S Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules 21095

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR materials received will be available for locations which formerly supported Fish and Wildlife Service public inspection during normal healthy populations. These same business hours, by appointment, at the locations may later support spinedace 50 CFR Part 17 Service's Office of Endangered Species populations. Little Colorado spinedace Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at the above address. are presently know from the following and Plants; Proposal To Determine FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: locations (Miller, 1961; Miller and Lepidomeda Vittata (Little Colorado Dr. James E. Johnson, Chief, Office of Hubbs, 1960; Minckley, 1973; Minckley Spinedace) To Be a Threatened Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and and Carufel, 1967; Miller, 1963; Minckley Species With Critical Habitat Wildlife Service, Region 2 (see and McCall, 1977): ADDRESSES AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, above) 505/766-3972. (1) EasLClear Creek and its Interior. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION Tributaries. Coconino County, Arizona. The spinedace occupies approximately ACTION: Proposed rule. Background 35 stream miles extending upstream SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife The Little Colorado spinedace, from the confluence with Clear Creek to Service proposes to list Lepidomeda Lepidomeda vittata, was first collected the headwaters near Potato Lake. The vittata (Little Colorado spinedace), a by members of the U.S. Topographical stream flows through the Apache- native fish of Arizona, as a threatened and Geographical Survey west of the Sitgreaves and Coconino National species and to determine its critical 100th meridian (Wheeler, 1889). The Forests, with some interspersed habitat under the authority contained in species was described by E.D. Cope in - privately-owned lands. At present the the Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1874 from that collection.g.ope listed the only tributary known to harbor Little 1978, as amended. A special rule is type locality as the “Chiquito Colorado," Colorado spinedance is Leonard Canyon proposed which would allow take for which was later defined as "The Little at Dines tank (T. 13 N., R. 12 E, Sec. 281; certain purposes in accordance with Colorado River somewhere between the however, during periods of higher Arizona State laws and regulations. The mouth of the Uni River and Sierra population levels it is likely that Little Colorado spinedace was Blanca (White Mountain)" (Miller and spinedace occupy the other tributaries, historically known to occur throughout - Hubbs, 1960). This fish is a member of particularly near their mouths. the upper portions of the Little Colorado the family Cyprinidae and is generally (2) Chevelon Creek. Navajo County, River drainage, but is now found only in less than 10 centimeters (4 inches) in Arizona. The spinedace occupies the portions of East Clear, Chevelon, Silver, total length. The species is endemic to lower 8 stream miles from the and Nutrioso Creeks and the Little the upper portions of the Little Colorado confluence with the Little Colorado Colorado River in Coconino, Navajo, River and to its north flowing, River, near Winslow, upstream. Lands and Apache Counties, Arizona. The permanent tributaries on the Mogollon here are privately-owned, with the decline of this species has been caused Rim and the northern slopes of the exception of a small portion which is the by habitat alteration and toss due to White Mountains, in eastern Arizona. Arizona Game and Fish Department's impoundment, removal of water from This naturally restricted historic range- Chevelon Creek Wildlife Area. the streams, channelization, gazing, has been significantly reduced in the (3) Silver Creek. Navajo County, road building, urban growth, and other past 50 years by habitat destruction, use Arizona. The spinedace occupies human activities. The decline was also of fish toxicants, and the introduction of approximately 20 stream miles of Silver caused by the introduction and spread exotic predatory and competitive fish Creek extending from its confluence of exotic predatory and competitive fish species. with the Little Colorado River upstream species, and the use of ichthyotoxins in • Populations of the Little Colorado to its headwaters near the town of Silver many of its native streams. These same spinedace, like those of many other Creek. The stream flows primarily on factors continue to threaten the survival desert fishes, fluctuate dramatically privately-owned lands with only small of the spinedace, and there are several from year-to-year. There are many sections of stream flowing through State water development projects which have reasons for these fluctuations, and and Bureau of Land Management lands. been or are being proposed for the historically they have probably reflected (4) Little Colorado River. Apache remaining