17296 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules

Areas of Regulatory Concern DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR hearings must be received by May 22, 1995. In calling on agencies to cut obsolete Fish and Wildlife Service ADDRESSES: Requests for additional regulations, the President directs each public hearings or comments and agency to consider the following issues 50 CFR Part 17 materials concerning this proposal in its review of the regulations: should be sent to the Field Supervisor, • Is this regulation obsolete? RIN 1018±AD 22 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Salt • Could its intended goal be achieved Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Lake City Field Office, 145 East 1300 in more efficient, less intrusive ways? and Plants; Proposed Determination of South, Suite 404, Salt Lake City, Utah • Are there better private sector Critical Habitat for Woundfin, Virgin 84115. The public hearing will be in the alternatives, such as market River Chub, and Virgin Spinedace and Garden Room at the St. George Hilton Inn, 1450 South Hilton Drive, St. mechanisms, that can better achieve the Notice of Public Hearing George, Utah. Comments and materials public good envisioned by the AGENCY: received will be available for public regulation? U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. inspection, by appointment, during • Could private business, setting its ACTION: Proposed rule and notice of normal business hours at the above own standards and being subject to public hearing. address. Copies of comments and public accountability, do the job as materials received also will be available well? SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service for public inspection at the Washington • Could the States or local (Service) proposes to designate critical County Public Library in St. George, governments do the job, making Federal habitat for the Virgin River chub (Gila Utah. regulation unnecessary? seminuda = G. robusta seminuda), the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. RSPA suggests that persons Virgin spinedace (Lepidomeda Robert D. Williams, Assistant Field commenting on the pipeline safety mollispinis mollispinis), and the Supervisor, Salt Lake City Field Office, program consider these issues. woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus). at the above address, (801) 524–5001. The Virgin River chub and wouldfin are The President’s call for regulatory SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: listed as endangered; the Virgin reform provides opportunities for spinedace has been proposed for listing Background eliminating or improving pipeline safety as threatened (May 18, 1994), but the regulations. RSPA is undertaking a The woundfin (Plagopterus listing has not been finalized as yet. page-by-page review of the Pipeline argentissimus) and Virgin River chub There is considerable overlap in critical Safety Regulations and is identifying (Gila seminuda =G. robusta seminuda) habitat proposed for the three species, certain sections of the regulations that are presently listed as endangered the proposed designation includes 330.8 are candidates for elimination, revision, pursuant to the Endangered Species Act km (206.8 mi) of the Virgin River and clarification or relaxation. (Act) of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. its tributaries in portions of Utah, 1531 et seq.). The Virgin spinedace Improvements to Customer Service Arizona, and Nevada. The Service (Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis) proposes 151.7 km (94.8 mi) of critical was proposed for listing on May 18, RSPA is soliciting comments on the habitat for the woundfin (approximately 1994, as threatened under the Act. In kind and quality of services its 13.5 percent of its historical range); the subsequent text, all three species of customers want and their level of 151.7 km (94.8 mi) for the Virgin River fish are referred to as ‘‘listed fishes’’ satisfaction with the services currently chub (70.8 percent of its historical even though the Virgin spinedace has provided by the pipeline safety range, excluding the chub occupying the only been proposed for listing at this program. RSPA will use the comments Muddy River); and 201.9 km (126.2 mi) time. These three fishes are all endemic to establish service standards and for the Virgin spinedace (87.3 percent of to the Virgin River Basin. The Virgin measure results against them; provide its historical range). The majority of the River flows generally along the customers with choices in both the land to be designated as critical habitat Hurricane Fault, which forms the sources of service and the means of is under Federal or private ownership. boundary between the Colorado Plateau delivery; make information, services, All three fish species are endemic to and the Great Basin. These two geologic and complaint systems easily accessible; the Virgin River Basin of southwestern provinces are quite dissimilar. The and provide the means to address Utah, northwestern Arizona, and Colorado Plateau is characterized by customer complaints. RSPA’s current southeastern Nevada. The proposed horizontal-lying strata eroded into customer services include providing critical habitat designation includes canyons, plateaus, and mesas. Long, guidance in understanding and portions of the mainstem Virgin River isolated mountain ranges separated by complying with the Pipeline Safety and its tributaries, including the 100- broad alluvial valleys typify the Great Regulations and processing exemptions, year floodplain. This proposed critical Basin province. The Virgin River approvals, registrations, grant habitat would result in additional originates in south-central Utah, applications, and enforcement actions. review requirements under section 7 of running in a southwest direction from Other customer services include the Act with regard to Federal agency Utah to northwestern Arizona, and conduct of pipeline safety seminars, and actions. Section 4 of the Act requires the southeastern Nevada for approximately the development and dissemination of Service to consider economic costs and 320 kilometers (km) (200 miles (mi)) training and informational materials. benefits prior to making a final decision before emptying into Lake Mead. Prior Issued in Washington, DC on March 31, on the size and scope of critical habitat. to the completion of Boulder (Hoover) 1995. DATES: Comments will be accepted until Dam in 1935, the Muddy River in Cesar De Leon, June 5, 1995. southeastern Nevada joined the Virgin Acting Associate Administrator for Pipeline A public hearing will be held from 5 River before the latter emptied into the Safety. p.m. to 9 p.m., with registration Colorado River. These two rivers now [FR Doc. 95–8362 Filed 4–4–95; 8:45 am] beginning at 4:30 p.m., on Monday, May flow separately into the Overton Arm of BILLING CODE 4910±60±P 8, 1995. Requests for additional public Lake Mead. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17297

