Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 8881

The full text of this Commission Joaquin County, . These two on private property. However, the decision is available for inspection and subspecies are threatened primarily by fragments are small, isolated, and copying during normal business hours flooding, wildfire, disease, predation, unlikely to be inhabited by either in the FCC Reference Center (Room competition, clearing of riparian riparian brush or riparian 239), 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, vegetation, use of rodenticide, and loss woodrats. In January of 1997, the Park DC. The complete text of this decision of genetic variability. Naturally flooded, submerging most of the may also be purchased from the occurring random events increase the of these two subspecies. Evidence of Commission’s copy contractor, risk to the single, small population of only three riparian brush rabbits and six International Transcription Services, each subspecies. This rule implements riparian woodrats was seen immediately Inc., (202) 857–3800, 1231 20th Street, the Federal protection and recovery following this flooding episode (Daniel NW, Washington, DC 20036. provisions afforded by the Act for these F. Williams, California State University, two subspecies. Stanislaus, in litt. 1997). In 1998, only List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73 EFFECTIVE DATE: This final rule is one riparian brush and nine Radio broadcasting. effective March 24, 2000. riparian woodrats were live-trapped (D. Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of ADDRESSES: The complete file for this Williams, in litt. 1998). Other potential Federal Regulations is amended as rule is available for inspection, by threats include wildfire, disease, follows: appointment, during normal business predation, competition, rodenticide use, hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife clearing of riparian vegetation, and the PART 73Ð[AMENDED] Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife loss of genetic variability. Naturally occurring events, such as drought and 1. The authority citation for Part 73 Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W– flooding, also increase the risk to the continues to read as follows: 2606, Sacramento, California 95825. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: single, small population of each Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334. 336. Heather Bell, staff biologist, at the U.S. subspecies. This rule extends the § 73.202 [Amended] Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento protective provisions under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) to these . 2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES Allotments under Nebraska, is amended section), telephone 916/414–6464; Discussion of the Two Subspecies facsimile 916/414–6486. by adding Mitchell, Channel 257A. Riparian Brush Rabbit 3. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The riparian brush rabbit was Allotments under Nevada, is amended Background described as a distinct subspecies by Orr by adding Channel 248C1 at Elko and Even though riparian brush rabbit (1935, in Orr 1940) and is one of 13 adding Lovelock, Channel 292C1. (Sylvilagus bachmani riparius) subspecies of Sylvilagus bachmani (Hall Federal Communications Commission. specimen records and sightings were 1981), 8 of which occur in California. John A. Karousos, known from along the San Joaquin River The specimen from which the Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules near the boundary of San Joaquin and subspecies designation was described Division, Mass Media Bureau. Stanislaus Counties, Orr (1935, in Orr was collected from the west side of the [FR Doc. 00–4171 Filed 2–22–00; 8:45 am] 1940) believed, based on the presence of San Joaquin River west of Modesto in BILLING CODE 6712±01±P suitable habitat, that the species’ Stanislaus County, California, less than historical range extended along the 10 kilometers (km) (6 miles (mi)) from Sacramento and San Joaquin river the Park. S. bachmani belongs to the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR systems, from Stanislaus County to the order and family Delta region. Historical records for the . The riparian brush rabbit is Fish and Wildlife Service riparian woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes a medium to small cottontail (total riparia) are similarly distributed along length 300 to 375 millimeters (mm) 50 CFR Part 17 the San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and (11.8 to 14.8 inches (in)), mass 500 to Tuolumne Rivers, and Corral Hollow, in 800 grams (g) (1.1 to 1.8 pounds (lb)) RIN 1018±AE40 San Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Merced and is unique in that the sides of the Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Counties (Hooper 1938; Williams 1986). rostrum (nasal/upper jaw region of the and Plants; Final Rule to List the Thus, prior to the statewide reduction of skull), when viewed from above, are Riparian Brush Rabbit and the riparian communities by nearly 90 noticeably convex instead of straight or Riparian, or San Joaquin Valley, percent (Katibah 1984), the riparian concave as in other races of S. bachmani Woodrat as Endangered brush rabbit and riparian woodrat (Orr 1940). The color varies from dark probably ranged throughout the brown to gray above to white AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, extensive riparian forests along major underneath. The subspecies is visually Interior. streams flowing onto the floor of the similar to the desert cottontail (S. ACTION: Final rule. northern San Joaquin Valley. audubonii), which also occurs in Today only one extant population of riparian within the historical SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and each of these subspecies is known. The distribution of the riparian brush rabbit. Wildlife Service (Service), determine remnant population of each subspecies The riparian brush rabbit can be endangered status pursuant to the is in a 104.5 hectare (ha) (258 acre (ac)) distinguished from the desert cottontail Endangered Species Act of 1973, as fragment of riparian forest on the by a smaller, more inconspicuous tail amended (Act), for the riparian brush at the Park (Williams and uniformly colored ears (no black rabbit (Sylvilagus bachmani riparius) 1993) situated on the border of San tip). However, in-hand identification is and the riparian or San Joaquin Valley Joaquin and Stanislaus Counties, needed to separate juveniles of these woodrat (Neotoma fuscipes riparia). northwest of Modesto, in the northern subspecies definitively (Williams 1993). Only a single population of each San Joaquin Valley, California. Breeding of the riparian brush rabbits subspecies has been confirmed, in Upstream and downstream of the Park, is restricted to the period of female Caswell Memorial State Park (Park), San some original riparian habitat remains receptivity, approximately January to

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 8882 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