habitat of the species. periods of drought and/or increased County, Arizona. The Little Colorado Remaining Little Colorado spinedace rainfall. However, in more recent history spinedace is found sporadically habitat is found on U.S. Forest Service, the impact of human populations and throughout approximately 40 miles of Bureau of Land Management, State of their increasing demand for water has stream in this area, from the town of St. Arizona, and privately owned lands. adversely affected spinedace Johns upstream to the headwaters in the This proposal, if finalized, would populations. Various uses of water by White Mountains near the town of implement Federal protection for man have adversely altered spinedace Greer. Upstream from St. Johns, Lepidomeda vittata as provided by the habitat and have accentuated Arizona. the river flows through Endangered Species Act of 1973, as population lows and reduced population privately-owned lands, then through amended. The Service seeks data and highs. Such activities could lead to the contiguous State lands, and then through comments from the public, State, and extirpation of the Little Colorado additional privately-owned lands Federal agencies on this proposal. spinedace in areas which normally around the town of Springerville. The DATEM Comments from all interested would have sustained populations of the upper end of the river flows through the parties must be received by July 22. fish through drought periods.. Such Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest with 1985. Public hearing requests must he population fluctuations make it difficult only a few privately-owned inholding,s. received by July 8. 1985. to delineate precisely the current range (5) Nutrioso Creek. Apache County, ADDRESSES: Comments and materials of the Little Colorado spinedace. Arizona. The spinedace occupies concerning this proposal sivield be sent Spinedace populations have fallen to approximately 12 stream miles from the to.the Regional Director, U.S. Fish and extremely low levels several times confluence with the Little Colorado Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, 421 Gold within the past 25 years. During these River upstream to near the town of Avenue SW.. Room 407, Albuquerque, population lows, extensive collection Nutrioso. The stream flows through New Mexico 87103. Cennments and • efforts may fail to take spinedace at privately-owned lands around the towns 21086 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 I Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules of Springerville and Nutrioso; however, Little Colorado River basin. One of the stream and significantly decrease approximately 5 miles of the stream most detrimental of these uses has been- downstream flows, while contributing flows through the Apache-Sitgreaves the impoundment of the rivers and significantly to the problem of exotic National Forest, and a small portion streams. The spinedace is a stream predatory and competitive fishes in East flows through State-owned lands. dwelling fish and as such is unable to Clear Creek (see Factors C and E). This The Little Colorado spinedace exist in lacustrine waters such as project is presently inactive and is not inhabits very small to moderate sized reservoirs. There are now expected to be reactivated in the near _ streams and is characteristically found approximately 150 impoundments in the future. However, the nearby town of in pools with flowing water, over fine Little Colorado basin, ranging from Flagstaff is presently seeking ways to - gravel and silt-mud substrates. During small stock tanks to reservoirs of up to increase its water supply, thus creating periods of drought spinedace persist in 1,400 surface acres. Except for the pressure to reactivate this or other intermittent streambed pools, and during smaller stock tanks located on streams, similar projects. In 1977, the Arizona flooding they tend to distribute these reservoirs are uninhabitable by Public Service Corporation did test themselves throughout the stream with the spinedace. In many areas, these drilling to tap groundwater in the no apparent habitat preferences. The reservoirs have inundated and thus Chevelon Creek drainage. This water spinedace apparently spawns primarily destroyed previously occupied was to be used for the Cholla Lake in early summer, but continues at a spinedace stream habitat. In addition, generating facility near Holbrook, reduced level until early fall (Minckley, these impoundments have often resulted Arizona; however, the quality of the 1973). in the total or partial dewatering of long water found in the test drilling was too The Little Colorado spinedace was downstream reaches of stream, resulting poor for their needs. Additionally, the included in the Service's "Review of in the destructiqp of spinedace habitat. Arizona Game and Fish Department has Vertebrate Wildlife for Listing as The presence of these reservoirs also identified nine potential sites within Endangered or Threatened Species" adversely affects the continued existing spinedace range that they are Federal Register published in the on existence of the spinedace upstream and considering for future recreational December 30, 1982 (47 FR 58454-60). It downstream from the reservoir through impoundments. 