watershed currently support
populations of the endangered San Bruno elfin butterfly and the
endangered Mission blue butterfly that share similar habitat
requirements as the Bay checkerspot butterfly (including native
grasslands). In addition, according to the environmental impact
statement for the Peninsula watershed management plan (SFPD 2001, p.
XLB-7), portions of the watershed have a high probability of supporting
the Bay checkerspot butterfly and are designated as serpentine
grassland habitat.
Unit 3: Edgewood Park
Unit 3 consists of 409 ac (166 ha) in San Mateo County. This unit
is comprised primarily of the Edgewood Park and Natural Preserve, a San
Mateo
[[Page 50425]]
County park located east of the junction of Edgewood Road and
Interstate 280. A portion of the unit, approximately 141 ac (57 ha), is
owned by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission and is part of
the Peninsula watershed. This unit was occupied at the time of listing,
is currently occupied, and contains all the features essential to the
conservation of the subspecies. Until recently, this unit supported the
main population of Bay checkerspot butterflies within the San Mateo
metapopulation. However, the subspecies was last observed here in 2002,
after a steady decline beginning in the late 1990s. Larval Bay
checkerspot butterflies were reintroduced to this unit in early 2007.
The population of Bay checkerspot butterflies within this unit has been
described as the only core population in San Mateo County, and without
Bay checkerspot butterflies in this unit, the subspecies in San Mateo
County is unlikely to persist, which would leave only the one
metapopulation in Santa Clara County and the loss of Unit 3 would
constitute a significant range reduction for the subspecies.
Unit 4: Jasper Ridge
Unit 4 consists of 329 ac (133 ha) in San Mateo County. The unit is
entirely contained within Stanford University's Jasper Ridge Biological
Preserve. The unit is 4 mi (7 km) southeast of Unit 3 and 23 mi (37 km)
west-northwest of Unit 5, and represents the closest connection to the
Santa Clara County metapopulation. This unit was occupied at the time
of listing and contains all the features essential to the conservation
of the subspecies. Dozens of published scientific papers about the
Jasper Ridge population of the Bay checkerspot butterfly exist. The
population was almost extirpated by prolonged drought in the late 1970s
and again in the late 1980s. The unit was occupied at the time of
listing; however the last known observation of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly in this unit was in 1997. The unit is currently unoccupied.
The unit is managed as a biological preserve by Stanford University,
and suitable habitat, containing all the PCEs, continues to be present.
Unit 4 is the closest unit in San Mateo County to populations of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly in Santa Clara County. While currently not
known to be occupied, metapopulation dynamics may allow for natural
recolonization to occur by Bay checkerspot butterflies from the
Edgewood Park Unit (Unit 3). The Jasper Ridge Unit is the closest
suitable habitat with sufficient PCEs to the recently reintroduced
Edgewood Park population and is necessary to support and maintain the
Edgewood Park population, which in turn supports the metapopulation
dynamics of the Bay checkerspot butterfly in San Mateo County.
Unit 5: Metcalf
Unit 5 consists of 4,503 ac (1,822 ha) in Santa Clara County. The
unit encompasses Units 10, 11, and 12 as identified in the 2001
designation and is the northern half of Unit 5 as identified in the
2007 proposed revised designation. The unit comprises the northern half
of the ridgeline currently referred to as Coyote Ridge (although in the
past has been referenced as Morgan Hill, Kirby Canyon, and the East
Hills), the majority of which is in private ownership, although
approximately 110 ac (45 ha) are owned by Santa Clara County Parks for
off-road vehicle recreation. To the north the unit is bordered by Yerba
Buena Road near its intersection with U.S. Highway 101 and Metcalf Road
to the south. The unit was occupied at the time of listing, contains
all the features essential to the conservation of the subspecies, and
represents the northern portion of the only remaining core population
of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. Other units in Santa Clara County
depend on the core population as a source for recolonization. The unit
represents the second largest, most contiguous, and highest quality
habitat containing the second largest population of Bay checkerspot
butterflies.
Researchers historically referred to the Bay checkerspot
butterflies within this unit as three populations, Metcalf, San Felipe,
and Silver Creek Hills, and our 2001 designation identified them as
separate units. However, according to Launer (2008, p. 4), there are
likely multiple subpopulations or populations within each of the
historically studied populations, and the four names only represent the
centers of historic study areas. The Metcalf population supported an
estimated 400,000 individuals in 2004, but has suffered a significant
decline down to an estimated 45,000 individuals in 2006 (Weiss 2006, p.
1). The Metcalf population is within the limits of the City of San Jose
and is located on private land. The San Felipe population is also
located on private lands and within the limits of the City of San Jose.
The Service is unaware of any recent surveys of the San Felipe
population; however, the population was estimated at 100,000
individuals in 1999 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). The Silver Creek Hills
population is the last of the three populations within this unit. The
population was considered relatively large, with approximately 115,000
individuals in 1993 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). This population was
significantly affected by the development of a residential area and
associated golf course (Ranch on Silver Creek) in the late 1990s. As a
result of formal consultation on the Ranch on Silver Creek,
approximately 473 ac (191 ha) owned by William Lyon Homes were
preserved under a conservation easement and are being managed for the
Bay checkerspot butterfly. Approximately 40 adults were observed at the
Silver Creek Preserve in 2006 (WRA 2006, p. i).
Unit 6: Tulare Hill
Unit 6 consists of 348 ac (141 ha) in Santa Clara County. The unit
is located in the middle of the Santa Clara Valley, south of San Jose,
and west of the crossing of Metcalf Road and Monterey Highway. The unit
was occupied by the Bay checkerspot butterfly at the time of listing
and is noted as one of the locations occupied in Harrison et al. (1988,
p. 362). The unit is currently occupied, contains all the features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies, and is essential to
the conservation of the subspecies because it acts as a population
center and because it provides a dispersal corridor across Coyote
Valley. This unit is the closest suitable intervening habitat between
the Coyote Ridge core population and most of the other populations in
Santa Clara County, primarily those on the western side of Coyote
Valley. Hundreds of butterflies have been observed on the southern half
of the unit from 2001-2006 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). The highest numbers of
individuals were 2,000 to 3,000 post diapause larvae in 2002, but the
population has declined significantly, and that decline is believed to
be due to lack of grazing over much of the unit (CH2M Hill 2008, p. 8-
8). We have determined that the long-term viability of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly in Santa Clara County depends on the presence of
corridors for dispersal of adults between Coyote Ridge and the other
units in Santa Clara County. Tulare Hill is an ideal location for such
a corridor because of the narrowness of the valley at this location,
the limited amount of development currently present, the presence of
high elevations on the hill that may attract butterflies over the
highways and developed areas, and the presence of suitable habitat on
Tulare Hill itself. Migrant butterflies from either Santa Teresa Hills
or Coyote Ridge may settle on Tulare Hill, contributing individuals to
the population within this unit, and adults
[[Page 50426]]
from Tulare Hill may migrate to the adjacent habitat areas. Locally
owned lands within this unit include parts of Coyote Creek Park,
Metcalf Park, and Santa Teresa County Park totaling approximately 14 ac
(5 ha). Roughly half of Tulare Hill itself is within the limits of the
City of San Jose; the remainder is on private lands in unincorporated
Santa Clara County. Approximately 114 ac (46 ha) of the unit is
currently protected under a conservation easement and is managed for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly by the Land Trust for Santa Clara County.
The unit is bisected by transmission lines from Pacific Gas & Electric
(PG&E), and the operations and maintenance of these lines are the
subject of a Safe Harbor Agreement and Habitat Conservation Agreement
for the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Unit 7: Santa Teresa Hills
Unit 7 consists of 3,278 ac (1,327 ha) in Santa Clara County. The
unit lies north of Bailey Avenue, McKean Road, and Almaden Road; south
of developed areas of the city of Santa Clara; and west of Santa Teresa
Boulevard. The unit abuts Unit 6. This unit was occupied at the time of
listing, although that was not specifically mentioned in the listing
rule. An unspecified number of Bay checkerspot butterflies were
observed in this unit in 1988 (CNDDB 2006, p. 26). The unit is
currently occupied (Arnold 2007, p. 1; H.T Harvey and Associates 1998,
p. 11), and contains the physical and biological features essential to
the conservation of the subspecies. Further, it includes the largest
block of undeveloped habitat containing all the PCEs west of U.S. Route
101 in Santa Clara County. In addition, due to the prevailing winds,
Unit 7 may experience less air pollution (i.e., nitrogen and ammonia
deposition) than the units on the east side of Coyote Valley.
Approximately 425 ac (172 ha) within the unit is owned by Santa Clara
County Department of Parks and Recreation with the remainder of the
unit consisting of private land.
Unit 8: Calero Reservoir
Unit 8 consists of 1,543 ac (624 ha) in Santa Clara County. The
unit is south of McKean Road and east of the town of New Almaden,
Almaden Road, and Alamitos Creek. This unit was occupied at the time of
listing (CNDDB 2006, p. 26), is currently occupied, and contains all
the features essential for the conservation of the subspecies. The unit
is less than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) south of Unit 7 and 1 mi (1.6 km) east of
Unit 9. It is also 3.3 mi (5.3 km) southwest of the core population in
Unit 5, and this distance is well within the dispersal capabilities of
the subspecies; therefore, Unit 8 is an important component of the
species' Santa Clara County metapopulation. The unit is comprised of
over 1,400 ac (567 ha) of mapped serpentine soils on public land. The
majority of the unit is within the Calero County Park and managed by
Santa Clara County Department of Parks and Recreation. The remainder is
owned and managed by the Santa Clara Valley Water District.
Unit 9: Kalana Hills
Unit 9 consists of two separate subunits: Subunit 9A (170 ac (69
ha)) and Subunit 9B (56 ac (22 ha)), totaling 226 ac (91 ha) in Santa
Clara County. The two subunits are located on the southwest side of the
Santa Clara Valley between Laguna Avenue and San Bruno Avenue and are
entirely on private land. Both subunit 9A and 9B were occupied by the
Bay checkerspot butterfly at the time of listing and are noted as one
of the locations occupied in Harrison et al. (1988, p. 362). Adults
were again observed during the last survey of the unit in 1997 (CNDDB
2006, p. 23). The two subunits include four hilltop serpentine
outcrops, which contain all the features essential for the conservation
of the species, and some intervening grassland. The intervening
grassland does not contain the larval host plants or serpentine or
similar soils, but does contain PCEs 1, 3, and 4 and connects the four
serpentine outcrops. Unit 5 lies about 2.1 mi (3.2 km) to the
northeast, Unit 7 is 1 mi (1.6 km) to the northwest, Unit 8 is 1 mi
(1.6 km) to the west, and Unit 10 about 2.2 mi (3.5 km) to the
southeast. The essential physical and biological features in Unit 9
assist in maintaining the metapopulation dynamics of the subspecies by
providing habitat for the subspecies within dispersal distance of
adjacent or nearby critical habitat units. Because of its proximity to
several other large population centers for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly, we expect the Kalana Hills subunits to be regularly occupied
by the subspecies and assist in maintaining the metapopulation dynamics
for the subspecies. If, as is possible given the Bay checkerspot
butterfly's large population swings, the butterfly's population in
these subunits were to become extirpated, the subunits are likely to be
repopulated by Bay checkerspot butterflies immigrating from adjacent
sites. These subunits act as a ``stepping stone'' to adjacent or nearby
units. A portion of the largest and northernmost serpentine outcrop
within subunit 9A is within the limits of the City of San Jose; the
remainder of the subunit is in unincorporated Santa Clara County.
Subunit 9A's northeast boundaries are bordered by the proposed Coyote
Valley Specific Plan.
Unit 10: Hale
Unit 10 consists of 507 ac (205 ha) in Santa Clara County. The unit
is northwest of the City of Morgan Hill, east of Willow Springs Road,
and south of Hale Avenue. The unit name ``Hale'' was changed from
``Morgan Hill'' in our 2007 proposed revised designation based on
comments from peer reviews. This unit was occupied in the late 1980s
and is described in the CNDDB as an ``active site'' (CNDDB 2006) for
the subspecies. The unit was occupied at the time of listing and is
noted as one of the locations occupied in Harrison et al. (1988, p.