These Virgin River fishes have chub (G. elegans), and reduced it to a information support this historic declined in numbers due to the subspecies (G. robusta seminuda) of the distribution (Rinne 1971, Cross 1975, cumulative effects of environmental roundtail chub. Valdez et al. 1991, Addley and Hardy impacts which include dewatering from Until recently, the Fish and Wildlife 1993). numerous diversion projects; Service (Service) and other authorities Over the last 50 years, there has been proliferation of nonnative fishes; and (Holden and Stalnaker 1970, Minckley a decline in the range of the species alterations to natural flow, temperature, 1973, Smith et al. 1977) have treated the with about a 37–40 percent (83 km, 52 and sediment regimes. chub in the Muddy River as a separate, mi) habitat loss due to human impacts unnamed subspecies of roundtail chub (Valdez et al. 1991, Addley and Hardy Woundfin (Moapa roundtail chub = G. robusta 1993). Stream reaches that once Based on early records, the original ssp.). Since 1982, the Service has contained spinedace (but are now range of the woundfin extended from considered this chub to be a Category 2 dewatered) include portions of the East near the junction of the Salt and Verde candidate species (47 FR 58455, 54 FR Fork of Beaver Dam Wash, the Santa Rivers at Tempe, Arizona, to the mouth 556, 56 FR 58804). Clara River downstream Gunlock of the Gila River at Yuma, Arizona In a recent taxonomic study of the Reservoir, Mogatsu Creek, Ash Creek (Gilbert and Scofield 1898, Minckley genus Gila, DeMarais et al. (1992) near Toquerville, Leeds Creek, and the 1973). Woundfin were also found in the asserted that full species status (G. mainstem Virgin River between Quail mainstem Colorado River from Yuma seminuda) was warranted for the Virgin Creek Diversion and Pah Tempe (Jordan and Evermann 1896, Meek 1904, River chub. The Muddy River form is Springs. Current distribution of the Follett 1961) upstream to the Virgin included in G. seminuda, although it is spinedace includes portions of the River in Nevada, Arizona, and Utah and a separate population. Gila seminuda mainstem Virgin River and 11 of its into La Verkin Creek, a tributary of the most likely arose through hybridization tributaries and subtributaries including Virgin River in Utah (Gilbert and involving G. robusta and G. elegans. the East Fork Virgin River, Shunes Scofield 1898, Snyder 1915, Miller and These taxonomic revisions were Creek, North Fork Virgin River, North Hubbs 1960, Cross 1975). However, recently accepted by the Service, Creek, La Verkin Creek, Ash Creek, there is reason to believe that the American Fisheries Society, and the Santa Clara River, Beaver Dam Wash, woundfin occurred further upstream in American Society of Ichthyologists and Coal Pits Wash, Moody Wash, and the Verde, Salt, and Gila Rivers in Herpetologists Fish Names Committee Mogatsu Creek. Arizona. (Mr. Joseph S. Nelson, American Fish Virgin spinedace are found in runs or Except for the mainstem of the Virgin Society, in litt. 1993). This proposal to pools in clear streams. The presence of River, woundfin were extirpated from designate critical habitat does not cover either in the form of vegetation, most of their historical range. Woundfin include the Muddy River form of the boulders, debris, or undercut banks is presently range from Pah Tempe Virgin River chub. However, the Service also characteristic. Substrates in Springs (also called La Verkin Springs) will review the status of the Muddy occupied habitats include rubble/ on the mainstem of the Virgin River and River population of the Virgin River cobble, gravel, sand, and silt. Spinedace the lower portion of La Verkin Creek in chub. are found in streams at depths of 0.1 to Utah, downstream to Lake Mead. A The Virgin River chub was first 0.9 m (0.3 to 2.9 ft) and with current single specimen was taken from the collected in the 1870’s from the Virgin velocities between 0.1 and 1.0 m/s (0.3 middle Muddy (Moapa) River, Clark River near Washington, Utah. to 3.2 ft/s). County, Nevada, in the late 1960’s and Historically, it was collected from the Importance of the Virgin River since that time no additional specimens mainstem Virgin River from Pah Tempe Floodplain have been collected (Deacon and Springs, Utah, downstream to the Bradley 1972). confluence with the Colorado River in Components of the river system Adult and juvenile woundfin inhabit Nevada (Cope and Yarrow 1875, Cross include the mainstem channel in which runs and quiet waters adjacent to riffles 1975). Presently, the Virgin River chub water is maintained most or all of the with sand and sand/gravel substrates. occurs within the mainstem Virgin year and the upland habitats which are Adults are generally found in habitats River from Pah Tempe Springs inundated during spring flows. These with water depths between 0.15 and downstream to at least the Mesquite seasonally flooded habitats contribute to 0.43 meters (m) (0.5 and 1.4 feet (ft)) Diversion. the biological productivity of the river with velocities between 0.24 and 0.49 Adult and juvenile Virgin River chub system by providing nutrients meters per second (m/s) (0.8 and 1.6 feet select deep runs or pools with slow to (allochthonous energy) and terrestrial per second ft/s)). Juveniles select areas moderate velocities containing boulders food sources to aquatic organisms with slower and deeper water, while fry or other instream cover over a sand (Hesse and Sheets 1993). Additionally, are found in backwaters and stream substrate. Generally, larger fish occupy Hynes (1970) reported that streams with margins which are often associated with deeper habitats; however, there is no higher percentages of vegetation growths of filamentous algae. Spawning apparent correlation with velocity. Chub contained higher densities of aquatic takes place during the period of are generally found in velocities ranging invertebrates. The Virgin River contains declining spring flows. up to 0.76 m/s (2.5 ft/s). little aquatic vegetation and produces a minimum of autochthonous Virgin River Chub Virgin Spinedace (indigenous) organic matter. Thus, the The Virgin River chub was described The historical distribution of the fauna of the Virgin River is dependent as a full species (Gila seminuda) in 1875 Virgin spinedace is not well known. on allochthonous energy inputs from (Cope and Yarrow 1875) and it was Holden (1977) speculated that the the floodplain that provide much of the thought to be restricted to the Virgin species occurred in most of the clear food base. River between Hurricane, Utah, and its water tributaries and in several Studies of the major floodplain rivers confluence with the Colorado River. mainstem reaches of the Virgin River in of the world have documented the value However, Ellis (1914) considered this southwestern Utah, northwestern of flooded bottomlands and uplands for chub to be an intermediate between the Arizona, and southeastern Nevada. fish production (Welcomme 1979). Due roundtail chub (G. robusta) and bonytail Museum records and species survey to their mobility, many species of fishes 17298 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules are able to take advantage of food the designation of critical habitat for the determinable, the Secretary of the sources from flooded lands. Indeed, Virgin River chub (43 FR 37668). This Interior (Secretary) designate critical many fishes have developed migratory proposal was also withdrawn (45 FR habitat at the time the species is strategies that allow them to utilize 64853; September 30, 1980), due to the determined to be endangered or inundated areas as spawning, nursery, 1978 amendments to the Act. The Virgin threatened. Critical habitat is now and foraging areas (Lowe-McConnel River chub was later listed as proposed for the woundfin, Virgin River 1975, Welcomme 1979). In this context, endangered on August 24, 1989 (54 FR chub, and Virgin spinedace. a rich food source of terrestrial origin 35305). Critical habitat was proposed on Role of Critical Habitat in Species may enhance fish growth, fecundity, June 24, 1988 (51 FR 22849); however, Conservation and/or survival. Use of these inundated the final determination was postponed. floodplains increases the energy When the Virgin River chub was listed, The designation of critical habitat is available for spawning and is necessary the Muddy River form was omitted due one of several measures available to for reproductive success in some species to the uncertainty of its taxonomy. The assist in the conservation and recovery (Finger and Stewart 1987). In many Virgin River Fishes Recovery Plan, of a species. Critical habitat helps focus cyprinid fishes, including these Virgin which is under final preparation, conservation activities by identifying River natives, spawning is associated includes the woundfin and Virgin River areas that contain essential habitat with seasonal rains and flooding of chub (but not the Muddy River form). features (primary constituent elements) rivers. Flood-related changes in the river The Virgin spinedace was proposed regardless of whether or not the areas environment not only induce spawning for listing as a threatened species on are currently occupied by the listed for many species, but these changes May 18, 1994 (59 FR 25875). A proposal species. Such designations alert Federal comprise the ultimate factors limiting to designate critical habitat for the agencies, States, the public, and other the survival of eggs, larvae, or young spinedace was delayed because the organizations to the areas’ importance to fish (Hontela and Stacey 1990). Service felt that the three fish species the conservation and recovery of the Loss of floodplain habitats in the would receive greater protection if species. Critical habitat also identifies Missouri River Basin has reduced fish critical habitat was designated areas that may require special biomass production as much as 98 simultaneously. management or protection percent (Karr and Schlosser 1978). On March 18, 1994, the U.S. District considerations. Areas designated as Inundation of floodplain habitats during Court, Colorado (Court) ordered the critical habitat receive protection under spring flows also provides areas with Service to designate critical habitat for section 7 of the Act. This is in regards warmer water temperatures, low the Virgin River chub, woundfin, and to actions carried out, funded, or velocity resting habitat, and cover from Virgin spinedace (if listed before authorized by a Federal agency that are predation. Recent studies in the December 31, 1994). The Court ordered likely to adversely modify or destroy Colorado River system show that the life that critical habitat be proposed no later critical habitat. Section 7 requires that histories and welfare of native riverine than April 1, 1995, and be finalized by Federal agencies consult with the fishes are linked to the maintenance of December 1, 1995. Service on actions that may destroy or a natural or historic flow regimen (i.e., Although the listing of the Virgin adversely modify critical habitat. hydrological pattern of high spring and spinedace has not been finalized, the Designation of critical habitat only low autumn-winter flows that vary in designation of critical habitat is being affects Federal actions that occur in the magnitude and duration depending on proposed for it, in order to allow for areas and does not automatically annual precipitation patterns and runoff public comment on all three species. prohibit certain actions or create a from snowmelt) (Tyus and Karp 1989, The final rule for critical habitat management plan for a listed species. 1990). Minckley and Meffe (1987) designation will also reflect the listed Such designation does not have a direct suggest that loss of flooding will result status of the Virgin spinedace as of that effect on habitat not specified as critical in extirpation of many of the native fish date. habitat. Critical habitat designation may species in the Colorado River system. increase protection of designated areas Definition of Critical Habitat and assists in the recovery of species. Previous Federal Actions Critical habitat is defined in section 3 Areas outside of critical habitat, The woundfin was listed as of the Act as: (i) The specific areas containing one or more of the primary endangered on October 13, 1970 (35 FR within the geographical area occupied constituent elements, serve to maintain 16047), and critical habitat was by a species, at the time it is listed in ecosystem integrity, thereby indirectly proposed on November 2, 1997 (42 FR accordance with the Act, on which are contributing to recovery. 57329). However, on March 6, 1979, the found those physical or biological proposal for critical habitat was features (I) essential to the conservation Relationship of Critical Habitat to withdrawn (44 FR 12382) due to the of the species and (II) that may require Recovery Plan 1978 amendments to the Act, which special management considerations or Recovery plans, developed in required proposals to be withdrawn if protection and; (ii) specific areas accordance with section 4(f) of the Act, not finalized within 2 years. A outside the geographical area occupied address the steps needed to recover a Woundfin Recovery Plan was originally by a species at the time it is listed, upon species throughout its range and approved in July 1979 and subsequently a determination that such areas are provide guidance, that may include revised on March 1, 1984. On July 24, essential for the conservation of the population goals and identification of 1985, the Service proposed the species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use areas in need of protection or special reintroduction of the woundfin into the of all methods and procedures needed management. In developing a recovery Gila River drainage in Arizona and to bring the species to the point at plan, the relationships between critical determined this population to be which listing under the Act is no longer habitat and other current planning ‘‘nonessential experimental’’ in necessary. efforts should be evaluated. Recovery accordance with section 10(j) of the Act Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as plans should recommend actions for (50 FR 30188). amended, and implementing regulations managing designated critical habitat on On August 23, 1978, the Service (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the Federal lands, as well as critical habitat proposed the listing as endangered and maximum extent prudent and under other landownership. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17299