1 was considered a category species, predation by and competition with Residential, recreational, and urban indicating that the Service had exotic fish species. growth in the vicinity of the towns of substantial information on hand to Other human uses and alterations of Snowflake, Taylor, Springerville, and support a proposal to list as endangered the waters aid lands of the Little Saint Johns, Arizona, are also potential or threatened. On April 12, 1983, the Colorado spinedace range have also threats to spinedace habitat. This Service received a petition from the been detrimental to spinedace habitat. growth has indirect effects on the Desert Fishes Council to list the Little These uses include riparian destruction, spinedace through an increased water Colorado spinedace. this petition was urban growth, mining, timber and - demand, and direct effects through found to contain substantial scientific or pulpwoodharvest, road construction, alterations to the stream channels and commercial information, and a notice of livestock grazing, and other watershed riparian zones and by contributing finding was published on June 14, 1983 disturbances. The precise effect of many pollution and excess sediments into the (48FR 72273). After a review and of these uses on fish populations, streams. evaluation of the petition's merits, the - particularly spinedace, are difficult to Much of the remaining Little Colorado service has found that the petitioned define. However, these uses have spinedace habitat is afforded some action is warranted, and a notice of the - resulted in many changes to the streams protection by inaccessibility or by finding that the species warrants listing utilized by the Litle Colorado spinedace was published in the Federal Register on such as dewatering, erosion and channel public ownership of the lands. The East July 13, 1984(49 FR 28583). This downcutting, chemical and organic Clear Creek population is located on the proposed rule constituted a required 12- . pollution, alteration of flow regimes, Coconino and Apache-Sitgreaves month finding on that petition, that the alteration of stream temperature, and National Forests; portions of the Little action requested is warranted. excessive siltation. In the 1880's, the Colorado River, Silver and Nutrioso Little eared° River above Grand Falls Creeks populations are also located on Summary of Factors Affecting the the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest, Species was a perennial stream with extensive riparian areas of grasses, cottonwoods, and the lower portion of Chevelon Creek Section 4(a)(1) of the Endangered and willows. Extensive swamps and flows through a rugged canyon in Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and marshy areas existed above the town of relatively roadless country. As the regulations promulgated to implement Winslow (Miller, 1961). The river now human population of the adjacent areas the listing provisions of the Act (to be has perennial flow only in the increases, and the demand for water codified at 50 CFR Part 424,49 FR 38900, uppermost 10 to 15 percent of its length. and recreational access increases, those October 1, 1984) set forth the procedures Future threats to the remaining habitat spinedace populations on public or for adding species to the Federal lists. A of the Little Colorado spinedace come presently inaccessible lands will be species may be determined to be an from the same human uses that have subjected to mounting pressures for endangered or threatened species due to resulted in past habitat alteration and water projects, road construction, and . one or more of the five factors described destruction. There are several proposed other development. in section 4(a)(1). These factors and new water projects for the area, and B. Overutilization for commercial, their application to the Little Colorado additional new projects continue to be recreational, scientific, or educational spinedace (Lepidomeda vittata) are as proposed as water demand increases. purposes. There is no evidence that the follows: Wilkins Dam, at the confluence of Clear Little Colorado spinedace is overutilized A. The present or threatened and East Clear Creeks, is a proposed for any of these purposes. destruction, modification, or curtailment Bureau of Reclamation project, a part of C. Disease of predation. Predation by of its habitat arrange. Much of the the larger Mogollon Mesa project which exotic piscivorousfish has been shown historic habitat of the Little Colorado would also include a new dam on upper to be a contributing factor in the decline apinedace has been adversely modified Chevelon Creek. Wilkin's Dam would of many native Southwestern- fishes, and or destroyed by human activities in the inundate approximately 8-miles of has undoubtedly been a major factor in

