Thursday, February 28, 2008

Part II

Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for the Contiguous United States Distinct Population Segment of the Canada Lynx (Lynx canadensis); Proposed Rule

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10860 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, refined to more closely circumscribe the Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. boreal forest landscapes occupied by Fish and Wildlife Service We will not accept e-mail or faxed lynx. Refined maps that accurately comments. We will post all comments depict the specific vegetation types on 50 CFR Part 17 on http://www.regulations.gov. This all land ownerships are not readily generally means that we will post any available. We are especially interested [FWS–R6–ES–2008–0026] personal information you provide us in this information for the Greater 92210–1117–0000-B4] (see the Public Comments section below Yellowstone Area unit. RIN 1018–AV78 for more information). (9) Whether our proposed revised FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: critical habitat for the lynx should be Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Mark Wilson, Field Supervisor, altered in any way to account for and Plants; Revised Critical Habitat for Montana Ecological Services Office, 585 climate change. the Contiguous United States Distinct Shepard Way, Helena, MT, 59601; (10) Whether the proposed revised critical habitat designation for the lynx Population Segment of the Canada telephone 406–449–5225. If you use a should include private lands, or Lynx (Lynx canadensis) telecommunications device for the deaf whether the proposed Federal lands are (TDD), call the Federal Information AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, sufficient to conserve lynx. Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. Interior. (11) Whether U.S. Forest Service SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: ACTION: Proposed rule. (USFS) lands that occur in the wildland- Public Comments urban-interface (WUI) should be SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and excluded from critical habitat under Wildlife Service (Service), propose to We intend that any final action section 4(b)(2) of the Act so that fuels- revise designated critical habitat for the resulting from this proposal will be as reduction projects designed to protect contiguous United States distinct accurate and as effective as possible. human life and property from wildfire population segment of the Canada lynx Therefore, we request comments or would not be impeded in any way in (Lynx canadensis) (lynx) under the suggestions on this proposed rule. We these areas. Endangered Species Act of 1973, as particularly seek comments concerning: (12) Whether the Greater Yellowstone amended (Act). In the contiguous (1) The reasons why we should or Area is essential to the conservation of United States, the lynx generally should not designate specific habitat as lynx. Lynx in this proposed unit occur inhabits cold, moist boreal forests. ‘‘critical habitat’’ under section 4 of the at lower densities than in other Approximately 42,753 square miles Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). proposed units, and the population is 2 2 (2) Specific information on: not connected to Canada, which is an (mi ) (110,727 square kilometers (km )) • fall within the boundaries of the The amount and distribution of important source of lynx in the United lynx habitat, States. proposed revised critical habitat • designation. The proposed revised What areas occupied at the time of (13) Any foreseeable economic, designation would add an additional listing and that contain features national security, or other potential 40,913 mi2 (105,959 km2) to the existing essential for the conservation of the impacts resulting from the proposed critical habitat designation of 1,841 mi2 species we should include in the designation and, in particular, any (4,768 km2). The proposed revised designation and why that might be so, impacts on small entities, and the and benefits of including or excluding areas critical habitat is located in Boundary • County, Idaho; Aroostook, Franklin, What areas not occupied at the time that exhibit these impacts. Penobscot, Piscataquis, and Somerset of listing are essential to the (14) Whether we could improve or Counties in Maine; Cook, Koochiching, conservation of the species and why modify our approach to designating Lake, and St. Louis Counties in that might be so. critical habitat in any way to provide for Minnesota; Flathead, Glacier, Granite, (3) Comments or information that may greater public participation and Lake, Lewis and Clark, Lincoln, assist us with identifying or clarifying understanding, or to better Missoula, Pondera, Powell, Teton, the primary constituent element. accommodate public concerns and Gallatin, Park, Sweetgrass, Stillwater, (4) Land use designations and current comments. and Carbon Counties in Montana; or planned activities in the areas The size of the individual Indian Chelan and Okanogan Counties in proposed as critical habitat and their reservation lands in the Northern Washington; and Park, Teton, Fremont, possible impacts on proposed revised Rockies, Maine, and Minnesota units is Sublette, and Lincoln Counties in critical habitat. relatively small. As a result, we believe Wyoming. (5) Whether Tribal lands in the conservation of the lynx can be Northern Rockies, Maine, and achieved by limiting the designation to DATES: We will accept comments Minnesota units need to be included as the other lands in the proposal without received or postmarked on or before critical habitat pursuant to Secretarial including Tribal lands (see April 28, 2008. We must receive Order Number 3206. ‘‘Relationship of Critical Habitat to requests for public hearings, in writing, (6) Whether lands the Southern Rocky Tribal Lands’’ below). at the address shown in the ADDRESSES Mountains contain the physical and The southern Rocky Mountains in section by April 14, 2008. biological features that are essential for Colorado, Utah, and southern Wyoming ADDRESSES: You may submit comments the conservation of the species and the are disjunct from other lynx habitats in by one of the following methods: basis for why that might be so the United States and Canada. The • Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// (7) Whether lands in any unoccupied nearest lynx population occurs in the www.regulations.gov. Follow the areas, such as the ‘‘Kettle Range’’ in Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA), which instructions for submitting comments. Ferry County, Washington, are essential is a small, low density population also • U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public to the conservation of lynx and the basis disjunct from other lynx populations Comments Processing, Attn: [FWS–R6– for why that might be so. and is unlikely to regularly supply ES–2008–0026]; Division of Policy and (8) How the proposed boundaries of dispersing lynx to the Southern Rockies. Directives Management; U.S. Fish and the revised critical habitat could be Native lynx were functionally extirpated

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10861

from their historic range in Colorado Hick 2007) that may provide insight on CONTACT). Maps of the proposed revised and southern Wyoming by the time the changes to lynx habitat. If necessary and critical habitat are also available on the lynx was listed as a threatened species appropriate, revisions to this proposed Internet at http://mountain-prairie. under the Act in 2000. In 1999, the State rule will be made to address this fws.gov/species/mammals/lynx/. of Colorado began an intensive effort to information. We will also be revising Background reintroduce lynx. Although it is too the economic analysis and early to determine whether the environmental assessment prepared for It is our intent to discuss only those introduction will result in a self- the previous designation and providing topics directly relevant to the sustaining population, the reintroduced drafts of the new economic analysis and designation of critical habitat in this lynx have produced kittens and now are environmental assessment to the public proposed rule. For more information on distributed throughout the lynx habitat before finalizing this proposal. the lynx refer to the final listing rule in Colorado and southern Wyoming. On the basis of public comment, published in the Federal Register on These animals are not designated as an during the development of the revised March 24, 2000 (65 FR 16052), and the experimental population under section final rule we may find, among other clarification of findings published in the 10(j) of the Act. Although Colorado’s things, that areas proposed are not Federal Register on July 3, 2003 (68 FR reintroduction effort is an important essential to the conservation of the 40076). step toward the recovery of lynx, we are species, are appropriate for exclusion Canada lynx are medium-sized cats, not proposing revised critical habitat in under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, or are generally measuring 30 to 35 inches (in) the Southern Rockies because of the not appropriate for exclusion. In all of (75 to 90 centimeters (cm)) long and current uncertainty that a self-sustaining these cases, this information will be weighing 18 to 23 pounds (8 to 10.5 lynx population will become incorporated into the revised final kilograms) (Quinn and Parker 1987, established. designation. Further, we may find as a Table 1). They have large, well-furred The Kettle Range in Washington result of public comments that areas not feet and long legs for traversing snow; historically supported lynx populations proposed should also be designated as tufts on the ears; and short, black-tipped (Stinson 2001). However, although critical habitat. Final management plans tails. boreal forest habitat within the Kettle that address the conservation of the lynx Lynx are highly specialized predators Range appears of high quality for lynx, must be submitted to us during the of snowshoe hare (Lepus americanus) there is no evidence that the Kettle public comment period so that we can (McCord and Cardoza 1982, p. 744; Range is currently occupied by a lynx take them into consideration when population nor has there been evidence making our final critical habitat Quinn and Parker 1987, pp. 684–685; of reproducing lynx in the Kettle Range determination. Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 375–378). Lynx in the past two decades (Koehler 2008). You may submit your comments and and snowshoe hares are strongly Fuels-reduction projects in the WUI materials concerning this proposed rule associated with what is broadly may degrade lynx habitat by reducing by one of the methods listed in the described as boreal forest (Bittner and its ability to support snowshoe hares. ADDRESSES section. We will not accept Rongstad 1982, p. 154; McCord and For this reason, if WUI areas were comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an Cardoza 1982, p. 743; Quinn and Parker designated as revised critical habitat, address not listed in the ADDRESSES 1987, p. 684; Agee 2000, p. 39; Aubry fuels-reduction projects may be section. We will not accept anonymous et al. 2000, pp. 378–382; Hodges 2000a, impaired or delayed as a result of comments; your comment must include pp. 136–140 and 2000b, pp. 183–191; requirements under section 7(a)(2) of your first and last name, city, State, McKelvey et al. 2000b, pp. 211–232). the Act, which could lead to reduced country, and postal (zip) code. Finally, The predominant vegetation of boreal effectiveness of the fuels-reduction, and we will not consider hand-delivered forest is conifer trees, primarily species increased risk to human life and comments that we do not receive, or of spruce (Picea spp.) and fir (Abies property. Mapped WUI areas can be mailed comments that are not spp.) (Elliot-Fisk 1988, pp. 34–35, 37– viewed on the Internet at: ftp:// postmarked, by the date specified in the 42). In the contiguous United States, the ftp2.fs.fed.us/incoming/r1/FWS/ DATES section. boreal forest types transition to wui_1mile_buffer_oct06.pdf. We will post your entire comment— deciduous temperate forest in the In addition to public comments including your personal identifying Northeast and Great Lakes and to received on this proposed rule, between information—on http:// subalpine forest in the west (Agee 2000, the proposed and final rules, the Service www.regulations.gov. If you provide pp. 40–41). Lynx habitat can generally will analyze the following for its personal identifying information in be described as moist boreal forests that relevance in revising critical habitat for addition to the required items specified have cold, snowy winters and a lynx: (1) Comments received in in the previous paragraph, such as your snowshoe hare prey base (Quinn and response to our initiation of a 5-year street address, phone number, or e-mail Parker 1987, p. 684–685; Agee 2000, pp. review for lynx; (2) a new study address, you may request at the top of 39–47; Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 373–375; addressing effects of snowmobile trails your document that we withhold this Buskirk et al. 2000b, pp. 397–405; on coyote movements within lynx home information from public review. Ruggiero et al. 2000, pp. 445–447). In ranges (Kolbe et al. 2007, pp. 1409– However, we cannot guarantee that we mountainous areas, the boreal forests 1418); (3) a study on lynx prey selection will be able to do so. that lynx use are characterized by (Squires and Ruggiero 2007, pp. 310– Comments and materials we receive, scattered moist forest types with high 315); (4) new reports we have received as well as supporting documentation we hare densities in a matrix of other on the numbers and distribution of lynx used in preparing this revised proposed habitats (e.g., hardwoods, dry forest, in some locations; (5) a newly released rule, will be available for public non-forest) with low hare densities. In study on the effects of climate change inspection on http:// these areas, lynx incorporate the matrix on snowpack in western mountains and www.regulations.gov, or by habitat (non-boreal forest habitat how that may affect lynx, snowshoe appointment, during normal business elements) into their home ranges and hares, and their habitats (Gonzalez et al. hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife use it for traveling between patches of 2007); and (6) additional new studies Service, Montana Ecological Services boreal forest that support high hare (e.g., Knowles et al. 2006 and Danby and Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION densities where most foraging occurs.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10862 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

Snow conditions also determine the boreal forest in Canada (Wolff 1980, pp. 285–287). Lynx prey opportunistically distribution of lynx (Ruggiero et al. 123–128; Buehler and Keith 1982, pp. on other small mammals and birds, 2000, pp. 445–449). Lynx are 24, 28; Koehler 1990, p. 849; Koehler particularly during lows in snowshoe morphologically and physiologically and Aubry 1994, p. 84). Additionally, hare populations, but alternate prey adapted for hunting snowshoe hares and the presence of more snowshoe hare species may not sufficiently compensate surviving in areas that have cold winters predators and competitors at southern for low availability of snowshoe hares, with deep, fluffy snow for extended latitudes may inhibit the potential for resulting in reduced lynx populations periods. These adaptations provide lynx high-density hare populations (Wolff (Brand et al. 1976, pp. 422–425; Brand a competitive advantage over potential 1980, p. 128). As a result, lynx generally and Keith 1979, pp. 833–834; Koehler competitors, such as bobcats (Lynx occur at relatively low densities in the 1990, pp. 848–849; Mowat et al. 2000, rufus) or coyotes (Canis latrans) contiguous United States compared to pp. 267–268). (McCord and Cardoza 1982, p. 748; the high lynx densities that occur in the In northern Canada, lynx populations Buskirk et al. 2000a, pp. 86–95; northern boreal forest of Canada (Aubry fluctuate in response to the cycling of Ruediger et al. 2000, p. 1–11; Ruggiero et al. 2000, pp. 375, 393–394) or the snowshoe hare populations (Hodges et al. 2000, pp. 445, 450). Bobcats and densities of species such as the bobcat, 2000a, pp. 118–123; Mowat et al. 2000, coyotes have a higher foot load (more which is a habitat and prey generalist. pp. 270–272). Although snowshoe hare weight per surface area of foot), which Lynx are highly mobile and generally populations in the northern portion of causes them to sink into the snow more move long distances (greater than 60 mi their range show strong, regular than lynx. Therefore, bobcats and (100 km)) (Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 386– population cycles, these fluctuations are coyotes cannot efficiently hunt in fluffy 387; Mowat et al. 2000, pp. 290–294). generally much less pronounced in the or deep snow and are at a competitive Lynx disperse primarily when southern portion of their range in the disadvantage to lynx. Long-term snow snowshoe hare populations decline contiguous United States (Hodges conditions presumably limit the winter (Ward and Krebs 1985, pp. 2821–2823; 2000b, pp. 165–173). In the contiguous distribution of potential lynx O’Donoghue et al. 1997, pp. 156, 159; United States, the degree to which competitors such as bobcats (McCord Poole 1997, pp. 499–503). Subadult lynx regional local lynx population and Cardoza 1982, p. 748) or coyotes. disperse even when prey is abundant fluctuations are influenced by local (Poole 1997, pp. 502–503), presumably snowshoe hare population dynamics is Lynx Habitat Requirements to establish new home ranges. Lynx also unclear. However, it is anticipated that Because of the patchiness and make exploratory movements outside because of natural fluctuations in temporal nature of high quality their home ranges (Aubry et al. 2000, p. snowshoe hare populations, there will snowshoe hare habitat, lynx populations 386; Squires et al. 2001, pp. 18–26). be periods when lynx densities are require large boreal forest landscapes to The boreal forest landscape is extremely low. ensure that sufficient high quality naturally dynamic. Forest stands within Because lynx population dynamics, snowshoe hare habitat is available and the landscape change as they undergo survival, and reproduction are closely to ensure that lynx may move freely succession after natural or human- tied to snowshoe hare availability, among patches of suitable habitat and caused disturbances such as fire, insect snowshoe hare habitat is a component among subpopulations of lynx. epidemics, wind, ice, disease, and forest of lynx habitat. Lynx generally Populations that are composed of a management (Elliot-Fisk 1988, pp. 47– concentrate their foraging and hunting number of discrete subpopulations, 48; Agee 2000, pp. 47–69). As a result, activities in areas where snowshoe hare connected by dispersal, are called lynx habitat within the boreal forest populations are high (Koehler et al. metapopulations (McKelvey et al. landscape is typically patchy because 1979, p. 442; Ward and Krebs 1985, pp. 2000c, p. 25). Individual lynx maintain the boreal forest contains stands of 2821–2823; Murray et al. 1994, p. 1450; large home ranges (reported as generally differing ages and conditions, some of O’Donoghue et al. 1997, pp. 155, 159– ranging between 12 to 83 mi2 (31 to 216 which are suitable as lynx foraging or 160 and 1998, pp. 178–181). Snowshoe km2)) (Koehler 1990, p. 847; Aubry et al. denning habitat (or will become suitable hares are most abundant in forests with 2000, pp. 382–386; Squires and Laurion in the future due to forest succession) dense understories that provide forage, 2000, pp. 342–347; Squires et al. 2004b, and some of which serve as travel routes cover to escape from predators, and pp. 13–16, Table 6; Vashon et al. 2005a, for lynx moving between foraging and protection during extreme weather pp. 7–11). The size of lynx home ranges denning habitat (McKelvey et al. 2000a, (Wolfe et al. 1982, pp. 665–669; Litvaitis varies depending on abundance of prey, pp. 427–434; Hoving et al. 2004, pp. et al. 1985, pp. 869–872; Hodges 2000a, the animal’s gender and age, the season, 290–292). pp. 136–140 and 2000b, pp. 183–195). and the density of lynx populations Snowshoe hares comprise a majority Generally, hare densities are higher in (Koehler 1990, p. 849; Poole 1994, pp. of the lynx diet (Nellis et al. 1972, pp. regenerating, earlier successional forest 612–616; Slough and Mowat 1996, pp. 323–325; Brand et al. 1976, pp. 422– stages because they have greater 951, 956; Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 382– 425; Koehler 1990, p. 848; Apps 2000, understory structure than mature forests 386; Mowat et al. 2000, pp. 276–280; pp. 358–359, 363; Aubry et al. 2000, pp. (Buehler and Keith 1982, p. 24; Wolfe et Vashon et al. 2005a, pp. 9–10). When 375–378; Mowat et al. 2000, pp. 267– al. 1982, pp. 665–669; Koehler 1990, pp. densities of snowshoe hares decline, for 268; von Kienast 2003, pp. 37–38; 847–848; Hodges 2000b, pp. 183–195; example, lynx enlarge their home ranges Squires et al. 2004b, p. 15, Table 8). Homyack 2003, p. 63, 141; Griffin 2004, to obtain sufficient amounts of food to When snowshoe hare populations are pp. 84–88). However, snowshoe hares survive and reproduce. low, female lynx produce few or no can be abundant in mature forests with In the contiguous United States, the kittens that survive to independence dense understories (Griffin 2004, pp. boreal forest landscape is naturally (Nellis et al. 1972, pp. 326–328; Brand 53–54). patchy and transitional because it is the et al. 1976, pp. 420, 427; Brand and Within the boreal forest, lynx den southern edge of the boreal forest range. Keith 1979, pp. 837–838, 847; Poole sites are located where coarse woody This generally limits snowshoe hare 1994, pp. 612–616; Slough and Mowat debris, such as downed logs and populations in the contiguous United 1996, pp. 953–958; O’Donoghue et al. windfalls, provides security and thermal States from achieving densities similar 1997, pp. 158–159; Aubry et al. 2000, cover for lynx kittens (McCord and to those of the expansive northern pp. 388–389; Mowat et al. 2000, pp. Cardoza 1982, pp. 743–744; Koehler