Primary Constituent Elements that is identified for the particular life the center line of each reach (Table 1). In determining areas for designation stage for each species. This represents approximately 13.5 as critical habitat, the Service considers Physical Habitat—Areas of the Virgin percent of the woundfin’s historical those physical and biological features River Basin that are inhabited or habitat. Due to the lack of historical data that are essential for the conservation of potentially habitable by fish for use in on the distribution of the woundfin in the species. Such physical and spawning, nursing, feeding, and rearing, Arizona, this number is only an biological features (in 50 CFR 424.12) or corridors between such areas. In estimate. These proposed reaches flow include, but are not limited to, the addition to river channels, these areas through both public and private lands following items: also include side channels, secondary (Table 2). channels, backwaters, springs, and other (1) Space for individual and Virgin River Chub—The proposed population growth, and for normal areas which provide spawning, nursery, feeding, or rearing habitats, or access to designation of critical habitat for the behavior; Virgin River chub is the mainstem (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or these habitats. Virgin River, extending from the other nutritional or physiological Biological Environment—Food confluence of Ash-La Verkin Creeks to requirements; supply, predation, and competition are (3) Cover or shelter; important elements of the biological above Lake Mead. Due to the (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, environment and are considered hydrological current functions of the rearing of offspring, germination, or components of this constituent element. Virgin River, it was divided into five seed dispersal; and generally Food supply is a function of nutrient distinct reaches (Table 1) and these (5) Habitats that are protected from supply, productivity, and availability to reaches total 151.7 km (94.8 mi). This disturbance or are representative of the each life stage of the species. Predation represents approximately 70.8 percent historical geographical and ecological and competition, although considered of the historical habitat within the distributions of a species. normal components of this Virgin River Basin, excluding the range In addition, the Act stipulates that environment, may be out of balance due historically occupied by the Muddy areas containing these elements may to nonnative fish species in many areas. River chub population. These reaches require special management Habitat requirements for the listed flow through both public and private considerations or protection. fishes vary. In designating an area as land (Table 2). In determining critical habitat for the critical habitat for more than one of the Virgin Spinedace—The Service Virgin River fishes, the Service focused species, the Service assessed the area for proposes 16 reaches within the Virgin on the primary physical and biological all applicable constituent elements. River Basin as critical habitat for the elements essential to the conservation of Specific information on primary Virgin spinedace (Table 1) and these each species. The Service is required to constituent elements for each of these list these elements together with a fish species is given in the following reaches total 201.9 km (126.2 mi). This description of the designated critical section. represents approximately 87.7 percent habitat. of the historical habitat for this species The primary constituent elements Proposed Critical Habitat Designation (230.2 km or 143.9 mi) (Valdez et al. determined necessary for the survival Woundfin—The proposed designation 1991). Critical habitat is being proposed and recovery of these Virgin River fishes of critical habitat for the woundfin is the for the mainstem Virgin River, the East include, but are not limited to: mainstem Virgin River, extending from and North Forks of the Virgin River, Water—A quantity of water of the confluence of Ash-La Verkin Creeks Beaver Dam Wash, Shunes Creek, sufficient quality (i.e., temperature, to above Lake Mead. The Virgin River Moody Wash, Mogatsu Creek, the Santa dissolved oxygen, contaminants, was divided into five distinct reaches Clara River, Ash Creek, La Verkin Creek, nutrients, turbidity, etc.) that is (due to its current functions and North Creek. These reaches flow delivered to a specific location in hydrologically) and these reaches total through both public and private lands accordance with a hydrologic regime 151.7 km (94.8 mi) as measures along (Table 2).

TABLE 1.ÐPROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT IN KILOMETERS (MILES) FOR VIRGIN RIVER LISTED FISHES

State Woundfin Virgin River Chub Virgin Spinedace State Totals a

Arizona ...... 50.6 (31.6) 50.6 (31.6) 1.3 (0.8) 51.9 (32.4) Nevada ...... 41.5 (25.9) 41.5 (25.9 ...... 41.5 (25.9 Utah ...... 59.6 (37.3) 59.6 (37.3) 200.6 (125.4) 237.4 (148.4)

Total ...... 151.7 (94.8) 151.7 (94.8) 201.9 (126.2) 330.8 (206.8)

a State totals do not equal the cumulative totals of the three species due to considerable overlap of proposed critical habitat among species.

TABLE 2.ÐSHORELINE OWNERSHIP IN KILOMETERS (MILES) OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR VIRGIN RIVER LISTED FISHES a

Ownership Woundfin Virgin River Chub Virgin Spinedace

Federal b ...... 85.2 (53.3) 85.2 (53.3) 76.8 (48.0) State ...... 7.5 (4.8) 7.5 (4.8) 2.8 (1.8) Tribal ...... 9.7 (6.1) Private ...... 59.0 (36.8) 59.0 (36.8) 112.6 (70.4) 17300 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2.ÐSHORELINE OWNERSHIP IN KILOMETERS (MILES) OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT FOR VIRGIN RIVER LISTED FISHES aÐContinued

Ownership Woundfin Virgin River Chub Virgin Spinedace

Total ...... 151.7 (94.8 151.7 (94.8) 201.9 (126.2) a Landownership was typically the same on both riverbanks. However, in several reaches (1.5 km or less) the river formed a boundary between Federal and private lands. Based upon the location of the channel, these reaches were identified as either Federal or private, not both. There- fore, distances may be doubled to represent ownership along both riverbanks. b Federal lands include those managed by the Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, and National Park Service.