362). Adult butterflies were observed in the unit in 1997 (CNDDB 2006).
Unit 10 is essential to the conservation of the subspecies because it
has large areas of serpentine soils and grassland with a variety of
slope exposures, contains all the PCEs, and serves as a ``stepping
stone'' between the southernmost occurrences of the subspecies (Unit
12) and the populations to the north. The unit is 1.5 mi (2.4 km)
southwest of Unit 5 and 2.2 mi (3.5 km) southeast of Unit 9, provides
dispersal habitat from adjacent critical habitat units, and provides
habitat during years with particularly favorable weather conditions
that support expanding populations of the Bay checkerspot butterfly.
This unit is comprised mostly of private property, a portion of which
is within the limits of the City of Morgan Hill and the rest in
unincorporated Santa Clara County.
Unit 11: Bear Ranch
Unit 11 consists of 283 ac (114 ha) in Santa Clara County. The unit
is adjacent to Coyote Reservoir and is entirely contained within the
Coyote Lake-Harvey Bear Ranch County Park. The Bay checkerspot
butterfly was known to occur within this unit in the mid-1970s, but was
considered extirpated in the listing rule; however, Bay checkerspot
butterflies were observed in this unit in 1994, 1997, and 1999 (CNDDB
2006, p. 15; Launer 2000, p. 1). This unit is currently occupied and is
the most southern occurrence of the Bay checkerspot butterfly on the
east side of Coyote Valley. Although we are unable to determine from
the available data that Unit 11 was occupied by the species at the time
of listing, we have determined that this area is essential for the
conservation of the subspecies because it assists in maintaining the
metapopulation dynamics of the subspecies by providing adjacent or
[[Page 50427]]
nearby habitat for Bay checkerspot butterflies to disperse to or to use
as foraging or resting habitat during longer dispersal events. The unit
contains all the features essential for the conservation of the
species. This unit is underlined by both serpentine and serpentine-like
soils. There are two patches of serpentine soils separated north-south
by intermittent woody vegetation; these patches are surrounded by
grasslands underlined by serpentine-like soils that provide adequate
dispersal corridors between the two patches.
Unit 12: San Martin
Unit 12 consists of 467 ac (189 ha) in Santa Clara County. The unit
is located in the western foothills of the Santa Clara Valley. This
unit was occupied at the time of listing, is currently occupied, and
contains all the features essential for the conservation of the
subspecies. The unit has extensive areas of serpentine soils
interspersed with grasslands that have PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 5. These areas
are important for dispersal between higher quality habitats within the
unit that contain all the necessary features essential for conservation
of the subspecies. The unit lies entirely on private lands in
unincorporated Santa Clara County, about 4 mi (6.4 km) west-southwest
of Unit 11, 4 mi (6.4 km) southeast of Unit 10, and 6 mi (9.6 km) south
of Unit 5's core area. This unit is the southernmost occurrence of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly. The adjacent Cordevalle Golf Club has
purchased approximately 298 ac (121 ha) of property within the unit,
has developed a management plan for the property, and is currently
working to establish a conservation easement for preservation as open
space. A portion of the proposed open space, approximately 42.3 ac
(17.1 ha), will be managed to benefit serpentine species including the
Bay checkerspot butterfly. The remainder of the unit is privately
owned.
Unit 13: Kirby
Unit 13 consists of 5,446 ac (2,204 ha) in Santa Clara County. The
unit encompasses Unit 8 identified in the 2001 designation and is the
southern half of Unit 5 as identified in the 2007 revised proposed
rule. The unit comprises the southern half of the ridgeline currently
referred to as Coyote Ridge (but as noted above has been referred to by
a variety of names in the past), the majority of which is in private
ownership. To the north the unit is bordered by Metcalf Road, to the
southwest by U.S. Highway 101, and Metcalf Road to the south. The unit
was occupied at the time of listing, contains all the features
essential to the conservation of the subspecies, and represents the
southern portion of the only remaining core population of the Bay
checkerspot butterfly (Unit 5 contains the northern portion of the core
population). Other units in Santa Clara County depend on the core
population as a source for recolonization. The unit represents the
largest, most contiguous, and highest quality habitat containing the
largest population of Bay checkerspot butterflies.
The Kirby population is the southernmost of the four historically
studied populations and has consistently had the largest numbers of Bay
checkerspot butterflies. The Kirby area had an estimated 700,000
individuals in 2004, 100,000 individuals in 2005 (Weiss 2006, p. 1),
and 40,000 in 2007 (CH2M Hill p. 8-8). Although still under private
ownership, approximately 291 ac (118 ha) of the Kirby area is under
some form of protection or management for special status species,
including the Bay checkerspot butterfly. In addition, a 250-ac (101-ha)
butterfly preserve is being managed by Waste Management Incorporated
(WMI) as compensation for adverse effects to the Bay checkerspot
butterfly in association with its landfill. However, the protection
afforded the butterfly preserve is not permanent, and the land the
preserve is on is not owned by WMI. Approximately 90 ac (37 ha) is
owned by the Santa Clara Department of Parks and Recreation.
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 jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify designated critical habitat. Decisions by
the Fifth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
definition of ``destruction or adverse modification'' (50 CFR 402.02)
(see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378
F. 3d 1059 (9th Cir 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442F (5th Cir 2001)), and we do not rely
on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is
likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain
functional (or retain the current ability for the PCEs to be
functionally established) to serve its intended conservation role for
the species.
Under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, 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 critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that are likely to
adversely affect listed species or 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 sometimes 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
[[Page 50428]]
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
Federal activities that may affect the Bay checkerspot butterfly or
its designated critical habitat will require section 7(a)(2)
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 under section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from us under section 10(a)(1)(B)
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
examples of agency actions that may be subject to the section 7(a)(2)
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 carried out, do not
require section 7(a)(2) 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 continue 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 the Bay checkerspot
butterfly.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to 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 the Bay checkerspot butterfly include, but are not
limited to:
(1) Actions that would cause ground disturbance, including, but not
limited to, trenching, grading, and discing. Ground disturbance would
likely result in the loss of larval and adult food plants and in an
increased mortality of larvae as a result of starvation. Individual Bay
checkerspot butterfly larvae, pupae, and eggs could be crushed during
any of these activities. A reduction in adult nectar sources could
result in reduced fecundity and longevity of females, and possibly
reduced longevity of males. Ground disturbance may also result in a
reduction in the number of stable holes and cracks that larvae use
during diapause, which would result in an increased risk of predation.
(2) Actions that would remove, destroy, or alter vegetation,
including, but not limited to, changes in grazing regimes (such as
increase or decrease in livestock density, changes in frequency or
timing of grazing, or removal of all grazing), prescribed burns
(generally limited to short-term effects), or other vegetation
management strategies that reduce densities of the larval and adult
host plants. These actions would have similar effects as those
associated with ground disturbance, such as loss of larval and adult
food plants. Prescribed burns may also result in direct injury or
mortality to larvae, pupae, and eggs if conducted during the fall or
early spring. Grazing is likely to result in some individual larvae,
eggs, and pupae being trampled or inadvertently eaten.
(3) Construction activities that destroy, degrade, or fragment
critical habitat, such as urban and suburban development (e.g.,
subdivisions, road building, placement of utilities, golf courses,
trail construction, off-road vehicle use). These activities could
result in the permanent loss of habitat or create barriers to movement
between patches of habitat. Construction activities could result in
crushing of both larval and adult food plants as well as larvae, pupae,
and eggs. Adults may be injured or killed as a result of collisions
with vehicles. In addition, larvae crossing open areas of construction
sites in search of edible host plants could be trampled. Urban
development could also cause changes in hydrology of Bay checkerspot
butterfly habitat. The presence of unseasonal water could result in an
alteration in the life cycle of larval and adult food plants, such that
plant growth and blooming are out of phase with the life cycle of the
subspecies, resulting in increased mortality of both larvae and adults.
Artificially wet conditions may also result in an increase in parasites
or diseases that could reduce larval and adult survival. In addition,
changes in hydrology that result in reduced water levels in nearby
creeks could result in increased mortality of adults during periods of
prolonged spring drought. Activities that result in direct loss of
habitat would also result in direct loss of individuals of all life
stages of the Bay checkerspot butterfly. Loss of habitat patches that
are ``stepping stone'' habitats would result in increased distances
between other patches of suitable habitat and reduce the likelihood of
distant patches being colonized, thus disrupting the metapopulation
dynamics of the subspecies and resulting in a decrease in the stability
of core populations and possible extinction of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly.
(4) Direct application on, or drift onto, critical habitat of
pesticides, herbicides, fertilizers, or other chemicals or biological
agents. Drift or runoff of chemicals, pesticides, and other biological
agents could kill or injure Bay checkerspot butterflies through direct
toxicity or by harming their food plants.
(5) Deposition or release onto critical habitat of nitrogen
compounds, such as NOx and ammonia. Nitrogen deposition
(i.e., NOx and ammonia) in and around Bay checkerspot
butterfly habitat would result in nutrient enrichment of serpentine and
serpentine-like soils. This enrichment allows for the successful
invasion of exotic and invasive plants, which out-compete nativeforbs
and grasses, into serpentine grasslands, resulting in lower densities
of larval and adult food plants. Lower densities of both larval and
adult food plants would result in fewer larval and adult Bay
checkerspot butterflies.
We have determined that all of the units designated contain
features essential to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. All units are within the geographic range of the species,
all were occupied by the species at the time of listing or are
currently occupied (based on most recent observations made), and all
are likely or have the potential to be used by the Bay checkerspot
butterfly. Federal agencies already consult with us on activities in
areas currently occupied by the Bay checkerspot butterfly, as well as
unoccupied critical habitat units, to ensure that their actions, which
may affect the species or its designated critical habitat, are not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Bay checkerspot
butterfly or result in adverse modification of critical habitat.
Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate critical
habitat on the basis of the best scientific information available and
to consider economic, national security and other relevant impacts of
designating a particular area as critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2) of
the Act allows the Secretary to exclude areas from critical habitat if
the Secretary determines that the benefits of such exclusion exceed the
benefits of designating the area as critical habitat.
[[Page 50429]]
However, this exclusion cannot occur unless the Secretary determines
that it will not result in the extinction of the species concerned.
Following the publication of the proposed critical habitat
designation, we conducted an economic analysis to estimate the
potential economic effect of the designation. On April 15, 2008, we
published a notice of availability (73 FR 20237), the draft analysis
(dated March 12, 2008), and we accepted public comments on the draft
document from April 15, 2008 to May 15, 2008. We received two public
comments related to the draft economic analysis. A final analysis of
the potential economic effects of the designation was developed
(Berkeley Economic Consulting 2008), taking into consideration any
relevant new information.
The primary purpose of the economic analysis is to estimate the
potential economic impacts associated with the designation of revised
critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly. This information is
intended to assist the Secretary in making decisions about whether the
benefits of excluding particular areas from the designation outweigh
the benefits of including those areas in the designation. This economic
analysis considers the economic efficiency effects that may result from
the designation, including habitat protections that may be co-extensive
with the listing of the subspecies. It also addresses distribution of
impacts, including an assessment of the potential effects on small
entities and the energy industry. This information can be used by the
Secretary to assess whether the effects of the designation might unduly
burden a particular group or economic sector.
The economic analysis quantifies impacts associated with the
conservation of Bay checkerspot butterfly including future urban
development, management of invasive plants, pesticide use, and
overgrazing or undergrazing. These activities were identified as
factors that may require special management (72 FR 48183-48184). Pre-
designation (1987 to 2007) impacts associated with species conservation
activities in areas designated as critical habitat are estimated at
approximately $9 million in 2007 dollars. The final EA forecasts
baseline economic impacts in the areas designated to be approximately
$390 million ($24 million annualized) (2008 dollars) applying a 3
percent discount rate over the next 22 years and $270 million ($24
million annualized) (2008 dollars) applying a 7 percent discount rate
over the next 22 years. The final EA forecasts incremental economic
impacts to be approximately $0 to $750,000 ($0 to $44,000 annualized)
(2008 dollars) applying a 3 percent discount rate over the next 22
years. The cost estimates are based on the proposed revised designation
of critical habitat published in the Federal Register on August 22,
2007 (72 FR 48178).