May, putting this subspecies at a Presence of more surface litter and lack Stanislaus, Tuolumne, and Merced competitive disadvantage to the desert of willows in the understory signify rivers (Williams 1986). The range of the cottontails outside the Park that breed areas of higher ground that are not subspecies probably extended farther all year (Mossman 1955; Service 1997). flooded regularly or heavily (Williams upstream than the Merced River, After a gestation period of 26 to 30 days, and Basey 1986). assuming that suitable habitat the young are born in nest cavities lined Brush rabbits are closely tied to cover historically occurred along the length of mainly with fur and covered with a and usually remain for several seconds the San Joaquin River system (Williams grass plug (Davis 1936; Orr 1940). The to minutes just inside dense, brushy and Basey 1986). cover before venturing into the open. young are born naked, blind, and Riparian Woodrat helpless and open their eyes in 10 days They seldom move more than a meter (Orr 1940). The young rabbits remain in from cover. When pursued, they leap The riparian woodrat (Neotoma the nest about 2 weeks before venturing back into the cover of shrubs instead of fuscipes riparia) was first described by out, and the female will continue to heading into open ground (Chapman Hooper (1938), and is one of 11 suckle her young 2 to 3 weeks after their 1974, in Service 1997). They will not subspecies of N. fuscipes in the family birth. Orr (1940) reported a mean litter cross large, open areas and, therefore, Muridae (order Rodentia). The size of 3 to 4, with extremes of 2 to 5, are unable to disperse beyond the dense specimens from which the subspecies while Mossman (1955) reported an brush of the riparian forest at the Park designation was described were average of 4, with a range of 2 to 6. (Williams 1988). The riparian brush collected about 3 km (2 mi) northeast of Riparian brush rabbits take 4 to 5 rabbit can climb into bushes and trees, Vernalis, west of Modesto in Stanislaus months to reach adult size but do not though its climbing is awkward and County, California, approximately 10 reach sexual maturity until the winter limited. This trait probably has km (6 mi) from the Park. Although some following birth. Females give birth to significant survival value, given that taxonomic studies of the genus Neotoma about 5 litters per season, averaging an riparian forests are subject to inundation have been completed in recent years, no estimated 9 to 16 young per breeding by periodic flooding. During periods of further systematic revisions of N. season (Basey 1990). The percentage of heavy flooding, when virtually no fuscipes have been published since females active during the breeding suitable habitat remains available as Hooper’s 1938 report (Hall 1981; season is unknown, but in one study, 9 refugia, the population has dropped Williams 1986; Williams 1993). The of 25 female adults examined showed dramatically. genetic structure of selected populations of N. fuscipes, including N. fuscipes no signs of reproductive activity (Basey During the flooding of 1976, Park riparia, is currently being examined 1990). Brush rabbits have relatively personnel used boats to rescue rabbits (James Patton, University of California, small home ranges that usually conform from bushes. During the flood of 1986, which was short lived, it was estimated Berkeley, in litt. 1998). The riparian to the size and shape of available brushy that all but 10–25 rabbits at the Park woodrat is a medium-sized rodent, habitat (Basey 1990). In general, the were lost (D. Williams, in litt. 1997). averaging 443 mm (17.4 in) in total home ranges of males are larger than The population rebounded to 213–312 length, including its 217 mm (8.5 in.) those of females but do not overlap the individuals by 1993 (Williams 1993), furred tail (Hooper 1938), and ranges primary activity centers within female and the Park was considered at carrying from 200 to 400 g (7.05 to 14.11 ounces territories (Basey 1990). Population capacity (the maximum population that (oz)) in weight, with marked seasonal estimates from the Park have varied a particular environment can sustain) variation (Williams et al. 1992; Service from 88 to 452 individuals (Williams under prevailing environmental 1997). Neotoma fuscipes riparia differs 1988), 320 to 540 individuals (Basey conditions (following 7 years of from other, adjacent subspecies of 1990), and 170 to 608 individuals over drought). Surveys were conducted in woodrats by being larger, lighter, and 81 ha (200.1 ac) (Williams 1993), but May 1997, after extensive winter more grayish in color, with white hind recent flooding in 1997 and 1998 flooding at the Park, but no riparian feet instead of dusky on their upper reduced numbers severely. In 1997, no brush rabbits were live-trapped. One surfaces, and a tail more distinctly riparian brush rabbits were live-trapped, brush rabbit was live-trapped in bicolored (lighter below and darker on one was sighted, and pellets from two February 1998, following a heavy and top). In addition, skull measurements others were seen; in 1998, one rabbit continuous rainfall. and skull characteristics differ (Hooper was live trapped. Such extraordinarily low population 1938). Habitat for the riparian brush rabbit levels subject this subspecies to The following information is taken consists of riparian forests with a dense increased genetic risks and naturally from a number of studies on Neotoma understory shrub layer. Forests with a occurring random events (see discussion fuscipes, including N. f. riparia and closed canopy, however, generally lack in Factor E of the Summary of Factors related subspecies. The dusky-footed sufficient understory of shrubs to meet Affecting the Species section of this woodrat lives in loosely cooperative riparian brush rabbits’ needs. Brush final rule). Surveys conducted in all societies and has a matrilineal (mother- rabbits frequent small clearings where potential habitat along the Merced, San offspring) social structure. Males are they bask in the sun and feed on a Joaquin, Stanislaus, and Tuolumne highly territorial and aggressive, variety of herbaceous vegetation, rivers during 1985 and 1986 failed to especially during the breeding season including grasses, sedges, , forbs, locate any additional populations of when they will mate with more than shoots, and leaves. Where mats of low- riparian brush rabbits (Williams 1988). one female (Kelly 1990, in Service growing Rosa californica (California Because the subspecies was not 1997). Females have 1 to 5 litters per wild rose) and Rubus vitifolius (Pacific described until after it is believed to year with 3 to 4 young in each litter. blackberry) occur, the brush rabbits live have been extirpated from most of its Reproduction occurs in all months, with in tunnels that run through the vines historical range, definitive information the fewest pregnancies in December and and shrubs. Other common plants in on its former distribution is lacking. It the most in February. Numbers of this riparian forest community are Vitis apparently has been extirpated from the juveniles appearing outside the nest is californica (wild grape), Baccharis Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta, as greatest in July and least in January and douglasii (Douglas’ bush), and well as most of the lower San Joaquin February (Williams et al. 1992). The grasses (Basey 1990; Williams 1988). River and its tributaries, and the young are born in stick nest houses, or