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10863

1990, pp. 847–849; Slough 1999, p. 607; and this rule proposes those revisions. For inclusion in a critical habitat Squires and Laurion 2000, pp. 346–347; On January 15, 2008, the U.S. District designation, habitat within the Organ 2001). The amount of structure Court for the District of Columbia issued geographical area occupied by the (e.g., downed, large, woody debris) an order stating the Service’s deadlines species at the time it was listed must appears to be more important than the for a proposed rule for revised critical contain physical and biological features age of the forest stand for lynx denning habitat by February 15, 2008, and a final that are essential to the conservation of habitat (Mowat et al. 2000, pp. 10–11). rule for revised critical habitat by the species. Consistent with this Future of Lynx Habitat February 15, 2009. requirement, the Service identifies, to the extent known using the best Critical Habitat In 2003, we determined that climate scientific data available, habitat areas on change was not a threat to lynx because Critical habitat is defined in section 3 which are found the physical and the best available science we had at that of the Act as: biological features essential, as defined time (Hoving 2001) was too uncertain in (1) The specific areas within the at 50 CFR 424.12(b), and identifies the nature (68 FR 40083). Since that time, geographical area occupied by a species, quantity and spatial arrangement of new information on regional climate at the time it is listed in accordance such areas to ensure that the areas changes and potential effects to lynx with the Act, on which are found those designated as critical habitat are habitat has been developed (e.g., physical or biological features essential for the conservation of the Gonzalez et al. 2007, entire; Knowles et (a) Essential to the conservation of the species. Occupied habitat that contains al. 2006, pp. 4545–4559; Danby and species and the physical and biological features Hick 2007, pp. 358–359) that suggests (b) That may require special essential to the conservation of the that climate change may be an issue of management considerations or species meets the definition of critical concern for the future conservation of protection; and habitat only if those features may lynx. This information, combined with (2) Specific areas outside the require special management the information in Hoving 2001, still geographical area occupied by a species considerations or protection. needs to be evaluated further to at the time it is listed, upon a Under the Act, we can designate determine how climate change might determination that such areas are unoccupied areas as critical habitat only affect lynx and lynx habitat. We are when we determine that the best evaluating this information in the 5-year essential for the conservation of the available scientific data demonstrate review we are conducting for lynx. species. At this time, we find it appropriate to Conservation, as defined under that the designation of that area is propose revised critical habitat in areas section 3 of the Act, means the use of essential to the conservation of the that are occupied and currently contain all methods and procedures that are species. the physical and biological features necessary to bring any endangered Section 4 of the Act requires that we essential to the conservation of the lynx. species or threatened species to the designate critical habitat on the basis of Revisions to the critical habitat point at which the measures provided the best scientific and commercial data designation may be necessary in the under the Act are no longer necessary. available. Further, our Policy on future to accommodate shifts in the Critical habitat receives protection Information Standards Under the occupied range of the lynx. To the under section 7 of the Act through the Endangered Species Act (published in extent lynx distribution and habitat is prohibition against Federal agencies the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 likely to shift upward in elevation carrying out, funding, or authorizing FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act within its currently occupied range as activities that result in the destruction (section 515 of the Treasury and General the temperatures increase (Gonzalez et or adverse modification of critical Government Appropriations Act for al. 2007, pp. 7, 13–14,19), the proposed habitat. Section 7 of the Act requires Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. revised critical habitat units include the consultation on Federal actions that 5658)), and our associated Information highest-elevation habitats that lynx may affect critical habitat. The Quality Guidelines provide criteria, would be able to use in that event. designation of critical habitat does not establish procedures, and provide affect land ownership or establish a guidance to ensure that our decisions Previous Federal Actions refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or are based on the best scientific data For more information on previous other conservation area. Such available. These documents require our Federal actions concerning the lynx, designation does not allow the biologists, to the extent consistent with refer to the final listing rule published government or public to access private the Act and with the use of the best in the Federal Register on March 24, lands. Such designation does not scientific data available, to use primary 2000 (65 FR 16052), the clarification of require implementation of restoration, and original sources of information as findings published in the Federal recovery, or enhancement measures by the basis for recommendations to Register on July 3, 2003 (68 FR 40076), the landowner. Where the landowner designate critical habitat. and the final rule designating critical seeks or requests Federal agency When we are determining which areas habitat for lynx published in the funding or authorization of an activity should be proposed as critical habitat, Federal Register on November 9, 2006 that may affect a listed species or our primary source of information is (71 FR 66007). On July 20, 2007, the critical habitat, the consultation generally the information developed Service announced that we would requirements of section 7 would apply. during the listing process for the review the November 9, 2006 final rule Nonetheless, even in the event a project species. Additional information sources after questions were raised about the with a Federal nexus may result in the may include the recovery plan for the integrity of scientific information used destruction or adverse modification of species, articles in peer-reviewed and whether the decision made was critical habitat, the landowner’s journals, conservation plans developed consistent with the appropriate legal obligation is not to restore or recover the by States and counties, scientific status standards. Based on our review of the species, but to implement reasonable surveys and studies, biological previous final critical habitat and prudent alternatives to avoid assessments, or other unpublished designation, we have determined that it destruction or adverse modification of materials and expert opinion or is necessary to revise critical habitat, critical habitat. personal knowledge.

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10864 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

Habitat is often dynamic, and species reports, unpublished data, and various movements. The primary constituent may move from one area to another over Geographic Information System (GIS) elements and therefore the resulting time. Furthermore, we recognize that data layers (e.g., land cover type physical and biological features designation of critical habitat may not information, land ownership essential for the conservation of the include all of the habitat areas that we information, snow depth information, species were determined from studies of may eventually determine, based on topographic information, locations of lynx and snowshoe hare ecology. scientific data not now available to the lynx obtained from radio- or Global Space for Individual and Population Service, are necessary for the recovery Positioning System (GPS) collars, and Growth and Normal Behavior—Boreal of the species. For these reasons, a locations of lynx confirmed via Forest Landscapes critical habitat designation does not deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) analysis or signal that habitat outside the other verified records). Lynx populations respond to biotic designated area is unimportant or may and abiotic factors at different scales. At Primary Constituent Elements not be required for recovery of the the regional scale, snow conditions, species. In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) boreal forest, and competitors Areas that support populations, but of the Act and the regulations at 50 CFR (especially bobcat) influence the are outside the critical habitat 424.12(b), in determining which areas species’ range (Aubry et al. 2000, pp. designation, may continue to be subject occupied at the time of listing to 378–380; McKelvey et al. 2000b, pp. to conservation actions we implement propose as critical habitat, we consider 242–253; Hoving et al. 2005, p. 749). At under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. They the physical and biological features that the landscape scale within each region, are also subject to the regulatory are essential to the conservation of the natural and human-caused disturbance protections afforded by the section species to be the primary constituent processes (e.g., fire, wind, insect 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as determined elements (PCEs) laid out in the infestations, and forest management) on the basis of the best available appropriate quantity and spatial influence the spatial and temporal scientific information at the time of the arrangement for conservation of the distribution of lynx populations by agency action. Federally funded or species. In general, PCEs include, but affecting the distribution of good habitat permitted projects affecting listed are not limited to: for snowshoe hares (Agee 2000, pp. 47– species outside their designated critical (1) Space for individual and 73; Ruediger et al. 2000, pp. 1–3, 2–2, habitat areas may still result in jeopardy population growth and for normal 2–6, 7–3). At the stand-level scale, findings in some cases. Similarly, behavior; quality, quantity, and juxtaposition of critical habitat designations made on the (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or habitats influence home range size, basis of the best available information at other nutritional or physiological productivity, and survival (Aubry et al. the time of designation will not control requirements; 2000, pp. 380–390; Vashon et al. 2005a, the direction and substance of future (3) Cover or shelter; pp. 9–11). At the substand scale, spatial recovery plans, habitat conservation (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or distribution, abundance of prey, and plans (HCPs), section 7 consultation, or rearing (or development) of offspring; microclimate influence movements, other species conservation planning and hunting behavior, and den and resting efforts if new information calls for a (5) Habitats that are protected from site locations. different outcome. disturbance or are representative of the All of the components of the physical historic, geographical, and ecological and biological features of proposed Methods distributions of a species. revised critical habitat for lynx are As required by section 4(b)(2) of the When considering the designation of found within large landscapes in what Act, we use the best scientific data critical habitat, we must focus on the is broadly described as the boreal forest available to determine areas occupied at principal biological or physical or cold temperate forest (Frelich and the time of listing that contain the constituent elements within the defined Reich 1995, p. 325; Agee 2000, pp. 43– features essential to the conservation of area that are essential to the 46). The primary constituent element is the lynx. We have reviewed the conservation of the species. As broadly described as the boreal forest approach to the conservation of the lynx previously stated, we consider the landscape. In the contiguous United provided in its recovery outline (Service physical and biological features that are States, the boreal forest is more 2005, entire) and information from essential to the conservation of the transitional than the true boreal forest of State, Federal, and Tribal agencies, and species to be the primary constituent northern Canada and Alaska (Agee from academia and private elements (PCEs) laid out in the 2000, pp. 43–46). This difference is organizations that have collected appropriate quantity and spatial because the boreal forest is at its scientific data on lynx. The Service also arrangement for conservation of the southern limits in the contiguous obtained information about critical species. As such, we derive the PCEs United States, where it transitions to habitat for lynx in 2005 and 2006 during required for lynx from its biological deciduous temperate forest in the development of rules for lynx critical needs. The area proposed for Northeast and Great Lakes and habitat. The Service also initiated a 5- designation as revised critical habitat subalpine forest in the west (Agee 2000, year review for the lynx on April 18, provides boreal forest habitat for pp. 43–46). We use the term ‘‘boreal 2007 (72 FR 19549). Information breeding, non-breeding, and dispersing forest’’ because it generally gathered for that purpose will be used lynx in metapopulations across their encompasses most of the vegetative in completing our final designation. range in the contiguous United States. descriptions of the transitional forest We have used information we We are not proposing any areas solely types that comprise lynx habitat in the reviewed for the prior designation of because they provide habitat for contiguous United States (Agee 2000, critical habitat, including data in reports dispersing animals because the areas we pp. 40–41). submitted by researchers holding are proposing serve a variety of At a regional scale, lynx habitat exists recovery permits under section functions that include acting as a source in areas that generally support deep 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act, research of dispersing animals and providing snow throughout the winter and boreal published in peer-reviewed articles and habitat that serves as travel corridors to forest vegetation types (see below for presented in academic theses, agency facilitate dispersal and exploratory more detail). In eastern North America,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10865

lynx distribution is strongly associated be strongly influenced by the quality of Minnesota with areas of deep snowfall (greater than the habitat, particularly the abundance In Minnesota, lynx primarily occur in 105 in (268 cm) of mean annual of snowshoe hares, in addition to other the Northern Superior Uplands 2 2 snowfall) and 40 mi (100 km ) factors such as gender, age, season, and Ecological Section of the Laurentian landscapes with a high proportion of density of the lynx population (Aubry et Mixed Forest Province. Historically, this regenerating forest (Hoving 2001, pp. 75, al. 2000, pp. 382–385; Mowat et al. area was dominated by red pine (Pinus 143). The broad geographic distribution 2000, pp. 276–280). Generally, females resinosa) and white pine (Pinus strobus) of lynx in eastern North America is most with kittens have the smallest home mixed with aspen (Populus spp.), paper influenced by snowfall, but within areas ranges while males have the largest birch (Betula papyrifera), spruce, of similarly deep snowfall, measures of home ranges (Moen et al. 2004, p. 11). balsam fir (Abies balsamifera), and jack forest succession become more Reported home range size varies from 12 pine (Pinus banksiana) (Minnesota important factors in determining lynx mi2 (31 km2) for females and 26 mi2 (68 Department of Natural Resources distribution (Hoving et al. 2004, p. 291). km2) for males in Maine (Vashon et al. [Minnesota DNR] 2003, p. 2). Boreal forests used by lynx are cool, 2005a, p. 7), 8 mi2 (21 km2) for females Preliminary research suggests lynx in moist, and dominated by conifer tree and 119 mi2 (307 km2) for males in Minnesota generally use younger stands species, primarily spruce and fir (Agee Minnesota (Moen et al. 2005, p. 12), and (less than 50 years) with a conifer 2000, pp. 40–46; Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 34 mi2 (88 km2) for females and 83 mi2 component in greater proportion than 378–383; Ruediger et al. 2000, pp. 4–3, (216 km2) for males in northwest their availability (R. Moen, University of 4–8, 4–11, 4–25, 4–26, 4–29, 4–30). Montana (Squires et al. 2004b, pp. 15– Minnesota, unpubl. data). Lynx prefer Boreal forest landscapes used by lynx 16). predominantly upland forests are a heterogeneous mosaic of vegetative dominated by red pine, white pine, jack cover types and successional forest The dynamic nature of boreal forest landscapes means that lynx home pine, black spruce (Picea mariana), stages created by natural and human- paper birch, quaking aspen (Populus caused disturbances (McKelvey et al. ranges will incorporate a variety of forest stands that are in different stages tremuloides), or balsam fir (R. Moen, 2000a, pp. 426, 434). Periodic vegetation unpubl. data). disturbances stimulate development of of succession and have differing dense understory or early successional potential to produce prey. In addition, Washington habitat for snowshoe hares (Ruediger et due to the naturally marginal nature of In the North Cascades in Washington, al. 2000, pp. 1–3, 1–4, 7–4, 7–5). In lynx habitat within the DPS, the moist the majority of lynx occurrences were Maine, lynx were positively associated boreal forest types that snowshoe hares found above 1,250 m (4,101 ft) elevation with landscapes clearcut 15 to 25 years prefer often occur in patches dissected (McKelvey et al. 2000b, p. 243 and previously (Hoving et al. 2004, p. 291). or surrounded by matrix habitat. Lynx 2000d, p. 321; von Kienast 2003, p. 28, The overall quality of the boreal forest use the matrix habitat primarily as Table 2; Maletzke 2004, p. 17). In this landscape matrix and the juxtaposition travel routes between foraging areas and area, lynx selected Engelman spruce of stands in suitable condition within denning areas. Although they are not (Picea engelmanii)-subalpine fir (Abies that landscape is important for both dependent on the specific vegetative lasiocarpa) forest cover types in winter lynx and snowshoe hares in that it condition of these habitats (i.e., they are (von Kienast 2003, p. 28; Maletzke 2004, influences connectivity or movements not sensitive to forest management pp. 16–17). Lodgepole pine (Pinus between suitable stands, availability of practices), the importance of these areas contorta) is a dominant tree species in food and cover, and spatial structuring as travel routes makes them necessary the earlier successional stages of these of populations or subpopulations habitat components for lynx. climax cover types. Seral lodgepole (Hodges 2000b, pp. 181–195; McKelvey Forest Type Associations stands contained dense understories et al. 2000a, pp. 431–432; Walker 2005, and therefore received high use by p. 79). For example, lynx foraging Maine snowshoe hares and lynx (Koehler 1990, habitat must be near denning habitat to pp. 847–848; McKelvey et al. 2000d, pp. allow females to adequately provide for Lynx are more likely to occur in 40 332–335). dependent kittens, especially when the mi2 (100 km2) landscapes with kittens are relatively immobile. In north- regenerating forest, and less likely to Northern Rockies central Washington, hare densities were occur in landscapes with recent clearcut In the Northern Rocky Mountains, the higher in landscapes with an abundance or partial harvest, (Hoving et al. 2004, majority of lynx occurrences are of dense boreal forest interspersed with pp. 291–292). Lynx in Maine select associated with the Rocky Mountain small patches of open habitat, in softwood (spruce and fir) dominated, Conifer Forest vegetative class (Kuchler contrast to landscapes composed regenerating stands (Vashon et al. 1964, p. 5; McKelvey et al. 2000b, p. primarily of open forest interspersed 2005a, p. 8). Regenerating stands used 246) and occur above 1,250 m (4,101 ft) with few dense vegetation patches by lynx generally develop 15–30 years elevation (Aubry et al. 2000, pp. 378– (Walker 2005, p. 79). Similarly, in after forest disturbance and are 380; McKelvey et al. 2000b, pp. 243– northwest Montana, connectivity of characterized by dense horizontal 245). The dominant vegetation that dense patches within the forest matrix structure and high stem density within constitutes lynx habitat in these areas is benefited snowshoe hares (Ausband and a meter of the ground. These habitats subalpine fir, Engelman spruce, and Baty 2005, p. 209). In mountainous support high snowshoe hare densities lodgepole pine (Aubry et al. 2000, p. areas, lynx appear to prefer flatter slopes (Homyack 2003, p. 63; Fuller and 379; Ruediger et al. 2000, pp. 4–8—4– (Apps 2000, p. 361; McKelvey et al. Harrison 2005, pp. 716, 719; Vashon et 10). As in the Cascades, lodgepole pine 2000d, p. 333; von Kienast 2003, p. 21, al. 2005a, pp. 10–11). At the stand scale, is an earlier successional stage of Table 2; Maletzke 2004, pp. 17–18). lynx in northwestern Maine selected subalpine fir and Engelman spruce Individual lynx require large portions older (11 to 26 year-old), tall (4.6 to 7.3 climax forest cover types. of boreal forest landscapes to support m (15 to 24 ft)), regenerating clearcut their home ranges and to facilitate stands and older (11 to 21 year-old), Greater Yellowstone Area dispersal and exploratory travel. The partially harvested stands (A. Fuller, Lynx habitat in the GYA is similar to size of lynx home ranges is believed to University of Maine, unpubl. data). the Northern Rockies in that lynx

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10866 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

occurrences are generally associated denning habitat (Agee 2000, pp. 62–72; p. 88). In Montana, lynx favor multi- with the Rocky Mountain Conifer Forest Buskirk et al. 2000b, pp. 403–408). For story stands, often in older age classes, vegetative class. The primary areas of example, a boreal forest stand where where tree boughs touch the snow lynx occurrence in this unit occur there has been recent disturbance, such surface but where stem density is low between 7,382 and 9,843 ft (2,250 and as fire or timber harvest, that has (Squires 2006, p. 4). 3,000 m) elevation (Aubry et al. 2000, p. resulted in little or no understory In Maine, the highest snowshoe hare 379; McKelvey et al. 2000b, Figure structure is unsuitable as snowhoe hare densities were found in regenerating 8.18). However, lynx are not limited to habitat for lynx foraging. That stand softwood (spruce and fir) and mixed these elevation zones. The dominant may regenerate into suitable snowshoe wood stands (Fuller and Harrison 2005, vegetation that constitutes lynx habitat hare (lynx foraging) habitat within 10 to pp. 716, 719; Robinson 2006, p. 69). In in these areas is subalpine fir, Engelman 25 years, depending on local conditions the North Cascades, the highest spruce, and lodgepole pine (Aubry et al. (Ruediger et al. 2000, pp. 1–3, 1–4, 2– snowshoe hare densities were found in 2000, pp. 378–382; Ruediger et al. 2000, 2—2–5). However, forest management 20-year-old seral lodgepole pine stands pp. 1–2, 1–3; Murphy et al. 2004, pp. 9– techniques that thin the understory may with a dense understory (Koehler 1990, 11). Lodgepole pine is an earlier render the habitat unsuitable for hares pp. 847–848). In montane and subalpine successional stage of subalpine fir and and, thus, for lynx (Ruediger et al. 2000, forests in northwest Montana, the Engelman spruce cover types. The pp. 2–4—3–2; Hoving et al. 2004, pp. highest snowshoe hare densities in vegetation characteristics in the GYA 291–292). Stands may continue to summer were generally in younger that support snowshoe hare populations provide suitable snowshoe hare habitat stands with dense forest structure; in (and form the basis for lynx for many years until woody stems in the winter snowshoe hare densities were as populations) are typically found in a understory become too sparse as a result high or higher in mature stands with widely scattered mosaic of matrix of undisturbed forest succession or dense understory forest structure habitat types (Murphy et al. 2005, p. 8– management (e.g., clearcutting or (Griffin 2004, p. 53). Snowshoe hare 11; Hodges and Mills 2005, p. 6; Agee thinning). Thus, if the vegetation studies are just underway in Minnesota 2000, p. 48). In the GYA, lynx exploit potential of the stand is appropriate, a (Moen et al. 2005, p. 18); therefore, hare populations in disjunct patches of stand that is not currently in a condition results on habitat relationships are still mesic boreal forest that support that is suitable to support abundant preliminary. In the GYA, the highest relatively dense understories (Hodges snowshoe hares for lynx foraging or snowshoe hare densities were found in and Mills 2005, pp. 4–6). In most cases, coarse woody debris for den sites has a douglas fir site and a few regenerating lynx home ranges in the GYA will by the capability to develop into suitable lodgepole pine and lodgepole stands necessity incorporate habitat that is not habitat for lynx and snowshoe hares that had a lodgepole understory. Low typically considered lynx foraging with time. hare densities were found in most habitat, and is used primarily for travel. regenerating lodgepole stands, most As described previously, snowshoe likely due to low stem densities (Hodges Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, Or hares prefer boreal forest stands that and Mills 2005, p. 6). Spruce-fir forests Other Nutritional Or Physiological have a dense horizontal understory to were the stand type most likely to Requirements provide food, cover, and security from support snowshoe hares; however, hare predators. Snowshoe hares feed on a. Snowshoe Hares (Food) densities were never high at these sites. conifers, deciduous trees, and shrubs Habitats supporting abundant Snowshoe hare density is the most (Hodges 2000b, pp. 181–183). Snowshoe snowshoe hares must be present in a important factor explaining the hare density is correlated to understory large proportion of the landscape to persistence of lynx populations (Steury cover between approximately 3 to 10 ft support a viable lynx population. Broad- and Murray 2004, p. 136). A minimum (1 to 3 m) above the ground or snow scale snowshoe hare density estimates snowshoe hare density necessary to level (Hodges 2000b, p. 184, Table 7.5). are not available for the areas we are maintain a persistent, reproducing lynx Habitats most heavily used by snowshoe proposing as lynx revised critical population within the contiguous hares are stands with shrubs, stands that habitat; available snowshoe hare density United States has not been determined, are densely stocked, and stands at ages estimates are only applicable for the although Ruggiero et al. (2000, pp. 446– where branches have more lateral cover immediate area and time frame for 447) suggested that at least 0.2 hares per (Hodges 2000b, p. 184). In Maine, the which the study was conducted and acre (0.5 hares per hectare) may be snowshoe hare densities were highest in cannot be extrapolated further. necessary. Steury and Murray (2004, p. the stands supporting high conifer stem 137) modeled lynx and snowshoe hare densities (Homyack et al. 2004, p. 195; b. Snow Conditions (Other populations and predicted that a Robinson 2006, p. 69). In northcentral Physiological Requirements) minimum of 0.4 to 0.7 hares per acre Washington, snowshoe hare density was As described in the ‘‘Background’’ (1.1 to 1.8 hares per hectare) was highest in 20-year-old lodgepole pine section above, snow conditions also required for persistence of a stands where the average density of determine the distribution of lynx. reintroduced lynx population in the trees and shrubs was 6,415 stems per Deep, fluffy snow conditions likely southern portion of the lynx range. acre (ac) (15,840 stems/hectare (ha)) restrict potential competitors such as The boreal forest landscape must (Koehler 1990, p. 848). Generally, earlier bobcat or coyote from effectively contain a mosaic of forest stand successional forest stages support a encroaching on or hunting in winter successional stages to sustain lynx greater density of horizontal understory lynx habitat. Snowfall was the strongest populations over the long term as the and more abundant snowshoe hares predictor of lynx occurrence at a condition of individual stands changes (Buehler and Keith 1982, p. 24; Wolfe et regional scale (Hoving et al. 2005, p. over time. If the vegetation potential (or al. 1982, pp. 668–669; Koehler 1990, pp. 746, Table 5). In addition to snow climax forest type) of a particular forest 847–848; Hodges 2000b, pp. 184–191; depth, other snow properties, including stand is conducive to supporting Griffin 2004, pp. 84–88); however, surface hardness or sinking depth, are abundant snowshoe hares, it likely will sometimes mature stands also can have important factors in the spatial, also go through successional phases that adequate dense understory to support ecological, and genetic structuring of the are unsuitable as lynx foraging or abundant snowshoe hares (Griffin 2004, species (Stenseth et al. 2004, p. 75).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10867