The final EA considers the potential economic effects of actions
relating to the conservation of the Bay checkerspot butterfly,
including costs associated with sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act, as
well as costs attributable to the designation of revised critical
habitat. It further considers the economic effects of protective
measures taken as a result of other Federal, State, and local laws that
aid habitat conservation for the Bay checkerspot butterfly in areas
containing features essential to the conservation of the species. The
final EA considers both economic efficiency and distributional effects.
In the case of habitat conservation, efficiency effects generally
reflect the ``opportunity costs'' associated with the commitment of
resources to comply with habitat protection measures (such as lost
economic opportunities associated with restrictions on land use).
The final EA also addresses how potential economic impacts are
likely to be distributed, including an assessment of any local or
regional impacts of habitat conservation and the potential effects of
conservation activities on government agencies, private businesses, and
individuals. The final EA measures lost economic efficiency associated
with residential and commercial development and public projects and
activities, such as economic impacts on water management and
transportation projects, Federal lands, small entities, and the energy
industry. Decision-makers can use this information to assess whether
the effects of the revised designation might unduly burden a particular
group or economic sector. Finally, the final EA looks retrospectively
at costs that have been incurred since the date we listed the Bay
checkerspot butterfly as endangered (52 FR 35366, September 18, 1987)
and considers those costs that may occur in the 22 years following the
designation of critical habitat. Because the final EA considers the
potential economic effects of all actions relating to the conservation
of the Bay checkerspot butterfly, including costs associated with
sections 4, 7, and 10 of the Act and those attributable to a revised
designation of critical habitat, the final EA may have overestimated
the potential economic impacts of the revised critical habitat
designation.
The final economic analysis is available at http://
www.regulations.gov and http://www.fws.gov/sacramento or upon request
from the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
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.'' There are no Department of Defense lands with a
completed integrated natural resources management plan within this
final revised critical habitat designation.
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must designate
or 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 sections, we address a number
of general issues that are relevant to the exclusions we have
considered.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, 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. Before we may
exclude an area, we must determine that
[[Page 50430]]
the exclusion would not result in the extinction of the species.
Portions of Units 5, 6, 12, and 13 are currently protected or
proposed for protection. Not all areas protected are under conservation
easements, some are protected through other means such as fee title,
deed restrictions, etc. (see unit descriptions above for acreages).
Some easements were established for the protection of the California
red-legged frog (Rana aurora draytonii) or the California tiger
salamander (Ambystoma californiense), while others were established for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly. These areas were considered for
exclusion, but were not excluded from this final revised designation of
critical habitat because some of them do not have management plans and
some only provide management plans for the tiger salamander or the
California red-legged frog. Those areas with conservation easements
that specifically provide protection for the Bay checkerspot butterfly
were not considered for exclusion because the easements are not
believed to be sufficiently funded to adequately deal with nonnative
invasive plants, such as the recent invasion of barbed goat grass
(Aegilops triuncialis). A conservation easement that has been proposed
for a portion of Unit 12 has not been finalized and has also not been
excluded in this final rule.
San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan (SBMHCP)
After consideration under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are not
excluding lands covered under the SBMHCP. The SBMHCP was originally
completed in November 1982, and we issued a 30-year section 10(a)(1)(B)
permit to the permittees on March 4, 1983. The permit (PRT 2-9818)
expires on March 4, 2013, unless it is renewed (Jones and Stokes 2007,
pp. 1-2). San Bruno Mountain is located on the northern end of the San
Francisco Peninsula, south of the San Mateo-San Francisco County line,
and is bordered to the north by Daly City, to the east by the City of
Brisbane, to the south by the City of South San Francisco, and to the
west by the City of Colma. The SBMHCP is comprised of 3,600 ac (1,457
ha), of which approximately 3,500 ac (1,416 ha) are open space. To
date, there have been four amendments to the SBMHCP. A notice of
availability for a draft of amendment five was published in the Federal
Register on April 15, 2008 (73 FR 20324). The draft of amendment five
to the SBMHCP includes proposed and ongoing conservation actions
designed to benefit both the Bay checkerspot butterfly and Callippe
silverspot butterfly. Conservation actions include: (1) Vegetation
management (prescribed fire, mowing, and grazing); (2) replanting and
restoration; (3) monitoring; and (4) approximately $ 4 million in an
endowment for ongoing habitat management. The Service expects amendment
five, if approved, would provide substantial protection for all of the
primary constituent elements (PCEs) for the Bay checkerspot butterfly,
and that protected lands will receive the special management required
through funding mechanisms that will be implemented under amendment
five of the SBMHCP.
In our August 22, 2007, proposed rule (72 FR 48178), we relied
largely on the draft provisions of amendment five to the SBMHCP as the
basis of the proposed exclusion of Unit 1 from critical habitat. As
stated above, we believed those provisions would significantly
contribute to the conservation of the essential features for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly. However, the finalization of amendment five will
not occur prior to the publication of this final rule. Therefore, our
evaluation of the potential exclusion of Unit 1 is based on the current
provisions of the SBMHCP, as amended by amendments one through four.
The Bay checkerspot butterfly is not currently a covered species
under the SBMHCP. Although all habitat for the Bay checkerspot
butterfly on San Bruno Mountain is contained within the SBMHCP, there
is currently inadequate funding to manage the grasslands within the HCP
in a manner that would conserve the species' larval host and adult
nectar plants (PCE 2). Without management actions (such as grazing,
prescribed burns, and exotic species control) that remove the buildup
of dense stands of grass (thatch), the species' larval host and adult
nectar plants are outcompeted by nonnative vegetation and the Bay
checkerspot butterfly is no longer able to persist. Therefore, without
adequate funding, the current HCP does not provide sufficient
protection for the Bay checkerspot butterfly or the features essential
to the conservation of the species.
Including this area in critical habitat may serve as an educational
tool for potential habitat restoration efforts and potential re-
introduction of the Bay checkerspot butterfly to Unit 1. Inclusion of
these non-Federal lands as critical habitat would not necessitate
additional management and conservation activities that would exceed the
approved SBMHCP and its implementing agreement; however, amendment 5 to
the SBMHCP provides funding to carry out the existing management plan.
As a result, we do not anticipate that any action on these lands would
destroy or adversely modify these areas. Therefore, we do not expect
that including Unit 1 in the final designation would lead to any
changes to actions on the conservation lands to avoid destroying or
adversely modifying that habitat.
Based upon the above considerations, the lands covered under the
SBMHCP in Unit 1have not been excluded in this final revised
designation of critical habitat.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this
rule is not significant under Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB
bases its determination upon the following four criteria:
(a) 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.
(b) Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
(c) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(d) 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), whenever an agency must 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 effects of the rule on small entities (small businesses,
small organizations, and small government jurisdictions). However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of the agency
certifies the rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA amended RFA to require
Federal agencies to provide a 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 the Bay
checkerspot butterfly will not have a
[[Page 50431]]
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The following discussion explains our rationale.
According to the Small Business Administration (SBA), small
entities include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; as well as small businesses. Small businesses include
manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500 employees,
wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees, retail and
service businesses with less than $5 million in annual sales, general
and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5 million in
annual business, special trade contractors doing less than $11.5
million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with annual
sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic impacts to
these small entities are significant, we consider the types of
activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this rule, as
well as the types of project modifications that may result. In general,
the term ``significant economic impact'' is meant to apply to a typical
small business firm's business operations.
To determine if the rule could significantly affect a substantial
number of small entities, we consider the number of small entities
affected within particular types of economic activities. We apply the
``substantial number'' test individually to each industry to determine
if certification is appropriate. However, the SBREFA does not
explicitly define ``substantial number'' or ``significant economic
impact.'' Consequently, to assess whether a ``substantial number'' of
small entities is affected by this designation, this analysis considers
the relative number of small entities likely to be impacted in an area.
In some circumstances, especially with critical habitat designations of
limited extent, we may aggregate across all industries and consider
whether the total number of small entities affected is substantial. In
estimating the number of small entities potentially affected, we also
consider whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
Designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted,
funded, or permitted by Federal agencies. Some kinds of activities are
unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not be affected by
critical habitat designation. In areas where the species is present,
Federal agencies already are required to consult with us under section
7 of the Act on activities they fund, permit, or implement that may
affect the Bay checkerspot butterfly (see Section 7 Consultation
section). Federal agencies also must consult with us if their
activities may affect critical habitat. Designation of critical
habitat, therefore, could result in an additional economic impact on
small entities due to the requirement to reinitiate consultation for
ongoing Federal activities (see Application of the ``Adverse
Modification'' Standard section).
In our economic analysis of this designation, we evaluated the
potential economic effects on small business entities resulting from
conservation actions related to the designation of critical habitat for
the Bay checkerspot butterfly. No entities that are likely to bear
incremental impacts from the rule are identified as small entities.
There are only 5 acres in Unit 1 that are privately owned and may be
affected by critical habitat. By definition, private landowners are not
small businesses. To the extent that a private landowner does operate a
business that relies on the potentially affected land, this would be
considered in this small business analysis. According to the economic
analysis, no information suggests this is the case. The economic
analysis therefore did not forecast impacts to small entities
associated with the designation on private land. Therefore, based on
the above reasoning and currently available information, we certify
that this rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. A regulatory flexibility analysis
is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 801 et
seq.)
Under SBREFA, this rule is not a major rule. Our detailed
assessment of the economic effects of this designation is described in
the economic analysis. Based on the effects identified in the economic
analysis, we believe that this rule will not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more, will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers, and will not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with
foreign-based enterprises. Refer to the final economic analysis for a
discussion of the effects of this determination (see ADDRESSES for
information on obtaining a copy of the final economic analysis).
Executive Order 13211 - Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use
On May 18, 2001, the President issued an Executive Order (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 without the regulatory action under
consideration. The final 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 Bay
checkerspot butterfly conservation activities within the final critical
habitat designation are not expected. 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 (2 U.S.C.
1501), the Service makes the following findings:
(a) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal
governments, or the private sector and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal governments'' with two
exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It also
excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary Federal
program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing Federal
program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually to State,
local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' if the
provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of assistance''
or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Government's
responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local, or Tribal
governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the time of
enactment, these entitlement programs were:
[[Page 50432]]
Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social
Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster
Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; Family Support
Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. ``Federal private
sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose an
enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a condition of
Federal assistance or (ii) a duty arising from participation in a
voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities 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 shift the costs of the large entitlement programs
listed above on to State governments.
(b) Due to current public knowledge of the species' protection, the
prohibition against take of the species both within and outside of the
designated areas, the fact that the majority of the areas are already
designated as critical habitat, and the fact that critical habitat
provides no incremental restrictions, our economic analysis did not
forecast any economic impacts to small governments. Therefore, we do
not anticipate that this rule will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments. As such, a Small Government Agency Plan is not
required.
Takings
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 revised critical habitat for the Bay checkerspot butterfly
in a takings implications assessment. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this designation of revised critical habitat
for the Bay checkerspot butterfly does not pose significant takings
implications.
Federalism
In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this final rule does
not have significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and Department of
Commerce policy, we requested information from, and coordinated
development of, this revised critical habitat designation with
appropriate State resource agencies in California. The designation of
critical habitat in areas currently occupied by the Bay checkerspot
butterfly imposes no additional restrictions to those currently in
place and, therefore, has little incremental impact on State and local
governments and their activities. The designation may have some benefit
to these governments in that the areas that contain the physical and
biological features essential to the conservation of the species are
more clearly defined, and the PCEs necessary to support the life
processes of the species are specifically identified. This information
does not alter where and what federally sponsored activities may occur.
However, it may assist local governments in long-range planning (rather
than having them wait for case-by-case section 7 consultations to
occur).