Federal Register Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules 21097 the decline of the Little Colorado and Fish Department treated the stream numbers fluctuate markedly. Because of spinedace. The spinedace was with a pesticide (fish toxicant) in an this, threats to the spinedace must be historically associated with few, if any, unsuccessful attempt to eradicate them. analyzed as to their impact at the lowest fish predators. Of the native fish species This treatment was considered population levels. Habitat alterations of the Little Colorado River, only the necessary because the golden shiner which may not significantly affect roundtail chub (Gila robustal was a competes with the young of game fish, populations at moderate or high levels potential predator on spinedace. particularly trout (Minckley, 1973). Since may be disastrous at low population However, in the past 100 years, several the Little Colorado spinedace is levels, and could lead to extirpation of exotic predatory fish species have been "troutlike in its behavior and habitat the species. introduced into Little Colorado requirements" (Miller, 1963), it is quite The Service has carefully assessed the spinedace habitats. These species likely that the golden shiner is also a best scientific and commerical include black bullhead (ktalurus significant competitor with the Little information available, regarding the me/as), channel catfish (ktalurus Colorado spinedace (Minckley and past, present, and future threats faced punctatus), yellow bullhead (ktalurus Carufel, 1967). The possibility of the by this species in determining to natalis), green sunfish (Lepomis further introduction of other competitive propose this rule. Based on this cyanellus), largemouth bass species, particularly the red shiner evaluation, the preferred action is to list (Micropterus salmodies), rainbow trout (Notropis lutrensis) and the redside the Little Colorado spinedace as (Salrno gairdnert), and brown trout shiner (Richardsonius balteatus), into threatened. Threatened status seems (Salmo trutta). The continuing adverse, spinedace habitats is an additional appropriate because of the severely impact of these predators en the Little threat to the Little Colorado spinedace. reduced range of the species, and Coloardo spinedace, and the possibility The redside shiner has been shown to because of the many threats to the fish of further introduction and spread of displace the Virgin River spinedace and its remaining habitat If this species predatory fish is a significant threat to (Lepidomeda mollispinis mollispinis) in is not listed, it could reasonably be the existence of the spinedace. The the Virgin River, and the red shiner is expected to become endangered within construction of reservoirs in or near apparently displacing the spinedace the foreseeable future and thus not spinedace habitat exacerbates the threat (Meda fulgida) in portions of the Gila listing would be a violation of the Act's of exotic fish introductions and the River system (Mincldey, 1973). The intent. Since the species is still extant in spread of predatory fishes since shiners are widespread in Arizona. The several locations and the threats to the reservoirs are desirable habitat for red shiner is commonly used for bait, species are generally localized, the many predatory game fishes, many of thus increasing the probability of its species is not in danger of extinction at which are purposely introduced for eventual introduction into Little- this time and thus endangered status is recreational purposes. The introduction Colorado spinedace habitat. not appropriate. of such fish into these reservoirs allows Construction of reservoirs in or near and encourages their spread throughout Little Colorado spinedace habitat also Critical Habitat the range of the Little Colorado increases that probability because of the spinedace. Additionally, parasites increased use of bait in the fishery Critical habitat, as defined by Section introduced with such exotic fish may which develops in such reservoirs. 