Virgin River Floodplain consultation procedures as if the critical activities that may adversely modify or The riparian zone within the 100-year habitat were already designated. Such a destroy such habitat or those activities floodplain of the Virgin River reaches is formal conference report is adopted as that may be affected by such being proposed as critical habitat, but the biological opinion pursuant to 50 designation. Destruction or adverse only those portions of the 100-year CFR 402.10(d) when the critical habitat modification of critical habitat is floodplain that contain constituent is designated, provided no significant defined as a direct or indirect alteration elements are being designated for information or changes in the action that appreciably diminishes the value of critical habitat. Developed lands not occur that would alter the content of the critical habitat for the survival and considered critical habitat within the opinion. recovery of a listed species. Some 100-year floodplain boundary include, Designation of critical habitat focuses activities disturb or remove the primary but are not limited to, existing paved on the primary constituent elements constituent elements within designated roads, bridges, parking lots, dikes, within the defined reaches and their critical habitat for the Virgin River levees, railroad tracks, railroad trestles, contribution to the species recovery, fishes. These activities include actions water diversion canals outside of and includes consideration of the that reduce the volume and timing of natural stream channels, active gravel species’ biological needs and factors water flows, destroy or eliminate access pits, cultivated agricultural land, and that will contribute to its recovery (i.e., to spawning and nursery habitat, residential, commercial, and industrial distribution, numbers, reproduction, prevent recruitment, impact food developments. These developed areas and viability). In evaluating Federal sources, contaminate the river, or do not contain primary constituent actions, the Service will consider the increase predation and competition by elements and will not contribute to the action’s impact on factors used to nonnative fishes. In contrast, other species’ recovery. determine critical habitat of the Virgin activities such as recreation (i.e., River listed fishes. These factors include Effects of Critical Habitat Designation boating, hiking, hunting, etc.), some the primary constituent elements of types of farming and ranching, may not Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires that water, physical habitat, and biological adversely modify critical habitat. activities Federal agencies authorize, environment. The ability of an area to fund, or carry out do not destroy or provide these constituent elements into Areas designated as critical habitat for adversely modify designated critical the future and the reaches’ capability to the Virgin River listed fishes support a habitat. This is in addition to the contribute to the recovery of the species number of proposed and existing requirement of section 7(a)(2) that will also be considered. The potential commercial and noncommercial Federal agencies insure that their level of allowable impacts or habitat activities. Some activities that will affect actions do not jeopardize the continued reduction in critical habitat reaches will critical habitat include construction and existence of a listed species. A Federal be determined on a case-by-case basis operation of hydroelectric facilities, agency must consult with the Service if during section 7 consultation. irrigation, flood control, bank a proposed action of theirs affects a For species with multiple critical stabilization, oil and gas drilling, listed species or its critical habitat. habitat reaches, each reach has local and mining, grazing, stocking or Regulations implementing this rangewide roles in contributing to the introduction of nonnative fishes, interagency cooperation provision of the conservation of the species. The loss of municipal water supplies, and resort Act are codified in 50 CFR part 402. a single reach may not jeopardize the facilities. Federal activities include the Once critical habitat is designated, continued existence of the species, but Sandstone Reservoir, Pah Tempe section 7(a)(4) of the Act and it could significantly reduce the critical Pipeline, Halfway Wash Project, Lake implementing regulations (50 CFR habitat’s contribution to recovery of a Powell Pipeline, water wheeling, water 402.10) require that Federal agencies species. In some cases, the destruction leasing, Washington Fields Pumpback, confer with the Service on any action of a reach proposed as critical habitat and dewatering of springs for municipal which will destroy or adversely modify could result in the loss of an entire and industrial purposes. Commercial the designated areas. Conference reports population, thereby preculding any activities that will not destroy or provide advisory conservation recovery and reducing the likelihood of adversely modify critical habitat include recommendations to assist a Federal survival of the species. The proposed river float trips and guided sport fishing. agency in identifying and resolving critical habitat reaches in the Virgin Noncommercial activities such as conflicts that may be caused by the River Fishes Recovery Plan include boating, fishing, and various activities proposed action. areas important for recovery of these associated with nature appreciation are If a Federal agency requests fishes. largely associated with private consultation under section 7 of the Act, recreation and most likely will not affect and the Service concurs, a formal Examples of Proposed Actions critical habitat. Section 7 of the Act only conference report may then be issued. Section 4(b)(8) requires for any applies to Federal actions (i.e., projects, Formal conference reports on proposed proposed or final regulation; permits, loans, etc.) and each Federal critical habitat contain an opinion designation of critical habitat, a brief action must be evaluated on a case-by- prepared in accordance with formal description and evaluation of those case basis. Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17301