In the northeastern United States, species and its suitable habitat into Based on the above needs and our lynx are most likely to occur in areas Canada. Four of the five proposed current knowledge of the life history, with a 10-year mean annual snowfall revised critical habitat units use the biology, and ecology of the species, we greater than 105 in (268 cm) (Hoving United States/Canada border as their have determined that the primary 2001, p. 75). The Northern Superior northern boundary. constituent element essential to the Uplands section of Minnesota, which conservation of the lynx is: roughly corresponds to the area Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or (1) Boreal forest landscapes proposed as revised critical habitat in Rearing (or Development) of Offspring— supporting a mosaic of differing that State, receives more of its Denning Habitat successional forest stages and precipitation as snow than any section Lynx den sites are found in mature containing: in the State, has the longest period of and younger boreal forest stands that (a) Presence of snowshoe hares and snow cover, and has the shortest have a large amount of cover and their preferred habitat conditions, growing season (Minnesota DNR 2003, downed, large woody debris. The including dense understories of young p. 2). Mean annual snowfall from 1971 structural components of lynx den sites trees or shrubs tall enough to protrude to 2000 in this area was generally are common features in managed above the snow; greater than 55 in (149 cm) (University (logged) and unmanaged (e.g., insect (b) Winter snow conditions that are of Minnesota 2005). damaged, wind-throw) stands. Downed generally deep and fluffy for extended Information on average snowfall or trees provide excellent cover for den periods of time; snow depths in mountainous areas such sites and kittens and often are (c) Sites for denning having abundant, as the Cascades or northwest Montana is associated with dense woody stem coarse, woody debris, such as downed limited because few weather stations in growth. trees and root wads; and (d) Matrix habitat (e.g., hardwood these regions have measured snow fall Site characteristics were evaluated for forest, dry forest, non-forest, or other or snow depth over time. Topography 26 lynx dens from 1999 to 2004 in habitat types that do not support strongly influences local snow northwest Maine. Dens were found in snowshoe hares) that occurs between conditions. In the Cascades, at the several stand types. Tip-up mounds patches of boreal forest in close Mazama station, average annual (exposed roots from fallen trees) alone juxtaposition (at the scale of a lynx snowfall from 1948 to 1976 was 115 in best explained den site selection (J. home range) such that lynx are likely to (292 cm) (Western Regional Climate Organ, Service, unpubl. data). Tip-up travel through such habitat while Center 2005). In Montana, at the Seeley mounds may purely be an index of Lake Ranger Station, average annual accessing patches of boreal forest within downed trees, which were abundant on snowfall from 1948 to 2005 is 124 in a home range. The important aspect of the landscape. Horizontal cover at 16 ft (315 cm), while at the Troy station the matrix habitat for lynx is that these (5 m) alone was the next best predictor average total snowfall from 1961 to 1994 habitats retain the ability to allow of denning (J. Organ, unpubl. data). was 90 in (229 cm) (Western Regional unimpeded movement of lynx through Dead, downed trees were sampled, but Climate Center 2005). them as lynx travel between patches of did not explain den site selection as We considered the effect climate boreal forest. change could have on average snowfall well as tip-up mounds and cover at 16 We designed the proposed revised or snow depths when we developed this ft (5 m). Lynx essentially select dense critical habitat units to capture these proposed rule. We have information to cover in a cover-rich area. elements of the PCE laid out in the indicate that up to two-thirds of the In the North Cascades, Washington, quantity and spatial arrangement lynx range in the lower 48 States may lynx denned in mature (older than 250 essential to the conservation of the become unsuitable by 2100 (Gonzalez et years) stands with an overstory of species (i.e., essential physical and al. 2007, pp. 4, 7–8, 10, 13–14, 19). Engelman spruce, subalpine fir, and biological features). To do this, we However, we have used current climate lodgepole pine with an abundance of mapped units across the geographic information in developing this rule downed, woody debris (Koehler 1990, p. range of the species in the United States because, until regional climate 847). In this study, all den sites were to protect populations in the event of projections are more certain, we find it located on north-northeast aspects catastrophic events that could impact a is appropriate to designate critical (Koehler 1990, p. 847). In northwest portion of the range. We designed each habitat for lynx where they currently Montana, areas around dens were a unit to be large enough to encompass exist. Projections for habitat loss go out variety of ages but all contained the temporal and spatial changes in over the next 100 years. If designated abundant woody debris including habitat and snowshoe hare populations habitat becomes unsuitable for lynx in downed logs, blowdowns, and to support interbreeding lynx the future due to climate change, the rootwads, and dense understory cover populations or metapopulations over Service will revise critical habitat to (Squires et al. 2004b, Table 3). time. remove unsuitable habitat and add new Information on den site characteristics suitable habitat in order to seek to in Minnesota has not yet been reported Special Management Considerations or facilitate the shift in lynx range that (Moen et al. 2005, p. 8). Protections climate change may cause. Lynx Primary Constituent Element for Lynx When designating critical habitat, we distribution and habitat is likely to shift assess whether the occupied areas upward in elevation and northward in Within the geographical area we know contain the physical and biological latitude as temperatures increase to be occupied by the lynx, we must features that are essential to the (Gonzalez et al. 2007, pp. 7, 13–14, 19). identify the primary constituent conservation of the species and that may All proposed revised critical habitat elements (PCEs) laid out in the quantity require special management units include the highest-elevation and spatial arrangement essential to the considerations or protections. habitats that lynx would be able to use conservation of the species (i.e., The area proposed for designation as in the event that they move to higher essential physical and biological revised critical habitat will require some elevations in response to climate features) that may require special level of management to address the change. Additionally, any northward management considerations or current and future threats to the lynx shifts in range would likely move the protections. and to maintain the physical and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10868 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

biological features essential to the movement include: highways, railroads at an adverse effect determination for conservation of the species. In all units, and utility corridors, land ownership lynx. special management will be required to pattern, and ski areas and large resorts. A Conservation Agreement between ensure that boreal forest landscapes Other potential large-scale risk factors the USFS and the Service (U.S. Forest provide a mosaic of forest stands of for lynx addressed by the LCAS include: Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife various ages to provide abundant prey fragmentation and degradation of lynx Service 2000) and a similar Agreement habitat, denning habitat, and refugia, lynx movement and dispersal between the BLM and the Service connectivity within the landscape. The across shrub-steppe habitats, and habitat (Bureau of Land Management and U.S. designation of critical habitat does not degradation by nonnative and invasive Fish and Wildlife Service 2000) imply that lands outside of critical plant species. committed the USFS and BLM to use habitat do not play an important role in The LCAS used the best available the LCAS in determining the effects of the conservation of the lynx. Federal information at the time to ensure the actions on lynx until Forest Plans were activities that may affect areas outside of appropriate mosaic of habitat is amended or revised to adequately critical habitat, such as forest provided for lynx on Federal lands. conserve lynx. A programmatic management, development, and road Although the LCAS was written biological opinion pursuant to section 7 construction, are still subject to review specifically for Federal lands, many of of the Act analyzed and confirmed the under section 7 of the Act if they may the conservation measures are pertinent adequacy of the LCAS and its affect lynx because Federal agencies for non-Federal lands. To facilitate conservation measures to conserve lynx must consider both effects to lynx and project planning and allow for the and concluded that Forest Service and effects to critical habitat independently. assessment of the potential effects of a BLM land management plans as The prohibitions of section 9 of the Act project on an individual lynx, the LCAS implemented in accordance with the (e.g., harm, harass, capture, kill) also directs Federal land management Conservation Agreements would not continue to apply both inside and agencies to delineate Lynx Analysis jeopardize the continued existence of outside of designated critical habitat. Units (LAUs). The scale of an LAU lynx (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approximates the size of area used by an 2000). Special management direction for In 2005, the USFS and the Service individual lynx (25 to 50 mi2 (65 to 130 lynx has been applied to public lands in renewed the conservation agreement km2)). The LCAS recognizes that LAUs much of the lynx DPS. The USFS, (U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Fish and will likely encompass both lynx habitat Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Wildlife Service 2005) because the and other areas (e.g., lakes, low NPS, and the Service developed a Lynx original agreement had expired. In the elevation ponderosa pine (Pinus Conservation Assessment and Strategy 2005 agreement, the parties agree to take (LCAS) (Ruediger et al. 2000, entire) ponderosa) forest, and alpine tundra). measures to reduce or eliminate adverse using the best available science at the Habitat-related standards the LCAS effects or risks to lynx and its occupied time specifically to provide a consistent provides to address potential risks habitat pending amendments to Forest and effective approach to conserve lynx include: (1) If more than 30 percent of Plans. The LCAS is a basis for and lynx habitat on Federal lands lynx habitat in an LAU is currently in implementing this agreement (U.S. (Ruediger et al. 2000). The overall goals unsuitable condition, no further Forest Service and U.S. Fish and of the LCAS were to recommend lynx reduction of suitable condition shall Wildlife Service 2005). The 2005 conservation measures, to provide a occur as a result of vegetation agreement was renewed on October 20, basis for reviewing the adequacy of management activities by Federal 2006, and expires December 31, 2010, USFS and BLM land and resource agencies; (2) within an LAU, maintain unless renewed. The BLM continues to management plans with regard to lynx denning habitat in patches generally adhere to their original agreement conservation, and to facilitate larger than 5 ac (2 ha), comprising at although it expired in December 2004. conferencing and consultation under least 10 percent of lynx habitat; (3) Lynx conservation depends on section 7 of the Act. The LCAS maintain habitat connectivity within management that supports boreal forest identifies an inclusive list of 17 and between LAUs; (4) management landscapes of sufficient size to potential risk factors for lynx or lynx actions (e.g., timber sales, salvage sales) encompass the temporal and spatial habitat that may be addressed under shall not change more than 15 percent changes in habitat and snowshoe hare programs, practices, and activities of lynx habitat within an LAU to an populations to support interbreeding within the authority and jurisdiction of unsuitable condition within a 10-year lynx populations or metapopulations Federal land management agencies. The period; (5) pre-commercial thinning will over time. At the time it was written, the risks identified in the LCAS are based only be allowed when stands no longer LCAS provided the highest level of on effects to either individual lynx, lynx provide snowshoe hare habitat; (6) on management or protection for lynx. The populations, or both, or to lynx habitat. Federal lands in lynx habitat, allow no LCAS conservation measures address Potential risk factors the LCAS net increase in groomed or designated risk factors affecting lynx habitat and addresses that may affect lynx over-the-snow routes and snowmobile lynx productivity and were designed to productivity include: timber play areas by LAU. be implemented at the scale necessary management, wildland fire With the listing of the lynx in 2000, to conserve lynx. This level of management, recreation, forest/ Federal agencies across the contiguous management is appropriate for Federal backcountry roads and trails, livestock United States range of the lynx were lands, because they account for the grazing, and other human required to consult with the Service on majority of high-quality habitat in the developments. Potential risk factors the actions that may affect lynx. The LCAS United States and also because the LCAS addresses that may affect lynx assists Federal agencies in planning inadequacy of regulatory mechanisms to mortality include: trapping, predator activities and projects in ways that conserve lynx on these lands at the time control, incidental or illegal shooting, benefit lynx or avoid adverse impacts to was the primary reason for listing the and competition and predation as lynx or lynx habitat (Ruediger et al. lynx as a threatened species under the influenced by human activities and 2000). If projects are designed that fail Act. Furthermore, new information has highways. Potential risk factors the to meet the standards in the LCAS, the come to light since the LCAS was LCAS addresses that may affect lynx biologists using the LCAS would arrive written concerning that should be taken

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10869

into account by land managers. For NRLA would provide for the recovery of habitat designation is based on the data instance, Kolbe et al. (2007) and lynx in these areas by addressing the that most closely represents the current Bunnell et al. (2006) published major reason we listed the lynx in 2000: status of lynx in the contiguous United information on the effects of The lack of guidance for conservation of States and the geographic area occupied snowmobiling on lynx, and Squires et lynx in Federal land management plans. by the species at the time of listing. Data al. (2006) documented the importance Consultation under section 7 of the Act that define the historic and current of multilayered stands as snowshoe hare was completed for the NRLA in 2007, range of the lynx (e.g., McKelvey et al. habitat. Further, ongoing research in and it is now official land management 2000b, pp. 207–232; Hoving et al. 2003, Minnesota and Maine has also resulted direction for the National Forests that entire) constitute the geographic area in information helpful to forming our adopted it. that may be occupied by the species; understanding of lynx and snowshoe Criteria Used To Identify Critical therefore, we determined that areas hare (e.g., Moen et al. 2004; Hoving et Habitat outside the historic distribution are not al. 2005; Homyack et al. 2007; Fuller et essential to the conservation of the al. 2007). In some regions of Wyoming, To identify areas containing the species. Although the average life span Washington and Maine, research physical and biological features that are of a wild lynx is not known, we have continues. Thus, as new information essential to the conservation of the lynx, assumed that a lynx born in 1995 could becomes available, this information we considered the concepts introduced have been alive in 2000 or 2003, the should be used in addition to that used in the recovery outline for the species dates of publication of the final listing in the LCAS. (Service 2005, entire) and the analysis rule (64 FR 4483) and our clarification The Forest Service considered some provided above concerning occupancy, of findings (68 FR 40075). We base this of the new information discussed above evidence of reproduction, and the conclusion on the fact that we do not when it proposed to revise 18 Forest primary constituent elements laid out in have any information to suggest that Plans under a programmatic plan the quantity and spatial arrangement lynx habitat has substantially contracted amendment called the Northern Rocky necessary for the conservation of the or expanded such that species’ range at Mountain Lynx Amendment (NRLA) species. We have also reviewed the time of listing would have been (Forest Service 2007). Because of the information from State, Federal, and different than the current observations. new information, some of the LCAS tribal agencies, and information from Clearly, lynx-related research in the standards were changed to guidelines academia and private organizations that contiguous United States substantially because the Service had determined that have collected scientific data on lynx. increased after we published the 1998 The focus of our strategy in some risk factors were not negatively proposal to list lynx, and this research considering lands for designation as affecting the U.S. lynx DPS as a whole. provides additional information on Since publication of the LCAS, lynx revised critical habitat was on boreal forest landscapes of sufficient size to which to base this proposed revised studied in the United States have been critical habitat designation. However, shown to use a variety of sites and encompass the temporal and spatial changes in habitat and snowshoe hare this is not a reflection of substantial conditions for denning. Lynx denning changes to lynx habitat or the range of sites are not believed to be a limiting populations to support interbreeding lynx populations or metapopulations the lynx since 1995. These recent factor in Montana and Maine study verified records were provided by areas (Service 2007, pp. 48–49). Further, over time. Individual lynx maintain large home ranges; the areas identified Federal research entities, State wildlife earlier assessments also concluded that agencies, academic researchers, and in most geographic areas, denning to have physical and biological features private individuals or organizations habitat was not likely limiting to lynx, essential to the conservation of the lynx working on lynx (K. Aubry, Pacific and existing forest plan direction would are large enough to encompass multiple Northwest Research Station, unpubl. not result in adverse effects home ranges. A secondary consideration data; S. Gehman, Wildthings Unlimited, (Hickenbottom et al. 1999). Likewise, is that, in addition to supporting unpubl. data; S. Gniadek, Glacier after evaluating Bunnell et al. (2006, breeding populations, these areas National Park, unpubl. data; S. Loch, entire) and Kolbe et al. (2007, entire), provide connectivity among patches of Independent Scientist, and E. Lindquist, we determined that the best information suitable habitat (e.g., patches containing Superior National Forest, unpubl. data; available did not indicate that abundant snowshoe hares), whose K. McKelvey, Rocky Mountain Research compacted snow routes increase locations in the landscape shift through competition from other species to levels time. Station, unpubl. data; Minnesota DNR that adversely impact lynx populations In proposing revised critical habitat 2005 website; R. Moen, University of in the NRLA area (Service 2007, pp. 55). for the lynx, we used the best scientific Minnesota, Natural Resources Research Finally, since the LCAS was written, data available to evaluate areas that Institute, unpubl. data; J. Squires, Rocky new information revealed the contained the PCEs in a spatial Mountain Research Station, unpubl. importance of multi-storied stands for arrangement and quantity to provide the data; J. Vashon, Maine Department of lynx (Squires et al. 2006). On the basis physical and biological features Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, unpubl. of this information, the Forest Service essential to the conservation of the data). included a standard for conserving these species and that may require special By accepting only verified recent lynx multi-storied stands in the NRLA. This management considerations or records, we restricted the available lynx LCAS does not contain this standard. protection. In evaluating areas for occurrence dataset because we wanted In addition to diverging from the proposal as revised critical habitat, we reliable data for the purposes of standards in the LCAS because of new first determined the geographic area evaluating areas and features for revised information, the NRLA also deviated occupied by the species. We used data critical habitat designation. The from the LCAS by allowing additional providing verified evidence of the reliability of lynx occurrence reports fuels reduction projects in areas within occurrence of lynx and evidence of the can be questionable because the bobcat, the wildlands-urban-interface (WUI). In presence of breeding lynx populations a common species, can be confused our analysis of this action, we as represented by records of lynx with the lynx, which is similar in determined that even with these reproduction. We focused on records appearance. Additionally, many surveys exceptions, the management in the since 1995 to ensure that this critical are conducted by snow tracking in