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 8883 lodges, on the ground, which measure 1938 (Williams 1986). The only verified disease, and use of rodenticides imperil 0.6 to 0.9 meters (m) (2 to 3 feet (ft)) population is restricted to about 102 ha the continued existence of these two high and 1.2 to 1.8 m (4 to 6 ft) in (252 ac) of riparian forest at the Park on subspecies in their last known diameter. Most houses are positioned the Stanislaus River. Loss, population center. over or against logs (Cook 1992). fragmentation, and degradation of Previous Federal Action Unoccupied houses can persist 20–30 habitat are the principal reasons for the years (Linsdale and Tevis 1951, in decline of the riparian woodrat (Service Federal action on these two Service 1998) if not destroyed by 1997). The most immediate threats subspecies began on September 18, flooding (D. Williams, pers. comm. include flooding of Park lands and 1985, when we published the Vertebrate 1998). Unlike other subspecies, the wildfires. Because the riparian woodrat Wildlife Notice of Review (50 FR riparian woodrat occasionally builds is able to climb trees more easily than 37958), which included the riparian nests in cavities in trees and in artificial the brush rabbit, the woodrat may not be brush rabbit and riparian woodrat as wood duck nest boxes (Williams 1986). directly affected by flooding to the category 2 candidate species. Category 2 Nest houses typically are occupied by degree the riparian brush rabbit is. candidates, a designation discontinued an individual adult. Unlike males, Woodrat houses, which are essential to in a Notice of Review published by us females remain in or near natal areas survival, can, however, be severely on February 28, 1996 (61 FR 7596), were (birthplace) throughout their life impacted by flooding, thus affecting the taxa for which we had information in (Williams et al. 1992). At the Park, viability of the population. Wildfires are our possession indicating that proposing Williams (1993) reported a mean of concern because of the potential for to list as endangered or threatened was density of 8.32 houses per hectare (ha) severe degradation of habitat and the possibly appropriate, but for which (20.55 houses per acre (ac)), or 757 loss of individuals unable to escape the conclusive data on biological houses on 91 ha (225 ac) of suitable fire. In addition to the threat of random vulnerability and threats were not habitat; occupancy was not verified. In natural events such as flooding and fire, currently available. In the January 6, a study of another subspecies of N. the riparian woodrat is also prone to the 1989, Notice of Review (54 FR fuscipes, Linsdale and Tevis (1951, in effects of ongoing threats such as 554), we elevated the riparian brush Service 1998) found that 70 percent of disease, predation, and potential rabbit to a category 1 candidate species the population survived less than 1 competition with the exotic black rat as a result of more intensive field work year, 27 percent survived 2 years, and (Rattus rattus) (D. Williams, in litt. by Williams and Basey (1986) that identified only a single remaining 3 percent survived 3 years or more. 1998; D. Williams, pers. comm. 1998). population of this subspecies. Category Williams et al. (1992) also cited a No specific conservation measures for 1 taxa were those for which we had number of studies that indicated the riparian woodrat are in place, but substantial information on biological woodrats are highly responsive to the species does receive some protection vulnerability and threats to support habitat alteration, with populations through the management plan for the preparation of listing proposals. We fluctuating widely in response to a riparian brush rabbit at the Park. The retained the riparian brush rabbit as a variety of natural or manmade factors, California Department of Parks and category 1 candidate and elevated the such as fire, flood, drought, habitat Recreation has supported some general status of the riparian woodrat to modification, and browsing and small- studies and woodrat trampling by ungulates. Cook (1992) category 1 in the November 21, 1991, population studies at the Park (Cook Animal Notice of Review (56 FR 58804). estimated the Park population at 637 1992; Williams 1993). woodrats over 102 ha (252 ac) of habitat. This change was based on a re- Williams (1993) estimated a peak Today, riparian communities of the evaluation of the information contained population at Caswell of 437 animals, lower San Joaquin River and its in the study conducted by Williams and based on mean density of 4.8 woodrats tributaries outside the Park have Basey (1986). The November 15, 1994, per ha on 91 ha (225 ac) of suitable virtually been eliminated. The Animal Notice of Review (59 FR 58987) habitat. A woodrat population was remaining habitat patches are small, included both subspecies in category 1. reported from the early 1970s near the narrow fragments confined within Upon publication of the February 28, type locality at Vernalis, but the current levees. The placement of these levees 1996 combined Animal and Plant status of the population is unknown has eliminated the natural floodplain of Notice of Review (61 FR 7596), we (Williams 1986). Between April 1, 1997, the Stanislaus River, increasing the ceased using category designations and and March 20, 1998, 15 riparian severity of the flooding that occurs included both subspecies as candidates. woodrats were live-trapped at the Park within the confines of the levees. Candidate species are those for which (D. Williams in litt. 1998). Therefore, the Park, which is on the we have on file sufficient information Riparian woodrats are common where river side of the levees, is prone to flood on biological vulnerability and threats there are deciduous valley oaks but few completely during major storms or to support proposals to list the species live oaks. Riparian woodrats are most heavy flow releases from New Melones as threatened or endangered. Candidate numerous where shrub cover is dense dam (D. Williams, pers. comm. 1998). status for these animals was continued and least abundant in open areas. In Because remaining riparian forests are in the September 19, 1997, Notice of riparian areas, highest densities of small, isolated, and vulnerable to major Review (62 FR 49398). woodrats and their houses are often flood events (Williams and Basey 1986), Based on the decline in numbers of encountered in willow thickets with an whether they can support viable both these subspecies as identified oak overstory (Linsdale and Tevis 1951, populations of these subspecies over the during the live-trapping surveys of 1997 in Service 1998). Mostly active at night, long-term is questionable. Historical (D. Williams, in litt. 1997) and the the woodrat’s diet is diverse and habitat and refugia from flooding in threats to their continued existence, the principally herbivorous, with leaves, surrounding lands are now unsuitable riparian brush rabbit and riparian fruits, terminal shoots of twigs, flowers, for these subspecies, as these lands woodrat were proposed for listing as nuts, and fungi comprising the bulk of consist primarily of cultivated fields, endangered on November 21, 1997 (62 ingested material (Williams et al. 1992). orchards, and vineyards (Williams and FR 62276). The range of the riparian woodrat is Basey 1986). Wildfire, flooding, brush The processing of this final rule far more restricted today than it was in clearing, predation, competition, conforms with our Listing Priority