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office of
the Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in accordance
with the provisions of the Act. This final rule uses standard property
descriptions and identifies the physical and biological features
essential to the conservation of the species within the designated
areas to assist the public in understanding the habitat needs of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
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)
It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the Circuit
Court of the United States for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to
prepare environmental analyses as defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.) 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 assertion was
upheld by the Circuit Court of the United States for the Ninth Circuit
(Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied
516 U.S. 1042 (1996)).
Government-to-Government Relationship with Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
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 have determined that there are no
Tribal lands that meet the definition of critical habitat for the Bay
checkerspot butterfly.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this rulemaking is
available upon request from the Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Author(s)
The primary author of this package is the staff of the Sacramento
Fish and Wildlife Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
[[Page 50433]]
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. Amend Sec. 17.95(i) by revising the entry for ``Bay Checkerspot
Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--wildlife.
(i) Insects.
(Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted for San Mateo and Santa
Clara Counties, California, on the maps below.
(2) The primary constituent elements of critical habitat for the
Bay checkerspot butterfly are the habitat components that provide:
(i) The presence of annual or perennial grasslands with little to
no overstory that provide north-south and east-west slopes with a tilt
of more than 7 degrees for larval host plant survival during periods of
atypical weather (for example, drought). Common grassland species
include wild oats (Avena fatua), soft chess (Bromus hordeaceus),
California oatgrass (Danthonia californica), purple needlegrass
(Nassella pulchra), and Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis); less
abundant in these grasslands are annual and perennial forbs such as
filaree (Erodium botrys), true clovers (Trifolium sp.), dwarf plantain
(Plantago erecta), and turkey mullein (Croton setigerus). These
species, with the exception of dwarf plantain, are not required by the
Bay checkerspot butterfly, but merely are provided here as an example
of species commonly found in California grasslands.
(ii) The presence of the primary larval host plant, dwarf plantain
(Plantago erecta), and at least one of the secondary host plants,
purple owl's-clover (Castilleja densiflora) or exserted paintbrush
(Castilleja exserta), are required for reproduction, feeding, and
larval development.
(iii) The presence of adult nectar sources for feeding. Common
nectar sources include desertparsley (Lomatium spp.), California
goldfields (Lasthenia californica), tidy-tips (Layia platyglossa), sea
muilla (Muilla maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium falcifolium), false
babystars (Linanthus androsaceus), and intermediate fiddleneck
(Amsinckia intermedia).
(iv) Soils derived from serpentinite ultramafic rock (Montara,
Climara, Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo soil series) or similar soils
(Inks, Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and Barnabe soil series) that
provide areas with fewer aggressive, nonnative plant species for larval
host plant and adult nectar plant survival and reproduction.
(v) The presence of stable holes and cracks in the soil, and
surface rock outcrops that provide shelter for the larval stage of the
Bay checkerspot butterfly during summer diapause.
(3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures (such as
buildings, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other paved areas) and the
land on which they are located existing on the effective date of this
rule and not containing one or more of the primary constituent
elements.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created on a base of USGS 7.5' quadrangles using USDA National
Agricultural Imagery Program (NAIP) county-wide MrSID compressed
mosaics of 1 meter resolution and natural color aerial photography from
summer 2005. Critical habitat units were then mapped using Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 10, North American Datum (NAD) 1983
coordinates.
(5) Note: Index map for Bay checkerspot butterfly critical habitat
units follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50434]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.000
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50435]]
(6) Unit 1: San Bruno Mountain, San Mateo County, California. From
USGS 1:24,000 scale quadrangle San Francisco South.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 52853, 4170062; 52856, 4170038; 52862, 4170043; 52866, 4170045;
52889, 4170061; 52915, 4170074; 52940, 4170084; 52970, 4170091; 52991,
4170102; 53010, 4170112; 53036, 4170134; 53057, 4170130; 53070,
4170151; 53089, 4170171; 53112, 4170170; 53135, 4170154; 53153,
4170109; 53184, 4170104; 53203, 4170081; 53207, 4170041; 53201,
4169958; 53214, 4169958; 53241, 4169938; 53257, 4169970; 53281,
4169974; 53303, 4169965; 53323, 4169971; 53344, 4169964; 53355,
4169943; 53374, 4169943; 53402, 4169930; 53404, 4169906; 53428,
4169900; 53458, 4169913; 53489, 4169909; 53527, 4169898; 53563,
4169900; 53592, 4169902; 53627, 4169892; 53656, 4169877; 53671,
4169859; 53713, 4169856; 53710, 4169804; 53665, 4169711; 53618,
4169606; 53604, 4169575; 53559, 4169488; 53521, 4169481; 53492,
4169479; 53478, 4169457; 53474, 4169413; 53454, 4169388; 53434,
4169364; 53387, 4169340; 53357, 4169322; 53336, 4169300; 53317,
4169269; 53301, 4169264; 53287, 4169242; 53260, 4169178; 53235,
4169105; 53164, 4169029; 53100, 4169010; 53101, 4168943; 53069,
4168920; 53013, 4168954; 52936, 4168954; 52882, 4169005; 52824,
4169051; 52752, 4169071; 52718, 4169074; 52650, 4169066; 52628,
4169020; 52610, 4168977; 52552, 4168965; 52580, 4169045; 52440,
4169117; 52362, 4169110; 52352, 4169041; 52235, 4169066; 52242,
4169257; 52198, 4169347; 52168, 4169354; 52159, 4169382; 52152,
4169426; 52142, 4169428; 52127, 4169422; 52107, 4169432; 52094,
4169445; 52088, 4169459; 52083, 4169491; 52068, 4169488; 52054,
4169493; 52049, 4169483; 52049, 4169465; 52046, 4169432; 52038,
4169413; 52024, 4169400; 52010, 4169390; 51996, 4169388; 51993,
4169373; 51990, 4169352; 51989, 4169338; 51977, 4169310; 51954,
4169295; 51930, 4169292; 51912, 4169296; 51896, 4169310; 51876,
4169332; 51849, 4169369; 51827, 4169382; 51815, 4169391; 51792,
4169390; 51759, 4169390; 51747, 4169402; 51752, 4169424; 51760,
4169437; 51769, 4169458; 51771, 4169481; 51797, 4169559; 51721,
4169595; 51695, 4169469; 51667, 4169464; 51647, 4169469; 51623,
4169501; 51589, 4169527; 51592, 4169674; 51570, 4169677; 51550,
4169674; 51508, 4169668; 51477, 4169671; 51435, 4169674; 51423,
4169719; 51419, 4169736; 51408, 4169731; 51394, 4169713; 51379,
4169697; 51354, 4169691; 51341, 4169690; 51337, 4169681; 51315,
4169681; 51303, 4169689; 51279, 4169713; 51229, 4169810; 51184,
4169770; 51171, 4169745; 51155, 4169731; 51135, 4169723; 51129,
4169719; 51129, 4169710; 51129, 4169690; 51127, 4169669; 51118,
4169651; 51104, 4169629; 51086, 4169609; 51061, 4169598; 51035,
4169591; 50999, 4169589; 50967, 4169591; 50935, 4169599; 50913,
4169616; 50896, 4169638; 50882, 4169668; 50844, 4169623; 50831,
4169611; 50810, 4169588; 50792, 4169588; 50777, 4169590; 50760,
4169600; 50748, 4169602; 50738, 4169589; 50731, 4169574; 50731,
4169561; 50736, 4169542; 50740, 4169517; 50741, 4169495; 50736,
4169475; 50729, 4169463; 50723, 4169447; 50722, 4169430; 50718,
4169415; 50710, 4169399; 50701, 4169385; 50690, 4169374; 50679,
4169365; 50674, 4169349; 50664, 4169330; 50655, 4169312; 50635,
4169299; 50623, 4169292; 50613, 4169284; 50613, 4169268; 50597,
4169255; 50583, 4169239; 50580, 4169215; 50583, 4169191; 50613,
4169153; 50665, 4169090; 50650, 4169068; 50617, 4169048; 50572,
4169043; 50542, 4169042; 50519, 4169048; 50498, 4169052; 50483,
4169061; 50461, 4169073; 50444, 4169085; 50387, 4169124; 50362,
4169151; 50346, 4169178; 50322, 4169174; 50297, 4169175; 50279,
4169181; 50235, 4169183; 50203, 4169194; 50169, 4169217; 50139,
4169238; 50122, 4169250; 50104, 4169267; 50081, 4169290; 50073,
4169317; 50068, 4169345; 50069, 4169377; 50070, 4169388; 50068,
4169402; 50068, 4169418; 50076, 4169438; 50087, 4169455; 50087,
4169464; 50068, 4169486; 50054, 4169509; 50044, 4169534; 50035,
4169557; 50033, 4169584; 50034, 4169608; 50040, 4169631; 50045,
4169650; 50050, 4169664; 50055, 4169673; 50059, 4169686; 50068,
4169712; 50078, 4169734; 50090, 4169776; 50096, 4169811; 50117,
4169844; 50136, 4169877; 50152, 4169904; 50180, 4169920; 50235,
4169925; 50279, 4169932; 50323, 4169940; 50364, 4169954; 50399,
4169970; 50412, 4169998; 50435, 4170034; 50460, 4170069; 50490,
4170103; 50485, 4170138; 50482, 4170165; 50479, 4170188; 50491,
4170214; 50483, 4170257; 50495, 4170295; 50515, 4170330; 50547,
4170370; 50580, 4170407; 50613, 4170479; 50624, 4170446; 50640,
4170421; 50667, 4170395; 50706, 4170376; 50730, 4170351; 50756,
4170336; 50784, 4170314; 50799, 4170279; 50794, 4170250; 50767,
4170227; 50774, 4170205; 50811, 4170182; 50851, 4170185; 50881,
4170201; 50892, 4170233; 50944, 4170243; 50957, 4170277; 50980,
4170307; 51017, 4170327; 51050, 4170349; 51063, 4170366; 51069,
4170404; 51069, 4170462; 51093, 4170507; 51112, 4170535; 51128,
4170569; 51159, 4170601; 51180, 4170643; 51195, 4170685; 51203,