3 of the Act means: (1) the specific areas also adversely affect the spinedace. Other exotic fishes, particularly within the geographical area occupied D. The inadequacy of existing cyprinids, may also be a competitive by a species, at the time it is listed in regulatory mechanisms. The State of threat to the Little Colorado spinedace, accordance with the Act, on which are Arizona lists this species under Group-3 and it has been found that the spinedace found those physical or biological - of the Threatened Wildlife of Arizona. is generally rare or absent where exotic features (I) essential to the conservation Group 3 includes, "Species or fish other than trout are present. of the species and (II) that may require subspecies whose continued presence in Another important factor in the special management considerations or Arizona could be in jeopardy in the decline of the Little Colorado spinedace protection, and specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a foreseeable future"i Arizona2 Game and has been the use of piscicides (fish Fish Commission, ). Under this toxicants) in the streams of the Little species at the time it is listed, upon a designation taking the Little Colorado Colorado River drainage. Most of the determination that such areas are spinedace is regulated and is allowed major game-fish streams of the drainage essential for the conservation of the only under a collecting permit or by have been subjected to poisoning, with species. licensed angling. However, no such chemicals as rotenone and Section 4(03) of the Act requires that protection of the habitat is included in - toxaphene, in generally unsuccessful critical habitat be designated to the such a designation and no management attempts to rid these streams of "trash" maximum extent prudent and plan exiats for this species. fish such as carp, suckers, chubs, and determinable concurrently with the E. Other natural or manmade factors shiners and thereby improve the streams determination that a species is affecting its continued existence. The for game fish (Miller, 1983). The Little endangered or threatened. Critical introduction of exotic fishes into the Colorado River was treated from Lyman habitat is being proposed for the Little habitat of the Little Colorado spinedace Reservoir downstream for Colorado spinedace to include the poses a major threat to the spinedace approximately 10 miles in 1951, and following: from competitive interactions as well as Chevelon Creek was treated twice in (1) East Clear Creek, Coconino from predation. The golden shiner 1965 (Minckley and CarufeL 1967), and County, Arizona; approximately 18 miles (Notemigonas cluysoleucus) is presently again several years later. These of stream extending from the confluence found in large numbers in Chevelon treatments undoubtly reduced both the with Leonard Canyon upstream to the Creek, and has been found in the Little populations and range of the Little Blue Ridge Reservoir dam, and Colorado River basin since the late Colorado spinedace significantly. approximately 13 miles of stream 1950's. In Chevelon Creek, golden No estimate has been made of Little extending from the upper end of Blue shiners were present in such large Colorado spinedace population sizes: Ridge Reservoir upstream to Potato numbers in1985 that the Arizona Game however, it is well known that their Lake. • 21098 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules