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 8884 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Guidance published in the Federal information that, along with other subspecies and that listing was Register on October 22, 1999 (64 FR clarifications, has been incorporated warranted. One reviewer was concerned 57114). The guidance clarifies the order into the ‘‘’Background’’’ or ‘‘’Summary that the listing may be too late to in which we will process rulemakings. of Factors Affecting the Species’’’ prevent extinction by natural factors Highest priority is processing sections of this final rule. Comments alone. The other reviewer suggested emergency listing rules for any species have been organized into specific issues. clarifications or changes within the text. determined to face a significant and These issues and our responses are The reviewer suggests that (1) low imminent risk to its well-being (Priority summarized as follows: population numbers of the brush rabbit 1). Second priority (Priority 2) is Issue 1: Two commenters expressed clearly make it extremely vulnerable to processing final determinations on concern that the area around the Park detrimental genetic processes and proposed additions to the lists of should be protected from further urban random events, while the proposed rule endangered and threatened wildlife and development. suggested such populations may be only plants. Third priority is processing new Our Response: Habitat protection somewhat vulnerable; (2) decreased proposals to add species to the lists. The afforded by the Act (under section 7) to survivorship of young is the best known processing of administrative petition species listed as threatened or of the effects of inbreeding (deleterious findings (petitions filed under section 4 endangered requires Federal agencies to genes). Inbreeding actually reduces all of the Act) is the fourth priority. The consult with us on any action that is of the following: fecundity, juvenile processing of critical habitat funded, authorized, or carried out by a survivorship, and adult lifespan; and (3) determinations (prudency and Federal agency. The concerns for the the reviewer provided a reference to a determinability decisions) and proposed subspecies will be addressed and new study by Saccheri et al. (1998) that or final designations of critical habitat measures may be implemented to states ‘‘* * * inbreeding can contribute will no longer be subject to ensure that the proposed action will not significantly to the extinction of wild prioritization under the Listing Priority jeopardize the continued existence of populations’ (Katherine Ralls, Guidance. This final rule is a Priority 2 either the riparian brush rabbit or the Smithsonian Institution, in litt. 1998). action and is being completed in riparian woodrat. For detailed Information and suggestions provided accordance with the current Listing discussions of the section 7 consultation by the reviewers have been taken into Priority Guidance. We have updated process, see the Available Conservation consideration during the development this rule to reflect any changes in Measures section of this final rule. In of this final rule and incorporated where information concerning distribution, addition, once the subspecies are listed, appropriate. status, and threats since the publication a recovery plan (or plans) is drafted (for of the proposed rule. This additional a discussion of the recovery planning Summary of Factors Affecting the information did not alter our decision to process, see the Available Conservation Species Measures section of this final rule). list the two subspecies. Section 4 of the Act and regulations Issue 2: The Department of Parks and (50 CFR part 424) that implement the Summary of Comments and Recreation, which owns and manages listing provisions of the Act set forth the Recommendations the Park, was concerned about procedures for adding species to the In the proposed rule published restrictions the listing of these two Federal lists of endangered and November 21, 1997 (62 FR 62276), we subspecies may have on the recreational threatened species. We determine if a requested that all interested parties and maintenance activities at the Park. submit factual reports or information Our Response: We recognize these species is endangered or threatened due that might contribute to the concerns and anticipate continuing to to one or more of the five factors development of a final rule for the work closely with the Department of described in section 4(a)(1) of the Act. riparian brush rabbit and the riparian Parks and Recreation and staff at the These factors and how we applied them woodrat. The public comment period Park in furthering protective measures, to the riparian brush rabbit and to the closed on January 21, 1998. We many of which have already been riparian woodrat are as follows: contacted appropriate State agencies, voluntarily implemented. We are A. The Present or Threatened county and city governments, Federal confident that the protection and Destruction, Modification, or agencies, scientific organizations, and recovery of these two subspecies will be Curtailment of Their Habitat or Range other interested parties and requested compatible with recreational and comments. We published a newspaper maintenance activities at the Park. Sylvilagus bachmani riparius and notice in The Modesto Bee on January Neotoma fuscipes riparia inhabit 20, 1998, which invited general public Peer Review riparian forest communities, and both comment. Given the flood events of In accordance with our Interagency apparently have been extirpated from 1997 and 1998, on April 13, 1998, the Cooperative Policy for Peer Review their entire historical range except for a public comment period was reopened published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR single known population of each along (63 FR 17981) to consider any new 34270), we solicited the expert opinions the Stanislaus River. Katibah (1984) survey information or other new of four independent and appropriate estimated that only 41,300 ha (102,052 information prior to making the final specialists regarding review of pertinent ac) remain of an estimated 373,000 ha status determinations. This comment scientific or commercial data and issues (921,170 ac) of presettlement riparian period ended May 28, 1998. relating to the , population forest in California’s Central Valley, a We received 11 comments concerning models, and supportive biological and reduction of 89 percent. He attributed the proposed rule during the comment ecological information for the riparian the loss and modification of riparian period, from a total of 10 commenters. brush rabbit and the riparian woodrat. forests along valley floor river systems Some commenters submitted more than We received comments from two of to urban, commercial, and agricultural one comment to us. Six commenters the four requested peer reviewers. Both development; wood cutting; reclamation supported the listing; four commenters reviewers stated that the proposed rule and flood control activities; were neutral. No commenters opposed contained an accurate summary of the groundwater pumping; river the proposed listing. Several natural history, current status, and channelization; dam construction; and commenters provided additional current threats to survival of the two water diversions (Katibah 1984).

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 8885

Several land use practices and related B. Overutilization for Commercial, clearing, tree cutting, and the human activities contributed to the Recreational, Scientific, or Educational conversion of riparian habitat to decline of the riparian brush rabbit and Purposes agricultural uses, all of which adversely riparian woodrat throughout their Overutilization is not known to be a affect both subspecies, are generally historical ranges. During the past 10 to threat to either subspecies. However, the unregulated, and this law does not provide protection from these activities. 20 years, cultivation has expanded very small population at the remaining For example, pursuant to 33 CFR 323.4, along the floodplain of the main site makes the riparian brush rabbit the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tributaries of the lower San Joaquin vulnerable to extinction from (Corps) has promulgated regulations River system (Basey 1990). Increased unauthorized recreational hunting and that exempt some farming, forestry, and habitat conversion to agricultural uses collection for scientific or other maintenance activities from the has resulted from the recent purposes. The brush rabbit (Sylvilagus regulatory requirements of section 404. bachmani) is designated as a resident construction of the following dams on Although the Corps administers flowage small game species in California and is tributaries that individually and (flooding) and restoration easements hunted from July 1 through January 30 collectively have altered the timing, along the lower reaches of the frequency, duration, and intensity of with a daily bag limit of five animals Stanislaus River, the difficulty of flooding—Exchequer Dam on the (Williams and Basey 1986). Hunting enforcing the conditions of the Merced River, New Melones Dam on the regulations set by the California Fish easements and inadequate funding for Stanislaus River, and New Don Pedro and Game Commission do not restoration impedes appropriate habitat Dam on the Tuolumne River. Before distinguish the riparian brush rabbit restoration activities. these dams and flood control projects from other subspecies of S. bachmani. The California Department of Parks (levees) were constructed, much of the Therefore, riparian brush rabbits that and Recreation developed a riparian natural floodplain was used as pasture disperse beyond the boundaries of the brush rabbit management plan for the Park (as they may, especially during land for livestock grazing (Basey 1990). Park (Williams 1988). This management times of flooding) face the potential Uneven topography in these areas, plan provides some measure of threat of being hunted. before the dams were constructed, protection to the riparian brush rabbit provided escape cover because some C. Disease or Predation population and incidental protection for the riparian woodrat. Despite the land remained above typical flood levels Like most rabbits, the riparian brush and contained patches of shrubs and existence of a management plan, both rabbit is subject to a variety of common the riparian brush rabbit and riparian trees for cover. Such sites likely diseases, including tularemia, plague, woodrat remain vulnerable to threats provided refuge from flooding for these encephalitis, and brucellosis. These and hazards originating outside of the subspecies. Williams and Basey (1986) contagious, and generally fatal, diseases Park as well as threats that continue state that ‘‘* * * virtually all areas could be transmitted easily to riparian within the Park’s boundaries (see Factor outside of flood control levees now have brush rabbits from neighboring E below). been cleared, leveled, and planted to populations of desert cottontails Under the California Environmental orchards, vineyards, or annual row (Williams 1988). A suspected outbreak Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources crops.’’ Conversion from pasture to of plague in 1966–67 decimated Code §§ 21000–21177), full disclosure of cultivated fields also eliminated woodrat populations in foothills of the the potential environmental impacts of hedgerows and other residual patches of southern , the Tehachapi proposed projects is required. The cover that provided travel corridors and Mountains, and the Coast Range public agency with primary authority or refuge sites for the two subspecies. The (Murray and Barnes 1969, in Williams et jurisdiction over the project is severity of flooding likely increased as al. 1992). The small population size and designated as the lead agency and is the habitat for these two subspecies was restricted distribution of both the responsible for conducting a review of incorporated by flood control levees. riparian brush rabbit and riparian the project and consulting with the The effects of catastrophic flooding are woodrat increase their vulnerability to other agencies concerned with the epidemic diseases. However, the discussed further under Factor E of this resources affected by the project. significance of the threat of disease to section. Section 15065 of the guidelines that the riparian brush rabbit and riparian guide CEQA implementation requires a Although brush clearing adversely woodrat is not known. finding of significance if a project has affected the habitat of the riparian brush (Canis latrans), gray the potential to ‘‘reduce the number or rabbit and the riparian woodrat (Vulpes cinereoargenteus), long-tailed restrict the range of a rare or endangered populations at the Park in the mid- (Mustela frenata), raccoons plant or animal.’’ Species that are 1980s (Williams 1986), these (Procyon lotor), feral domestic cats eligible for listing as rare, threatened, or populations are no longer directly (Felis catus) and dogs (Canis familiaris), endangered but are not so listed are threatened by brush clearing, tree hawks (Accipitridae), and owls given the same protection as those cutting, or the conversion of land to (Strigidae) are known predators of brush species that are officially listed with the agricultural uses. Because the only rabbits and woodrats (Orr 1940; State. However, once significant effects known populations of these subspecies Williams 1988). At currently depleted are identified, the lead agency has the occur within the boundaries of the Park, population levels, any predation could option to require mitigation for effects such activities outside of Park substantially affect the survival of these through changes in the project or to boundaries do not currently pose a two subspecies. decide that overriding considerations, direct threat to either subspecies. Such such as overriding social or economic D. The Inadequacy of Existing considerations, make mitigation activities continue, however, to Regulatory Mechanisms infeasible (CEQA § 21002). In the latter eliminate and fragment patches of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act case, projects may be approved that remnant habitat within the historical (CWA) is a Federal law that potentially cause significant environmental range of these subspecies. affords some attention and protection damage, such as destruction of for these subspecies. However, brush endangered species, their habitat, or