Consideration of Economic and Other (1995 through 2040) projected to recover primary inputs are labor, capital, and Factors the listed fishes. other raw resources. Through its Washington County, Utah, and Clark multiplier analysis, the I–O model is Section 4(b)(2) of the Act considers County, Nevada are two counties that capable of generating estimates of the economic and other relevant impacts in will be directly affected by any actions changes in output for economic sectors, determining whether to exclude any taken by the Service on behalf of the changes in employment, and changes in proposed areas from the final listed fishes. Presently, these counties income due to the critical habitat designation of critical habitat. The are among the fastest growing areas in designation. The models report total Service may exclude areas from critical the United States. From 1980 to 1990, impacts resulting from interactions habitat designation when the costs or Washington County’s population grew among the different sectors of the impacts outweigh the benefits, provided by 52 percent, while Clark County’s economy. that exclusion will not result in grew by 62.5 percent. The Virgin River Regional economic efficiency impacts extinction of a species. An economic also flows through a portion of Mohave refer to the overall net impacts on the analysis was conducted on the costs of County in Arizona. This area has a very regional economy after accounting for the proposed critical habitat designation small population and a modest the effects of intercounty transfers. The (Brookshire et al. 1995). The study area economic base. Iron County, Utah, (lies goal of a regional efficiency analysis is for the economic analysis encompassed north of Washington County) is a to determine whether an action would portions of the Virgin River Basin in rapidly growing area that is have an overall positive or negative Utah, Arizona, and Nevada. economically closely linked to impact on the regional economy. The biological requirements for the Washington County. Although the A separate I–O model was developed recovery of these listed fishes and Virgin River does not flow through Iron for each county and focused on the regional economic activities were County, any economic impacts on direct and indirect impacts generated by assessed and form the basis of the Washington County would be felt in the critical habitat designation economic analysis. The biological Iron County as well. (Brookshire et al. 1995). In most cases, requirements include adjustments in The linkage between the biological impacts on a given county generated water diversions in the Virgin River requirements for the survival and impacts on neighboring counties. Thus, Basin and/or mitigation of nonflow- recovery of the listed fishes and it was necessary to investigate potential related activities within the 100-year economic activities in the region formed offsetting impacts. As a result, an I–O floodplain. The effects of recovery the basis for the economic analysis. As model was constructed that investigated efforts on future water depletions in the an index of these biological the impacts for an entire region (all four basin also were taken into requirements, adjustments made in the counties). operations of the Quail Creek Reservoir Economic activity for the models was consideration. The impacts of these and agricultural diversions on the estimated using Impact Analysis for possible changes on current and Virgin River were included. The effects Planning (IMPLAN) 1990 data sets that prospective economic activities were of recovery efforts on projected future were updated and projected through the estimated using input-output models for water development and delivery year 2040, using data from the Bureau each county and region in the Virgin projects were taken into consideration. of Economic Analysis of the U.S. River Basin. Direct and indirect impacts The direct effects on the agencies Department of Commerce. The IMPLAN on employment, wages, and State and responsible for water development and data set contains 528 economic sectors Federal revenues derived from business delivery also were taken into that were aggregated to 16 sectors and personal income taxes were also consideration. The direct and indirect (Brookshire et al. 1995). factored into the exclusion process. The impacts of these possible changes on The I–O models used in this study are results of these models are found in the current and prospective economic essentially demand-side models. The economic analysis document prepared activities were then estimated for each conventional way to introduce impacts for determining critical habitat for these county and regional economy. into such models is through a vector of particular fish species (Brookshire et al. One cannot predict the outcome of changes in final demands. That is, the 1995). This complete economic analysis future section 7 consultations involving impacts reduce the regional demand for is part of the administrative record listed fishes in the region. Economic the output of the sector that experiences which is available to the public upon impacts associated with the critical a direct impact. However, this method request. habitat designation depends on the time is not logical for determining effects on Economic Analysis Methodology required for the recovery of the listed the agricultural sector because these fishes. County and regional economic effects are generated by converting The economic analysis provides impacts are of interest when considering agricultural sectors to municipal and insights into the reallocation of the effects of critical habitat industrial (M&I) uses. This conversion resources from the perspectives of both designations. County economic impacts effectively reduces the quantity of economic efficiency and distribution or are the direct and indirect impacts of output in the agricultural sectors by equity. The efficiency criterion the critical habitat designations on restricting the supply of a key input. For determines whether designating areas as specific geographic areas. County this reason, a mixed modeling approach critical habitat produces any net gains to economic impacts were analyzed using was used, in which the agricultural society. The equity criterion looks at the input-output (I–O) models that organize impacts are represented as a supply-side resulting distribution of gains and the basic accounting relationships that shock used to generate an exogenous losses. The study region for which the describe the production section of the level of output in the agricultural economic analysis was conducted economy (Brookshire et al. 1995). The I– sectors. The direct impacts in the includes Washington and Iron Counties O model is based on the assumption remaining sectors are modeled as more in Utah, Clark County in Nevada, and that all sectors of the economy are typical changes in final demand. the portion of Mohave County in related, and the production of a good or The study utilized three scenarios to Arizona located north of the Colorado service can be described by a recipe explore the impacts of preserving the River. The time frame chosen for the whose ingredients are the outputs from listed fishes upon the water needs of the study encompasses a 45-year period other sectors of the economy. The projected human population. Projected 17302 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules economic activity to the year 2040 in All of the scenarios utilize the operation of the river would result in the Virgin River Basin, if no flows and reallocation of agricultural water to loss of revenue that must be made up habitat are protected to preserve the urban and industrial uses and/or to through higher revenues from the sale of listed fishes, is compared to projected habitat preservation for the listed fishes. water. In this model, the impact is economic activity if flows and habitat Whether habitat is preserved for fish, treated as a cost increase across all are preserved for the fish. The baseline water must be reallocated as the human sectors in proportion to their level of scenario represents a ‘‘without fish’’ population continues to grow. The economic activity. The motivation for projection of economic growth that is impacts of critical habitat designation the argument is identical to that then compared to two ‘‘with fish’’ affect the timing of the reallocation of presented in the previous section. projections. All of the scenarios used resources, and not the quantity of water To these three direct impacts, the the same population projection. that must be reallocated. The ‘‘with ‘‘with fish’’ conservation scenario adds The baseline ‘‘without fish’’ scenario fish’’ agricultural scenario produces another class of direct impacts. (WOFBA) is based upon the water three sets of direct impacts which are (1) Conservation Expenditures— development plans of water districts in outlined below. Expenditures for low-water-using the Virgin River Basin: the Washington (1) Agriculture—The conversion of appliances, landscaping changes, and County Water Conservation District use will occur earlier than under the other water-saving equipment (i.e., (WCWCD) and the Las Vegas Valley baseline scenario, with the result that timed sprinklers) in new structures Water District. The ‘‘without fish’’ agricultural output is projected to only. These expenditures are modeled scenario determines how much water decline under the ‘‘with fish’’ scenario. as being offset by reductions elsewhere will be needed for municipal and The method if incorporating this impact in the construction sector. For example, industrial development in order to into the I–O models is to introduce a costs due to the installation of low- satisfy the population projections. This reduction in the allocation of water to water-using appliances are offset scenario accepts the Boyle (1994) water the affected agricultural sectors. This through lower expenses elsewhere in need projections under a limited translates directly into a specified the construction budget. To ensure that the analysis errs on the side of conservation assumption. Thus, the reduction in the dollar value of the overstating the impacts, all water needs of the expanding output of the agriculture sector. This conservation-related expenditures are population base are determined by a mechanism was used to generate the assumed to be made outside the region, gallons-per-day-per-capita value, which decline in agricultural output in the and all offsetting reductions in assumes a level of conservation above baseline (WOFBA) projection. Water expenditures are assumed to be incurred the existing consumption observed in was pulled from agriculture to meet the by local suppliers. Thus, conservation- the region. needs of the growing M&I sectors. The growth in the nonagricultural sectors of related expenditures are introduced into The ‘‘with fish’’ structural scenario the economy, reported in the WOFBA the I–O models as a negative impact for (WFST) asks the same questions as in projection, is predicated on the the region. the baseline scenario. The fundamental conversion of water to M&I uses. It should be emphasized that the differences are—(1) Given the water (2) Water Delivery Projects—To meet water delivery projects mentioned in needs associated with preserving the the baseline growth projection for these scenarios are necessary in any listed fishes, the structural water Washington County, several water case to support the water needs of the development projects must be brought delivery projects are under region’s growing population. Actions on line at an earlier time, and (2) winter consideration. Supplying instream taken to preserve and restore the listed flows below Quail Creek Diversion water for the fishes will require these fish species in the Virgin River will remain at 2.4 cubic meters per second projects to be built earlier than in the affect only the timing of these projects. (86 cubic feet per second) rather than ‘‘without fish’’ baseline. This may result They are not the primary reason for why 1.4 cubic meters per second (50 cubic in an increased cost of water delivery. these projects must be built. The same feet per second) as in the ‘‘without fish’’ This cost increase is driven by increased is true for the agricultural conversions scenario. Generally, the volume of water user cost of the funds devoted to the that are required to satisfy the region’s available from each new project is not projects. The increased cost of each growing municipal and industrial water directly affected by the actions taken on accelerated project is incorporated as an needs. Using some Virgin River water to behalf of the listed fishes. However, the increase in the weighted average cost meet the listed fishes’ requirements may maintenance of the 86 cfs instream flow per acre-foot of water delivered to the affect the timing of agricultural for the listed fishes results in less users. Thus, a new delivery project retirements. However, it is not the root available water for municipal use. could increase in the user’s total ‘‘water cause for the retirements nor will it Therefore, water projects are required to bill.’’ A cost increase for a basic input involve condemnation of any come on line sooner to meet the is incorporated into the I–O models as agricultural lands. Agricultural projected demand. In addition, the an equiproportionate reduction in the conversions will continue to be agricultural retirement program must level of expenditure in each sector of voluntary market transactions. begin earlier. In this scenario, the per- the economy. Actions taken on behalf of the listed capita consumption of water is the same (3) Electric Power—WCWCD runs two fishes result in two types of direct as in the baseline. small hydroelectric power facilities and impacts to the affected economies. The The ‘‘with fish’’ conservation scenario sells the power to the local grid. As a instream flows for the fishes require that (WFCO) addresses the water needs of result of diversions that put water into the conversion of agricultural water to the growing population and the listed the Virgin River to meet fish needs, M&I uses take place earlier than without fishes through a combination of power production may decline. For the fish consideration. It is important to conservation and agricultural electricity users in the area, there is no note that actions taken on behalf of the retirements. Conservation requires that impact as a result of this change because fishes affect only the timing of this per-capita consumption should fall. the amount of power produced is small conversion. This is achieved through water-saving and seasonal and the decline will be Setting aside instream flows for the technologies incorporated into new made up through load shifting. For the listed fishes requires the timing of some homes and industrial facilities. WCWCD, however, the change in the planned water delivery projects to be Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17303 altered. Actions taken on behalf of the for the regional economy. The three agricultural land is expected when fishes affect only the timing of water scenarios investigated in this study are water and agricultural land are used for delivery projects that are required to based on the assumption of sustained other purposes. support the growing human population. regional population growth rates during The Act requires that the economic the 45-year study period, even though a effects of designating critical habitat be Results of the Economic Analysis decline is expected as desirable building computed separately from the total The Virgin River Basin has an sites become scarce. The growing economic effects of listing and critical economy that is service-oriented, thus population’s water needs will be met by habitat designation. Table 3 summarizes reflecting the popularity of the region as constructing a series of dams to increase the effects of critical habitat designation a retirement and recreation area. the region’s water supply for municipal under the WFST and WFCO impact Employment, earnings, and tax revenues and industrial uses. This will also scenarios. These effects are reported for are reported for each of the sectors improve water quality in the Virgin the entire Virgin River region, including analyzed in the I–O models, as well as River. In addition, retirement of Washington County and Clark Counties.