(2) Chevelon Creek, Navajo County. chemical or biological pollutants at a At present, no known Federal Arizona; approximately 8 miles of point source or by dispersed release. activities would be affected by this stream extending from the confluence The introduction, advertent or proposal. On East Clear Creek, the Little with the Little Colorado River upstream otherwise, of exotic predatory and Colorado spinedace habitat is primarily to a spring source. competitive fish species and their on the Conconino and Apache- (3) Nutrioso Creek, Apache County. parasites could adversely affect Little Sitgreaves National Forests. The Forest Arizona; approximately 5 miles of Colorado spinedace populations and Service does not expect any significant stream from the Apache-Sitgreaves could reduce or eliminate them within impact on management of this area as a National Forest boundary upstream to the critical habitat result of this proposal since the Little the Nelson Reservoir dam. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires the Colorado spinedace is already one of These stream portions were chosen Service to consider economic and other their emphasized species. Wilkin's Dam for critical habitat designation because impacts of designating a particular area on Clear Creek is a Bureau of they presently support healthy self- as critical habitat The Service will Reclamation project and Section 7 perpetuating populations of the Little consider the critical habitat designation consultation will be required if that Colorado spinedace. They provide all of in light of all additional relevant project is ever reactivated. On Chevelon the ecological, behavioral, and information obtained at the time of final Creek, the majority of the lands is physiological requirements necessary - rule. privately owned. This land is used for livestock grazing and the activities that for the survival of the spinedace. Available Conservation Measures However, due to the extreme might be affected by this proposal could fluctuations which Little Colorado Conservation measures provided to be future water development projects if spinedace populations exhibit, these species listed as endangered or they are federally funded or authorized. areas may not necessarily support the threatened under the Endangered At the lower end of Chevelon Creek, most stable and healthy populations of Species Act include recognition, there is a small portion of land owned spinedace at any given time in the recovery actions, requirements for by the Arizona Game and Fish future. At -present, the Silver Creek and Federal protection, and prohibitions Department This is the Chevelon Creek Little Colorado River populations are against certain practices. Recognition Wildlife Area and no effects from this- spotty and/or difficult to locate, but this through listing encourages and results in proposal are expected on its situation may change with periodic conservation actions by other Federal, management since it is already being population fluctuations. This State, and private agencies, groups, and managed for wildlife values. On the designation of critical habitat was individuals. The Endangered Species privately-owned lands on Silver and proposed based on the best available Act provides for possible land Nutrioso Creeks, and the Little Colorado information; however, if subsequent to acquisition and cooperation with the River, no effect is expected from this this proposal, some areas are found not States and requires that recovery proposaL It is possible that future water to be critical to the species' needs, or if actions be carried out for all listed development projects on these lands exclusion of some areas outweigh the species Such actions are initiated by the might be affected if such projects have benefits of specifying the areas as part Service following listing. The protection any Federal involvement. On portions of of the critical habitat, they may be required by Federal agencies and the those streams on the Apache-Sitgreaves excluded from the final rulemaking. prohibitions against taking and harm are National Forest no effect is expected. Notwithstanding this provision, if failure discussed, in part, below. The Act and implementing regulations to designate any area as critical habitat Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended. found at 50 CFR 17.21 and 17.31 set forth would result in extinction of the species, requires Federal agencies to evaluate a series of general prohibitions and such areas may not be excluded. If new their actions with respect to any species exceptions that apply to all threatened information demonstrates additional that is proposed or listed as endangered wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, necessary critical habitat areas for this or threatened and-with respect to its would make it illegal for any person species, they must be subject to a new critical habitat. Regulations subject to the jurisdiction of the United Federal Register proposal. implementing this interagency States to take, import or export, ship in Section 4(b)(8) requires, for any cooperation provision of the Act are interstate commerce in the course of a proposed or final regulation that codified at 50 CFR Part 402, and are commercial activity; or sell or offer for designates critical habitat, a brief presently under revision (see proposal sale in interstate or foreign commerce. description and evaluation of those published at 48 FR 29990; June 29, 1983). any listed species. It would also be activities (public or private) which may Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies illegal to possess, sell, deliver, carry. adversely modify such habitat or may to confer informally with the Service on transport or ship any such wildlife that be affected by such designation. Any any action that is likely to jeopardize had been illegally taken. Certain activity which would deplete the flow, the continued existence of a proposed exceptions would apply to agents of the lessen the amount of minimum flow, or species or result in destruction or Service and State conservation significantly alter the natural flow adverse modification of proposed agencies. regime of East Clear, Chevelon, or critical habitat. If a species is listed The above discussion generally Nutrioso Creeks could adversely impact subsequently, Section 7(a)(2) requires applies to threatened species of fish or the proposed critical habitat Such Federal agencies to ensure that wildlife. However, the Secretary has the activities include, but are not limited to. activities they authorize, fund or carry discretion, under section 4(d) of the Act excessive groundwater pumping, out are not likely to jeopardize the to issue such special regulations as are impoundment, and water diversion. continued existence of such a species or necessary and advisable for the Also, any activity which would to destroy or adversely modify its conservation of a threatened species. extensively alter the water chemistry of critical habitat If a Federal action may The State of Arizona presently regulates East Clear. Chevelon, or Nutrioso affect a listed species or its critical direct taking of the little Colorado Creeks could adversely affect the habitat, the responsible Federal agency spinedace through the requirements of proposed critical habitat. Such activities must enter into formal consultation with State collecting permits. Since the - include, but are not limited to, release of the Service. primary threat to this species stems Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules 21099