4170750; 51268, 4170754; 51274, 4170805; 51322, 4170818; 51364,
4170820; 51385, 4170786; 51354, 4170744; 51345, 4170699; 51303,
4170619; 51206, 4170481; 51188, 4170457; 51133, 4170443; 51104,
4170432; 51101, 4170397; 51113, 4170364; 51119, 4170341; 51150,
4170331; 51167, 4170314; 51187, 4170309; 51214, 4170298; 51227,
4170315; 51243, 4170321; 51262, 4170291; 51287, 4170284; 51316,
4170276; 51343, 4170291; 51382, 4170291; 51427, 4170277; 51455,
4170354; 51495, 4170371; 51506, 4170328; 51536, 4170284; 51569,
4170288; 51589, 4170279; 51614, 4170278; 51628, 4170264; 51622,
4170249; 51626, 4170230; 51629, 4170215; 51643, 4170211; 51657,
4170201; 51673, 4170196; 51689, 4170185; 51711, 4170180; 51736,
4170180; 51767, 4170176; 51793, 4170180; 51823, 4170182; 51845,
4170150; 51843, 4170122; 51871, 4170112; 51874, 4170144; 51879,
4170178; 51893, 4170205; 51914, 4170246; 51916, 4170287; 51943,
4170335; 51944, 4170395; 51956, 4170442; 51967, 4170500; 51964,
4170535; 51947, 4170559; 51929, 4170584; 51937, 4170647; 51943,
4170683; 51944, 4170710; 51919, 4170764; 51916, 4170789; 51925,
4170815; 51944, 4170850; 51955, 4170879; 51974, 4170905; 51980,
4170939; 51981, 4170982; 51997, 4170985; 52017, 4170989; 52040,
4170986; 52056, 4170972; 52076, 4170953; 52091, 4170957; 52113,
4170977; 52150, 4170992; 52173, 4170975; 52186, 4170953; 52150,
4170924; 52147, 4170872; 52166, 4170834; 52169, 4170799; 52160,
4170686; 52125, 4170673; 52125, 4170651; 52160, 4170651; 52157,
4170619; 52131, 4170600; 52141, 4170564; 52173, 4170564; 52176,
4170503; 52128, 4170295; 52125, 4170263; 52134, 4170222; 52153,
[[Page 50436]]
4170202; 52176, 4170190; 52214, 4170190; 52243, 4170206; 52266,
4170196; 52266, 4170129; 52236, 4170086; 52202, 4170051; 52145,
4169994; 52165, 4169960; 52221, 4169933; 52269, 4169930; 52319,
4169895; 52385, 4169894; 52425, 4169868; 52461, 4169881; 52449,
4170010; 52462, 4170073; 52488, 4170158; 52518, 4170166; 52539,
4170168; 52560, 4170160; 52575, 4170162; 52596, 4170173; 52616,
4170174; 52651, 4170154; 52683, 4170159; 52723, 4170154; 52754,
4170155; 52782, 4170155; 52805, 4170147; 52831, 4170134; 52847,
4170094; returning to 52853, 4170062.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50437]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.001
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50438]]
(7) Unit 2: Pulgas Ridge, San Mateo County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangle San Mateo.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 558502, 4151442; 558422, 4151451; 558339, 4151484; 558223,
4151555; 558094, 4151656; 557957, 4151788; 557745, 4152013; 557545,
4152228; 557398, 4152392; 557274, 4152523; 557191, 4152632; 557123,
4152751; 557076, 4152838; 557061, 4152902; 557012, 4153060; 557027,
4153077; 557027, 4153130; 556994, 4153145; 556961, 4153171; 556939,
4153182; 556936, 4153216; 556913, 4153220; 556880, 4153242; 556868,
4153273; 556867, 4153329; 557060, 4153350; 557277, 4153095; 557358,
4153009; 557407, 4152900; 557494, 4152681; 557576, 4152631; 557851,
4152470; 558104, 4152134; 558210, 4152004; 558320, 4151850; 558268,
4151803; 558302, 4151758; 558363, 4151800; 558474, 4151666; 558625,
4151470; 558602, 4151463; 558557, 4151448; returning to 558502,
4151442.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50439]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.002
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50440]]
(8) Unit 3: Edgewood Park, San Mateo County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangle Woodside.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 564162, 4146806; 564197, 4146796; 564234, 4146748; 564270,
4146731; 564196, 4146657; 564182, 4146642; 564169, 4146630; 564154,
4146615; 564142, 4146585; 564128, 4146601; 564108, 4146585; 564097,
4146565; 564092, 4146540; 564078, 4146514; 564061, 4146457; 564032,
4146525; 564003, 4146549; 563949, 4146575; 563903, 4146582; 563868,
4146576; 563834, 4146542; 563809, 4146492; 563808, 4146448; 563842,
4146394; 563811, 4146384; 563774, 4146364; 563747, 4146377; 563726,
4146394; 563702, 4146416; 563668, 4146413; 563684, 4146384; 563656,
4146377; 563626, 4146409; 563555, 4146423; 563533, 4146403; 563533,
4146374; 563520, 4146338; 563543, 4146316; 563596, 4146356; 563604,
4146338; 563576, 4146297; 563520, 4146284; 563450, 4146312; 563396,
4146314; 563360, 4146293; 563338, 4146263; 563340, 4146229; 563365,
4146198; 563424, 4146176; 563464, 4146140; 563488, 4146094; 563459,
4146043; 563420, 4146003; 563361, 4145965; 563305, 4145945; 563215,
4145902; 563106, 4145980; 563077, 4145966; 563050, 4145976; 563014,
4145948; 562923, 4146053; 562820, 4146153; 562674, 4146184; 562550,
4146190; 562503, 4146146; 562432, 4146134; 562367, 4146141; 562337,
4146177; 562290, 4146269; 562106, 4146315; 562126, 4146380; 562087,
4146395; 562148, 4146523; 562121, 4146554; 562162, 4146602; 562260,
4146697; 562284, 4146723; 562369, 4146818; 562418, 4146870; 562467,
4146918; 562548, 4147005; 562667, 4147115; 562724, 4147186; 562744,
4147200; 562771, 4147206; 562796, 4147214; 562816, 4147212; 562849,
4147216; 562862, 4147203; 562874, 4147191; 562858, 4147160; 562876,
4147148; 562907, 4147149; 562915, 4147187; 562936, 4147221; 562955,
4147207; 562963, 4147174; 563001, 4147137; 563034, 4147121; 563052,
4147122; 563063, 4147135; 563063, 4147160; 563070, 4147174; 563098,
4147180; 563141, 4147173; 563179, 4147179; 563199, 4147187; 563196,
4147227; 563164, 4147243; 563156, 4147274; 563140, 4147290; 563124,
4147308; 563103, 4147329; 563087, 4147356; 563093, 4147379; 563113,
4147405; 563138, 4147424; 563196, 4147403; 563228, 4147396; 563247,
4147392; 563256, 4147354; 563275, 4147334; 563304, 4147313; 563304,
4147357; 563312, 4147395; 563324, 4147437; 563329, 4147458; 563336,
4147478; 563334, 4147508; 563354, 4147530; 563371, 4147543; 563411,
4147539; 563440, 4147526; 563465, 4147513; 563468, 4147488; 563457,
4147462; 563446, 4147441; 563436, 4147420; 563429, 4147405; 563422,
4147390; 563415, 4147377; 563414, 4147360; 563406, 4147327; 563408,
4147272; 563443, 4147244; 563457, 4147229; 563480, 4147222; 563502,
4147229; 563517, 4147251; 563534, 4147276; 563553, 4147283; 563569,
4147282; 563595, 4147274; 563623, 4147264; 563646, 4147239; 563645,
4147181; 563608, 4147135; 563604, 4147096; 563609, 4147060; 563647,
4147048; 563675, 4147047; 563668, 4147013; 563671, 4146982; 563673,
4146964; 563675, 4146954; 563669, 4146934; 563697, 4146903; 563739,
4146896; 563788, 4146903; 563825, 4146934; 563853, 4146979; 563862,
4146993; 563882, 4147004; 563902, 4147007; 563915, 4147002; 563912,
4146981; 563900, 4146963; 563883, 4146944; 563881, 4146913; 563889,
4146885; 563888, 4146855; 563858, 4146857; 563817, 4146861; 563749,
4146833; 563727, 4146798; 563744, 4146751; 563776, 4146699; 563799,
4146661; 563863, 4146689; 563971, 4146735; 563979, 4146753; 563997,
4146758; 564017, 4146756; 564030, 4146769; 564048, 4146778; 564080,
4146775; 564099, 4146784; 564131, 4146803; returning to 564162,
4146806.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50441]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.003
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50442]]
(9) Unit 4: Jasper Ridge, San Mateo County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangle Palo Alto.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 569513, 4139881; 569524, 4139862; 569550, 4139849; 569569,
4139829; 569580, 4139812; 569578, 4139791; 569578, 4139780; 569605,
4139771; 569631, 4139770; 569696, 4139789; 569703, 4139764; 569676,
4139743; 569686, 4139716; 569736, 4139668; 569782, 4139670; 569815,
4139659; 569839, 4139671; 569869, 4139687; 569893, 4139716; 569915,
4139714; 569954, 4139692; 569993, 4139680; 570014, 4139658; 570027,
4139642; 570046, 4139627; 569983, 4139608; 568859, 4139177; 568865,
4139205; 568889, 4139237; 568921, 4139265; 568951, 4139280; 568962,
4139308; 568947, 4139319; 568908, 4139319; 568882, 4139319; 568882,
4139327; 568885, 4139340; 568885, 4139353; 568876, 4139355; 568869,
4139342; 568848, 4139319; 568831, 4139278; 568816, 4139261; 568797,
4139250; 568775, 4139252; 568758, 4139261; 568747, 4139261; 568736,
4139274; 568745, 4139299; 568749, 4139323; 568728, 4139344; 568702,
4139342; 568674, 4139342; 568666, 4139342; 568664, 4139362; 568676,
4139387; 568698, 4139407; 568743, 4139411; 568771, 4139411; 568805,
4139411; 568816, 4139441; 568846, 4139490; 568852, 4139520; 568852,
4139527; 568844, 4139531; 568833, 4139507; 568788, 4139495; 568771,
4139495; 568749, 4139505; 568741, 4139527; 568730, 4139548; 568724,
4139548; 568713, 4139531; 568694, 4139518; 568685, 4139503; 568674,
4139501; 568657, 4139501; 568642, 4139495; 568627, 4139484; 568603,
4139473; 568597, 4139499; 568603, 4139512; 568520, 4139578; 568505,
4139565; 568475, 4139565; 568470, 4139574; 568479, 4139595; 568485,
4139621; 568481, 4139625; 568462, 4139617; 568425, 4139604; 568400,
4139604; 568389, 4139623; 568389, 4139641; 568391, 4139668; 568404,
4139688; 568410, 4139705; 568410, 4139722; 568412, 4139741; 568417,
4139746; 568408, 4139752; 568389, 4139737; 568361, 4139718; 568325,
4139694; 568314, 4139694; 568307, 4139703; 568322, 4139737; 568335,
4139765; 568348, 4139791; 568335, 4139793; 568315, 4139789; 568305,
4139799; 568296, 4139814; 568270, 4139808; 568246, 4139783; 568225,
4139748; 568210, 4139748; 568210, 4139778; 568221, 4139803; 568247,
4139836; 568261, 4139857; 568252, 4139870; 568210, 4139863; 568165,
4139858; 568142, 4139865; 568145, 4139890; 568159, 4139919; 568152,
4139934; 568108, 4139937; 568099, 4139966; 568083, 4139989; 568070,
4140011; 568066, 4140038; 568090, 4140032; 568131, 4139998; 568168,
4139984; 568203, 4139975; 568250, 4139976; 568279, 4139979; 568289,
4139967; 568294, 4139945; 568303, 4139922; 568324, 4139914; 568345,
4139906; 568371, 4139896; 568407, 4139913; 568461, 4139913; 568495,
4139923; 568526, 4139951; 568571, 4140000; 568574, 4140034; 568543,
4140051; 568497, 4140049; 568467, 4140066; 568430, 4140076; 568397,
4140063; 568353, 4140055; 568300, 4140059; 568250, 4140072; 568225,