TABLE 3.ÐCOUNTY AND REGIONAL-LEVEL PRESENT VALUE AND ANNUALIZED INCREMENTAL CRITICAL HABITAT IMPACTS (1990 $ MILLIONS) (3 PERCENT DISCOUNT RATE)

Output Employment Earnings Tax revenues

WFST vs WOFBA: Washington: Present Value ...... ¥47.496 ...... ¥13.617 ...... ¥6.182 Percent Deviation from WOFBA ...... ¥0.0016 ...... ¥0.0019 ...... ¥0.0016 ...... ¥0.0016 Annualized Values ...... ¥1.947 ...... ¥26 ...... ¥0.558 ...... ¥0.253 Clark: Present Value ...... ¥10.63 ...... ¥0.827 ...... ¥0.632 Percent Deviation from WOFBA ...... ¥0.00001 .... ¥0.0001 ...... 0 ...... 0 Annualized Values ...... ¥0.428 ...... ¥1 ...... ¥0.034 ...... ¥0.026 Region: Present Value ...... ¥59.818 ...... ¥14.961 ...... ¥6.283 Percent Deviation from WOFBA ...... ¥0.0001 ...... ¥0.0001 ...... 0 ...... ¥0.00001 Annualized Values ...... ¥2.453 ...... ¥30 ...... ¥0.613 ...... ¥0.258 WFCO vs. WOFBA: Output ...... Employment Earnings ...... Tax Revenues Washington: Present Value ...... ¥13.742 ...... ¥2.065 ...... ¥0.133 Percent Deviation form WOFBA ...... ¥0.00046 .... ¥0.00011 .... ¥0.00024 .... ¥0.00003 Annualized Values ...... ¥0.563 ...... 4 ...... ¥0.085 ...... ¥0.005 Region: Present Value ...... ¥20.938 ...... ¥1.12 ...... ¥1.476 Percent Deviation from WOFBA ...... 0 ...... 0 ...... 0 ...... 0 Annualized values ...... ¥0.858 ...... 4 ...... ¥0.046 ...... ¥0.061

Under the WFST scenario, the present percent). The other aggregate effects are reasonable approximations may be value of output changes in the of similar relative magnitudes. obtained through aggregate factor Washington County economy due to Water use conservation can payments. These omit surplus measures critical habitat designation is ¥$1.95 significantly mitigate the effects of (producer and consumer) and hence million annually. This constitutes designating critical habitat for these understate the aggregate changes in 0.0016 percent of the present value of listed fishes. This is also true for the national efficiency. They do, however, the baseline stream of output (WOFBA). critical habitat effects alone. Under the provide a reasonable approximation Employment and earnings effects are WFCO scenario, the present value of the under certain assumptions. presented in the report and are similar output changes in Washington County is In many applications of I–O analysis to that of the output effects. ¥$13.7 million, 0.00046 percent of the for use as inputs to a cost-benefit baseline level of activity. For the region analysis, aggregate factor payments For Clark County, the output effects of as a whole, the output effects of (value added) are used to represent the the critical habitat designation are designating critical habitat are ¥$20.9 national efficiency effect of a policy ¥$0.43 million annually. The baseline million, an amount too small to change or action. This measure is economy of Clark County is much larger calculate as a percentage of the baseline. correct only for cases in which the than that of Washington County. There are no conservation scenario value-added change can be attributed Consequently, the effects of the impacts for Clark County for reasons solely to the policy change or action designation of critical habitat on the discussed later. undertaken. In the case of the listed economy are smaller. The cumulative fishes, this assumption is reasonable output effects represent only 0.00001 National Efficiency Effects because all changes in resource percent of the baseline level of To obtain true measures of national allocation can be attributed to actions economic activity. Both the earnings efficiency impacts, exact welfare taken on behalf of the fishes by virtue and tax revenue effects are too small to changes must be computed. These are of the methodology followed in this be reliably reported as deviations from calculated as changes in aggregate study. the baseline level of economic activity. household utility. In general, I–O Including secondary effects in For the region as a whole, the output models are not capable of producing computing national efficiency impacts effect of designating critical habitat is such values because they lack a fully is valid because these effects are ¥$2.45 million annually (0.0001 modeled household sector. However, technological in nature rather than pure 17304 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules transfers. That is, the linkages in the population growth and economic this notice and for public review. Copies economy between productive sectors development will lead to shifts in may be obtained by contacting the field arise from the basic production resource use. Consequently, agricultural office (see ADDRESSES section). functions in the economy. Thus, a direct water will be converted to M&I uses Available Conservation Measures impact occurring in one sector of the resulting in a decline in agricultural economy will generate ripple effects output. At the same time, several The purpose of the Act, as stated in throughout the economy. Such effects required water delivery projects are section 2(b), is to provide a means to are solely attributable to the initial planned to provide water to sustain the conserve the ecosystems upon which direct impact. projected growth levels. endangered and threatened species The I–O model permits computation The WFST scenario takes the baseline depend and to provide a program for the of this factor income, and it may be used regional projection and introduces conservation of listed species. Section to measure the national efficiency measures designed to protect and 2(c)(1) of the Act declares that effects of various changes in the recover the listed fishes. These ‘‘* * * all Federal departments and economy, such as those introduced by measures result in more rapid agencies shall seek to conserve actions taken on behalf of the listed conversion of agricultural water and the endangered and threatened species and fishes. Aggregate factor payments are acceleration of some water delivery shall utilize their authorities in computed for the baseline (WOFBA) projects. Thus, agricultural production furtherance of the purposes of this Act.’’ scenario and for the ‘‘with fish’’ declines more quickly under the WFST The Act mandates the conservation of scenarios (WFST and WFCO). scenario. Water costs also rise as a result listed species through various The factor payments capture the value of the earlier development of these mechanisms, such as section 7 added from the production side of the projects, and the effect is a reduced (requiring Federal agencies to further local economy. Because some of the level of final demand in all sectors. the purposes of the Act by carrying out output change is captured through In summary, all of the economic conservation programs and insuring that leakages to the rest of the world effects of the WFST scenario indicate Federal actions will not likely (principally the United States), the total that preserving and recovering the listed jeopardize the continued existence of factor payments changes will be smaller fishes will have a relatively small the listed species or result in the than the total output changes. impact on the overall economy. Some destruction or adverse modification of Based on these results, it is not sectors will experience greater declines critical habitat), section 9 (prohibition of surprising that the effects of the factor than others, but the overall decline in taking of listed species), section 10 payments are small for the county-level economic activity is projected to be (research permits and habitat and regional analysis. Under the WFST small. conservation plans), section 6 scenario, the efficiency losses to the Since water usage rates in Washington (cooperative State and Federal grants), nation are a $32.2 million reduction in County are high compared to other land acquisition, and research. The value added. The annualized value of southwestern cities, a conservation section 7 requirement that Federal this reduction is ¥$1.32 million. With scenario (WFCO) was analyzed. In this agencies consult with the Service if water conservation measures, the scenario, consumption levels were their actions may impact critical habitat cumulative change (over the 45-year reduced through the use of water- enables the Service to assess Federal period) in value added is ¥$10.68 conserving appliances, fixtures, and activities that may impair survival and million (¥$0.438 million as an landscaping, applied to new recovery potential, thus ensuring that annualized value). Water conservation construction only. Conservation is not such actions are considered in relation mitigates most of the impacts associated without some cost. These costs were to the goals and recommendations of the with the critical habitat designation. introduced into the models in the form recovery plan. For Washington County, the present of crowding-out other expenditures. value of the cumulative changes (over Thus, construction costs were projected Public Comments Solicited the 45-year period) in value added is to increase. Offsetting this cost increase The Service finds that any final action ¥$24.62 million for the WFST scenario. are the savings that will result from resulting from this proposal be accurate With the inclusion of water delaying the planned construction of and effective as possible. Therefore, the conservation measures, this value falls new water delivery facilities. A further Service requests comments or to ¥$8.153 million (annualized value offset is provided because agricultural suggestions from the public, other ¥$0.764 million). water is converted to M&I uses at a concerned government agencies, Indian For Clark County, the present value of slower pace. Nations, the scientific community, the cumulative changes (over the 45- The overall effect of conservation is commercial interests, or any other year period) is ¥$4.649 million an almost complete mitigation of the interested party concerning this (annualized value is ¥$0.191 million). economic effects associated with actions proposed rule. Comments are undertaken on behalf of the listed Conclusions of the Economic Analysis particularly sought concerning: fishes. In fact, by the latter part of the (1) The location and reasons why any The three described impact scenarios study period, there are negative effects Federal or non-Federal lands (either were analyzed and it is useful to only in the agriculture and construction proposed critical habitat or additional distinguish them in summarizing the sectors. However, latter effects are likely areas) should or should not be economic effects of actions taken on overstated in the analysis due to the determined to be critical habitat as behalf of the listed fishes. The baseline extreme nature of the complete provided by section 4 of the Act; scenario (WOFBA) represents the way crowding-out assumption. (2) Current and planned activities in in which the county-level and regional The Service has prepared detailed the vicinity of proposed critical habitat economies would grow over the 45-year documents further explaining the areas and their possible impacts on study period if no actions were taken to biology of each fish species (Maddux et proposed critical habitat; protect the listed species. The entire al. 1995) and the economic analysis (3) Other physical and biological region is projected to experience process used to determine critical features that are essential to the population growth at rates well above habitat (Brookshire et al. 1995). These conservation of the species and in need the national average. Projected documents are available to supplement of special management or protection; Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17305