from habitat disturbance and suggestions from the public, other Much. Acad. Sci., Arts and Letters 46:365- modification, and not from direct taking concerned governmental agencies, the 404. of the species or from scientific community, industry, private Miller, R.R. 1963. Distribution, variation and commercialization, the Service interests, or any other interested party ecology of Lepidomeda vittata, a rare concludes that the State's collecting cyprinid fish endemic to Eastern Arizona. concerning any aspect of these proposed Copies 1963:1-5. permit system is more than adequate to rules are hereby solicited. Comments Miller, R.R., and CL. Hubbs. 1960. The spiny- protect the species from excessive particularly are sought concerning: rayed cyprinid fishes (Plagoterini) of the taking, so long as such takes are limited (1) Biological, commercial trade, or Colorado River system. Misc. Pub!. Univ. to: educational purposes, scientific other relevant data concerning any Mich. Mus. Zoo!. 115:1-39.3 pls. purposes, the enhancement of the threat (or the lack thereof) to Minckley, C.O., and T.C. McCall. 1977. Fish propagation or survival of the species, Lepidomeda vittata; populations. Pages 24-30 in: Blinn. D.W. zoological exhibition, and other (2) The location of any additional (ed.), An aquatic survey of Chevelon Creek, conservation purposes consistent with populations of Lepidomeda vittata and Arizona. Report to Arizona Public Service the Endangered Species Act. A separate Company, Department of Biology, Northern the reasons why any habitat of this Arizona Univ. 44 pp. Federal permit system is not required to species should or should not be Minckley, W.L 1973. Fishes of Arizona. Sims address the current threats to the determined to be critical habitat as Printing Company, Phoenix, Arizona. 293 species. Therefore, a special rule for the provided by Section of the Act; - 4 pp. Little Colorado spinedace is proposed (3) Additional information concerning Minckley, W.L, and L.H. CarufeL 1967. The which will allow taking to occur for the the range and distribution of the species; Little Colorado River spinedace, above stated purposes without the need (4) Current or planned activities in the Lepidomeda vittata, in Arizona. for a Federal permit, if a State collecting subject areas and their possible impacts Southwestern Nat 12(3):291-302. permit is obtained and all other State on Lepidomeda vittata; and Wheeler, G.M. 1889. Report upon United wildlife conservation laws and States geographical surveys west of the (5) Any foreseeable economic and One Hundred Meridian, Vol.!, regulations are satisfied. In relying upon other impacts resulting from the Geographical Rep., Washington. 780 pp. 39 the State's permitting system, however, proposed designation of critical habitat. pls. and not establishing separate Federal Final promulgation of the regulations permitting procedures, the Service is on'Lepiodmeda vittata will take into Authors interpreting the act as precluding any consideration the comments and any The authors of this proposed rule are further application of piscicides which additional information received by the Sandra Limerick and Sally Stefferud, could directly affect the Little Colorado Service, and such communications may Endangered Species Staff, U.S. Fish and spinedace, unless it is in accordance lead to a final regulation that differs Wildlife Service, Albuquerque, New with an approved conservation plan for from this proposal. Mexico (505/766-3972 or FTS 546-5608). the species. The special rule also The Endangered Species Act provides Status information was provided by acknowledges the fact that incidental for a public hearing on this proposal, if CO. Minckley, Flagstaff, Arizona. take of the species by State-licensed requested. Requests must be filed within recreational fishermen is not a 45 days of the date of the proposal. Such List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 significant threat to this species. requests must be made in writing and Endangered and threatened wildlife, Therefore,- such incidental take would addressed to the Regional Director, U.S. Fish, Marine mammals, Plants not be a violation of the Act tithe Fish and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306, (agriculture). fisherman immediately returned the Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. _ taken fish to its habitat. It should be Proposed Regulations Promulgation National Environmental Policy Act recognized that any activities involving PART 17--(AMENDED) the taking of this species not otherwile The Fish and Wildlife Service has enumerated in the special rule are determined that an Environmental Accordingly, it is hereby proposed to prohibited. Without this special rule, all Assessment, as defined by the National amend Part 17, Subchapter B of Chapter of the prohibitions under 50 CFR Part Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need I, Title 50 of the Code of Federal 17.31 would apply. The Service believes not be prepared in connection with Regulations, as set forth below: that this special rule will allow for more regulations adopted pursuant to section 1. The authority citation for Part 17 efficient management of the species, 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of reads as follows: thereby facilitating its conservation. For 1973, as amended. A notice outlining the Authority: Pub. L 93-205,87 Stat. 884; Pub, these reasons, the Service has Service's reasons for this determination L. 94-359,90 Stat 911; Pub. L 95-632,92 Stat. concluded that this regulatory proposal was published in the Federal Register on 3751; Pub. L 96-159,93 Stet. 1225; Pub. L 97- is necessary and advisable for the October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). 304,96 Stet. 1411 (10 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).. conservation of the Little Colorado 2. It is proposed to amend 17.11(h) spinedace. Literature Cited § Arizona Game and Fish Commission. 1982: by adding the following in alphabetical Public Comments Solicited Threatened native wildlife in Arizona. order, under "Fishes" to the List of mimeo. 11pp. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife: The Service intends that any final rule Cope, ED. 1874. On the Plagopterinae and the adopted will be accurate and as Ichthyology of Utah. Proc. of the Am. Phil. § 17.11 Endangered and threatened effective as possible in the conservation Soc. 14:129-140. wildlife. of any endangered or threatened Miller, R.R. 1961. Man and the changing fish a a a _ a a species. Therefore, any comments or fauna of the American Southwest. Pap, (h) a "