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 8886 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations their continued existence. Protection of frequency, timing, and severity, due to tracks were found (D. Williams, in litt. listed species through CEQA is, manmade levees, dams, and water 1997). therefore, dependent upon the diversions. The Stanislaus River, for The riparian woodrat also is discretion of the agency involved. example, has manmade levees built to vulnerable to flooding events, although The California Endangered Species keep high flows channelized and dams its ability to nest in trees and wood Act (CESA) affords the riparian brush upstream for flood control and water duck nest boxes (Williams 1993) rabbit some conservation benefits. The storage. The riparian habitat at the Park suggests some ability to avoid the State of California listed the riparian is confined entirely within levees, negative effects of flooding. brush rabbit as an endangered species in offering little protection from flooding Nonetheless, the large majority of May 1994. Although the CESA provides during periods of high stream flow that woodrat nests occur on the ground a measure of protection to the routinely occur during the wet winter (Williams 1993). After the January 1997 subspecies, resulting in the formulation season. Major flooding likely drowns floods inundated the Park for 2 to 7 of mitigation measures to reduce or riparian brush rabbits and riparian weeks, trapping and survey efforts in offset impacts for any projects proposed woodrats, eliminates foraging habitat May 1997 resulted in the capture of only in riparian brush rabbit habitat, this law and shelter for prolonged periods, and eight woodrats (D. Williams, in litt. has not adequately prevented the exposes brush rabbits and woodrats to 1997). Trapping efforts of similar ongoing loss of riparian forest. Riparian increased predation by stranding them intensity in 1993 resulted in the capture forests outside of the Park are important in trees or on high ground where there of 57 woodrats (D. Williams, in litt. for recovery implementation to succeed, is little or no cover (Nolan 1984, in 1997). Severe flooding could eliminate as neither the riparian brush rabbit nor Service 1997). Ironically the levees the Park populations of both the the riparian woodrat can be recovered themselves now function as high ground riparian brush rabbit and the riparian on Park lands alone (Service 1997). during flooding events. woodrat and result in the extinction of these subspecies. Flooding is also likely E. Other Natural or Manmade Factors Surveys have confirmed that after to increase competition between Affecting its Continued Existence major flooding events the numbers of riparian brush rabbits and desert Small, isolated populations are riparian brush rabbits and riparian woodrats decrease, sometimes cottontails, a subspecies that occurs in especially at risk from random events as a wider range of habitats, including there is little or no possibility of dramatically. Basey (1990) concluded, based on visual sightings and pellet riparian zones, within the same recolonization if the random event, geographic area (Basey 1990). Riparian surveys, that the riparian brush rabbit whether natural or manmade, affects the brush rabbits cannot return to their population may have been reduced to entire population. Random events that home areas if displaced more than about fewer than 15 to 20 individuals during may be catastrophic to the riparian 340 m (1,115.5 ft) (Chapman 1971, in flooding in 1983. Only about 3.6 ha (9 brush rabbit or the riparian woodrat Basey 1990). Desert cottontails, in ac) in five small areas of the 104.5 ha include the threat of wildfire, severe contrast, may return home when (258 ac) Park showed regular use by flooding, and prolonged drought. displaced as much as 4.8 km (3 mi) brush rabbits in the summer of 1986 Although the Park initiated a fire (Bowers 1954, in Basey 1990). after floods in February and March of management plan to reduce fuel load Therefore, if displaced by flooding more that year (Williams 1988). Williams and create firebreaks in an effort to than about 340 m (1,115.5 ft) from their protect habitat, the threat of fires (1986) found that riparian brush rabbits home areas, riparian brush rabbits may originating outside of the Park sometimes gain temporary shelter from be stranded in habitats where desert boundaries and accidentally within the floods by climbing trees, but he cottontails have a competitive Park boundaries from recreational estimated that only 10 or fewer advantage. activities still exists. Wildfire exposes individual rabbits survived the severe Drought may decrease the carrying the riparian brush rabbit and the winter flooding in 1985–86 (Williams capacity of riparian forest habitat for the riparian woodrat to 1988). riparian brush rabbit and the riparian and death (Basey 1990). The brushy The floods of January 1997 left about woodrat. By 1993, following seven years areas most vulnerable to fire also are 85 percent of the Park under 0.6–3.0 m of drought, riparian forest habitat at the important areas of habitat for riparian (2–10 ft) or more of water in most areas Park was considered to be at carrying brush rabbits and riparian woodrats for at least 2 weeks and, in lower areas, capacity for the riparian brush rabbit (Basey 1990). Between 1975 and 1987, for as long as 7 weeks. Efforts in January (Williams 1993). Depressed population 10 wildfires were reported within the to locate and potentially rescue stranded densities of woodrats have been Park. After 0.2 ha (0.5 ac) were burned riparian brush rabbits resulted in the reported due to drought (Linsdale and in 1981, no evidence of brush rabbits observation of only a single rabbit pellet Tevis 1951, in Service 1998). Because was found in the area (Basey 1990). Fire (D. Williams, in litt. 1997). In areas of riparian forest habitat at the Park is an is known to kill other species of the Park searched visually in March isolated area of habitat, decreased woodrats, such as the closely related 1997, no rabbits or pellets were found, carrying capacity may affect the dusky-footed woodrat (Neotoma although searchers did find two mounds populations of riparian brush rabbits fuscipes), and thus presumably poses containing fresh grass. Such mounds or and riparian woodrats because more the same threat to the riparian woodrat. ‘‘forms’’ are typically made by rabbits. individuals compete for the same After a fire burned a canyon bottom In April 1997, searchers documented resources, such as food and shelter. In dominated by oaks and sycamores in two rabbit fecal pellets but found no some , long periods of drought south-coastal California, Chew et al. other sign of rabbits or woodrat activity. and increased competition among (1959, in Williams et al. 1992) found 16 Trapping surveys were initiated in early individuals can affect individual dead dusky-footed woodrats per acre. May, well after floodwaters had survivorship and reproductive success Although flooding of low-lying receded, in hopes that any surviving (Service 1997). Surveys to determine the riparian forests is a naturally occurring rabbits would be located. During 22 effects of prolonged drought on the event, the changes to the river systems nights of trapping, no rabbits were carrying capacity of Park habitat for the which began around the 1940s have caught, one rabbit was visually sighted, riparian woodrat, however, have not altered natural flooding and its and at another location, fresh rabbit been conducted.