(4) Specific information on the scale, under the authority of the National § 17.11 [Amended] location, and distribution of primary Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need 2. It is proposed to amend § 17.11(h) constituent elements on all ownership not be prepared in connection with by revising the ‘‘critical habitat’’ entry and land designations; regulations adopted pursuant to section for ‘‘Chub, Virgin River’’ and (5) Information concerning health of 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining the ‘‘Woundfin’’ under Fishes, to read the ecosystems on which the woundfin, Service’s reasons for this determination ‘‘17.95(e)’’. Virgin River chub, and Virgin spinedace was published in the Federal Register 3. It is proposed to amend § 17.95(e) depend; on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). by adding critical habitat of the Virgin (6) Information on the economic Required Determinations River chub (Gila robusta seminuda=G. benefits and costs that would result seminuda) and woundfin (Plagopterus from this proposed designation of This proposed rule was reviewed argentissimus) in the same alphabetical critical habitat; under Executive Order 12866. The rule order as these species occur in 17.11(h). (7) Data and information relevant to will not have a significant economic determining whether the benefits of § 17.95 Critical habitat-fish and wildlife. effect on a substantial number of small excluding a particular area from critical entities under the Regulatory Flexibility * * * * * habitat outweigh the benefits of Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). Based on the (e) * * * specifying the area as critical habitat; Virgin River Chub (Gila seminuda) (8) The methods and thresholds the information discussed in this rule Service might use in determining concerning public projects and private Legal descriptions for St. George whether the costs of designating an area activities within the proposed critical (Utah-Arizona) and Littlefield (Arizona) outweigh the benefits of designation; habitat, significant economic impacts were obtained from the 1987 Bureau of (9) Methods of analysis useful in will not result from this action. Also, no Land Management (BLM) maps (Surface × evaluating economic and other relevant direct costs, enforcement costs, Management Status 30 60 Minute impacts; information collection, or recordkeeping Quadrangle). Legal descriptions for (10) Information regarding the requirements are imposed on small Overton (Nevada-Arizona) were suitability or unsuitability of critical entities by this action, and the rule obtained from the 1989 BLM maps habitat boundaries of the 100-year contains no recordkeeping requirements (Surface Management Status 30×60 floodplain (as defined on Federal as defined under the Paperwork Minute Quadrangle). Critical habitat Emergency Management Agency Reduction Act of 1980 (44 U.S.C. 3501 areas proposed for the Virgin River chub (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps et seq.). This rule does not require a in each State are as follows: (FIRMs)); federalism assessment under Executive Utah, Washington County. The Virgin (11) Information about areas of land or Order 12612 because it would not have River from its confluence with Ash-La water located within the outer any significant federalism effects as Verkin Creeks in T.41S., R.13W., Sec. 23 boundaries of the proposed critical described in the order. (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to habitat, but that do not provide primary References Cited Washington Fields Diversion in T.42S., constituent elements and thus can be R.14W., Sec. 21 (Salt Lake Base and excluded. Of particular interest are A complete list of all references cited Meridian). means to describe these areas of land is available upon request from the Field Utah, Washington County. The Virgin within specific limits using reference Supervisor, Salt Lake City Field Office River from the Washington Fields points and lines as found on standard (see ADDRESSES section). Diversion in T.42S., R.14W., Sec. 21 topographical maps. (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to the Authors The final decision on this proposal Johnson Diversion in T.42S., R.15W., will take into consideration the The primary authors of this proposal are Sec. 27 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). comments and any additional Henry R. Maddux and Janet A. Mizzi of the Utah, Washington County. The Virgin information received by the Service, and Service’s Salt Lake City Field Office; Selena River from the Johnson Diversion in J. Werdon of the Service’s Nevada State such communications may lead to a Office; and Lesley A. Fitzpatrick of the T.42S., R.15W., Sec. 27 (Salt Lake Base final regulation that differs from this Service’s Arizona State Office. and Meridian) to the Arizona-Utah proposal. border in T.43S., R.17W., Sec. 36 (Salt List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Lake Base and Meridian). Public Hearings Arizona, Mohave County. The Virgin Endangered and threatened species, The Act provides for at least one River from the Arizona-Utah border in Exports, Imports, Reporting and public hearing on this proposal, if T.42N., R.13W., Sec. 33 (Salt Lake Base recordkeeping requirements, requested within 45 days from date of and Meridian) to the Arizona-Nevada Transportation. publication of this proposal in the border in T.39N., R.16W., Sec. 2 (Salt Federal Register. Requests for a hearing Proposed Regulation Promulgation Lake Base and Meridian). must be made in writing and addressed Nevada, Clark County. The Virgin to the Field Supervisor, Salt Lake City Accordingly, the Service hereby River from the Arizona-Nevada border Field Office (see ADDRESSES section). proposes to amend part 17, subchapter in T.13S., R.71E., Sec. 15 (Salt Lake The Service has arranged for a public B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Base and Meridian) to the highwater hearing to be held on May 8, 1995, from Federal Regulations, as set forth below: level of Lake Mead in T.16S., R.68E., 5 p.m. to 9 p.m., with registration Sec. 1 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). PART 17Ð[AMENDED] beginning at 4:30 p.m., at the St. George Known constituent elements include Hilton Inn, 1450 South Hilton Drive, St. water, physical habitat, and biological 1. The authority citation for part 17 George, Utah. environment as required for each continues to read as follows: National Environmental Policy Act particular life stage for each species. Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. The Service has determined that an 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– Note: Map follows. Environmental Assessment, as defined 625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. BILLING CODE 4310±55±M 17306 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4310±55±C Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17307