4140087; 568205, 4140107; 568200, 4140141; 568207, 4140177; 568200,
4140183; 568163, 4140157; 568082, 4140161; 568023, 4140180; 568005,
4140193; 567998, 4140211; 568015, 4140225; 568027, 4140241; 568028,
4140259; 568006, 4140269; 567984, 4140271; 567967, 4140280; 567962,
4140301; 567948, 4140320; 567930, 4140339; 567915, 4140373; 567904,
4140392; 567938, 4140398; 567980, 4140405; 568008, 4140418; 568001,
4140442; 567988, 4140457; 568031, 4140467; 568098, 4140470; 568123,
4140484; 568166, 4140471; 568183, 4140472; 568180, 4140494; 568172,
4140517; 568147, 4140543; 568153, 4140554; 568184, 4140561; 568209,
4140577; 568249, 4140579; 568285, 4140585; 568318, 4140597; 568356,
4140608; 568383, 4140600; 568423, 4140577; 568471, 4140580; 568488,
4140590; 568483, 4140612; 568507, 4140625; 568551, 4140623; 568572,
4140632; 568606, 4140653; 568658, 4140676; 568681, 4140691; 568705,
4140693; 568723, 4140687; 568741, 4140684; 568762, 4140673; 568807,
4140653; 568830, 4140634; 568862, 4140607; 568873, 4140591; 568894,
4140584; 568891, 4140566; 568881, 4140556; 568856, 4140536; 568838,
4140520; 568834, 4140499; 568812, 4140474; 568803, 4140445; 568791,
4140422; 568786, 4140395; 568739, 4140382; 568733, 4140366; 568719,
4140353; 568682, 4140355; 568648, 4140350; 568651, 4140331; 568668,
4140312; 568672, 4140286; 568653, 4140278; 568668, 4140256; 568713,
4140235; 568736, 4140273; 568769, 4140284; 568805, 4140303; 568827,
4140297; 568848, 4140312; 568872, 4140321; 568918, 4140335; 568964,
4140327; 569000, 4140248; 569024, 4140226; 569058, 4140256; 569097,
4140267; 569129, 4140244; 569166, 4140211; 569186, 4140185; 569202,
4140165; 569217, 4140136; 569219, 4140119; 569228, 4140106; 569240,
4140094; 569260, 4140088; 569282, 4140073; 569286, 4140045; 569284,
4140017; 569286, 4139986; 569279, 4139961; 569254, 4139955; 569242,
4139943; 569217, 4139920; 569211, 4139900; 569246, 4139893; 569275,
4139877; 569305, 4139877; 569342, 4139883; 569367, 4139919; 569404,
4139945; 569434, 4139949; 569455, 4139945; 569485, 4139917; returning
to 569513, 4139881.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50443]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.004
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50444]]
(10) Unit 5: Metcalf, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 611242, 4121203; 611273, 4121300; 611382, 4121353; 611488,
4121320; 611607, 4121360; 611707, 4121423; 611776, 4121486; 611856,
4121482; 611945, 4121496; 612084, 4121502; 612190, 4121555; 612315,
4121543; 612448, 4121585; 612577, 4121572; 612974, 4121532; 613302,
4121410; 613507, 4121310; 613672, 4121337; 613907, 4121337; 614056,
4121410; 614393, 4121110; 614418, 4121079; 614479, 4121095; 614513,
4121108; 614547, 4121103; 614579, 4121103; 614616, 4121102; 614628,
4121071; 614610, 4121032; 614633, 4121024; 614691, 4121025; 614737,
4121019; 614760, 4120988; 614750, 4120961; 614713, 4120939; 614711,
4120903; 614703, 4120876; 614718, 4120863; 614731, 4120832; 614743,
4120810; 614774, 4120852; 614784, 4120819; 614904, 4120878; 614919,
4120849; 614913, 4120812; 614919, 4120775; 614897, 4120730; 614874,
4120715; 614886, 4120686; 614891, 4120659; 614921, 4120671; 614969,
4120678; 614999, 4120664; 614999, 4120625; 614974, 4120593; 614980,
4120547; 614950, 4120517; 614942, 4120488; 614970, 4120470; 614986,
4120424; 614996, 4120339; 615037, 4120410; 615163, 4120270; 615782,
4119656; 615873, 4119555; 616548, 4118936; 616751, 4118743; 617140,
4118453; 617774, 4118066; 617873, 4118037; 617986, 4118057; 618040,
4118015; 617983, 4117993; 617934, 4117940; 617896, 4117916; 617930,
4117901; 617984, 4117896; 618000, 4117874; 618032, 4117863; 618054,
4117849; 618052, 4117820; 618027, 4117810; 618025, 4117766; 618067,
4117760; 618067, 4117728; 618144, 4117713; 618222, 4117720; 618262,
4117696; 618278, 4117655; 618256, 4117633; 618279, 4117591; 618286,
4117527; 618323, 4117503; 618317, 4117455; 618359, 4117439; 618413,
4117435; 618427, 4117461; 618457, 4117471; 618489, 4117476; 618489,
4117501; 618516, 4117516; 618545, 4117506; 618559, 4117469; 618589,
4117466; 618618, 4117430; 618642, 4117442; 618642, 4117477; 618684,
4117503; 618711, 4117527; 618730, 4117550; 618760, 4117564; 618797,
4117553; 618818, 4117545; 618836, 4117511; 618852, 4117500; 618877,
4117494; 618874, 4117457; 618894, 4117445; 618932, 4117427; 618932,
4117442; 618957, 4117445; 618976, 4117432; 618976, 4117393; 619062,
4117364; 619092, 4117373; 619113, 4117369; 619111, 4117323; 619145,
4117283; 619062, 4117188; 619058, 4117150; 619037, 4117123; 618984,
4117044; 619147, 4117114; 619236, 4117123; 619294, 4117077; 619329,
4117080; 619357, 4117092; 619387, 4117074; 619392, 4117037; 619382,
4117011; 619414, 4117004; 619446, 4116993; 619441, 4116938; 619469,
4116920; 619483, 4116876; 619460, 4116840; 619496, 4116812; 619525,
4116780; 619536, 4116746; 619553, 4116743; 619592, 4116766; 619630,
4116739; 619626, 4116701; 619641, 4116687; 619677, 4116701; 619706,
4116681; 619753, 4116690; 619769, 4116667; 619745, 4116648; 619789,
4116592; 619775, 4116566; 619685, 4116547; 619768, 4116513; 619764,
4116489; 619720, 4116399; 619758, 4116390; 619725, 4116298; 619792,
4116295; 619827, 4116268; 619843, 4116231; 619832, 4116189; 619956,
4116200; 620026, 4116196; 620027, 4116146; 620037, 4116090; 619981,
4115976; 620018, 4115910; 619981, 4115866; 619891, 4115850; 619903,
4115813; 619978, 4115796; 619996, 4115766; 620072, 4115793; 620111,
4115763; 620096, 4115712; 620116, 4115680; 620199, 4115750; 620314,
4115703; 620320, 4115653; 620356, 4115633; 620401, 4115659; 620444,
4115506; 620503, 4115495; 620571, 4115549; 620617, 4115454; 620788,
4115324; 620903, 4115266; 620995, 4115260; 621058, 4115374; 621097,
4115435; 621107, 4115413; 621122, 4115390; 621149, 4115374; 621156,
4115344; 621200, 4115254; 621608, 4115039; 621668, 4115004; 621715,
4114977; 621744, 4114932; 621789, 4114879; 621788, 4114836; 621788,
4114810; 621768, 4114773; 621773, 4114740; 621772, 4114662; 621773,
4114638; 621766, 4114618; 621782, 4114597; 621842, 4114600; 621857,
4114586; 621875, 4114583; 621881, 4114552; 621827, 4114518; 621800,
4114474; 621727, 4114441; 621038, 4114280; 620937, 4114292; 620831,
4114261; 620046, 4114525; 619795, 4114578; 619736, 4114633; 619738,
4114702; 619674, 4114732; 619453, 4114356; 619351, 4114262; 619197,
4114240; 619041, 4114293; 618895, 4114410; 618599, 4114424; 618361,
4114506; 618185, 4114530; 617740, 4115026; 617095, 4115754; 616662,
4116332; 616403, 4116568; 616244, 4116697; 616203, 4116810; 616126,
4117005; 615933, 4117032; 615789, 4117099; 615722, 4117186; 615933,
4117280; 616097, 4117217; 616167, 4117292; 616030, 4117460; 615914,
4117446; 615683, 4117614; 615229, 4117907; 615099, 4117854; 615457,
4117510; 615390, 4117438; 615003, 4117751; 614469, 4118133; 613965,
4118481; 613890, 4118524; 613954, 4118666; 613790, 4118831; 613636,
4118894; 613636, 4119149; 613557, 4119283; 613403, 4119531; 613254,
4119651; 613077, 4119606; 612893, 4119620; 612832, 4119665; 612853,
4119708; 612847, 4119729; 612784, 4119705; 612770, 4119740; 612715,
4119760; 612640, 4119824; 612618, 4119872; 612583, 4119977; 612062,
4120400; 611707, 4120758; 611686, 4120748; 611631, 4120824; 611294,
4121127; returning to 611242, 4121203.
(ii) Note: Unit 5 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50445]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.005
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50446]]
(11) Unit 6: Tulare Hill, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 610971, 4120478; 611134, 4120435; 611200, 4120245; 611116,
4120132; 611181, 4119977; 611212, 4119824; 611280, 4119743; 611293,
4119653; 611241, 4119512; 610967, 4119335; 610786, 4119391; 610392,
4119622; 610302, 4119674; 610057, 4119813; 610117, 4119846; 609929,
4120074; 609799, 4120229; 609915, 4120374; 609819, 4120430; 610113,
4120749; 610310, 4120833; 610459, 4120769; 610531, 4120847; 610797,
4120659; 610776, 4120464; 610843, 4120449; returning to 610971,
4120478.
(ii) Note: Unit 6 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(12) Unit 7: Santa Teresa Hills, Santa Clara County, California.
From USGS 1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory,
Santa Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 608447, 4119332; 608474, 4119309; 608576, 4119335; 608615,
4119330; 608689, 4119306; 608706, 4119356; 608749, 4119377; 608758,
4119360; 608746, 4119302; 608760, 4119230; 608722, 4119159; 608656,
4119124; 608669, 4119080; 608762, 4119101; 608846, 4119140; 608892,
4119222; 609000, 4119082; 609117, 4119040; 609190, 4119077; 609244,
4119107; 609509, 4119359; 609534, 4119358; 609548, 4119366; 609549,
4119393; 609568, 4119444; 609582, 4119466; 609606, 4119520; 609628,
4119547; 609656, 4119568; 610016, 4119783; 610228, 4119650; 610177,
4119543; 610143, 4119434; 610086, 4119368; 610019, 4119278; 609929,
4119219; 609928, 4119116; 609956, 4119070; 610001, 4119067; 610048,
4119044; 610138, 4119037; 610165, 4119006; 610240, 4118997; 610306,
4118956; 610325, 4118923; 610343, 4118915; 610381, 4118905; 610405,
4118877; 610414, 4118822; 610436, 4118812; 610464, 4118833; 610521,
4118824; 610564, 4118822; 610592, 4118815; 610612, 4118795; 610617,
4118776; 610617, 4118756; 610624, 4118735; 610650, 4118729; 610669,
4118717; 610700, 4118710; 610723, 4118718; 610757, 4118723; 610773,
4118706; 610780, 4118658; 610790, 4118646; 610787, 4118598; 610775,
4118570; 610773, 4118536; 610771, 4118519; 610782, 4118517; 610822,
4118530; 610842, 4118528; 610864, 4118520; 610880, 4118508; 610899,
4118501; 610915, 4118487; 610914, 4118461; 610906, 4118446; 610889,
4118430; 610886, 4118417; 610902, 4118393; 610900, 4118367; 610896,
4118340; 610912, 4118330; 610934, 4118310; 610940, 4118282; 610932,
4118260; 610935, 4118251; 610949, 4118231; 610955, 4118207; 610957,
4118181; 610964, 4118176; 610991, 4118168; 610989, 4118152; 610992,
4118113; 611000, 4118109; 611019, 4118109; 611041, 4118121; 611066,
4118127; 611096, 4118122; 611114, 4118125; 611160, 4118145; 611185,
4118147; 611220, 4118143; 611254, 4118124; 611259, 4118093; 611250,