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10870 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

which correct identification of tracks and delineating appropriate boundaries the lynx because the habitat appears to can be difficult because of variable for consideration as revised critical be of lesser quality, and lynx occur at conditions affecting the quality of the habitat. lower densities than the populations track and variable expertise of the In the North Cascades and Northern found in other units. Although lynx tracker. Our definition of a verified lynx Rockies, the physical and biological currently occupy the GYA (Murphy et record is modified from McKelvey et al. features essential to the conservation of al. 2004, entire; J. Squires, Rocky (2000b, p. 209)—(1) An animal (live or lynx, the majority of lynx records, Mountain Research Station, unpubl. dead) in hand or observed closely by a evidence of reproduction, and the boreal data; S. Gehman, Wildthings Unlimited, person knowledgeable in lynx forest types are found above 4,000 feet unpubl. data), their presence has been at identification, (2) genetic (DNA) (ft) (1,219 meters (m)) in elevation a naturally lower level compared to the confirmation, (3) snow tracks only when (McKelvey et al. 2000b, pp. 243–245; other areas we are proposing as revised confirmed by genetic analysis (e.g., McAllister et al. 2000, entire). Thus, we critical habitat. In the clarification of McKelvey et al. 2006, entire) or (4) limited the delineation of revised findings published in the Federal location data from radio-or GPS-collared critical habitat to lands above this Register on July 3, 2003 (68 FR 40076), lynx. Documentation of lynx elevation. Additionally, in the North we concluded that habitat in this area is reproduction consists of lynx kittens in Cascades, physical and biological less capable than other areas of hand, or observed with the mother by features essential to the conservation of supporting snowshoe hares because it is someone knowledgeable in lynx the lynx, the majority of the lynx naturally patchy and contains drier identification, or snow tracks records, and evidence of reproduction forest types, and because the GYA is demonstrating family groups traveling occur east of the crest of the Cascade disjunct from likely source populations. together, as identified by a person Mountains. Therefore, in the Cascades Within Yellowstone National Park, few highly knowledgeable in identification we used the border with Canada, the lynx were detected during recent of carnivore tracks. However, we made Cascade crest, and the 4,000-ft (1,219-m) surveys (Murphy et al. 2004, pp. 8–9) an exception and accepted snow track elevation contour east of the crest as the and hare densities were very low data from Maine because of the stringent boundary. In the Northern Rockies, the (Hodges and Mills 2005, pp. 5–6). protocols used in confirming tracks as 4,000-ft (1,219-m) contour was used as Murphy et al. (2004, pp. 9–10) lynx and the minimal number of species the primary boundary west of the concluded that elevations and slope in the area with which lynx tracks could Continental Divide. However, the aspects cause lynx habitat in this area to be misidentified (McCollough 2006, climatic effects of the Continental be naturally highly fragmented resulting entire). Divide cause the 4,000-ft (1,219-m) in low lynx densities. Few lynx were elevation contour to be too broad east of documented in the Wyoming Mountain The area occupied by the species was the Continental Divide, such that it then overlaid with areas that contain Range in the southern portion of the includes substantial areas of grassland ecosystem (Squires and Laurion 2000, boreal forest types. From this overlay we habitats that do not contain the physical determined which areas contain the pp. 343–345; Squires et al. 2001, pp. 9– and biological features essential to the 10). On study sites on the western edge essential physical and biological lynx or are not important for snowshoe features (i.e., the primary constituent of the Yellowstone ecosystem in Idaho, hares. Therefore, east of the Continental the subalpine fir vegetation series that element (PCE) laid out in the quantity Divide in the Northern Rockies we used and spatial arrangement essential to the comprises lynx and snowshoe hare National Forest and National Park habitat was found only in naturally conservation of the species) by Service (NPS) park boundaries to small, discontinuous patches (McDaniel examining recent lynx records, evidence circumscribe proposed revised critical and McKelvey 2004, pp. 15–18). In this of breeding lynx populations, and habitat boundaries to more closely study area, few stands supported presence of the boreal forest type that is encompass essential features; recent snowshoe hare densities similar to areas currently occupied by lynx in each records of lynx, including records of known to support lynx (McKelvey and particular area and that provides direct reproduction; and boreal forest McDaniel 2001, pp. 11–18). connectivity with lynx populations in currently occupied by lynx. The Canada. Lynx populations in the northern boundary for the Northern If we determine, based on the best contiguous United States seem to be Rockies unit is the border with Canada. available scientific information and influenced by lynx population Delineating proposed revised lynx information obtained through public dynamics in Canada (Thiel 1987; critical habitat boundaries in the Greater comments, that the GYA does not McKelvey et al. 2000a, p. 427, 2000c, p. Yellowstone Area (GYA) was more contain the physical and biological 33). Many of these populations in challenging because it is a complex, features essential to the conservation of Canada are directly interconnected with high elevation ecosystem in which lynx, we will not include it in the final United States’ populations, and are simply following elevation contours rule. If we determine the area (or likely a source of emigration into the would be too broad in that they would portions of it) does contain the features contiguous United States; lynx from the encompass extensive areas of non-lynx essential to the conservation of lynx, we contiguous United States are known to habitat. Furthermore, the GYA has the intend to further refine the critical move into Canada. Therefore, we least amount of available lynx-related habitat boundary in the final rule based assume that retaining connectivity with research to assist us in delineating on improved mapping data and lynx larger lynx populations in Canada is boundaries. Therefore, we drew the occurrence data. Due to the fragmented important to ensuring long-term boundaries in the GYA around the mosaic nature of the GYA unit, it will persistence of lynx populations in the majority of recent lynx records using a by necessity contain patches of habitat United States. We assume that, combination of National Forest that do not fit into the moist boreal regionally, lynx within the contiguous boundaries and township lines to forest types (e.g., dry douglas fir, non- United States and adjacent Canadian encompass the lynx habitat in this area. forest, or other habitats that do not provinces interact as metapopulations. As discussed above, we are seeking support snowshoe hares, hereafter Where available, data on historic information on whether lands within ‘‘matrix habitat’’) usually considered average snow depths and bobcat harvest the GYA contain physical and biological lynx habitat. The inclusion of matrix provided additional insight for refining features essential to the conservation of habitat in this and other units is

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10871

necessary due to the inclusion of these area of the five units covers a large of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, areas in lynx home ranges and their use geographic area (42,753 mi2 (110,727 New York); the western Great Lakes as travel habitat as lynx move between km2)), and because it contains the (portions of Minnesota, Wisconsin, foraging and denning areas within their highest quality habitat in the United Michigan); the Northern Rocky home ranges. Matrix habitat is included States. Redundancy of populations may Mountains/Cascades (portions of because it is interwoven with moist be needed to provide a margin of safety Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, boreal forest types and, therefore, is for the species to withstand catastrophic northwestern Wyoming, Utah); and the used by lynx to travel unimpeded events. The idea is to conserve enough Southern Rocky Mountains (portions of between foraging and denning areas areas of the range such that random Colorado, southeastern Wyoming) (Agee within their home ranges. The perturbations in the system act on only 2000, pp. 39–45; McKelvey et al. 2000b, important aspect of matrix habitat for a few populations. The proposed pp. 211–232, 242–253; Hoving et al. lynx is that movement through it is not revised critical habitat addresses the 2003, pp. 368–373). Within this broad impeded. concept of redundancy because it distribution, the recovery outline We are also seeking information on includes five units distributed across a (Service 2005, entire) delineated core whether the Kettle Range in north- broad geographic area. Catastrophic areas that contain consistent, verified central Washington is an area essential events that could affect all five units are records of lynx over time and evidence to the conservation of the lynx in the extremely improbable. Adequate of reproduction within the past 20 contiguous United States. Trapping representation insures that the species’ years. The long-term occupation of these records from the 1960s and 1970s show adaptive capabilities (often as indicated general areas by lynx supports the that the lynx population that once by genetic diversity) are conserved. assumption that they contain habitats inhabited this area underwent dramatic Genetic representation is not an issue sufficient in quality and quantity to swings in abundance going from high for lynx, because lynx across the range continue to sustain lynx populations. levels of harvest to low levels several are similar and all share the same An additional factor strongly times over two decades (McKelvey haplotypes (Rueness et al. 2003, p. 71). influencing the sustainability of all core 1999, pp. 13–14). Since the 1970s, the Thus, we have determined that the five areas with the exception of the GYA is area appears to have been unoccupied units contained in this proposed revised their connection with larger lynx due to a lack of verifiable reports of critical habitat address the concept of populations in Canada. Each proposed lynx. Snow-tracking surveys conducted representation. revised critical habitat unit occurs from 1992 to 1996 in the Kettle Range Lynx in the southern portion of their within one of the areas identified as resulted in only two sets of tracks: one range exhibit metapopulation dynamics core in the recovery outline. in 1991–1992 and one in 1995–1996. (i.e., populations exist as semi-isolated This indicates the lack of a reproducing subpopulations connected to other Relationship to Recovery Outline population of lynx at that time. The subpopulations by migration) (Thiel We considered the lynx recovery Kettle Range currently has suitable lynx 1987, p. 94; McKelvey et al. 1999, p. 24). outline (Service 2005) when developing habitat (Koehler 2008) and the The southern extensions of the North this proposed revised critical habitat possibility that lynx occur does exist; American lynx population that extend rule for lynx. However, the recovery however, the lack of verified into the contiguous United States occur outline and this proposed rule contain occurrences since 1995 leads us to in marginal and naturally fragmented some differences. Recovery outlines are conclude that it is not likely to be habitats and are likely dependent on brief, internally-developed documents occupied. migration from the core portion of the intended as preliminary strategies for We are not currently proposing any metapopulation in the Canadian taiga the conservation of a listed species until areas outside the geographical area for genetic and demographic enrichment a formal recovery plan is completed presently occupied by the species (McCord and Cardoza 1982, p. 729; (Service 1989, entire; Service 1990, p. 6; because we have determined that McKelvey 1999, p. 232). Occupied areas National Marine Fisheries Service 2004, occupied areas are sufficient for the within the current distribution of lynx pp. 3.0–1 to 3.1–1). The lynx recovery conservation of the species because (except for the reintroduced Colorado outline was prepared by Service staff these areas adequately address the population) are the areas that have been experienced in lynx conservation and concepts of representation, resiliency, most consistently occupied by recovery planning under the Act and and redundancy necessary for reproducing populations (McKelvey two lynx experts from the USFS. The conservation of a species (Shaffer and 1999, pp. 211–232) and are the largest lynx recovery outline presented the Stein 2000). Resiliency of a species patches of suitable lynx habitat within understanding of historical and current allows the species to recover from the range of the DPS. Patches of lynx lynx distribution, ecology, and periodic disturbance. Areas are resilient habitat outside of this occupied range population dynamics at the time it was if they are relatively large and contain are generally smaller and more isolated written in 2005. The outline introduces particularly high-quality habitat or if and have inconsistent records of lynx concepts regarding the relative their location or characteristics make presence and reproduction, or no record importance of different geographic areas them less susceptible to certain threats at all (McKelvey 1999, pp. 211–232). to the persistence of lynx in the than other portions of the range. Due to their high mobility, lynx may contiguous United States, identifying Resiliency of a species allows the periodically occupy these areas; areas as either core, provisional core, species to recover from periodic however, the lack of consistent secondary, or peripheral based disturbance. A species will likely be occupation and reproduction means that primarily on lynx records over time and more resilient if large populations exist these areas do not materially contribute evidence of reproduction. Additionally, in high-quality habitat that is to persistence of the DPS while the the outline describes preliminary distributed throughout the range of the proposed areas clearly do. recovery objectives and actions. species in such a way as to capture the In summary, the area occupied by the The recovery outline and this environmental variability found within lynx in the contiguous United States is proposed revised critical habitat rule the range of the species. The proposed broadly delineated by the distribution of used different standards and criteria. revised critical habitat addresses the the southern extensions of boreal forest, The recovery outline did not consider concept of resiliency because the total which occur in the Northeast (portions what areas contain the physical and

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10872 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

biological features that are essential to In this revision, we do not propose rates of reproduction have fallen in the conservation of lynx; rather, the revised critical habitat in one area the recent years, with zero reproduction preparers concentrated on recovery outline defined as core: the detected for 34 females with radio distinguishing between areas with past Kettle Range in north-central collars in 2007 (Shenk 2007, p. 13). or present lynx populations and those Washington. The Kettle Range Although it is still too early to with lynx occurrence records that were historically supported lynx populations determine whether the introduction will unlikely to support reproducing (Stinson 2001, pp. 13–14). However, result in a self-sustaining population, populations. In designating critical although boreal forest habitat within the the reintroduced lynx have produced habitat, we are required to determine Kettle Range appears of high quality for kittens and now are distributed those areas that contain the physical lynx, there is no evidence that the Kettle throughout the lynx habitat in Colorado and biological features essential to the Range is currently occupied by a lynx and southern Wyoming. These animals conservation of lynx within the population nor has it been for at least are not designated as experimental geographical area occupied by the two decades (McKelvey 1999, p. 228; under section 10(j) of the Act. Although species. We have determined that areas Koehler 2008, entire). Furthermore, it Colorado’s reintroduction effort is an that contain the physical and biological does not have recent (i.e., 20 years) important step toward the recovery of features essential to the conservation of evidence of reproduction. Thus, it does lynx, we do not propose habitat in the lynx are those with verified records of not meet the criteria for ‘‘core’’ outlined Southern Rockies for revised lynx persistence into the present time in the recovery outline (Service 2005, p. designation because of the current and with verified evidence of 5). Snowtracking surveys conducted uncertainty that a self-sustaining lynx reproduction. The areas identified as from 1992 to 1996 in the Kettle Range population will become established. core in the recovery outline roughly resulted in only two sets of tracks: one Determination of establishment will be coincide with the areas proposed as in 1991–1992 and one in 1995–1996 based on the maintenance of a stable or revised critical habitat with the (McKelvey 1999, p. 228), indicating that naturally oscillating population following exceptions: (1) Mapping for although lynx may have been able to structure composed of breeding the purposes of the recovery outline was reach the range, they were unable to individuals derived from wild mating done on a course scale without refined establish a population there. The above and births (rather than introduced GIS layers, while the mapping done for described attributes of the Kettle Range animals). A population that has the purposes of this proposed rule were indicate that while this area may be demonstrated robustness to natural more exact; and (2) further analysis considered a core area in the recovery fluctuations due to oscillations in prey shows that some areas considered core outline, its importance for lynx abundance is key to determining that in the recovery outline (e.g., the Kettle conservation is less than those areas that they are established. we consider essential for the Range and New Hampshire) do not meet Many areas within the contiguous conservation of lynx due to their the criteria for core because they do not United States contain varying levels of historic and recent history of have long-term evidence of individual lynx records with no reproduction and population reproduction or current occupancy (see evidence of persistent, reproducing lynx discussion below). occupation. We have made the preliminary determination that the area populations. Our review of many years The recovery outline did not define is not essential for the conservation of of occurrence records reveals lynx which areas are essential to the lynx; therefore, we do not propose to records in areas with unsuitable habitats conservation of lynx as is necessary for include it as revised critical habitat. or snow conditions. However, we do not this revised proposed critical habitat Likewise, the areas included in the consider these areas capable of designation. The criteria we used for recovery outline as core in western supporting lynx populations because determining areas essential to the Maine and New Hampshire do not they do not have the habitat or snow conservation of lynx for this proposed appear now to meet the criteria for core. conditions suitable for lynx or revised critical habitat were more No lynx were detected in New snowshoe hare. Lynx occurrence in narrowly defined than those used for Hampshire and western Maine in the these areas is due to the population delineating the recovery areas in the course of surveys done according to the dynamics of lynx and their dispersal lynx recovery outline; in particular, for standard lynx protocol for this region in abilities that lead to lynx attempting to critical habitat we focused closely on 2005 (for New Hampshire) and 2006– colonize new areas with little ability to areas with reliable evidence of lynx 2007 (in western Maine) (McCullough support lynx reproduction. That is why reproduction since 1995. We used 1995 2008, entire). we rely on a combination of consistent, because of the Act’s definition at The recovery outline identified the verifiable evidence of lynx presence and 3(5)(A)(i) that occupied habitat include Southern Rocky Mountains as a reproduction, along with habitat specific areas within the geographical ‘‘provisional core’’ because of the characteristics to delimit critical habitat. area occupied by the species at the time current uncertainty that ongoing lynx Reliance on occurrence records alone, it is listed. We believe that the reintroduction efforts will result in a without consideration of reproduction documented lynx observations since self-sustaining lynx population. Native and habitat variables, would lead to 1995 best depict the range of the species lynx were functionally extirpated from designation of large areas that may both at the time it was listed (2000) and their historic range in Colorado and occasionally hold dispersing lynx for a at the time of our clarification of southern Wyoming in the Southern short time, but due to their marginal findings (2003). Furthermore, the Rocky Mountains by the time the lynx nature and lack of sufficient food boundaries for the recovery areas were was listed in 2000. In 1999, the State of supply, will not support lynx drawn on a gross scale compared to the Colorado began an intensive effort to reproduction and so do not contribute to proposed revised critical habitat reintroduce lynx. Initial results of this lynx conservation. It is unlikely that boundaries. As a result, the proposed reintroduction were encouraging, with these areas support undocumented, revised critical habitat units are subsets documented rates of reproduction persistent populations of lynx because of five of the six areas preliminarily similar to other lynx populations in the the forest types, snow conditions, and delineated as core in the lynx recovery DPS (Shenk 2007, pp. 12–13). However, snowshoe hare populations are absent outline. subsequent monitoring indicates that or are of such marginal condition due to

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10873

natural fragmentation that their ability contiguous United States range, as it is reflect the exclusion of such developed to support lynx is minimal. In many these areas that will serve as source areas. Any such structures and the land cases these areas also support populations for secondary areas as the under them inadvertently left inside populations of bobcats, a species that populations expand. For this reason, we critical habitat boundaries shown on the excludes lynx from areas with low snow have determined the units in this maps of this proposed rule have been accumulation and act as a general proposed revision contain the physical excluded by text in the proposed rule indicator of habitat that cannot support and biological features essential to the and are not proposed for designation as lynx. Most of the records in these areas conservation of lynx while other areas revised critical habitat. Therefore, are likely a result of wide-ranging do not. Federal actions involving these areas dispersal events through less suitable We propose critical habitat on lands would not trigger consultation under habitats that are mostly disjunct from we have determined were occupied at section 7 of the Act with respect to areas that contain persistent lynx the time of listing; currently support the critical habitat, unless the specific populations. Our recovery outline most abundant, reproducing lynx action would affect the primary defines these areas as secondary or populations in the contiguous United constituent element. peripheral (see Service 2005, p. 21 for States; and contain the physical and Proposed Revised Critical Habitat a map of core, secondary, and biological features essential to the Designation peripheral areas), and their role in conservation of the lynx and that may require special management. The focus sustaining persistent lynx populations is We are proposing five units as revised unclear. Such areas may provide habitat of our proposed critical habitat revision is on boreal forest landscapes of critical habitat for the lynx. These areas to dispersing lynx, especially when sufficient size to encompass the occur in northern Maine, northeastern populations are extremely high and temporal and spatial changes in habitat Minnesota, the Northern Rocky some of these animals may eventually and snowshoe hare populations Mountains (northwestern Montana/ settle in areas capable of supporting necessary to support interbreeding lynx northeastern Idaho), the North Cascades lynx populations. Areas delineated as populations or metapopulations over (north-central Washington), and the secondary or peripheral in the lynx time. Individual lynx maintain large GYA (southwestern Montana, recovery outline are not included in our home ranges; the areas proposed as northwestern Wyoming). The areas are proposed revised critical habitat revised critical habitat are large enough distributed across the known occupied designation because they lack evidence to encompass multiple home ranges. A range of the lynx in the contiguous of reproducing lynx populations and secondary consideration is that, in United States, and are essential to the they lack large areas of contiguous addition to supporting breeding conservation of the species. The critical habitat required to support populations. populations, these areas provide habitat areas we describe below During natural lynx population connectivity among patches of foraging constitute our current best assessment of fluctuations, these peripheral areas are habitat (e.g., patches containing areas that meet the definition of critical likely to be the last areas to be colonized abundant snowshoe hares), whose habitat for lynx. To better understand by excess lynx and the first to lose lynx locations in the landscape shift through the location of these proposed areas, as populations recede. We expect the time. please see the associated maps found areas in the proposed revised units to When determining proposed revised within this proposed rule or examine maintain lynx populations through critical habitat boundaries within this them at http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/ natural population lows and serve as proposed rule, we made every effort to species/mammals/lynx/. The five source populations for secondary areas avoid including water bodies (lakes, proposed revised critical habitat units as populations expand. We expect the rivers, and streams) and developed areas are: (1) Northern Maine unit; (2) areas in the proposed revised units will such as buildings, paved areas, and Northeastern Minnesota unit; (3) support lynx through cyclic population other structures that lack the physical Northern Rocky Mountains unit fluctuations, the most crucial time being and biological features essential for the (northwestern Montana/northeastern the population lows. We consider the conservation of the lynx. The scale of Idaho); (4) North Cascades unit (north- proposed revised units as the areas the maps we prepared under the central Washington); and (5) Greater essential to provide for the long-term parameters for publication within the Yellowstone Area (southwestern conservation of lynx across its Code of Federal Regulations may not Montana, northwestern Wyoming).