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 8887

Other factors that are a concern are River system to the point that the few the riparian brush rabbit and riparian the use of rodenticides in areas outside remaining habitat remnants outside of woodrat would be prudent. of the Park (rodenticides are no longer the Park are small and isolated and In the absence of a finding that critical applied in Park habitat) and competition cannot support viable populations of habitat would increase threats to a from exotic or invading species, such as these subspecies that can persist over species, if there are any benefits to the desert cottontail or the black rat, time. Thus, even in the event that the critical habitat designation, then a which may compete with the riparian few remaining unsurveyed fragments of prudent finding is warranted. In the brush rabbit or the riparian woodrat, habitat do support these subspecies, the case of these species, there may be some respectively (Service 1997). recommended listing status of the benefits to designation of critical Additionally, the extent to which riparian brush rabbit and riparian habitat. The primary regulatory effect of recreational activities such as vehicular woodrat would not change and their critical habitat is the section 7 and pedestrian traffic and predation by listing as endangered would be requirement that Federal agencies domestic dogs and cats may affect these warranted. Projected increases in refrain from taking any action that subspecies has not been studied. With human population within the San destroys or adversely modifies critical severely low populations of both Joaquin Valley and pressures associated habitat. While a critical habitat subspecies, these activities may have a with urban development, as well as the designation for habitat currently significant effect on their survival. inadequacy of existing regulatory occupied by these species would not be The population numbers of both mechanisms, suggest action is needed to likely to change the section 7 subspecies are now sufficiently low that successfully recover the riparian brush consultation outcome because an action the effects of inbreeding are highly rabbit and the riparian woodrat. that destroys or adversely modifies such likely to result in the expression of Threatened status is not appropriate for critical habitat would also be likely to deleterious genes in the population (i.e., either subspecies, considering the extent result in jeopardy to the species, there inbreeding depression) (Gilpin 1987; K. of loss and degradation of their habitat may be instances where section 7 Ralls, in litt. 1998). Such deleterious and the vulnerability of the remaining consultation would be triggered only if genes can reduce individual fitness in population. critical habitat is designated. Examples various ways, including decreased could include unoccupied habitat or survivorship of young, reduced Critical Habitat occupied habitat that may become fecundity (reproductive capacity), and Critical habitat is defined in section 3 unoccupied in the future. There may reduced adult lifespan (K. Ralls, in litt. of the Act as the specific areas within also be some educational or 1998). Small populations are also at the geographical area occupied by a informational benefits to designating greater risk from the effects of genetic species, at the time it is listed in critical habitat. Therefore, we find that drift, a decrease in genetic variability accordance with the Act, on which are critical habitat is prudent for the due to random changes in gene found those physical or biological riparian brush rabbit and riparian frequency from one generation to the features essential to the conservation of woodrat. The Final Listing Priority Guidance next. This reduction of variability the species and that may require special for FY 2000 (64 FR 57114) states that the within a population limits the ability of management considerations or processing of critical habitat that population to respond to protection; and specific areas outside determinations (prudency and environmental changes. the geographical area occupied by the Presently, a multispecies habitat determinability decisions) and proposed species at the time it is listed, upon conservation plan (HCP) is being or final designations of critical habitat determination that such areas are developed for San Joaquin County, will no longer be subject to essential for the conservation of the California. The riparian brush rabbit and prioritization under the Listing Priority riparian woodrat will be considered in species. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use Guidance. Critical habitat this HCP, and some conservation of all methods and procedures needed determinations, which were previously measures that will likely minimize to bring the species to the point at included in final listing rules published adverse impacts and/or benefit these which listing under the Act is no longer in the Federal Register, may now be two subspecies. A draft HCP will be necessary. processed separately, in which case available for public review in the future. In the proposed rule, we indicated stand-alone critical habitat Until the HCP is released for public that designation of critical habitat was determinations will be published as comment, we cannot determine how the not prudent for the riparian brush rabbit notices in the Federal Register. We will HCP will affect these two subspecies. and riparian woodrat because we undertake critical habitat In developing this final rule, we have believed it would not provide any determinations and designations during carefully assessed the best scientific and additional benefit beyond that provided FY 2000 as allowed by our funding commercial information available through listing as endangered since the allocation for that year. As explained in regarding the past, present, and future species are only found within the State detail in the Listing Priority Guidance, threats faced by these subspecies. Based park. our listing budget is currently on this evaluation, the preferred action In the last few years, a series of court insufficient to allow us to immediately is to list the riparian brush rabbit and decisions have overturned Service complete all of the listing actions the riparian woodrat as endangered. The determinations regarding a variety of required by the Act. Deferral of the small population size and single locality species that designation of critical critical habitat designation for the of these two subspecies render them habitat would not be prudent (e.g., riparian brush rabbit and riparian extremely vulnerable to a wide array of Natural Resources Defense Council v. woodrat will allow us to concentrate our threats. These subspecies currently face U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F. limited resources on higher priority immediate threats from wildfire, 3d 1121 (9th Cir. 1997); Conservation critical habitat and other listing actions, flooding events, and drought. In Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. while allowing us to put in place addition, they face threats from habitat 2d 1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the protections needed for the conservation destruction, competition, predation, and standards applied in those judicial of the riparian brush rabbit and riparian the use of rodenticides. The riparian opinions, we have reexamined the woodrat without further delay. forest is reduced along the San Joaquin question of whether critical habitat for However, because we have successfully