21100 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules

Vertebrate • population where When listed Critical habitat Special rules Historic range endangered or Status Common name threatened

FtSUES • • Spined&Ce. Little Colorado.. Lepidomeds Whets ...... U.S.A. (AZ) Entire 17.95(e) ...... 17.44( ) • • • •

3. It is further proposed to amend Title scientific purposes, the enhancement of State fish and wildlife conservation 50 CFR section 17.44 by adding the propagation or survival of the species. laws or iegulations. following (the position of this special zoological exhibition, and other (4) It is unlawful for any person to rule will be determined at the time the conservation purposes consistent with attempt to commit, solicit another to final rule is published in the Federal the Act. commit, or cause to be committed, any Register): (2) Any violation of applicable State offense defined in paragraphs (1) 17.44 Special rules—fishes. fish and wildlife conservation laws or through (3) above. * * * regulations with respect to the taking of ( ) Little Colorado spinedace this species will also be a violation of (Lepidomeda vittata). the Endangered Species Act. 4. It is further proposed to amend (1) No person shall take this species, (3) No person shall possess, sell, § 17.95(e) by adding critical habitat of except in accordance with applicable deliver, carry, transport, ship, import, or the Little Colorado spinedace, as State fish and wildlife conservation export, by any means whatsoever, any follows: The position of this entry under laws and regulations in the following such species taken in violation of these 17.95(e) follows the same sequence as instances: for educational purposes, regulations or in violation of applicable the species occurs in §17.11. a. • Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday—May, 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules 21101

§ 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. approximately 18 miles of stream extending (e) ' * from the confluence with Leonard Canyon * * * (NE Vs Sec. 11, T. 14 N., R. 12 E.) upstream to the Blue Ridge Reservoir dam (SE Vs Sec. 33, Little Colorado Spinedace T. 14 N., R. 11 E.), and approximately 13 miles of stream extending from the upper end of (LEPIDOMEDA VITTATA) 1 Blue Reservoir (east boundary SE /4 Sec. 36, ARIZONA: T. 14 N., R. 10 E.) upstream to Potato Lake 1. Coconino County. East Clear Creek; (NE 1/4 Sec. I, T. 12 N, R. 9 E.).

9 1 2 11. 11 A. A. 11 S. R. 13 E. . I ' 1° 2' I LEPIDOMEDA VITTATA (Little Colorado Spinedace EAST CLEAR CREEK COCONINO COUNTY. ARIZONA. ItLationt

T. 16 oU nd S r, N.

COCONINO 7

NATIONAL

Zesa FOR SST T.

14 14 N. N.

SI

SITGRRAVII3 T. Sloe Rids* T Is R•••■••Ir ,1 N . 0\ C .C 7 NATIONAL

Potato La k• IP ORIST T. 12 12 N. N.

PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT (Width not to ..e•10)

0 I 2 S mats

it. 9 5. 5. i z. f R. 11 S. R. 12 R.

S

21102 Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 90 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 I Proposed Rules

2. Navajo County. Chevelon Creek; River (NW V4 Sec. 23, T. 18 N., R. 17 E.) approximately 8 miles of stream extending upstream to a spring source (NE V4 of the SW from the confluence with the Little Colorado Sec. 11, T. 17 (A1,, R. 17 E.).

LEPIDOMEDA VITTATA (Little. Colorado Spinedace) ' CHEVELON CREEK NAVAJO COUNTY, ARIZONA

Í0 00 '.> F ,

csoff.

ARIZONA •

(- ITE LOCATION

PROPOSED CRITICAL PIADIT AT , / //7 ( Width Pe/ 10 sC•I•) a N.

0 v I IAI•

1. 17 Z.

• Federal Register / Vol. 50, No. 99 / Wednesday, May 22, 1985 / Proposed Rules 21103

3. Apache County. Nutrioso Creek: boundary (north boundary Sec. 5, T. 8 N.. R. approximately 5 miles of stream extending 30 E.) upsteam to the Nelson Reservoir dam from the Apache-Sitgreaves National Forest (NE V; Sec. 29, T. 8 N.. R. 30 E.).

K. JO E. LEPIDOMEDA VITTATA (Little Colorado Spinedace) NUTRIOSO CREEK

APACHE 'COUNTY, 'ARIZONA

T. 1'.

N.

HATCHAL.

APACHE

SLICE EAVES

NATIONKL 10CaHolt

FOREST

PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT (vrtOtit- IS •calet RtSCRKIX

o ■/2 2 RILES

It. 211 R.

Constituent elements, for all areas Susan Recce, proposed as critical habitat, include clean. Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and permanent flowing water, with pools and a Wildlife and Parks. fine gravel or silt-mud substrate. • • • [FR Doc. 85-12242 Filed 5-21-85:8:45 am) Dated: April 29.1985. BILLING CODE 4310-5641 ‚I