TABLE 1.—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS PROPOSED FOR THE CANADA LYNX

Critical habitat unit Miles 2 Kilometers 2

1. Northern Maine ...... 10,633 27,539 2. Northeastern Minnesota ...... 8,226 21,305 3. Northern Rocky Mountains (ID/MT) ...... 11,304 29,276 4. North Cascades (WA) ...... 2,000 5,180 5. Greater Yellowstone Area (MT/WY) ...... 10,590 27,427

Total ...... 42,753 110,727

TABLE 2.—CRITICAL HABITAT PROPOSED FOR THE CANADA LYNX BY LANDOWNERSHIP AND STATE (MI2/KM2)

Federal State Private Tribal Other

Idaho ...... 50/131 1/3 0/0 0/0 0/0 Maine ...... 13/34 758/1,962 9,741/25,230 86/223 35/90 Minnesota ...... 4,279/11,082 1,099/2,848 1,548/4,008 72/187 1,149/2,976 Montana ...... 11,182/28,960 372/964 1,985/5,140 347/898 72/188

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10874 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2.—CRITICAL HABITAT PROPOSED FOR THE CANADA LYNX BY LANDOWNERSHIP AND STATE (MI2/KM2)—Continued

Federal State Private Tribal Other

Washington ...... 1,831/4,742 164/424 5/13 0/0 0.1/0.2 Wyoming ...... 7,695/19,930 14/36 133/343 0/0 43/110 Total ...... 25,050/64,879 2,408/6,237 13,412/34,737 505/1,308 1,299/3,364

We present brief descriptions of each analysis, radio- and GPS-collared by the GAP data, which is based on 10– critical habitat unit below. animals, and documentation of 15-year-old satellite imagery. These reproduction (Moen et al. 2004, entire; disturbed areas are not proposed as Unit 1: Northern Maine [10,633 mi2 Minnesota DNR 2005, entire; S. Loch, revised lynx critical habitat. (27,539 km2)] unpubl. data; Minnesota Department of Unit 3: Northern Rocky Mountains Unit 1 is located in northern Maine in Natural Resources, unpubl. data). This [11,304 mi2 (29,276 km2)] portions of Aroostook, Franklin, area contains the physical and Penobscot, Piscataquis, and Somerset biological features essential to the Unit 3 is located in northwestern Counties. This area was occupied by the conservation of the lynx as it is Montana and a small portion of lynx at the time of listing and is comprised of the primary constituent northeastern Idaho in portions of currently occupied by the species. Lynx element and its components laid out in Boundary County in Idaho and in northwestern Maine have high the appropriate quantity and spatial Flathead, Glacier, Granite, Lake, Lewis productivity: 91 percent of available arrangement. This area is essential to and Clark, Lincoln, Missoula, Pondera, adult females (greater than 2 years) the conservation of lynx because it is Powell and Teton Counties in Montana. produced litters, and litters averaged the only area in the U.S. Great Lakes It includes the Flathead Indian 2.83 kittens (Vashon et al. 2005b, pp. 4– region for which we have evidence of Reservation, National Forest lands, and 6). This area contains the physical and recent lynx reproduction. It likely acts Bureau of Land Management (BLM) biological features essential to the as a source or provides connectivity for lands in the Garnet Resource Area. This conservation of the lynx as it is more peripheral portions of the lynx’s area was occupied by lynx at the time comprised of the primary constituent range in the region. Timber harvest and of listing and is currently occupied by element and its components laid out in management is a dominant land use (68 the species. Lynx are known to be the appropriate quantity and spatial FR 40075). Therefore, special widely distributed throughout this unit arrangement. This area is also important management is required depending on and breeding has been documented in for lynx conservation because it is the the silvicultural practices conducted. multiple locations (Gehman et al. 2004, only area in the northeastern region of Timber management practices that pp. 24–29; Squires et al. 2004a, pp. 7– the lynx’s range within the contiguous provide for a dense understory are 10 and 2004b, pp. 8–10). This area United States that currently supports beneficial for lynx and snowshoe hares. contains the physical and biological breeding lynx populations and likely In this area, lack of an International features essential to the conservation of acts as a source or provides connectivity conservation strategy for lynx, fire the lynx as it is comprised of the for more peripheral portions of the suppression or fuels treatment, traffic, primary constituent element and its lynx’s range in the Northeast. Timber and development are other habitat- components laid out in the appropriate harvest and management is the related threats to lynx (68 FR 40075). quantity and spatial arrangement. This dominant land use within the unit; Specific sections of land area is essential to the conservation of therefore, special management is encompassing a mining district in lynx because it appears to support the required depending on the silvicultural Minnesota known as the Iron Range are highest density lynx populations in the practices conducted (68 FR 40075). not included in this proposed revised Northern Rocky Mountain region of the Timber management practices that designation because they do not contain lynx’s range. It likely acts as a source for provide for a dense understory are the physical and biological features lynx and provides connectivity to other beneficial for lynx and snowshoe hares. essential to the conservation of lynx. In portions of the lynx’s range in the Rocky In this area, other habitat-related threats much of the Iron Range, mining has Mountains, particularly the Yellowstone to lynx are lack of an International removed all vegetation and much of this area. Timber harvest and management is conservation strategy for lynx, traffic, area was subsequently flooded. Areas a dominant land use (68 FR 40075); and development (68 FR 40075). that are still vegetated and not flooded therefore, special management is are extensively fragmented by the mined required depending on the silvicultural Unit 2: Northeastern Minnesota [8,226 areas and haul roads. We used the ‘‘GAP practices conducted. Timber mi2 (21,305 km2)] Land Cover—Tiled Raster’’ dataset management practices that provide for a Unit 2 is located in northeastern (Minnesota Department of Natural dense understory are beneficial for lynx Minnesota in portions of Cook, Resources 2002) to identify sections that and snowshoe hares. In this area, fire Koochiching, Lake, and St. Louis are heavily influenced by mining suppression or fuels treatment, lack of Counties, and Superior National Forest. activities. Areas described as ‘‘Barren’’ an International conservation strategy In 2003, when we last formally and ‘‘Mixed Developed’’ in the GAP for lynx, traffic, and development are reviewed the status of the lynx, dataset seemed to correspond to areas other habitat-related threats to lynx (68 numerous verified records of lynx that were mined or extensively FR 40075). existed from northeastern Minnesota (68 disturbed by mining-related activities 2 FR 40076, July 3, 2003). The area was (e.g., service roads), based on aerial Unit 4: North Cascades [2,000 mi 2 occupied at the time of listing and is photos (National Agricultural Imagery (5,180 km )] currently occupied by the species. Lynx Program 2003). Further inspection of the Unit 4 is located in north-central are currently known to be distributed aerial photos indicate there are Washington in portions of Chelan and throughout northeastern Minnesota, as additional sections with extensive Okanogan Counties, and includes BLM has been confirmed through DNA effects of mining, beyond that indicated lands in the Spokane District. This area

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10875

was occupied at the time lynx was listed Counties in Montana, and Park, Teton, conference report if requested by a and is currently occupied by the Fremont, Sublette, and Lincoln Counties Federal agency. Formal conference species. This unit supports the highest in Wyoming. This area was occupied by reports on proposed critical habitat densities of lynx in Washington lynx at the time of listing and is contain an opinion that is prepared (Stinson 2001). Evidence from limited currently occupied by the species. The according to 50 CFR 402.14, as if critical recent research and DNA shows lynx area contains the physical and habitat were designated. We may adopt distributed within this unit, with biological features essential to the the formal conference report as the breeding being documented (von conservation of the lynx as it contains biological opinion when the critical Kienast 2003, p. 36; K. Aubry, Pacific the primary constituent element and its habitat is designated, if no substantial Northwest Research Station, unpubl. components laid out in the appropriate new information or changes in the data; B. Maletzke, Washington State quantity and spatial arrangement. The action alter the content of the opinion University, unpubl. data). Although GYA is naturally marginal lynx habitat (see 50 CFR 402.10(d)). The there appear to be fewer records in the with highly fragmented foraging habitat. conservation recommendations in a portion of the unit south of Highway 20, For this reason lynx home ranges in this conference report are advisory. few surveys have been conducted in this unit are likely to be larger and If a species is listed or critical habitat portion of the unit. This area contains incorporate large areas of non-foraging is designated, section 7(a)(2) of the Act boreal forest habitat and the matrix habitat. In this area, fire requires Federal agencies to ensure that components essential to the suppression or fuels treatment, lack of activities they authorize, fund, or carry conservation of the lynx. Further, it is an International conservation strategy out are not likely to jeopardize the contiguous with the portion of the unit for lynx, traffic, and development are continued existence of the species or to north of Highway 20, particularly in other habitat-related threats to lynx (68 destroy or adversely modify its critical winter when deep snows close Highway FR 40075). Therefore, special habitat. If a Federal action may affect a 20. The northern portion of the unit management is required depending on listed species or its critical habitat, the adjacent to the Canadian border also the fire suppression and fuels treatment responsible Federal agency (action appears to support few recent lynx practices conducted and the design of agency) must enter into consultation records; however, it is designated highway development projects. with us in most cases. As a result of this wilderness, so access to survey this area consultation, we document compliance is difficult. This northern portion Effects of Critical Habitat Designation with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) contains extensive boreal forest Section 7 Consultation through our issuance of: vegetation types and the components (1) A concurrence letter for Federal Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires essential to the conservation of the lynx. actions that may affect, but are not Federal agencies, including the Service, Additionally, lynx populations exist in likely to adversely affect, listed species to ensure that actions they fund, British Columbia directly north of this or critical habitat; or unit (E. Lofrothe, British Columbia authorize, or carry out are not likely to (2) A biological opinion for Federal Ministry of the Environment, unpubl. destroy or adversely modify critical actions that may affect, and are likely to data). This area contains the physical habitat. Decisions by the 5th and 9th adversely affect, listed species or critical and biological features essential to the Circuit Court of Appeals have habitat. conservation of the lynx as it contains invalidated our definition of An exception to the concurrence the primary constituent element and its ‘‘destruction or adverse modification’’ process referred to in (1) above occurs components laid out in the appropriate (50 CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot in consultations involving National Fire quantity and spatial arrangement. This Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Plan projects. When we issue a area is essential to the conservation of Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) biological opinion concluding that a lynx because it is the only area in the and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and project is likely to jeopardize the Cascades region of the lynx’s range that Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, continued existence of a listed species is known to support breeding lynx 442F (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do not rely or destroy or adversely modify critical populations. Timber harvest and on this regulatory definition when habitat, we also provide reasonable and management is a dominant land use; analyzing whether an action is likely to prudent alternatives to the project, if therefore, special management is destroy or adversely modify critical any are identifiable. We define required depending on the silvicultural habitat. Under the statutory provisions ‘‘Reasonable and prudent alternatives’’ practices conducted. Timber of the Act, we determine destruction or at 50 CFR 402.02 as alternative actions management practices that provide for a adverse modification on the basis of identified during consultation that: density understory are beneficial for whether, with implementation of the • Can be implemented in a manner lynx and snowshoe hares. In this area, proposed Federal action, the affected consistent with the intended purpose of Federal land management plans have critical habitat would remain functional the action, not been amended to incorporate lynx (or retain the current ability for the PCEs • Can be implemented consistent conservation. The lack of an to be functionally established) to serve with the scope of the Federal agency’s International conservation strategy for its intended conservation role for the legal authority and jurisdiction, lynx, traffic, and development are other species (Jones 2004, p. 3). • Are economically and habitat-related threats to lynx (68 FR Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires technologically feasible, and 40075). Federal agencies to confer with us on • Would, in the Director’s opinion, any action that is likely to jeopardize avoid jeopardizing the continued Unit 5: Greater Yellowstone Area the continued existence of a proposed 2 2 existence of the listed species or [10,590 mi (27,427 km )] species or result in destruction or destroying or adversely modifying Unit 5 is located in Yellowstone adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. National Park and surrounding lands in critical habitat. Conference reports Reasonable and prudent alternatives southwestern Montana and provide conservation recommendations can vary from slight project northwestern Wyoming. Lands in this to assist the agency in eliminating modifications to extensive redesign or unit are found in Gallatin, Park, conflicts that may be caused by the relocation of the project. Costs Sweetgrass, Stillwater, and Carbon proposed action. We may issue a formal associated with implementing a

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10876 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

reasonable and prudent alternative are private lands requiring a Federal permit quality of snowshoe hare habitat such similarly variable. (such as a permit from the U.S. Army that the landscape’s ability to produce When we issue a biological opinion Corps of Engineers under section 404 of adequate densities of snowshoe hares to concluding that a project is not likely to the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et support persistent lynx populations is at jeopardize a listed species or adversely seq.) or a permit from us under section least temporarily diminished. Where modify critical habitat, but may result in 10 of the Act) or an activity involving moist boreal forest stands occur in a incidental take of listed animals, we some other Federal action (such as mosaic along with matrix habitat, the provide an incidental take statement funding from the Federal Highway above described activities within the that specifies the impact of such Administration, Federal Aviation matrix habitat portions of the unit incidental taking on the species. We Administration, or the Federal would not affect the physical and then define ‘‘Reasonable and Prudent Emergency Management Agency) are biological features essential to the Measures’’ considered necessary or subject to the section 7 consultation conservation of the lynx. appropriate to minimize the impact of process. Federal actions not affecting (2) Actions that would cause such taking. Reasonable and prudent listed species or critical habitat, and permanent loss or conversion of the measures are binding measures the actions on State, Tribal, local, or private boreal forest. Such activities could action agency must implement to lands that are not federally funded, include, but are not limited to, receive an exemption to the prohibition authorized, or permitted, do not require recreational area developments, certain against take contained in section 9 of section 7 consultation. types of mining activities and associated the Act. These reasonable and prudent Application of the ‘‘Adverse developments, and road building. Such measures are implemented through Modification’’ Standard activities would eliminate and fragment specific ‘‘Terms and Conditions’’ that lynx and snowshoe hare habitat. Where must be followed by the action agency The key factor related to the adverse modification determination is whether, moist boreal forest stands occur in a or passed along by the action agency as mosaic surrounded by matrix habitats, binding conditions to an applicant. with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the affected critical the above described activities within the Reasonable and prudent measures, matrix habitat portion of the unit would along with the terms and conditions that habitat would continue to serve its intended conservation role for the not affect the physical and biological implement them, cannot alter the basic species, or would retain its current features essential to the conservation of design, location, scope, duration, or ability for the primary constituent the lynx. timing of the action under consultation element(s) to be functionally (3) Actions that would increase traffic and may involve only minor changes established. Activities that may destroy volume and speed on roads that divide (50 CFR 402.14). The Service may or adversely modify critical habitat are lynx critical habitat. Such activities provide the action agency with those that alter the physical and could include, but are not limited to, additional conservation biological features to an extent that transportation projects to upgrade roads recommendations, which are advisory appreciably reduces the conservation or development of a new tourist and not intended to carry binding legal value of critical habitat for lynx. destination. These activities could force. Generally, the conservation role of the reduce connectivity within the boreal Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require proposed revised lynx critical habitat forest landscape for lynx and could Federal agencies to reinitiate units is to support viable populations. result in increased mortality of lynx consultation on previously reviewed Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us within the proposed revised critical actions in instances where we have to briefly evaluate and describe in any habitat units as lynx are highly mobile listed a new species or subsequently proposed or final regulation that and frequently cross roads during designated critical habitat that may be designates critical habitat those dispersal, exploratory movements, or affected and the Federal agency has activities involving a Federal action that travel within their home ranges. retained discretionary involvement or may destroy or adversely modify such Note that the scale of these activities control over the action (or the agency’s habitat, or that may be affected by such would be a crucial factor in determining discretionary involvement or control is designation. authorized by law). Consequently, Activities that that when carried out, whether, in any instance, they would Federal agencies may sometimes need to funded, or authorized by a Federal directly or indirectly alter critical request reinitiation of consultation with agency, may adversely affect critical habitat to the extent that the value of the us on actions for which formal habitat and therefore should result in critical habitat for the survival and consultation has been completed, if consultation for the lynx include, but recovery of lynx would be appreciably those actions with discretionary are not limited to, the following: diminished. involvement or control may affect (1) Actions that would reduce or If you have questions regarding subsequently listed species or remove understory vegetation within whether specific activities may designated critical habitat. boreal forest stands. Such activities constitute destruction or adverse Federal activities that may affect lynx could include, but are not limited to, modification of critical habitat, contact or its designated critical habitat require pre-commercial thinning or fuels the Supervisor of the appropriate section 7 consultation under the Act. treatment of forest stands. These Ecological Services Field Office (see list Activities on State, Tribal, local, or activities could significantly reduce the below).

State Address Phone No.

Maine ...... 1168 Main Street, Old Town, Maine 04468 ...... (207) 827–5938 Minnesota ...... 4101 East 80th Street, Bloomington, Minnesota 55425 ...... (612) 725–3548 Montana ...... 585 Shepard Way, Helena, Montana 59601 ...... (406) 449–5225 Idaho and Washington ...... 11103 E. Montgomery Drive, Spokane, Washington 99206 ...... (509) 893–8015 Wyoming ...... 5353 Yellowstone Road, Suite 308A, Cheyenne, Wyoming 82009 ...... (307) 772–2374

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10877

Application of Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of might occur because of the designation. designation of critical habitat on other the Act The National Environmental Policy Act lands. The Tribal lands in the Northern The National Defense Authorization (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA) analysis Rockies unit (portions of the Flathead Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– we will conduct may also disclose other Indian Reservation) are managed by the 136) amended the Act to limit areas impacts we may consider in our section Confederated Salish and Kootenai eligible for designation as critical 4(b)(2) analysis. We are conducting an updated Tribes (CSKT) under a Forest habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) economic analysis of the impacts of the Management Plan that incorporates the of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) proposed critical habitat designation, provisions of the LCAS (CSKT 2000). now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not which will be available for public The Tribes manage these lands in a way designate as critical habitat any lands or review and comment when it is that is consistent with lynx other geographical areas owned or complete. Based on public comment on conservation. controlled by the Department of that document, the proposed Defense, or designated for its use, that designation itself, and the information TRIBAL LANDS UNDER CONSIDERATION are subject to an integrated natural in the final economic analysis, the FOR EXCLUSION FROM FINAL DES- resources management plan prepared Secretary may exclude from critical IGNATION AS CRITICAL HABITAT under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 habitat additional areas beyond those U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines identified in this assessment under the Critical habitat unit Reservation or tribe in writing that such plan provides a provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. benefit to the species for which critical This is also addressed in our Maine ...... Maliseet Tribe. habitat is proposed for designation.’’ implementing regulations at 50 CFR Micmac Tribe. There are no Department of Defense 424.19. Passamaquoddy lands with a completed Integrated Tribe. Natural Resource Management Plan Relationship of Critical Habitat to Penobscot Tribe. within the proposed revised critical Tribal Lands Minnesota ...... Grand Portage Indian Reservation. habitat designation. In accordance with the Secretarial Vermillion Lake In- Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act Order 3206, ‘‘American Indian Tribal dian Reservation. Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Northern Rocky Flathead Indian Res- Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that Responsibilities, and the Endangered Mountains. ervation. the Secretary must designate and revise Species Act’’ (June 5, 1997); the North Cascades ...... None. critical habitat on the basis of the best President’s memorandum of April 29, Greater Yellowstone None. available scientific data after taking into 1994, ‘‘Government-to-Government Area. consideration the economic impact, Relations with Native American Tribal national security impact, and any other Governments’’ (59 FR 22951); Executive Economic Analysis relevant impact of specifying any Order 13175 ‘‘Consultation and We conducted an analysis of the particular area as critical habitat. The Coordination with Indian Tribal potential economic impacts of Secretary may exclude an area from Governments’’; and the relevant proposing critical habitat for the lynx in critical habitat if he determines that the provision of the Departmental Manual 2006 when we designated critical benefits of such exclusion outweigh the of the Department of the Interior (512 habitat. We will update that analysis benefits of specifying such area as part DM 2), we believe that fish, wildlife, with any new information that may be of the critical habitat, unless he and other natural resources on tribal available in addition to considering the determines, based on the best scientific lands are better managed under tribal economic impacts on lands that are data available, that the failure to authorities, policies, and programs than proposed in this revision but that were designate such area as critical habitat through Federal regulation wherever not previously proposed. We will will result in the extinction of the possible and practicable. Such announce the availability of the draft species. The Secretary has broad designation is often viewed by tribes as economic analysis as soon as it is discretion regarding which factor(s) to an unwanted intrusion into tribal self completed, at which time we will seek use and how much weight to give to any governance, thus compromising the public review and comment. At that factor. government-to-government relationship time, copies of the draft economic Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we essential to achieving our mutual goal of analysis will be available on the Internet must consider economic impacts. We managing for healthy ecosystems upon at www.regulations.gov, on the Internet also consider a number of factors in a which the viability of threatened and at http://www.mountain-prairie.fws.gov/ section 4(b)(2) analysis. For example, endangered species populations species/mammals/lynx/, or by we consider whether there are lands depend. We believe that conservation of contacting the Montana Ecological owned or managed by the Department of lynx can be achieved off of Tribal lands Services Office directly (see FOR Defense (DOD) where a national security within the critical habitat units or with FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). impact might exist. We also consider the cooperation of Tribes; the amount of whether landowners having proposed Tribal lands within the proposed Peer Review critical habitat on their lands have revised units is relatively small: 86 mi2 In accordance with our joint policy developed any conservation plans for (223 km2) in the Maine unit; 72 mi2 (187 published in the Federal Register on the area, or whether there are km2) in the Minnesota unit; and 347 mi2 July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we are conservation partnerships that would be (898 km2) in the Northern Rocky obtaining the expert opinions of at least encouraged by designation of, or Mountains unit. No Tribal lands occur three appropriate independent exclusion from, critical habitat. In within the North Cascades and GYA specialists regarding this proposed rule. addition, we look at any Tribal issues, units. We have requested comment with The purpose of peer review is to ensure and consider the government-to- regard to the Tribal lands in the that our proposed revised critical government relationship of the United Northern Rocky Mountains, Maine, and habitat designation is based on States with tribal entities. We also Minnesota and whether the scientifically sound data, assumptions, consider any social or other impacts that conservation of lynx can occur with and analyses. We have invited these