Woundfin (Plagopterus argentissimus) Washington Fields Diversion in T.42S., T.42N., R. 13W., Sec. 33 (Salt Lake Base Legal descriptions for St. George R.14W., Sec. 21 (Salt Lake Base and and Meridian) to the Arizona-Nevada Meridian). (Utah-Arizona) and Littlefield (Arizona) border in T.39N., R.16W., Sec. 2 (Salt Utah, Washington County. The Virgin were obtained from the 1987 BLM maps Lake Base and Meridian). River from the Washington Fields (Surface Management Status 30×60 Nevada, Clark County. The Virgin Diversion in T.42S., R.14W., Sec. 21 River from the Arizona-Nevada border Minute Quadrangles). Legal descriptions (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to the for Overton (Nevada-Arizona) were in T.13S., R.71E., Sec. 15 (Salt Lake Johnson Diversion in T.42S., R.15W., Base and Meridian) to the highwater obtained from the 1989 BLM maps Sec. 27 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). (Surface Management Status 30×60 level of Lake Mead in T.16S., R.68E., Utah, Washington County. The Virgin Sec. 1 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). Minute Quadrangles). Critical habitat River from the Johnson Diversion in areas proposed for the woundfin in each T.42S., R.15W., Sec. 27 (Salt Lake Base Known constituent elements include State are as follows: and Meridian) to the Arizona-Utah water, physical habitat, and biological Utah, Washington County. The Virgin border in T.43S., R.17W., Sec. 36 (Salt environment as required for each River from its confluence with Ash-La Lake Base and Meridian). particular life stage for each species. Verkin Creeks in T.41S., R.13W., Sec. 23 Arizona, Mohave County. The Virgin Note: Map follows. (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to the River from the Arizona-Utah border in BILLING CODE 4310±55±M 17308 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4310±55±C Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17309

4. The proposed rule published in the and Meridian) to its confluence with the Virgin River in T.41S., R.13W., Sec. 23 Federal Register of May 18, 1994, pages East Fork of the Virgin River in T.42S., (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). 25875–25880, adding the Virgin R.10W., Sec. 4 (Salt Lake Base and Utah, Washington County. La Verkin spinedace to § 17.11(h) is amended by Meridian). Creek from Chute Falls in T.40S., revising the critical habitat entry for Utah, Washington County. Beaver R.12W., Sec. 30 (Salt Lake Base and ‘‘Spinedace, Virgin’’ to read ‘‘17.95(e)’’. Dam Wash from the Narrows in T.39S., Meridian) to its confluence with the 5. The proposed rule published in the R.20W., Sec. 1 (Salt Lake Base and Virgin River in T.41S., R.13W., Sec. 23 Federal Register of May 18, 1994, pages Meridian) to 0.4 km (0.25 mi) upstream (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). 25875–25880, adding the Virgin of the confluence with East Bunker Peak Utah, Washington County. North spinedace to § 17.11(h) is further Wash in T.40S., R.19W., Sec. 5 (Salt Creek from the confluence of the Left amended by adding critical habitat of Lake Base and Meridian). and Right Forks in T.40S., R.11W., Sec. the Virgin spinedace (Lepidomeda Utah, Washington County. Beaver 33 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to its mollispinis mollispinis) to § 17.95(e) in Dam Wash from Horse Canyon in confluence with the Virgin River in the same alphabetical order as the T.41S., R.19W., Sec. 31 (Salt Lake Base T.41S., R.12W., Sec. 23 (Salt Lake Base species occurs in 17.11(h). and Meridian) downstream through and Meridian). Lytle Ranch downstream to Iverson § 17.95 Critical habitat-fish and wildlife. Utah, Washington County. The Virgin Ranch in T.42S., R.20W., Sec. 13 (Salt River from the confluence of Ash-La * * * * * Lake Base and Meridian). Verkin Creeks in T.41S., R.13W., Sec. 23 (e) * * * Utah, Washington County. Moody (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to the * * * * * Wash from the lower end of Racer Washington Fields Diversion in T.42S., Virgin Spinedace (Lepidomeda Canyon in T.38S., R.17W. Sec. 33 (Salt R.14W., Sec. 21 (Salt Lake Base and mollispinis mollispinis) Lake Base and Meridian) to just below Meridian). Legal descriptions for St. George the Dixie National Forest Boundary in Utah, Washington County. The North (Utah-Arizona) and Littlefield (Arizona) T.39S., R.17W., Sec. 26 (Salt Lake Base Fork of the Virgin River from the were obtained from the 1987 BLM maps and Meridian). Narrows in T.40S., R10W., Sec. 34 (Salt × (Surface Management Status 30 60 Utah, Washington County. Mogatsu Lake Base and Meridian) to its Minute Quadrangles). Legal descriptions Creek from the falls downstream of confluence with the East Fork of the for Kanab (Utah-Arizona) were obtained Bingham Ranch in T.39S., R.16W., Sec. Virgin River in T.42S., R.10W., Sec. 5 from the 1983 BLM maps (Surface 30 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to its (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). × Management Status 30 60 Minute confluence with the Santa Clara River in Utah, Washington County. The Virgin Quadrangles). Critical habitat areas T.40S., R.17W., Sec. 14 (Salt Lake Base River from the confluence of the East proposed for the Virgin spinedace in and Meridian). and North Forks in T.42S., R.10W., Sec. each State are as follows: Uath, Washington County. Santa Clara 5 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to the Arizona, Mohave County. Beaver Dam River from Veyo Hot Springs in T.39S., Quail Creek Diversion in T.41S., Wash from the confluence with the R.16W., Sec. 32 (Salt Lake Base and R.14W., Sec. 36 (Salt Lake Base and Virgin River in T.40N., R.15W., Sec. 4 Meridian) to the upstream end of Meridian). (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) upstream Gunlock Reservoir in T.40S., R.17W., Utah, Washington County. The Virgin 1.3 km (0.8 mi) in T.40N., R15W., Sec. Sec. 29 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). River from the Quail Creek Diversion in 5 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). Utah, Washington County. Santa Clara T.41S., R.12W., Sec. 30 (Salt Lake Base Utah, Kane County. The East Fork of River from downstream of the dam and Meridian) to the confluence of Ash- the Virgin River from the falls in forming Gunlock Reservoir in T.41S., La Verkin Creeks in T.41S., R.13W, Sec. Parunuweap Canyon in T.42S., R.9W., R.17W., Sec. 5 (Salt Lake Base and 23) (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). Sec. 5 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian) to Meridian) to its confluence with the Known constituent elements include its confluence with the North Fork of Virgin River in T.43S., R.15W., Sec. 6 water, physical habitat, and biological the Virgin River in T.42S., R.10W., Sec. (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). environment as required for each 5 (Salt Lake Base and Meridian). Utah, Washington County. Ash Creek particular life stage for each species. Utah, Kane County. Shunes Creek from Toquerville Springs in T.40S., from the Second Creek confluence in R.13W., Sec. 35 (Salt Lake Base and Note: Map follows. T.42S., R.10W., Sec. 11 (Salt Lake Base Meridian) to its confluence with the BILLING CODE 4310±55±M 17310 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules

BILLING CODE 4310±55±C Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 65 / Wednesday, April 5, 1995 / Proposed Rules 17311

Dated: March 29, 1995. George T. Frampton, Jr., Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 95–8301 Filed 3–31–95; 2:53 pm] BILLING CODE 4310±55±M