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 8888 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations reduced, although not eliminated, the activities they authorize, fund, or carry We may be able to issue permits to backlog of other listing actions, we out are not likely to jeopardize the carry out otherwise prohibited activities anticipate in FY 2000 and beyond giving continued existence of the species or to involving endangered wildlife under higher priority to critical habitat destroy or adversely modify its critical certain circumstances. Regulations designation, including designations habitat. If a Federal action may affect a governing permits are codified at 50 deferred pursuant to the Listing Priority listed species or its critical habitat, the CFR 17.22 and 17.23. Such permits are Guidance, such as the designation for responsible Federal agency must enter available for scientific purposes, to these species, than we have in recent into formal consultation with us. As enhance the propagation or survival of fiscal years. part of our outreach efforts, we will the species, and/or for incidental take in We plan to employ a priority system notify the Corps and U.S. Bureau of connection with otherwise lawful for deciding which outstanding critical Reclamation (BOR), as well as affected activities. Under some circumstances, habitat designations should be landowners, to ensure they are aware of we can issue permits for a specified addressed first. We will focus our efforts the species’ presence and clarify their period for species in trade in order to on those designations that will provide obligations in protecting both species relieve undue economic hardship that the most conservation benefit, taking under the Act. would be suffered if such relief were not into consideration the efficacy of critical Federal actions that may require available. habitat designation in addressing the conference or consultation with us Our policy, as published in the threats to the species, and the include activities by the Corps that fund Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR magnitude and immediacy of those or authorize levee and channel 34272), is to identify to the maximum threats. We will develop a proposal to maintenance projects along the lower extent practicable at the time a species designate critical habitat for the riparian San Joaquin River and its tributaries, the is listed those activities that would or brush rabbit and riparian woodrat as operation of upstream water storage would not constitute a violation of soon as feasible, considering our facilities and dams by the Corps and section 9 of the Act. The intent of this workload priorities. Unfortunately, for BOR, and oversight of flowage (flood) policy is to increase public awareness of the immediate future, most of Region 1’s and restoration easements by the Corps the effect of listing on proposed and listing budget must be directed to over riparian lands downstream from ongoing activities within the species’ complying with numerous court orders these dams. Additionally, the Federal range and to assist the public in and settlement agreements, as well as Emergency Management Agency may be identifying measures needed to protect due and overdue final listing required to consult if an emergency the species. We believe that, based on determinations (like the one at issue in action affected either of these the best available information, the this case). subspecies. following actions would not likely Listing the riparian brush rabbit and result in a violation of section 9: Available Conservation Measures riparian woodrat as endangered triggers (1) Possession of legally acquired Conservation measures provided to the development of a recovery plan. species listed as endangered or Such a plan establishes a conservation riparian brush rabbits and riparian threatened under the Act include framework for State, Federal, and local woodrats; recognition, recovery actions, governmental planning. The plan sets (2) Light to moderate livestock grazing requirements for Federal protection, and recovery priorities and estimates costs that prevents or minimizes the prohibitions against certain activities. of various tasks necessary to accomplish encroachment of invasive plant species; Recognition through listing encourages them. The plan also would describe site- (3) Federally approved projects that and results in conservation actions by specific management actions necessary involve activities such as discharge of Federal, State, local agencies, private to achieve conservation and survival of fill material, draining, ditching, tiling, organizations, and individuals. The Act these subspecies. The riparian brush pond construction, stream provides for possible land acquisition rabbit and the riparian woodrat are both channelization or diversion, or and cooperation with the State and included in the final ‘‘Recovery Plan for alteration of surface or ground water requires that recovery actions be carried Upland Species of the San Joaquin into or out of riparian areas (i.e., due to out for all listed species. The protection Valley, California’’ (Service 1998), and roads, impoundments, discharge pipes, required of Federal agencies and the thus the recovery planning process is storm water detention basins, etc.), or prohibitions against certain activities already under way. wildlife habitat restoration, when such involving listed species are discussed, The Act and implementing activity is conducted in accordance with in part, below. regulations set forth a series of general any reasonable and prudent measures Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, prohibitions and exceptions that apply given by us in accordance with section requires Federal agencies to evaluate to all endangered wildlife. The 7 of the Act; their actions with respect to any species prohibitions, codified at 50 CFR 17.21, (4) Ongoing activities at the Park that that is proposed or listed as endangered in part, make it illegal for any person are compatible with sustaining a viable or threatened and with respect to its subject to the jurisdiction of the United population of both subspecies. These critical habitat, if any is being States to take (includes harass, harm, activities include camping and designated. Regulations implementing pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, recreational activities such as this interagency cooperation provision capture, or collect; or to attempt any of picnicking, swimming, hiking, and of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part these), import or export, ship in fishing, as well as routine operations 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires interstate commerce in the course of such as wildfire management, mowing, Federal agencies to confer with us on commercial activity, or sell or offer for trail clearing, repairing water and sewer any action that is likely to jeopardize sale in interstate or foreign commerce lines, removing hazardous trees, and the the continued existence of a species any listed species. It also is illegal to application of insecticides and proposed for listing or result in possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport, or herbicides rodenticides consistent with destruction or adverse modification of ship any such wildlife that has been label instructions and restrictions. proposed critical habitat. If a species is taken illegally. Certain exceptions apply Activities that we believe could listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) to our agents and State conservation potentially harm the riparian brush requires Federal agencies to ensure that agencies. rabbit and the riparian woodrat and

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations 8889 result in a violation of section 9 include, Questions regarding whether specific permits and associated requirements for but are not limited to, the following: activities may constitute a violation of endangered species, see 50 CFR 17.22. section 9 should be directed to the Field (1) Unauthorized collecting, handling, References Cited or holding in captivity of either of these Supervisor of our Sacramento Field subspecies; Office (see ADDRESSES section). Requests A complete list of all references we (2) Unauthorized destruction/ for copies of the regulations concerning cited, as well as others, is available alteration of the subspecies habitat listed wildlife and general inquiries upon request from the Field Supervisor, through the discharge of fill material, regarding prohibitions and permits may U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, draining, ditching, tiling, pond be addressed to the U.S. Fish and Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office construction, stream channelization or Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, (see ADDRESSES section). diversion, or the alteration of surface or Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E. Author. The primary authors of this ground water flow into or out of a 11th Avenue, Portland, , 97232– final rule are Heather Bell and Diane riparian area (i.e., due to roads, 4181 (telephone 503/231–2063; Windham, U.S. Fish and Wildlife impoundments, discharge pipes, storm facsimile 503/231–6243). Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section), water detention basins, etc.); National Environmental Policy Act (3) Violation of discharge permits; telephone 916/414–6600. (4) Burning, cutting, or mowing of We have determined that we do not List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 riparian vegetation, repairing water and need to prepare Environmental Endangered and threatened species, sewer lines, and the spraying of Assessments and Environmental Impact Exports, Imports, Reporting and insecticides or herbicides, if conducted Statements, as defined under the recordkeeping requirements, in an untimely or inappropriate manner authority of the National Environmental Transportation. (e.g., when individuals of these Policy Act of 1969, in connection with subspecies would be killed or injured, regulations adopted pursuant to section Final Regulation Promulgation when reproductive efforts would be 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of disrupted); 1973, as amended. We published a We amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal (5) Rodenticide applications if notice outlining our reasons for this Regulations, as set forth below: conducted in an untimely or determination in the Federal Register inappropriate manner, or in violation of on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). PART 17Ð[AMENDED] label restrictions; Required Determinations (6) Discharges or dumping of toxic 1. The authority citation for Part 17 chemicals, silt, or other pollutants (i.e., This rule does not contain any continues to read as follows: sewage, oil, and gasoline) onto land information collection requirements for Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. supporting these subspecies; and which the Office of Management and 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– (7) Interstate and foreign commerce Budget (OMB) approval under the 625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise noted. (commerce across State lines and Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 2. Amend section 17.11(h) by adding international boundaries) and import/ 3501 et seq. is required. An information the following, in alphabetical order export (as discussed earlier in this collection related to the rule pertaining under MAMMALS, to the List of section) without prior obtainment of an to permits for endangered and Endangered and Threatened Wildlife: endangered species permit. Permits to threatened species has OMB approval conduct these activities are available for and is assigned clearance number 1018– § 17.11 Endangered and threatened purposes of scientific research and 0094. This rule does not alter that wildlife. enhancement of propagation or survival information collection requirement. For * * * * * of the species. additional information concerning (h) * * *