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10878 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

peer reviewers to comment during this mining). We considered each industry of the information contained in the draft public comment period on our specific or category individually. In estimating economic analysis: assumptions and conclusions in this the numbers of small entities potentially (a) Timber Activities proposed designation of revised critical affected, we also considered whether habitat. their activities have any Federal According to the draft economic involvement. Some kinds of activities analysis for the 2005 proposed critical Public Hearings are unlikely to have any Federal habitat, impacts on timberlands have The Act provides for one or more involvement and so will not be affected historically resulted from public hearings on this proposal, if we by the designation of critical habitat. implementation of lynx management receive any requests for hearings. We Designation of critical habitat only plans and project modifications. The must receive your request for a public affects activities conducted, funded, majority of forecast impacts on timber hearing within 45 days after the date of permitted, or authorized by Federal relate to potential restrictions on pre- this Federal Register publication. Send agencies; other activities are not affected commercial thinning, with nearly half of your request to an address listed in the by the designation. these impacts occurring on private ADDRESSES section. We will schedule If this revised proposed critical timberland in Maine. The economic public hearings on this proposal, if any habitat designation is made final, analysis applied two scenarios to bound are requested, and announce the dates, Federal agencies must consult with us if the impacts resulting from potential times, and places of those hearings, as their activities may affect designated changes to timber activities. Under well as how to obtain reasonable critical habitat. Consultations to avoid Scenario 2, the upper bound, timber accommodations, in the Federal the destruction or adverse modification impacts range from $15.6 million Register and local newspapers at least of critical habitat would be incorporated (discounted at 7 percent) to $33.3 15 days before the first hearing. into the existing consultation process. million (discounted at 3 percent) over Private companies may also be subject 20 years. When compared to forestry- Required Determinations to consultation or mitigation impacts. related earning across counties in the Regulatory Planning and Review (E.O Several of the activities potentially study area ($454 million in 2003), these 12866) affected by lynx conservation efforts potential losses are approximately 3 to within the study area (timber, 7 percent of total forestry-related This document is not a significant recreation, grazing) involve small earnings. Total forecast impacts to rule and the Office of Management and businesses. Given the rural nature of the timber activities range from $117 Budget (OMB) has not reviewed this proposed designation, most of the million to $808 million over 20 years. proposed rule under Executive Order potentially affected businesses in the Exhibits C–1 through C–4 of the 12866. affected regions are small. economic analysis quantify the small Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 Our draft economic analysis of the timber companies that may be affected et seq.) 2005 proposed designation evaluated by the proposed rule. However, the draft the potential economic effects on small economic analysis states that it is Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act business entities and small governments uncertain whether private timber (RFA, 5 U.S.C. 601, et seq., as amended resulting from conservation actions companies will be affected by the by the Small Business Regulatory related to the listing of this species and designation of critical habitat. Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of proposed designation of its critical Government agencies, such as the U.S. 1996), whenever an agency must habitat. We evaluated small business Forest Service, are subject to critical publish a notice of rulemaking for any entities in the following categories: habitat consultations. proposed or final rule, it must prepare timber activities; residential and (b) Residential and Commercial and make available for public comment commercial development; recreation; Development a regulatory flexibility analysis that public lands management and describes the effects of the rule on small conservation planning; transportation, Because specific information on how entities (small businesses, small utilities, and municipal activities; and residential and commercial organizations, and small government mining operations. Based on our development projects would mitigate for jurisdictions). However, no regulatory analysis, impacts associated with small impacts to lynx and its habitat is flexibility analysis is required if the entities are anticipated to occur to unknown, the draft economic analysis head of the agency certifies the rule will timber activities, recreation, public does not attempt to quantify the not have a significant economic impact lands management, conservation economic impacts of mitigating on a substantial number of small planning, transportation, and mining. development activities. Instead, it entities. SBREFA amended RFA to Because no information was available presents the full value that may be require Federal agencies to provide a regarding how residential and derived from potential future statement of the factual basis for commercial development may be development within the potential certifying that the rule will not have a affected by lynx conservation, the critical habitat. The total projected significant economic impact on a analysis does not quantify specific future development value of areas substantial number of small entities. impacts to residential and commercial proposed for designation as critical Based on our 2005 proposed development but rather provides the full habitat for the lynx is approximately designation of critical habitat for lynx option value for development within the $2.26 billion. Approximately 69.1 (70 FR 68294) and associated draft study area. Thus, residential and percent ($1.56 billion) of this is the economic analysis, we conducted a commercial development impacts to value of future development in preliminary evaluation of the effects to small entities are not addressed in the Minnesota (Unit 2); 25.7 percent ($579 a substantial number of small entities by SBREFA screening analysis. We are million) of this is the value of future considering the number of small entities seeking comments from potentially development in Maine (Unit 1), of affected within particular types of affected small entities involved in which $1.57 million is proposed for economic activities (e.g., timber, timber activities, residential and exclusion; and 5.2 percent ($117 recreation, public and conservation land commercial development, recreation, million) of this is the value of future management, transportation, and and mining. The following is a summary development in Montana. Lands

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10879

proposed for critical habitat in how small businesses in the residential associated with transportation, utilities, Washington are characterized by public and commercial development field will and municipal activities for areas lands managed for timber and be affected by this critical habitat proposed for designation will range recreation. As such, residential and designation? What would you suggest as from $34.9 million to $55.1 million over commercial development is not another measure of these costs? the next 20 years, or an annualized considered to be a future land use, and (c) Recreation value of $1.9 to 2.9 million (present the value of these lands for future value applying a 7 percent discount development is considered to be Recreational activities that have the rate) or $1.8 to $2.8 million (present potential to affect the lynx and its negligible. Recognizing that value applying a 3 percent discount habitat include over-the-snow trails for approximately 80 percent of the rate). Of the total post-designation costs, projected value of potential future snowmobiling and cross-country skiing, accidental trapping or shooting, and approximately 71 percent are attributed residential and commercial to transportation activities, and 29 development within the area proposed recreation area expansions such as ski resorts, campgrounds, or snowmobile percent are attributed to utility and as critical habitat consist of lands within municipal activities. Impacts to Minnesota and recognizing the potential areas. Total forecast costs to all recreation activities in areas proposed transportation and municipal projects effects on landowners and development are expected to be borne by the Federal companies, we will consider this for designation are $1.05 to $3.46 and State agencies undertaking lynx- information pursuant to section 4(b)(2) million, or an annualized estimate of related modifications to these types of of the Act during the development of $57,600 to $178,000 (applying a 7 projects, including the Federal Highway the final designation. percent discount rate) or $54,500 to No North American Industry $175,000 (applying a 3 percent discount Administration, the Federal Emergency Classification System (NAICS) code rate). Impacts to recreation activity Management Agency, the U.S. Army exists for landowners, and the Small forecast in the draft analysis include Corps of Engineers, and State Business Administration does not welfare impacts to individual transportation departments. Since provide a definition of a small snowmobilers; however, the level of Federal and State entities do not qualify landowner. However, recognizing that it participation is not expected to change. as small businesses, the designation of is possible that some of the landowners As no decrease in the level of critical habitat for the lynx is not may be small businesses, this analysis snowmobiling activity is forecast, anticipated to have a significant impact provides information concerning the impacts to small businesses that support on a substantial number of small number of landowners potentially the recreation sector are not anticipated. businesses associated with affected: An upward estimate of 38 in Because the scale of this revised transportation, utilities, and municipal Maine, 53 in Minnesota, and 110 in proposed critical habitat is significantly activities. different than the 2005 proposed critical Montana. It is possible that a portion of Impacts to dam projects, including these affected landowners could be habitat, we are requesting comments from any potentially affected small costs of remote monitoring for lynx that small businesses in the residential or could be required for relicensing of commercial land development industry businesses in the involved in recreation activities, about the impacts resulting dams, could be borne by the companies or could be associated businesses, such that own the dams. In particular, 14 as builders and developers. Actual from the proposed designation of critical habitat. What are the estimated dams in Minnesota and two in Maine conservation requirements undertaken cost impacts of this proposed are expected to consider lynx by an individual landowner will depend designation to your small business? conservation at the time of relicensing. on how much of a parcel lies within or The economic analysis estimated costs affects proposed critical habitat. (d) Public lands management and of $13,000 to $18,000 to each of these Individual single-family home conservation planning 16 dam projects in 2025. Based on these development has not historically been The draft economic analysis for the small costs, we do not anticipate that subject to consultation or habitat 2005 proposed critical habitat estimates this would be a significant impact to conservation requirements for lynx, that total post-designation costs of lynx dam operators. although consultation could be required conservation efforts associated with if Federal permits from the Army Corps public and conservation lands (f) Mining Operations of Engineers, Environmental Protection management in areas proposed for The draft economic analysis for the Agency, or Federal Emergency designation to be approximately $12.8 2005 proposed critical habitat estimates Management Agency are required. million over the next 20 years, or an total post-designation costs resulting For these reasons and because the annualized cost of $940,000 (present from lynx conservation efforts scale of this revised proposed critical value applying a 7 percent discount habitat is significantly different than the rate) or $767,000 (applying a 3 percent associated with mining projects of 2005 proposed critical habitat, we are discount rate). The majority of public approximately $430,000, or an requesting comments from any lands are managed by Federal and State annualized rate of $38,000 (present potentially affected small businesses entities that do not qualify as small value applying a 7 percent discount involved in residential and commercial businesses. As such, designation of rate) or $28,100 (present value applying development activities, about the critical habitat for lynx is not a 3 percent discount rate). Unit 2 impacts resulting from the proposed anticipated to have a significant impact (Minnesota) is the only area of potential designation of critical habitat. How will on a substantial number of small critical habitat for which future surface small businesses, such as landowners, businesses involved in public lands mining expansion and development builders or developers be affected by management or conservation planning. projects have been identified; this critical habitat designation? The specifically, three new or expanded economic analysis presents the full (e) Transportation, Utilities, and mining projects are forecast to occur on potential development value of Municipal Activities leased lands of Superior National impacted lands within the potential The draft economic analysis for the Forest. The greatest impact estimated is critical habitat as a baseline, but does 2005 proposed critical habitat estimates $375,000 or an annualized impact of not provide a cost estimate. How could that total post-designation costs $33,100 for the East Reserve Mine, this estimate be refined to demonstrate resulting from lynx conservation efforts which has a total value of $819 million,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:27 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10880 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

which equates to less than a 1 percent These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. governments because small annual impact to the mine relative to its 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental governments will be affected only to the total value. There is an uncertainty for mandate’’ includes a regulation that extent that any programs having Federal realized impacts on the mining industry ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty funds, permits, or other authorized from lynx conservation activities. upon State, local, or [T]ribal activities must ensure that their actions Because the scale of this revised governments’’ with two exceptions. It will not adversely affect the critical proposed critical habitat is significantly excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal habitat. Therefore, we do not believe different than the 2005 proposed critical assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty that a Small Government Agency Plan is habitat, we are requesting comments arising from participation in a voluntary required at this time. However, as we from any potentially affected small Federal program,’’ unless the regulation conduct our revised economic analysis, businesses involved in the mining ‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal we will further evaluate this issue and industry, about the impacts resulting program under which $500,000,000 or revise this assessment if appropriate. from the proposed designation of more is provided annually to State, Takings critical habitat. What are the estimated local, and tribal governments under cost impacts of this proposed entitlement authority,’’ if the provision In accordance with E.O. 12630 designation to your small business? would ‘‘increase the stringency of (Government Actions and Interference We evaluated small business entities conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps with Constitutionally Protected Private relative to the revised proposed upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal Property Rights), we have analyzed the designation of critical habitat for the Government’s responsibility to provide potential takings implications of lynx to determine potential effects to funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal designating revised critical habitat for these business entities and the scale of governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust the lynx in a takings implications any potential impact using, in part, the accordingly. At the time of enactment, assessment. The takings implications draft economic analysis for the 2005 these entitlement programs were: assessment concludes that this proposed critical habitat. Based on our Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child designation of critical habitat for the analysis, there may be potential Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services lynx does not pose significant takings projected impacts associated with small Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation implications for lands within or affected entities in the areas of timber activities, State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption by the designation. recreation, public lands management, Assistance, and Independent Living; Federalism conservation planning, transportation, Family Support Welfare Services; and and mining. There is also a possibility Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal In accordance with E.O. 13132, this of potential projected impacts to private sector mandate’’ includes a proposed rule does not have significant development activities. Due to the lack regulation that ‘‘would impose an Federalism effects. A Federalism of information, the economic analysis enforceable duty upon the private assessment is not required. In keeping for this critical habitat does not attempt sector, except (i) a condition of Federal with Department of the Interior and to assign development impacts to assistance or (ii) a duty arising from Department of Commerce policy, we specific small entities, rather leaving participation in a voluntary Federal requested information from, and open the question of whether any small program.’’ coordinated development of, our entities will be affected. We have The designation of critical habitat previous proposed critical habitat outlined above potential projected does not impose a legally binding duty designation with appropriate State future impacts to these entities resulting on non-Federal Government entities or resource agencies in Idaho, Maine, from conservation-related activities for private parties. Under the Act, the only Minnesota, Montana, Washington, and the lynx, and asked potential affected regulatory effect is that Federal agencies Wyoming. The information gathered in small entities for input as to what the must ensure that their actions do not that coordination effort was used in this likely impacts will be for their industry destroy or adversely modify critical revised proposal. We believe that the sectors. We do, however, recognize that habitat under section 7. While non- designation of critical habitat for the there may be disproportionate impact to Federal entities that receive Federal lynx will have little incremental impact certain sectors and geographic areas funding, assistance, or permits, or that on State and local governments and within lands proposed for designation. otherwise require approval or their activities. The designation of As such, we will more fully evaluate authorization from a Federal agency for critical habitat in areas currently these potential impacts during the an action, may be indirectly impacted occupied by the lynx imposes no development of the final designation, by the designation of critical habitat, the additional restrictions to those currently and may, if appropriate, consider such legally binding duty to avoid in place and, therefore, has little lands for exclusion pursuant to section destruction or adverse modification of incremental impact on State and local 4(b)(2) of the Act. critical habitat rests squarely on the governments and their activities. The Federal agency. Furthermore, to the designation may have some benefit to Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 extent that non-Federal entities are these governments because the areas U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) indirectly impacted because they that contain the physical and biological In accordance with the Unfunded receive Federal assistance or participate features essential to the conservation of Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et in a voluntary Federal aid program, the the species are more clearly defined, seq.), we make the following findings: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would and the PCE necessary to support the (a) This rule will not produce a not apply; nor would critical habitat life processes of the species are Federal mandate. In general, a Federal shift the costs of the large entitlement specifically identified. This information mandate is a provision in legislation, programs listed above on to State does not alter where and what federally statute or regulation that would impose governments. sponsored activities may occur. an enforceable duty upon State, local, or (b) On the basis of the economic However, it may assist local tribal governments, or the private sector, analysis for our previous designation of governments in long-range planning and includes both ‘‘Federal critical habitat for the lynx in 2006, we (rather than having them wait for case- intergovernmental mandates’’ and do not believe that this rule will by-case consultations under section 7 of ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ significantly or uniquely affect small the Act to occur).