4118046; 611250, 4118012; 611247, 4117972; 611255, 4117966; 611276,
4117974; 611292, 4117975; 611331, 4117963; 611374, 4117922; 611421,
4117919; 611446, 4117915; 611462, 4117908; 611475, 4117891; 611511,
4117839; 611533, 4117814; 611554, 4117805; 611567, 4117772; 611556,
4117741; 611560, 4117712; 611562, 4117677; 611517, 4117611; 611572,
4117536; 611578, 4117500; 611570, 4117478; 611547, 4117451; 611503,
4117429; 611458, 4117422; 611405, 4117439; 611323, 4117480; 611291,
4117518; 611268, 4117566; 611230, 4117618; 611169, 4117625; 611100,
4117637; 611072, 4117668; 611021, 4117766; 610962, 4117743; 610985,
4117678; 611007, 4117611; 610957, 4117563; 610836, 4117565; 610800,
4117537; 610773, 4117534; 610752, 4117518; 610733, 4117438; 610716,
4117404; 610610, 4117272; 610572, 4117243; 610501, 4117238; 610412,
4117262; 610370, 4117294; 610350, 4117341; 610281, 4117354; 610220,
4117381; 610179, 4117413; 610146, 4117441; 610127, 4117492; 610058,
4117531; 609819, 4117309; 609692, 4117372; 609593, 4117353; 609526,
4117409; 609460, 4117386; 609405, 4117409; 609091, 4117456; 608872,
4117364; 608840, 4117297; 608733, 4117262; 608502, 4117237; 608524,
4117204; 608603, 4117138; 608723, 4117081; 608830, 4117067; 608934,
4117066; 609071, 4117093; 609181, 4117210; 609225, 4117208; 609240,
4117159; 609163, 4117083; 609228, 4117009; 609303, 4116981; 609325,
4117003; 609303, 4117052; 609302, 4117087; 609324, 4117084; 609349,
4117043; 609401, 4117059; 609409, 4117162; 609430, 4117203; 609458,
4117190; 609471, 4117150; 609435, 4117016; 609506, 4116986; 609350,
4116852; 609333, 4116880; 609256, 4116873; 609228, 4116889; 609205,
4116873; 609163, 4116848; 609131, 4116849; 609102, 4116863; 609061,
4116836; 609011, 4116841; 608843, 4116838; 608804, 4116864; 608758,
4116878; 608714, 4116867; 608672, 4116827; 608625, 4116899; 608542,
4116933; 608489, 4117019; 608426, 4117079; 608382, 4117115; 608343,
4117134; 608305, 4117136; 608259, 4117127; 608216, 4117129; 608210,
4117170; 608197, 4117192; 608138, 4117197; 608062, 4117234; 608020,
4117241; 607997, 4117227; 607959, 4117228; 607963, 4117262; 607941,
4117301; 607896, 4117334; 607909, 4117377; 608067, 4117348; 608170,
4117343; 608289, 4117332; 608298, 4117392; 608239, 4117418; 608166,
4117436; 608066, 4117450; 608012, 4117453; 607942, 4117507; 607907,
4117572; 607938, 4117605; 607924, 4117642; 607848, 4117626; 607678,
4117759; 607397, 4117766; 607129, 4117689; 606990, 4117599; 606767,
4117931; 606643, 4118119; 606701, 4118302; 606742, 4118358; 606828,
4118289; 606858, 4118323; 606693, 4118461; 606644, 4118391; 606609,
4118328; 606542, 4118254; 606425, 4118183; 606179, 4118078; 605438,
4118128; 605263, 4118203; 605074, 4118293; 604975, 4118365; 605178,
4118600; 604548, 4118947; 604625, 4119145; 604788, 4119569; 604936,
4119955; 604817, 4119974; 604817, 4120089; 604555, 4120119; 604414,
4120139; 604283, 4120149; 604549, 4120858; 604561, 4120889; 604564,
4120912; 604561, 4120952; 604572, 4120972; 604606, 4120977; 604622,
4120963; 604624, 4120946; 604628, 4120920; 604645, 4120904; 604680,
4120899; 604729, 4120910; 604729, 4120867; 604787, 4120831; 604810,
4120814; 604844, 4120783; 604890, 4120765; 604924, 4120799; 604948,
4120835; 604970, 4120831; 604986, 4120786; 605003, 4120742; 605064,
4120714; 605093, 4120722; 605132, 4120760; 605163, 4120770; 605185,
4120744; 605219, 4120689; 605272, 4120656; 605329, 4120668; 605395,
4120706; 605405, 4120671; 605424, 4120642; 605452, 4120646; 605473,
4120657; 605509, 4120656; 605548, 4120664; 605588, 4120656; 605614,
4120682; 605643, 4120689; 605647, 4120649; 605679, 4120645; 605711,
4120633; 605746, 4120610; 605728, 4120571; 605712, 4120545; 605685,
4120526; 605653, 4120525; 605613, 4120522; 605608, 4120506; 605619,
4120496; 605645, 4120487; 605709, 4120480; 605729, 4120443; 605749,
4120426; 605775, 4120431; 605792, 4120456; 605809, 4120473; 605836,
4120498; 605864, 4120508; 605879, 4120512; 605904, 4120506; 605928,
4120490; 605945, 4120465; 605949, 4120449; 605945, 4120432; 605953,
4120401; 605971, 4120390; 606001, 4120399; 606040, 4120411; 606076,
[[Page 50447]]
4120422; 606105, 4120433; 606133, 4120448; 606158, 4120474; 606200,
4120494; 606241, 4120516; 606272, 4120540; 606310, 4120548; 606353,
4120567; 606378, 4120587; 606394, 4120604; 606407, 4120596; 606422,
4120586; 606474, 4120580; 606521, 4120577; 606553, 4120566; 606589,
4120544; 606625, 4120524; 606653, 4120496; 606653, 4120520; 606626,
4120579; 606625, 4120607; 606650, 4120613; 606703, 4120612; 606736,
4120611; 606751, 4120586; 606748, 4120556; 606762, 4120552; 606804,
4120566; 606861, 4120594; 606917, 4120615; 606968, 4120624; 607030,
4120627; 607084, 4120614; 607139, 4120594; 607197, 4120614; 607194,
4120598; 607195, 4120569; 607195, 4120549; 607188, 4120521; 607174,
4120507; 607179, 4120472; 607191, 4120455; 607214, 4120443; 607247,
4120427; 607277, 4120408; 607280, 4120373; 607298, 4120340; 607305,
4120307; 607332, 4120290; 607364, 4120276; 607395, 4120272; 607414,
4120266; 607434, 4120261; 607453, 4120267; 607461, 4120254; 607462,
4120237; 607458, 4120220; 607449, 4120201; 607437, 4120184; 607421,
4120162; 607397, 4120136; 607370, 4120088; 607327, 4120023; 607297,
4119983; 607182, 4119926; 607113, 4119874; 607064, 4119832; 607020,
4119802; 606938, 4119784; 606848, 4119768; 606800, 4119732; 606822,
4119719; 606891, 4119713; 606982, 4119681; 607021, 4119632; 607033,
4119550; 607049, 4119507; 607064, 4119439; 607068, 4119404; 607099,
4119389; 607118, 4119342; 607152, 4119323; 607181, 4119286; 607199,
4119244; 607188, 4119204; 607145, 4119123; 607167, 4119087; 607256,
4119070; 607355, 4119123; 607619, 4119104; 607673, 4119099; 607702,
4119117; 607733, 4119120; 607774, 4119125; 607775, 4119165; 607814,
4119200; 607861, 4119222; 607909, 4119212; 607985, 4119188; 608024,
4119217; 607998, 4119236; 608004, 4119270; 608048, 4119275; 608100,
4119228; 608157, 4119228; 608207, 4119263; 608269, 4119268; 608314,
4119280; 608363, 4119287; 608409, 4119297; 608425, 4119321; returning
to 608447, 4119332.
(ii) Note: Unit 7 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(13) Unit 8: Calero Reservoir, Santa Clara County, California. From
USGS 1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 605493, 4116867; 605661, 4116896; 605718, 4116853; 605799,
4116844; 605856, 4116923; 605938, 4116906; 606045, 4116752; 606122,
4116520; 606156, 4116383; 606165, 4116288; 606051, 4116182; 606069,
4116127; 606132, 4116039; 606177, 4116025; 606230, 4116083; 606269,
4115997; 606336, 4116015; 606337, 4115938; 606300, 4115931; 606262,
4115861; 606326, 4115838; 606387, 4115849; 606433, 4115829; 606519,
4115734; 606574, 4115740; 606867, 4115901; 606937, 4115907; 606994,
4115890; 607043, 4115856; 607081, 4115818; 607068, 4115755; 607090,
4115693; 607144, 4115664; 607241, 4115643; 607290, 4115588; 607342,
4115554; 607159, 4115391; 607119, 4115368; 607073, 4115389; 607047,
4115495; 606903, 4115584; 606837, 4115586; 606861, 4115560; 606919,
4115549; 606944, 4115530; 606950, 4115482; 606978, 4115469; 606996,
4115393; 606975, 4115370; 606902, 4115402; 606901, 4115371; 606921,
4115339; 606904, 4115306; 606880, 4115337; 606861, 4115296; 606876,
4115251; 606935, 4115241; 606958, 4115263; 606986, 4115195; 607026,
4115199; 607027, 4115255; 607060, 4115266; 607082, 4115207; 607089,
4115149; 607179, 4115149; 607266, 4115115; 607415, 4115156; 607464,
4115136; 607555, 4115164; 607716, 4115136; 607712, 4115003; 607657,
4114850; 607604, 4114753; 607518, 4114686; 607611, 4114702; 607791,
4114919; 607826, 4114984; 607808, 4115366; 607972, 4115293; 608186,
4115186; 608470, 4115055; 608850, 4114830; 608992, 4114854; 609129,
4114812; 609117, 4115020; 608880, 4115233; 608512, 4115397; 608059,
4115492; 608029, 4115644; 607959, 4115592; 607880, 4115595; 607966,
4115726; 608052, 4115817; 608155, 4115878; 608258, 4115908; 608358,
4115910; 608437, 4115938; 608556, 4115906; 608545, 4115971; 608608,
4115990; 608682, 4115957; 608750, 4115901; 608776, 4115906; 608815,
4115934; 608892, 4115927; 608946, 4115873; 608948, 4115826; 608906,
4115731; 608967, 4115710; 609032, 4115647; 609481, 4115100; 609477,
4115025; 609577, 4114951; 609821, 4114856; 609866, 4114711; 609880,
4114582; 610030, 4114486; 610081, 4114398; 610120, 4114330; 610159,
4114322; 610155, 4114287; 610124, 4114240; 610287, 4114038; 610327,
4113965; 610319, 4113865; 610257, 4113742; 610202, 4113705; 610079,
4113729; 609993, 4113754; 609891, 4113813; 609798, 4113845; 609735,
4113885; 609737, 4113963; 609663, 4114035; 609563, 4114088; 609524,
4114248; 609455, 4114356; 609212, 4114403; 609004, 4114676; 608945,
4114439; 608774, 4114422; 608635, 4114302; 608547, 4114164; 608453,
4113729; 608135, 4113470; 608079, 4113433; 608043, 4113356; 608038,
4113230; 608012, 4113254; 607980, 4113238; 607947, 4113270; 607907,
4113243; 607855, 4113282; 607814, 4113362; 607802, 4113545; 607694,
4113606; 607526, 4113700; 607691, 4113754; 607691, 4114069; 607465,
4114176; 607326, 4114660; 606930, 4114755; 606709, 4114597; 606401,
4114641; 606250, 4114805; 605916, 4114924; 605715, 4115195; 605293,
4115604; 605224, 4115604; 605180, 4115755; 605224, 4115869; 605035,
4116101; 605042, 4116215; 605067, 4116309; 605123, 4116366; 605229,
4116454; 605338, 4116598; 605387, 4116705; returning to 605493,
4116867.
(ii) Note: Unit 8 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(14) Unit 9: Kalana Hills, Santa Clara County, California. From
USGS 1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Subunit 9A: Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983
coordinates (E,N): 612463, 4115364; 612548, 4115283; 612611, 4115228;
612581, 4115190; 612560, 4115157; 612725, 4114962; 612697, 4114924;
612640, 4114916; 612512, 4114806; 612469, 4114770; 612456, 4114706;
612331, 4114635; 612276, 4114621; 612159, 4114668; 612036, 4114796;
611975, 4114842; 611928, 4114901; 611857, 4114927; 611811, 4114924;
611806, 4115198; 611735, 4115382; 611703, 4115487; 611772, 4115526;
611741, 4115600; 611742, returning to 4115605; 612028, 4115820;
returning to 612463, 4115364.