Species Vertebrate popu- Historic range lation where endan- Status When listed Critical Special Common name Scientific name gered or threatened habitat rules

******* MAMMALS

******* Rabbit, riparian Sylvilagus bachmani U.S.A. (CA) ...... Entire ...... E 687 NA NA brush. riparius.

******* Woodrat, riparian Neotoma fuscipes U.S.A. (CA) ...... Entire ...... E 687 NA NA (San Joaquin Val- riparia. ley).

*******

VerDate 162000 11:24 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1 8890 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 36 / Wednesday, February 23, 2000 / Rules and Regulations

Dated: January 31, 2000. Sea and Aleutian Islands Area. It is governing fishing by U.S. vessels and Jamie Rappaport Clark, intended to increase the flexibility of implementing the FMP appear at 50 Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. observer contractors in deploying CDQ CFR parts 600 and 679. [FR Doc. 00–4207 Filed 2–22–00; 8:45 am] observers and to decrease costs to the On June 4, 1998 (63 FR 30381), NMFS BILLING CODE 4310±55±P vessels and processors participating in published a final rule implementing the CDQ fisheries. catch monitoring and observer coverage DATES: Effective March 6, 2000, through requirements for all vessels and DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE December 31, 2000. Comments must be processors participating in the received at the following address no multispecies (MS) CDQ fisheries. On National Oceanic and Atmospheric later than 4:30 p.m., A.l.t., March 9, April 26, 1999 (64 FR 20210), NMFS Administration 2000. extended these requirements to vessels ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to equal to or greater than 60 ft (18.3 m) 50 CFR Part 679 Sue Salveson, Assistant Regional length overall (LOA) that participate in [Docket No. 981221311±9096±02; I.D. Administrator, Sustainable Fisheries the halibut CDQ fishery. These 021400F] Division, Alaska Region, NMFS, P.O. regulations were implemented because Box 21668, Juneau, AK 99802–1668, in the CDQ fisheries, all groundfish and Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Attn: Lori Gravel. Hand delivery or prohibited species catch by vessels Zone Off Alaska; Inseason Adjustment courier delivery of comments may be fishing for CDQ groups accrue against to Required Observer Coverage sent to the Federal Building, 709 West the CDQ groups’ individual allocations. 9th Street, Room 453, Juneau, AK Because individual vessels, processors, AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 99801. and CDQ groups are accountable for the Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and catch of groundfish and prohibited Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: species, the catch monitoring standards Commerce. Sally Bibb, 907–586–7389. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NMFS must be more stringent than in many ACTION: Inseason adjustment; request for other fisheries. These final rules also comments. manages fishing for groundfish by U.S. vessels in the exclusive economic zone implemented experience and training SUMMARY: NMFS issues an inseason of the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands requirements for observers that, in most adjustment to reduce certain observer according to the Fishery Management cases, exceeded the requirements in the coverage requirements for some catcher Plan for the Groundfish Fishery of the non-CDQ fisheries. vessels and shoreside processors Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Area Table 1 summarizes the current participating in the Western Alaska (FMP). The North Pacific Fishery observer coverage requirements for the Community Development Quota (CDQ) Management Council (Council) CDQ fisheries at 50 CFR 679.50(c) and fisheries. This action is necessary to prepared the FMP under authority of the (d). Table 2 summarizes the experience increase the availability of experienced Magnuson-Stevens Fishery requirements necessary for a CDQ and trained observers to effectively Conservation and Management Act observer and a lead CDQ observer at 50 manage the CDQ fisheries in the Bering (Magnuson-Stevens Act). Regulations CFR 679.50(h). Table 1. Current Observer Coverage Requirements for the CDQ Fisheries.

Category CDQ Observer Requirements

Catcher vessel, < 60 ft ...... none Catcher vessel, ´ 60 ft ...... 1 lead CDQ observer (obs.) Catcher/processor, mothership ...... 2 total (1 lead CDQ obs., 1 CDQ obs.) Shoreside processor ...... 1 lead CDQ obs. for each CDQ delivery, except deliveries from catcher vessels < 60 ft LOA fishing halibut CDQ

Table 2. Requirements for CDQ Observer and ``Lead'' CDQ Observer in 50 CFR 679.50

CDQ Observer Classification Experience Requirements

All CDQ observers ...... Prior experience as an observer with 60 days observer data collection, - Minimum evaluation rating of 1 or 2, - Successfully complete CDQ observer training course ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ``LEAD'' CDQ OBSERVERS Lead observer on a factory trawler or a mothership ...... At least 2 cruises (contracts) and sampled at least 100 hauls on a fac- tory trawler or a mothership. Lead on catcher vessel using trawl gear ...... At least 2 cruises (contracts) and sampled at least 50 hauls on a catcher vessel using trawl gear. Lead on vessel using nontrawl gear ...... At least 2 cruises (contracts) of at least 10 days each and sampled at least 60 sets on a vessel using nontrawl gear. Lead in shoreside plant ...... Observed at least 30 days in a shoreside processing plant.

At the time of initial implementation observers needed prior experience on a first year of the MS CDQ fisheries in of the MS CDQ Program, lead CDQ vessel using the same gear type or in a December 1999, NMFS believes that observers were required on all vessels shoreside plant in order to collect the reductions in some CDQ observer and in the shoreside processing plants data needed to manage the CDQ coverage requirements could be made because NMFS believed that the CDQ fisheries. However, after reviewing the without reducing the quality or quantity

VerDate 162000 16:29 Feb 22, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\23FER1.SGM pfrm04 PsN: 23FER1