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10881

Civil Justice Reform language. This means that each rule we E.O. 12866 in that it may raise novel In accordance with E.O. 12988, (Civil publish must: legal and policy issues, we do not (a) Be logically organized; expect it to significantly affect energy Justice Reform), the Office of the (b) Use the active voice to address Solicitor has determined that the rule supplies, distribution, or use based on readers directly; the economic analysis we completed for does not unduly burden the judicial (c) Use clear language rather than system and that it meets the the 2005 proposed lynx critical habitat jargon; rule. Therefore, this action is not a requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) (d) Be divided into short sections and of the Order. We have proposed significant energy action, and no sentences; and Statement of Energy Effects is required. designating revised critical habitat in (e) Use lists and tables wherever accordance with the provisions of the However, we will further evaluate this possible. issue as we conduct our economic Act. This proposed rule uses standard If you feel that we have not met these analysis, and review and revise this property descriptions and identifies the requirements, send us comments by one assessment as warranted. physical and biological features of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES essential to the conservation of the section. To better help us revise the References Cited species within the designated areas to rule, your comments should be as A complete list of all references cited assist the public in understanding the specific as possible. For example, you in this rulemaking is available online at habitat needs of the lynx. should tell us the numbers of the http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/ Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 sections or paragraphs that are unclearly mammals/lynx/ or upon request from U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) written, which sections or sentences are the Field Supervisor, Montana too long, the sections where you feel Ecological Services Office (see FOR This rule does not contain any new lists or tables would be useful, etc. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). collections of information that require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Government-to-Government Author(s) Relationship With Tribes Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 The primary author(s) of this package et seq.). This rule will not impose In accordance with the President’s are staff from the Maine and Montana recordkeeping or reporting requirements memorandum of April 29, 1994, Ecological Services Offices. on State or local governments, Government-to-Government Relations individuals, businesses, or with Native American Tribal List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 organizations. An agency may not Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, Endangered and threatened species, conduct or sponsor, and a person is not the Department of Interior’s manual at Exports, Imports, Reporting and required to respond to, a collection of 512 DM 2, and Secretarial Order 3206, recordkeeping requirements, information unless it displays a we readily acknowledge our Transportation. currently valid OMB control number. responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal Proposed Regulation Promulgation National Environmental Policy Act Tribes on a government-to-government (NEPA) Accordingly, we propose to amend basis. In accordance with Secretarial part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title It is our position that, outside the Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of the Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal as set forth below: United States for the Tenth Circuit, we Trust Responsibilities, and the do not need to prepare environmental Endangered Species Act), we readily PART 17—[AMENDED] analyses as defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. acknowledge our responsibilities to 1. The authority for part 17 continues 4321 et seq.) in connection with work directly with Tribes in developing to read as follows: designating critical habitat under the programs for healthy ecosystems, to Act of 1973, as amended. We published acknowledge that tribal lands are not Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. a notice outlining our reasons for this subject to the same controls as Federal 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– determination in the Federal Register public lands, to remain sensitive to 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This Indian culture, and to make information 2. In § 17.95(a), revise the entry for position was upheld by the Circuit available to Tribes. Tribal lands in the ‘‘Canada lynx (Lynx Canadensis)’’ to Court of the United States for the Ninth Maine, Minnesota, and Northern Rocky read as follows: Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 Mountains units are included in this F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. Ore. 1995), cert. proposed designation; however, we are § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996). However, asking the public if Tribal lands need to (a) Mammals. when the range of the species includes be included as critical habitat in light of * * * * * States within the tenth circuit, such as Secretarial Order 3206. Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) that of the lynx, under the tenth circuit (1) Critical habitat units are depicted ruling in Catron County Board of Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use on the maps below for the following Commissioners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife On May 18, 2001, the President issued States and counties: Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), an Executive Order (E.O. 13211; Actions (i) Idaho: Boundary County; we will undertake a NEPA analysis for Concerning Regulations That (ii) Maine: Aroostook, Franklin, critical habitat designation and notify Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Penobscot, Piscataquis, and Somerset the public of the availability of a NEPA Distribution, or Use) on regulations that Counties; document for this proposal. significantly affect energy supply, (iii) Minnesota: Cook, Koochiching, distribution, and use. E.O. 13211 Lake, and St. Louis Counties; Clarity of the Rule requires agencies to prepare Statements (iv) Montana: Flathead, Glacier, We are required by Executive Orders of Energy Effects when undertaking Granite, Lake, Lewis and Clark, Lincoln, 12866 and 12988 and by the certain actions. While this proposed Missoula, Pondera, Powell, Teton, Presidential Memorandum of June 1, rule to revise critical habitat for the lynx Gallatin, Park, Sweetgrass, Stillwater, 1998, to write all rules in plain is a significant regulatory action under and Carbon Counties;

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10882 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

(v) Washington: Chelan and Okanogan (i) Maine: Allagash, Ashland, Sparta, Spring Lodge Resort and Marina, Counties; and Chapman, Dennistown, Dickey, Eagle Stewart, Taconite Harbor, Taft, (vi) Wyoming: Park, Teton, Fremont, Lake, Frenchville, Grindstone, Jackman, Thunderbird Resort, Tofte, Toimi, Sublette, and Lincoln Counties. Kokadjo, Oxbow, Portage, Rockwood, Tower, Tower Junction, Two Harbors, (2) Within these areas the primary Saint Francis, Saint John, Smyrna Wahlsten, Wakemup, Waldo, Wales, constituent element for the Canada lynx Center, Wallagrass, Winterville. Wheeler Landing, White Iron, is boreal forest landscapes supporting a (ii) Minnesota: Alger, Allen, Angora, Whiteface, Whyte, Winter, Winton, mosaic of differing successional forest Arnold, Aurora, Babbitt, Baptism Woodland, York. stages and containing: Crossing, Bartlett, Beaver Bay, Beaver (iii) Montana: Aldridge, Alpine, (i) Presence of snowshoe hares and Crossing, Belgrade, Bell Harbor, their preferred habitat conditions, Avon, Beartown, Bison, Blacktail, Biwabik, Breda, Brimson, Britt, Blossburg, Brock Creek, Calamity Janes including dense understories of young Burntside, Burntside Lake, Buyck, trees or shrubs tall enough to protrude Trailer Court, Cassidy Curve, Coloma, Canyon, Castle Danger, Chippewa City, above the snow; Contact, Cooke City, Copper Cliff, Clappers, Clifton, Cook, Cotton, Covill, (ii) Winter snow conditions that are Corwin Springs, Coughlin, Crystal Ford, generally deep and fluffy for extended Cramer, Crane Lake, Croftville, Cusson, Crystal Point, Dodge Summit, Dutton, periods of time; Darby Junction, Duluth, Duluth Heights, Electric, Elliston, False Summit, Finn, (iii) Sites for denning having Eagles Nest, East Beaver Bay, Ely, Forest Heights, Frontier Town, abundant, coarse, woody debris, such as Embarrass, Fairbanks, Falls Junction, Gardiner, Garnet, Geary, George Norman downed trees and root wads; and Finland, Forest Center, Forsman, Four Trailer Court, Helmville, Huckleberry (iv) Matrix habitat (e.g., hardwood Corners, Fredenberg, French River, Trailer Court, Independence, Jardine, forest, dry forest, non-forest, or other Gappas Landing Campground, Genoa, Keiley, Kotke, Limestone, Lincoln, habitat types that do not support Gheen, Gheen Corner, Gilbert, Glendale, Mannix, McDonald, McGillvary, Meyers snowshoe hares) that occurs between Grand Portage, Grand Marais, Creek, Mountain View, Ovando, patches of boreal forest in close Greenwood Junction, Haley, Happy Packers, Quigley, Reynolds City, Ricci juxtaposition (at the scale of a lynx Wanderer, Highland, Hornby, Hovland, Trailer Terraces, Rising Sun, Riverside, home range) such that lynx are likely to Hunters Park, Idington, Illgen City, Rocky Mountain Trailer Park, Silver travel through such habitat while Isabella, Island View, Jameson, Jay See Gate, Singleshot, Siyeh Bend, Skyline, accessing patches of boreal forest within Landing, Jordan, Kabetogama, Kelly Snowslip, Sperry Chalets, Sphinx, a home range. The important aspect of Landing, Kettle Falls, Knife River, Springtown, Stoner Place, Summit, matrix habitat for lynx is that these Lakewood, Larsmont, Lauren, Lax Lake, Swiftcurrent, Three Forks, Top O’Deep, habitats retain the ability to allow Leander, Lester Park, Little Marais, White City, Woodworth, Yreka. unimpeded movement of lynx through Little Marais Postoffice, London, Lutsen, (iv) Wyoming: Afton, Bannock Ford, them as lynx travel between patches of Makinen, Manitou Junction, Maple, Bedford, Bondurant, Buffalo Ford, boreal forest. Maple Hill, Markham, Martin Landing, (3) Critical habitat does not include McComber, McNair, Melrude, Midway, Canyon Junction, Canyon Village, Devils waterbodies (lakes, rivers, streams), or Murphy City, Murray, Norshor Junction, Den, DuNoir, Etna, Fossil Forest, man-made structures existing on the Orr, Palmers, Palo, Peyla, Pigeon River, Hoback, Hoback Junction, Jack Pine, effective date of this rule, such as Pineville, Prairie Portage, Ranier, Red Mammoth, Osmond Community, buildings, airports, paved and gravel Rock, Reno, Robinson, Rollins, Pahaska Tepee, Sylvan Bay Summer roadbeds, active railroad beds, and the Rothman, Salo Corner, Sawbill Landing, Home Area, Thayne, Tower Junction, land on which such structures are Schroeder, Scott Junction, Section Turnerville, Yanceys. located. Critical habitat does not include Thirty, Sha-Sha Resort, Shaw, Silver (4) Index map for lynx critical habitat the following towns or populated areas Bay, Silver Creek, Silver Rapids, Skibo, follows: as they exist now: Soudan, South International Falls, BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10883

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:21 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.000 10884 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

(5) Unit 1: Northern Maine; to intersection with State Highway 11 in Westfield Twp. boundary (579218, Aroostook, Franklin, Penobscot, Long A Twp. (506181, 5040542). Follow 5160782). Follow township boundary Piscataquis and Somerset Counties, State Highway 11 NE to intersection west to intersection with Chapman Maine. with T4 Indian Purchase Twp. Twp. boundary (572903, 5160530). (i) Coordinate projection: UTM, Boundary (515204, 5052175). Follow Follow township boundary north to NE NAD83, Zone 19, Meters. Coordinate township boundary NW to SW corner of corner of township (572577, 5168198). definition: (easting, northing). Starting T1 R8 Twp. (513460, 5059043). Follow Follow township boundaries west to at Maine/Canada Border (SW corner of township boundary NE to intersection intersection with Ashland Twp. Merrill Strip Twp.) (371910, 5028021), with Grindstone Twp. Boundary boundary (553502, 5167377). Follow follow township boundary east to SE (523967, 5061550). Follow township township boundaries north to SW corner of Skinner Twp. (383434, boundary south and east to intersection corner of Westmanland Twp. (553279, 5029673). Follow township boundary with State Highway 11 (533826, 5197228). Follow township boundary SE to SW corner of T5 R6 Twp. (383438, 5057404). Follow State Highway 11 5029673). Follow township boundaries north to intersection with Soldiertown east to SE corner of township (562523, NE to boundary of Moosehead Lake Twp. boundary (533178, 5067644). 5197586). Follow township boundaries (450963, 5036788). Follow Moosehead Follow township boundary east to SE north to intersection with State Lake boundary to intersection with corner of township (534261, 5067639), Highway 161 (562361, 5209395). Follow Beaver Cove Twp. (452704, 5040915). then follow township boundaries north State Highway 161 NE to New Canada Follow township boundary to to SE corner of T6 R7 Twp. (533735, Twp. boundary (536315, 5227346). Moosehead Lake boundary (453125, 5108030). Follow township boundaries Follow township boundaries west to 5040999). Follow Moosehead Lake east to intersection with U.S. Highway NW corner of Wallagrass Twp. (522883, boundary to township boundary 2 (563731, 5108104). Follow U.S. 5227037). Follow township boundaries (453705, 5041123). Follow township Highway 2 to intersection with New north to Maine/Canada border (522876, boundary to NW corner of Bowdoin Limerick Twp. boundary (584664, 5231986). Follow Maine/Canada border College Grant West Twp. (460415, 5109885). Follow township boundaries to beginning. 5042546). Follow township boundary to north to intersection with U.S. Highway (ii) Map of Northern Maine Unit SW corner of township (462537, 1 (583834, 5153895). Follow U.S. follows: 5032002). Follow township boundaries Highway 1 NW to intersection with

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:21 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10885

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:30 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.001 10886 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

(6) Unit 2: Northeastern Minnesota; Minnesota/Canada border to the Danger, Split Rock Point OE S, Arnold, Cook, Koochiching, Lake, and St. Louis beginning. This area is found within the French River, Knife River, Two Harbors Counties. following USGS 1:24000 Quads; Pine OE S, Fredenberg, Duluth, Lakewood, (i) Coordinate Projection: UTM, Mountain, Grand Marais, Kadunce Duluth Heights, Chad Lake, Lake Insula, NAD83, Zone 15, Meters. Coordinate River, Marr Island, Hovland, Mineral Shagawa Lake, Ojibway Lake, Definition: (easting, northing) Center OE S, Good Harbor Bay OE E, Snowbank Lake, Soudan, Eagles Nest, (ii) Starting at the intersection Linden Grove, Cook, Sassas Creek, Lost Bear Island, Bogberry Lake, Quadga (470383, 5383928) of the Minnesota/ Lake, Tower, Idington, Britt, Biwabik Lake, Isabella Lake, Perent Lake, Canada border and U.S. Highway 53, NE, Biwabik NW, Virginia, McKinley, Kawishiwi Lake, Beth Lake, Sawbill follow U.S. Highway 53 to the Biwabik, Eveleth, Gilbert, Palo, Central Camp, Tait Lake, Mark Lake, Devil intersection (533455, 5265811) with the Lakes, Makinen, Zim, Cotton, Track Lake, Kangas Bay, Gabbro Lake, north boundary of T. 58N, R. 17W, Whiteface, Canyon, Shaw, Twig, Embarrass, Babbitt, Slate Lake West, Section 6. Follow the section line east Independence, Adolph, Ranier OE N, Slate Lake East, Mitawan Lake, Sawbill to the NE corner of section 6 (534436, Island View OE N, Cranberry Bay OE N, Landing, Silver Island Lake, Wilson 5265846). Follow the section line north Soldier Point OE N, Ranier, Island View, Lake, Toohey Lake, Honeymoon to the NW corner of T. 59N, R. 17W, Cranberry Bay, Soldier Point, Kempton Mountain, Lutsen, Isaac Lake, Babbitt Section 29 (534449, 5269188). Follow Bay, Kettle Falls, International Falls, NE, Deer Yard Lake, Good Harbor Bay the section line east to the NE corner of Kabetogama, Daley Bay, Ash River NE, (digital), Aurora, Allen, Babbitt SW, T. 59N R. 17W, Section 28 (537595, Namakan Island, Hale Bay, Ericsburg, Babbitt SE, Greenwood Lake West, 5269278). Follow the section line north Ray, Redhorse Bay, Ash River SW, Ash Greenwood Lake East, Isabella, Cabin to the NW corner of T. 59N, R. 17W, River SE, Marion Lake, Johnson Lake, Lake, Cramer, Schroeder, Lutsen OE S, Section 22 (537612, 5270884). Follow Isabella Station, Tofte, Turpela Lake, the section east to the NE corner of Crane Lake, Snow Bay, Ash Lake, Orr Bird Lake, Skibo, Cloquet Lake, Doyle section 22 (539244, 5270743). Follow NE, Elephant Lake, Kabustasa Lake, Lake, Little Marais OE E, Toimi, Mount the section line north to the NW corner Echo Lake, Lake Jeanette, Orr, Myrtle Weber, Whyte, Finland, Little Marais of T. 59N, R. 17W, Section 14 (539166, Lake, Buyck, Picket Lake, Astrid Lake, (digital), Whiteface Reservoir, Harris 5272477). Follow the section line east to Gheen, Haley, Norwegian Bay, Lake, Fairbanks, Brimson, Legler Lake, the NE corner of T. 59N, R. 17W, Vermilion Dam, Sioux Pine Island, Silver Bay SW, Silver Bay, Illgen City, Section 13 (542538, 5272377). Follow Coleman Island, Iron Lake OE N, Kane Lake, Comstock Lake, Pequaywan the section line south to the SE corner Takucmich Lake, Shell Lake, Lake Lake, King Lake, Split Rock Point, Split of T. 59N, R, 17W, Section 24 (542468, Agnes, Iron Lake, Friday Bay, Jackfish 5269207). Follow the section line west Lake, Dutton Lake, Ester Lake, Munker Rock Point NE, Boulder Lake Reservoir to the SW corner of section 24 (540886, Island, Conners Island, Bootleg Lake, NE, Highland, Two Harbors NE. This 5269302). Follow the section line south Lapond Lake, Angleworm Lake, entire area is designated proposed to SE corner of T. 59N, R. 17W, Section Fourtown Lake, Ensign Lake West, critical habitat expect for the following 26 (540871, 5267661). Follow the Ensign Lake East, Kekekabic Lake, lands: T. 58N, R.17W, Sections 13, 24– section line west to the SW corner of Ogishkemuncie Lake, Gillis Lake, Long 26; T. 58N, R. 16W, Sections 3, 8– section 26 (539258, 5267619). Follow Island Lake, Gunflint Lake, South Lake, 10,16,17; T. 58N, R 15W, Sections 1– the section line south to the SE corner Hungry Jack Lake, Crocodile Lake, Pine 3,11,12; T. 58N R. 14W, Sections 3–10; of T. 58N, R. 17W, Section 15 (539373, Lake West, Pine Lake East, South Fowl T. 59N, R. 15W, Sections 21–28, 33–36; 5261082). Follow the section line west Lake, The Cascades, Grand Portage OE T. 59N, R. 14W, Sections 1–5, 8–23, 27– to the intersection with U.S. Highway N, Pigeon Point OE N, Basswood Lake 34; T. 59N., R. 13W, Sections 5,6; T. 53 (535956, 5261013). Follow U.S. West, Basswood Lake East, Pigeon Point 60N, R. 14W, Sections 32–34, 36; T. Highway 53 to the intersection with OE NE, Ely, Farm Lake, Alice Lake, Lake 60N, R. 13W, Sections 22–28, 31–35; T. U.S. Interstate 35/State Highway 61 Polly, Kelso Mountain, Cherokee Lake, 60N, R.12W Sections 2, 3, 10, 15–20, 30; (568056, 5180758). Follow U.S. Brule Lake, Eagle Mountain, Lima T. 61N, R. 12W, Sections 12, 35. These Interstate 35/Highway 61 to coordinate Mountain, Tom Lake, Farquhar Peak, areas area found within the following 568974, 5181862. Go approximately 178 Mineral Center, Grand Portage (digital), USGS 1:24000 Quads; McKinley, meters east to the shore of Lake Superior Pigeon Point (digital), Crab Lake, Bawabik, Gilbert, Embarrass, Babbitt, (569151, 5181874). Follow the shore of Northern Light Lake, Boulder Lake IsaacLake, Babbitt NE, Aurora, Allen Lake Superior to the Minnesota/Canada Reservoir, Thompson Lake, Barrs Lake, (iii) Map of Northeastern Minnesota border (761503, 5322824). Follow the McCarthy Creek, Two Harbors, Castle unit follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10887

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:21 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.002 10888 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