(ii) Subunit 9B: Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD
1983 coordinates (E,N): 613292, 4114458; 613477, 4114328; 613645,
4114236; 613859, 4114112; 613800, 4114081; 613704, 4114080; 613628,
4114115; 613571, 4114099; 613525, 4114035; 613464, 4114059; 613430,
4114072; 613389, 4114098; 613269, 4114176; 613135, 4114270; 613043,
4114292; 612952, 4114245; 612882, 4114296; 612769, 4114341; 612771,
4114386; 612807, 4114455; 612779, 4114504; 612761, 4114557; 612827,
4114609; 612910, 4114621; 613020, 4114550; 613029, 4114509; 612967,
4114492; 612953, 4114422; 612990, 4114368; 613090, 4114360; 613112,
4114463; 613178, 4114499; returning to 613292, 4114458;
(iii) Note: Unit 9 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
[[Page 50448]]
(15) Unit 10: Hale, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Unit 10: Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983
coordinates (E,N): 617448, 4111989; 617422, 4111978; 617343, 4111978;
617295, 4111947; 617252, 4111862; 617269, 4111828; 617405, 4111774;
617445, 4111797; 617501, 4111797; 617512, 4111746; 617589, 4111729;
617733, 4111766; 618083, 4111853; 618116, 4111766; 618023, 4111705;
617936, 4111647; 617899, 4111684; 617764, 4111596; 617933, 4111368;
617964, 4111303; 617953, 4111188; 617891, 4111138; 617937, 4111083;
617919, 4111040; 617865, 4111014; 617798, 4111069; 617586, 4110876;
617618, 4110838; 617504, 4110738; 617459, 4110704; 617380, 4110673;
617197, 4110835; 617009, 4111119; 616981, 4111133; 616936, 4111110;
616925, 4111147; 616908, 4111187; 616885, 4111204; 616843, 4111232;
616817, 4111274; 616809, 4111303; 616781, 4111297; 616758, 4111257;
616724, 4111221; 616713, 4111159; 616744, 4111088; 616724, 4111060;
616730, 4111037; 616789, 4110983; 616702, 4110933; 616668, 4110952;
616620, 4110952; 616611, 4110901; 616436, 4111062; 616394, 4111037;
616410, 4110989; 616472, 4110988; 616532, 4110930; 616523, 4110872;
616555, 4110831; 616077, 4110537; 616073, 4110327; 615914, 4110402;
615846, 4110431; 615912, 4110524; 615761, 4110576; 615745, 4110646;
615715, 4110728; 615645, 4110790; 615684, 4110906; 615779, 4110867;
615779, 4110825; 615918, 4110725; 616038, 4110856; 615936, 4110930;
615947, 4111077; 615894, 4111105; 615830, 4111216; 615902, 4111306;
615866, 4111429; 615933, 4111449; 616044, 4111449; 616147, 4111428;
616225, 4111410; 616275, 4111430; 616313, 4111483; 616368, 4111489;
616399, 4111520; 616394, 4111579; 616380, 4111625; 616430, 4111650;
616484, 4111622; 616498, 4111585; 616555, 4111562; 616671, 4111591;
616659, 4111653; 616685, 4111715; 616741, 4111780; 616846, 4111829;
616677, 4112120; 616760, 4112261; 616792, 4112343; 617011, 4112356;
617160, 4112394; 617286, 4112306; 617433, 4112045; returning to 617448,
4111989 .
(ii) Note: Unit 10 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
(16) Unit 11: Bear Ranch, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangle Gilroy.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 628304, 4108774; 628402, 4108819; 628507, 4108797; 628590,
4108729; 628635, 4108675; 628659, 4108564; 628747, 4108397; 628931,
4108012; 629104, 4107674; 629171, 4107133; 629022, 4107043; 628875,
4107022; 628732, 4107075; 628575, 4107128; 628449, 4107072; 628322,
4107074; 628234, 4107094; 628173, 4107173; 628166, 4107286; 628210,
4107426; 628327, 4107650; 628375, 4107703; 628458, 4107736; 628368,
4107898; 628263, 4108172; 628208, 4108414; returning to 628304,
4108774.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 11 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50449]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.006
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50450]]
(17) Unit 12: San Martin, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangles Mt. Madonna and Gilroy.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 622150, 4104262; 622178, 4104216; 622192, 4104170; 622217,
4104195; 622241, 4104226; 622274, 4104226; 622296, 4104208; 622309,
4104171; 622302, 4104120; 622340, 4104110; 622347, 4104088; 622336,
4104047; 622334, 4103984; 622320, 4103948; 622317, 4103898; 622330,
4103845; 622404, 4103809; 622421, 4103769; 622421, 4103689; 622441,
4103649; 622487, 4103631; 622538, 4103599; 622557, 4103529; 622591,
4103461; 622575, 4103406; 622538, 4103358; 622441, 4103346; 622399,
4103363; 622352, 4103322; 622274, 4103300; 622206, 4103304; 622098,
4103341; 622020, 4103370; 621920, 4103382; 621843, 4103390; 621812,
4103362; 621779, 4103365; 621739, 4103372; 621700, 4103404; 621682,
4103449; 621705, 4103496; 621667, 4103560; 621569, 4103489; 621509,
4103489; 621463, 4103477; 621464, 4103459; 621411, 4103467; 621348,
4103472; 621288, 4103477; 621223, 4103476; 621183, 4103476; 621127,
4103476; 621079, 4103490; 621030, 4103508; 620988, 4103525; 620973,
4103571; 620996, 4103623; 621025, 4103666; 621055, 4103695; 621076,
4103707; 621079, 4103733; 621087, 4103764; 621112, 4103805; 621046,
4103796; 621009, 4103805; 620979, 4103791; 620922, 4103774; 620887,
4103775; 620871, 4103811; 620845, 4103873; 620806, 4103922; 620751,
4103944; 620702, 4103984; 620679, 4103961; 620627, 4103961; 620593,
4103979; 620591, 4104020; 620568, 4104053; 620542, 4104032; 620509,
4104030; 620482, 4104039; 620450, 4104073; 620393, 4104116; 620330,
4104174; 620283, 4104200; 620255, 4104240; 620230, 4104262; 620197,
4104288; 620191, 4104325; 620193, 4104362; 620203, 4104399; 620176,
4104412; 620126, 4104472; 620132, 4104499; 620211, 4104578; 620245,
4104578; 620329, 4104574; 620440, 4104541; 620510, 4104492; 620543,
4104480; 620529, 4104405; 620612, 4104386; 620646, 4104431; 620657,
4104489; 620672, 4104509; 620728, 4104541; 620794, 4104556; 620852,
4104539; 620909, 4104525; 620931, 4104568; 620942, 4104598; 620946,
4104627; 620968, 4104627; 620988, 4104586; 621013, 4104556; 621034,
4104566; 621046, 4104621; 621098, 4104634; 621083, 4104537; 621176,
4104528; 621262, 4104540; 621334, 4104549; 621398, 4104575; 621488,
4104622; 621559, 4104617; 621598, 4104563; 621688, 4104533; 621739,
4104536; 621811, 4104464; 621836, 4104417; 621908, 4104391; 621951,
4104417; 622007, 4104440; 622132, 4104423; 622160, 4104403; 622153,
4104371; 622118, 4104356; 622033, 4104350; 622004, 4104340; 621974,
4104326; 621951, 4104304; 621969, 4104286; 621996, 4104293; 622032,
4104294; 622060, 4104274; 622115, 4104272; returning to 622150,
4104262.
(ii) Note: Map of Unit 12 for Bay checkerspot butterfly follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 50451]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR26AU08.007
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 50452]]
(18) Unit 13: Kirby, Santa Clara County, California. From USGS
1:24,000 scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick Observatory, Santa
Teresa Hills, and Morgan Hill.
(i) Land bounded by the following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 coordinates
(E,N): 614073, 4122412; 613927, 4122313; 613818, 4122194; 613722,
4121982; 613609, 4121926; 613463, 4121895; 613322, 4121923; 613199,
4122005; 613063, 4121982; 612938, 4122012; 612845, 4121942; 612809,
4121823; 612723, 4121727; 612574, 4121711; 612435, 4121734; 612295,
4121716; 612154, 4121723; 612079, 4121699; 612017, 4121720; 611996,
4121655; 611902, 4121653; 611790, 4121695; 611662, 4121642; 611579,
4121554; 611512, 4121447; 611422, 4121445; 611365, 4121419; 611310,
4121420; 611247, 4121377; 610975, 4121590; 610770, 4121774; 610611,
4121899; 610472, 4122085; 610310, 4122006; 610106, 4122145; 610077,
4122227; 610126, 4122316; 610217, 4122395; 610179, 4122447; 610133,
4122430; 610089, 4122512; 610125, 4122559; 610156, 4122607; 610157,
4122653; 610128, 4122660; 610058, 4122641; 610016, 4122607; 609977,
4122674; 610091, 4122763; 610187, 4122847; 610220, 4122921; 610249,
4122977; 610374, 4123102; 610254, 4123181; 610015, 4123335; 609613,
4123583; 609641, 4123630; 609399, 4123790; 609324, 4123843; 609182,
4124041; 608934, 4123924; 608736, 4124027; 608538, 4124145; 608423,
4124256; 608167, 4124471; 608065, 4124633; 608059, 4124666; 607803,
4124871; 607677, 4124973; 607615, 4125109; 607637, 4125224; 607756,
4125351; 607593, 4125474; 607351, 4125490; 607272, 4125663; 607018,
4125820; 606980, 4125845; 606948, 4125876; 606896, 4125972; 606890,
4125996; 606845, 4125998; 606796, 4126045; 606753, 4126055; 606663,
4126127; 606595, 4126178; 606463, 4126353; 606314, 4126287; 606282,
4126331; 606153, 4126428; 605939, 4126505; 605841, 4126533; 605785,
4126693; 605832, 4126844; 605701, 4126851; 605621, 4127118; 605715,
4127161; 605847, 4127159; 605992, 4127130; 606076, 4127058; 606215,
4127099; 606422, 4127010; 606465, 4126897; 606699, 4126796; 606886,
4126695; 607019, 4126736; 607190, 4126796; 607356, 4126935; 607437,
4127065; 607306, 4127251; 607149, 4127421; 607062, 4127440; 606910,
4127537; 606714, 4127727; 606521, 4127943; 606345, 4128015; 606227,
4128006; 606179, 4127924; 606131, 4127779; 606097, 4127827; 606067,
4127868; 605982, 4127883; 605953, 4128027; 605857, 4127996; 605761,
4128001; 605703, 4128063; 605662, 4128160; 605702, 4128211; 605770,
4128251; 605842, 4128289; 605912, 4128287; 605946, 4128220; 605992,
4128138; 606059, 4128152; 606148, 4128174; 606210, 4128152; 606324,
4128056; 606410, 4128049; 606321, 4128171; 606343, 4128210; 606614,
4128290; 606611, 4128519; 606706, 4128535; 606802, 4128525; 607015,
4128424; 607079, 4128412; 607069, 4128316; 607125, 4128227; 607190,
4128215; 607202, 4128263; 607252, 4128252; 606865, 4127849; 607067,
4127789; 607267, 4127710; 607475, 4127729; 607713, 4127722; 607817,
4127626; 607733, 4127426; 607803, 4127314; 607825, 4127248; 607762,
4127173; 607740, 4127113; 607808, 4127063; 607894, 4127046; 608043,
4127019; 608116, 4126921; 608123, 4126707; 608000, 4126634; 607880,
4126543; 607769, 4126507; 607654, 4126497; 607668, 4126413; 607779,
4126408; 607805, 4126324; 608058, 4126129; 608255, 4125992; 608610,
4125722; 608893, 4125417; 609482, 4125417; 609838, 4125398; 610196,
4125396; 610302, 4125557; 610370, 4125506; 610487, 4125492; 610584,
4125439; 610692, 4125442; 610769, 4125405; 610827, 4125316; 610877,
4125249; 610937, 4125251; 610947, 4125345; 610759, 4125562; 610815,
4125701; 610858, 4125797; 610945, 4125841; 611101, 4125858; 611199,
4125833; 611308, 4125853; 611356, 4125884; 611424, 4125805; 611461,
4125744; 611542, 4125723; 611602, 4125671; 611673, 4125610; 611808,
4125456; 611970, 4125331; 612147, 4125249; 612322, 4125103; 612539,
4124931; 612515, 4124823; 612590, 4124756; 612648, 4124664; 612753,
4124575; 612773, 4124506; 612879, 4124335; 612972, 4124219; 613073,
4124178; 613129, 4124085; 613251, 4123917; 613206, 4123339; 613193,
4122893; 613280, 4122832; 613351, 4122715; 613426, 4122657; 613489,
4122657; 613563, 4122662; 613669, 4122607; 613741, 4122596; 614073,
4122412.
(ii) Note: Unit 13 for Bay checkerspot butterfly is depicted on the
map in paragraph (10)(ii) of this entry.
Dated: August 13, 2008
David Verhey
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks
[FR Doc. E8-19195 Filed 8-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S