(7) Unit 3: Northern Rocky (G) Starting at coordinate (143538, within the following USGS 1:24000 Mountains; Boundary County, Idaho; 5402032), follow 4000 feet elevation Quads; Demers Ridge and Huckleberry Flathead, Glacier, Granite, Lake, Lewis contour to beginning. This area is found Mountain. and Clark, Lincoln, Missoula, Pondera, within the following USGS 1:24000 (N) Starting at coordinate (269763, Powell, and Teton Counties, Montana. Quads; Sylvanite, Flatiron Mountain, 5390173), follow 4000 feet elevation (i) Coordinate Projection: UTM, Turner Mountain, Pulpit Mountain, contour to beginning. This area is found NAD83, Zone 12, Meters. Coordinate Kilbrennan Lake, Kootenai Falls, and Definition: (easting, northing). within the following USGS 1:24000 Scenery Mountain. Quads; McGee Meadow, Huckleberry (A) Starting at the intersection of the (H) Starting at coordinate (154367, Mountain, and Hungry Horse. Idaho/Canada border and 4000 feet 5393646), follow 4000 feet elevation elevation contour (122032, 5440460), contour to beginning. This area is found (O) Starting at coordinate (268105, follow the 4000 feet elevation contour to within the following USGS 1:24000 5372525), follow 4000 feet elevation intersection with Montana/Canada Quads; Turner Mountain, Gold Hill, contour to beginning. This area is found border (151617, 5438492). Follow Libby, and Scenery Mountain. within the following USGS 1:24000 Montana/Canada border west to (I) Starting at coordinate (174032, Quads; Columbia Falls North and intersection with 4000 feet elevation 5379043), follow 4000 feet elevation Hungry Horse. contour (147739, 5438749). Follow 4000 contour to beginning. This area is found (P) Starting at the intersection of the feet elevation contour to intersection within the following USGS 1:24000 Montana/Canada border and 4000 feet with Montana/Canada border (147356, Quads; Vermiculite Mountain and elevation contour (247220, 5433213), 5438775). Follow Idaho/Montana/ Alexander Mountain. Canada border west to beginning. This follow the 4000 feet elevation contour to (J) Starting at coordinate (199737, intersection with Interstate Highway 90 area is found within the following USGS 5417559), follow 4000 feet elevation 1:24000 Quads; Eastport, Canuck Peak, (338356, 5167811). Follow Interstate contour to beginning. This area is found Highway 90 to intersection with USFS Northwest Peak, Garver Mountain, within the following USGS 1:24000 Bonnet Top, Yaak, Clark Mountain, boundary (402512, 5159444). Follow Quads; Webb Mountain, Beartrap USFS boundary to NPS boundary Mount Baldy, Line Point, Meadow Mountain, Eureka South, Inch Creek, Curley Creek, and Newton (334101, 5364611). Follow NPS Mountain, McGuire Mountain, Pinkham boundary to intersection with Montana/ Mountain. Mountain, Edna Mountain, Volcour, (B) Starting at the intersection of the Canada border (309104, 5430544). Davis Mountain, Skillet Mountain, Montana/Canada border and 4000 feet Follow Montana/Canada border west to Alexander Mountain, Cripple Horse elevation contour (152307, 5438447), intersection with 4000 feet elevation Mountain, Warland Peak, Bowen Lake, follow the 4000 feet elevation contour to contour (247562, 5433194). Follow 4000 Tony Peak, Richards Mountain, Wolf intersection with Montana/Canada feet elevation contour to intersection Prairie, and Fisher Mountain. with Montana/Canada border (247373, border (157205, 5438130). Follow (K) Starting at coordinate (217651, Montana/Canada border west to 5433204). Follow Montana/Canada 5399051), follow 4000 feet elevation beginning. This area is found within the border west to beginning. This area is contour to beginning. This area is found following USGS 1:24000 Quads; Garver found within the following USGS within the following USGS 1:24000 Mountain and Bonnet Top. Quads; Stryker, Skillet Mountain, 1:24000 Quads; Trailcreek, Kintla Lake, (C) Starting at coordinate (158408, Kintla Peak, Mount Carter, Porcupine 5437023), follow 4000 feet elevation Sunday Mountain, Radnor, Bowen Lake, Dunsire Point, Johnson Peak, Tally Ridge, Mount Cleveland, Gable contour to beginning. This area is found Mountain, Chief Mountain, Babb, Lake within the following USGS 1:24000 Lake, Wolf Prairie, Horse Hill, Sylvia Lake, Ashley Mountain, Lost Creek Sherburne, Many Glacier, Ahern Pass, Quad; Bonnet Top. Mount Geduhn, Vulture Peak, Quartz (D) Starting at coordinate (160775, Divide, Rhodes, Deer Creek, Lynch Lake, Dahl Lake, Pleasant Valley Ridge, Polebridge, Demers Ridge, Camas 5430791), follow 4000 feet elevation Ridge West, Camas Ridge East, Mount contour to beginning. This area is found Mountain, Lone Lake, Blue Grass Ridge, Cannon, Logan Pass, Rising Sun, Saint within the following USGS 1:24000 Thompson Lakes, Meadow Peak, Mary, Kiowa, Cut Bank Pass, Mount Quads; Bonnet Top and Mount Henry. McGregor Peak, Marion, Haskill (E) Starting at coordinate (161176, Mountain, and Kila. Stimson, Mount Jackson, Lake 5427344), follow 4000 feet elevation (L) Starting at the intersection of the McDonald East, Lake McDonald West, contour to beginning. This area is found Montana/Canada border and 4000 feet McGee Meadow, West Glacier, Nyack, within the following USGS 1:24000 elevation contour (205956, 5435192), Stanton Lake, Mount Saint Nicholas, Quads; Bonnet Top, Mount Henry, follow the 4000 feet elevation contour to Mount Rockwell, Squaw Mountain, East Yaak, and Lost Horse Mountain. intersection with Montana/Canada Glacier Park, Mitten Lake, Half Dome (F) Starting at the intersection of the border (245279, 5433300). Follow Crag, Hyde Creek, Summit, Blacktail, Montana/Canada border and 4000 feet Montana/Canada border west to Essex, Pinnacle, Mount Grant, Nyack elevation contour (163418, 5437730), beginning. This area is found within the SW, Doris Mountain, Columbia Falls follow the 4000 feet elevation contour to following USGS 1:24000 Quads; Eureka South, Hash Mountain, Jewel Basin, intersection with Montana/Canada North, Ksanka Peak, Stahl Peak, Pioneer Ridge, Felix Ridge, Nimrod, border (186741, 5436254). Follow Tuchuck Mountain, Mount Hefty, Mount Bradley, Red Plum Mountain, Montana/Canada border west to Trailcreek, Polebridge, Whale Buttes, Crescent Cliff, Morningstar Mountain, beginning. This area is found within the Red Meadow Lake, Mount Thompson- Swift Reservoir, Fish Lake, Volcano following USGS 1:24000 Quads; Mount Seton, Mount Marston, Fortine, Stryker, Reef, Walling Reef, Gateway Pass, Henry, Robinson Mountain, Red Bull Lake, Upper Whitefish Lake, Moose Gooseberry Peak, Gable Peaks, Capitol Mountain, Webb Mountain, Boulder Peak, Cyclone Lake, Demers Ridge, Mountain, Horseshoe Peak, Circus Peak, Lakes, Lost Horse Mountain, Yaak, Clark Huckleberry Mountain, Skookoleel Quintonkon, Big Hawk Mountain, Crater Mountain, Mount Baldy, Sylvanite, Creek, Werner Peak, Olney, Beaver Lake, Woods Bay, Yew Creek, Swan Flatiron Mountain, Pink Mountain, Lake, Whitefish, and Columbia Falls Lake, Connor Creek, Tin Creek, Spotted Parsnip Mountain, Inch Mountain, North. Bear Mountain, Whitcomb Peak, Volcour, Ural, Banfield Mountain, Gold (M) Starting at coordinate (263061, Trilobite Peak, Pentagon Mountain, Hill, Turner Mountain, Alexander 5395697), follow 4000 feet elevation Porphyry Reef, Mount Wright, Cave Mountain, and Vermiculite Mountain. contour to beginning. This area is found Mountain, Ear Mountain, Our Lake,

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:21 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10889

Gates Park, Three Sisters, Bungalow Mountain, Danaher Mountain, Hahn Lincoln, Swede Gulch, Stemple Pass Mountain, Cathedral Peak, Meadow Creek Pass, Crimson Peak, Morrell Lake, Wilborn, Granite Butte, Nevada Creek, String Creek, Thunderbolt Lake Inez, Lake Marshall, Gray Wolf Mountain, Finn, Nevada Lake, Mountain, Cilly Creek, Porcupine Creek, Lake, Saint Marys Lake, Upper Jocko Helmville, Chimney Lakes, Wild Horse Cedar Lake, Salmon Prairie, Swan Peak, Lake, Seeley Lake West, Seeley Lake Parks, Elevation Mountain, Union Peak, Sunburst Lake, Marmot Mountain, East, Morrell Mountain, Dunham Point, Mineral Ridge, Clinton, Bonner, Iris Pagoda Mountain, Amphitheatre Spread Mountain, Lake Mountain, Point, Ravenna, Medicine Tree Hill, Mountain, Slategoat Mountain, Glenn Olson Peak, Heart Lake, Caribou Peak, Bearmouth, Drummond, Limestone Creek, Arsenic Mountain, Castle Reef, Blowout Mountain, Rogers Pass, Cadotte Ridge, Bailey Mountain, Windy Rock, Sawtooth Ridge, Patricks Basin, Pretty Creek, Silver King Mountain, Stonewall Gravely Mountain, Ophir Creek, Prairie, Prairie Reef, Haystack Mountain, Arrastra Mountain, Coopers Esmeralda Hill, Greenhorn Mountain, Mountain, Big Salmon Lake East, Big Lake, Ovando Mountain, Ovando, Austin, Black Mountain, MacDonald Salmon Lake West, Holland Peak, Woodworth, Salmon Lake, Belmont Pass, Elliston, Avon, Luke Mountain, Condon, Peck Lake, Piper-Crow Pass, Point, Gold Creek Peak, Wapiti Lake, Garrison, Griffin Creek, Dunkleberg Mount Harding, Hemlock Lake, Cygnet Stuart Peak, Evaro, Northwest Missoula, Creek, Saint Ignatius, Ravalli, Saddle Lake, Holland Lake Shaw Creek, Una Northeast Missoula, Blue Point, Mountain, Pilot Lake, Trap Mountain, Sunflower Mountain, Potomac, Mountain, Arlee, Gold Creek, and Benchmark, Wood Lake, Double Falls, Greenough, Bata Mountain, Belmore Slough. Bean Lake, Steamboat Mountain, Jakie Chamberlain Mountain, Browns Lake, (iii) Map of Northern Rocky Creek, Scapegoat Mountain, Flint Marcum Mountain, Moose Creek, Mountains unit follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:21 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10890 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.003 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10891

(8) Unit 4: North Cascades; Chelan feet elevation contour (240301, Arriva, Washington Pass, Silver Star and Okanogan Counties, Washington. 5433596). Follow 4000 feet elevation Mountain, Mazama, Lewis Butte, (i) Coordinate Projection: UTM, contour to intersection with Pearrygin Peak, Old Baldy, Conconully NAD83, Zone 11, Meters. Coordinate Washington/Canada border (239526, West, Rendevous Mountain, Conconully Definition: (easting, northing). Starting 5433632). Follow Washington/Canada East McGregor Mountain, McAlester at the Washington/Canada border border to beginning. This area is found Mountain, Gilbert, Midnight Mountain, (Whatcom/Okanogan Counties within the following USGS 1:24000 Thompson Ridge, Loup Loup Summit, boundary—‘‘Cascade Crest’’) (218319, Quads; Skagit Peak, Castle Peak, Frosty Buck Mountain, Cascade Pass, Goode 5434639), follow the ‘‘Cascade Crest’’ Creek, Ashnola Mountain, Ashnola Mountain, Blue Buck Mountain, south to coordinate (200268, 5369981). Pass, Remmel Mountain, Bauerman Stehekin, Sun Mountain, Oval Peak, Go south approximately 250 meters Ridge, Horseshoe Basin, Hurley Peak, Hoodoo Peak, Twisp West, Thrapp (200241, 5369733) to watercourse Nighthawk, Tatoosh Buttes, Shull (headwaters—Flat Creek). Follow Mountain, Pasayten Peak, Mount Lago, Mountain, Chiliwist Valley, Lucerne, watercourse (Flat Creek) to intersection Mount Barney, Coleman Peak, Corral Prince Creek, Martin Peak, Hungry with 4000 feet elevation contour Butte, Duncan Ridge, Loomis, Lost Peak, Mountain, Big Goat Mountain, South (201629, 5366872) (Cascade Pass Billy Goat Mountain, Azurite Peak, Slate Navarre Peak, Oss Peak, Cooper Quad—USGS 1:24000). Follow 4000 feet Peak, Robinson Mountain, McLeod Mountain, Pateros, Manson, Cooper elevation contour to intersection with Mountain, Sweetgrass Butte, Doe Ridge, and Azwell. Washington/Canada border (298810, Mountain, Spur Peak, Tiffany mountain, (ii) Map of North Cascades unit 5431112). Follow Washington/Canada Coxit Mountain, Blue Goat Mountain, follows: border west to intersection with 4000 Forbidden Peak, Mount Logan, Mount

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10892 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.004 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10893

(9) Unit 5: Greater Yellowstone Area; Wilderness boundary to the intersection Box Canyon Creek, Mount Schidler, Red Gallatin, Park, Sweetgrass, Stillwater, (599238, 4811188) with the west Castle Creek, Afton, Smoot, Poison and Carbon counties in Montana; Park, boundary of T. 40N, R. 108W, Meadows, Wyoming Peak, Springman Teton, Fremont, Sublette, and Lincoln Sectiom12. Follow the section line to Creek, Mount Wagner, Salt Flat, Counties, Wyoming. the NW corner (599108, 4812285) Porcupine Creek, Graham Peak, Mount (i) Coordinate Projection: UTM, section 12. Follow the section line to Thompson, Pine Grove Ridge, Big Park, NAD83, Zone 12, Meters; Coordinate coordinate 601191, 4812390. Go north Coal Creek, Lake Mountain, Devils Hole Definition: (easting, northing). Starting to the intersection (661183, 4812925) Creek, Nugent Park, Pole Creek, at the intersection (480972, 5041390) of with the Fitzpatrick Wilderness Fontenelle Basin, Ousel Falls, Lone U.S. Highway 191 and the north boundary. Follow the Fitzpatrick Indian Peak, Ramshorn Peak, Miner, boundary of T. 4S, R. 4E, Section 4, Wilderness boundary to the intersection Dome Mountain, Iron Mountain, follow U.S. Highway 191 to the (609608, 4816305) with Shoshone NF Monitor Peak, Mineral Mountain, intersection (4484464, 4989013) with boundary. Follow the Shoshone NF Mount Wallace, Sunshine Point, Big Yellowstone National Park (NP) boundary to the SE corner (629592, Horn Peak, Sportsman Lake, Electric boundary. Follow the Yellowstone NP 4834753) of T. 43N, R. 105W, Section Peak, Gardiner, Ash Mountain, boundary to the intersection (492295, 25. Follow the section line to the Specimen Creek, Hummingbird Peak, 4945003) with U.S. Highway 20. Follow intersection (628768, 4860150) with the Divide Lake, Joseph Peak, Quadrant U.S. Highway 20 (Entrance Road) to the Fremont County, WY boundary. Follow Mountain, Mammoth, Blacktail Deer intersection (511252, 4943604) with the Fremont County boundary to Creek, Tower Junction, Lamar Canyon, Grand Loop Road. Follow Grand Loop coordinate 588156, 4866541. Go north Three Rivers Peak, Mount Holmes, Road to the intersection (524028, approximately 20.6 KM/12.8 miles to Obsidian Cliff, Cook Peak, Mount 4952481) with Norris Canyon Road. coordinate 587881, 4887097. Follow a Washburn, Amethyst Mountain, Ruby Follow Norris Canyon Road to the route which is approximately 9.2 km/5 Mountain, Gallatin Gateway, Beacon intersection (539780, 4951312) with miles east of the Yellowstone NP Point, Garnet Mountain, Gallatin Peak, Grand Loop Road. Follow Grand Loop boundary to the intersection (599376, Hidden Lake, Wheeler Mountain, Mount Road to the intersection (548580, 4957892) with the south boundary of T. Ellis, Bald Knob, Brisbin, Livingston 4935153) with U.S. Highway 20. Follow 55N, R. 107W, Section 3. Follow the Peak, Mount Rae, Mount Blackmore, Big U.S. Highway 20 to coordinate 557355, section line to the SE corner (623296 Draw, Dexter Point, Mount Cowen, West 4928610. Go southeasterly 4958237) of T. 55N, R. 105W, Section 1. Boulder Plateau, Fridley Peak, The approximately 62 meters (557295, Follow the section line to the NE corner Sentinel, Lewis Creek, Dailey Lake, 4928602) to the shore of Yellowstone (623068, 4969812) of T. 56N, R.105W, Emigrant, Knowles Peak, The Pyramid, Lake. Follow the shore of Yellowstone Section 1. Follow the section line to the The Needles, Richards Creek, West Lake to coordinate 535146, 4915754. Go SE corner (619728, 4969746) of T. 57N, Yellowstone, Mount Jackson, Madison west approximately 960 meters to the R. 105W, Section 36. Follow the section Junction, Norris Junction, Crystal Falls, intersection (534188, 4915753) with line to the NW corner (619373, 4984494) Canyon Village, White Lake, Lake, Lake U.S. Highway 89/287. Follow U.S. of T. 58N, R. 104W, section 18 Butte, West Thumb, Dot Island, Frank Highway 89/287 to the intersection (Montana/Wyoming border). Follow the Island, Lewis Falls, Mount Sheridan, (526800, 4886642) with the Yellowstone state border to the SE corner (622659, Heart Lake, Alder Lake, Lewis Canyon, NP boundary. Follow the Yellowstone 4984617) of T. 9S, R. 18E, Section 36. Mount Hancock, Crooked Creek, Snake NP boundary to the intersection Follow the section line to the Hot Springs, Gravel Peak, Flagg Ranch, (527033, 4886643) with the Bridger- intersection (622048, 5009101) with the Huckleberry Mountain, Bobcat Ridge, Teton National Forest (NF) boundary. Custer NF boundary. Follow the Custer Two Ocean Lake, Whetstone Mountain, Follow the Bridger-Teton NF boundary NF boundary to the SE corner (593114, Hunter Mountain, Moran, Davis Hill, to the intersection (520702, 4802862) 5028792) of T. 5S, R. 15E, Section 12. Rosies Ridge, Shadow Mountain, Mount with U.S. Highway 26. Follow U.S. Follow the section line to the NE corner Leidy, Green Mountain, Blue Miner Highway 26 to the intersection (498488, (592962, 5041683) of T 4S, R. 15E, Lake, Grizzly Lake, Gros Ventre 4779960) with U.S. Highway 89. Follow Section 1. Follow the section line to the Junction, Upper Slide Lake, Jackson, U.S. Highway 89 to the intersection intersection (538520, 5041519) with the Darwin Peak, Cache Creek, Turquoise (505452, 4703698) with the east Custer NF boundary. Follow the Custer Lake, Crystal Peak, Munger Mountain, boundary of T. 29N, R. 118W, Section NF boundary to the SE corner (506528, Camp Davis, Bull Creek, Granite Falls, 19. Follow the section line to the 5004163) of T. 7S, R6E, Section 25. Doubletop Peak, Joy Peak, Crater Lake, intersection (505447, 4699501) with the Follow the section line to the Younts Peak, Hardluck Mountain, Bridger-Teton NF boundary. Follow the intersection (506549, 5010565) with the Mount Burwell, Ferry Lake, Emerald Bridger-Teton NF boundary to the NW Custer NF boundary. Follow the Custer Lake, Dundee Meadows, Shoshone Pass, corner (597743, 4754744) of T. 34N, R. NF boundary to the NW corner (514340, Five Pockets, Snow Lake, Angle 108W, Section 7. Follow the section line 5041288) of T. 4S, R. 7E, Section 1. Mountain, Togwotee Pass, Wiggins to the SW corner (599399, 4754756) of Follow the section line to the beginning. Peak, Tripod Peak, Lava Mountain, T. 34N, R. 108W, Section 5. Follow the This area is found within the following Kisinger Lakes, Esmond Park, Ramshorn section line to the NW corner (599380, USGS 1:24000 Quads; Alpine, Pine Peak, Indian Point, Castle Rock, Burnt 4756357) of section 5. Follow the Creek, Bailey Lake, Ferry Peak, Clause Mountain, Sheridan Pass, Warm Spring section line to the SE corner (607400, Peak, Bondurant, Raspberry Ridge, Mountain, Dubois, Fish Lake, Ouzel 4756477) of T. 35N, R. 108W Section 36. Stewart Peak, Deer Creek, Noble Basin, Falls, Mosquito Lake, Fish Creek Park, Follow the section line to the NW Kismet Peak, Etna, Pickle Pass, Hoback Union Peak, Simpson Lake, Tosi Peak, corner (607286, 4765982) of T. 35N, R. Peak, Thayne West, Thayne East, Man Klondike Hill, Big Sheep Mountain, 107W, Section 6. Follow the section line Peak, Blind Bull Creek, Lookout Downs Mountain, Green River Lakes, to the intersection (617268, 4766147) Mountain, Prospect Peak, Merna, Park Windy Mountain, Pelican Cone, Little with USFS-Fitzpatrick Wilderness Creek, Triple Peak, Maki Creek, Grover, Saddle Mountain, Pollux Peak, boundary. Follow the Fitzpatrick Rock Lake Peak, Red Top Mountain, Stinkingwater Peak, Geers Point, Mount

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS 10894 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

Chittenden, Cathedral Peak, Pahaska Mountain, Cathedral Point, Mount Butte, Deep Lake, Opal Creek, Wahb Tepee, Sunlight Peak, Sylvan Lake, Wood, Emerald Lake, Mackay Ranch, Springs, Canoe Lake, Hurricane Mesa, Plenty Coups Peak, Eagle Creek, Trail Roscoe, Haystack Peak, Granite Peak, Hunter Peak, Dillworth Bench, Dodge Lake, Eagle Peak, Pinnacle Mountain, Alpine, Sylvan Peak, Bare Mountain, Butte, Kendall Mountain, Gannett Peak, Badger Creek, Open Creek, The Trident, Pinnacle Mountain, Little Park Pass Peak, Squaretop Mountain, Two Ocean Pass, Yellowstone Point, Mountain, Roundhead Butte, Cutoff Fremont Peak North, Bridger Lakes, Thorofare Plateau, McLeod Basin, Mountain, Cooke City, Fossil Lake, Fremont Peak South, New Fork Lakes, Squaw Peak, Sliderock Mountain, Castle Mountain, Silver Run Peak, Black Fremont Lake North, Cora, Fremont Wildcat Draw, Chrome Mountain, Picket Pyramid Mountain, Jim Smith Peak, Lake South, Fayette Lake. Pin Mountain, Meyer Mountain, Nye, Muddy Creek, Mount Hornaday, (ii) Map of Greater Yellowstone Area Beehive, Mount Douglas, Tumble Abiathar Peak, Pilot Peak, Beartooth unit follows:

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules 10895

VerDate Aug<31>2005 21:30 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS EP28FE08.005 10896 Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 40 / Thursday, February 28, 2008 / Proposed Rules

* * * * * Dated: February 13, 2008. Lyle Laverty, Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 08–779 Filed 2–27–08; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–C

VerDate Aug<31>2005 18:58 Feb 27, 2008 Jkt 214001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\28FEP2.SGM 28FEP2 sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS