6952 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules

For further information, please confirmation from the system that we oviposition (egg laying) (Pearson 1988). contact: Chris Murphy, Satellite Policy have received your e-mail message, It is not known at this time how many Branch, (202) 418–2373, or Howard contact us directly by calling our eggs the Ohlone tiger beetle female lays, Griboff, Satellite Policy Branch, at (202) Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at but other species of Cicindela are 418–0657. phone number 805/644–1766. known to lay between 1 and 14 eggs per (3) You may hand-deliver comments female (mean range 3.7 to 7.7), List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25 to our Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, depending on the species (Kaulbars and Satellites. 2493 Portola Road, Suite B, Ventura, Freitag 1993). After the larva emerges Federal Communications Commission. California 93003. from the egg and becomes hardened, it Anna M. Gomez, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: enlarges the chamber that contained the Deputy Chief, International Bureau. Colleen Sculley, invertebrate biologist, egg into a tunnel (Pearson 1988). Before pupation (transformation process from [FR Doc. 00–3332 Filed 2–10–00; 8:45 am] Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, at the larva to adult), the third instar larva will BILLING CODE 6712±01±P above address (telephone 805/644–1766; facsimile 805/644–3958). plug the burrow entrance and dig a SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: chamber for pupation. After pupation, the adult tiger beetle will dig out of the DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Background soil and emerge. Reproduction may Fish and Wildlife Service The Ohlone tiger beetle (Cicindela either begin soon after emergence or be ohlone) is a member of the Coleopteran delayed (Pearson 1988). 50 CFR Part 17 family Cicindelidae (tiger beetles), Tiger beetles are a well-studied which includes over 2,000 species taxonomic group with a large body of RIN 1018±AF89 worldwide and over 100 species in the scientific literature; the journal United States (Pearson and Cassola Cicindela is devoted exclusively to tiger Endangered and Threatened Wildlife beetles. Scientists have studied the and Plants; Proposed Endangered 1992). Tiger beetles are day-active, predatory insects that prey on small diversity and ecological specialization Status for the Ohlone Tiger Beetle of tiger beetles, and amateur collectors (Cicindela ohlone) arthropods. Because many tiger beetles often feed on insect species that are have long been attracted by their bright AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, injurious to man and crops, they are coloration and swift movements. Tiger Interior. regarded as beneficial (Pearson and beetle species occur in many different ACTION: Proposed rule. Cassola 1992; Nagano 1982). Adult tiger habitats including riparian habitats, beetles are medium-sized, elongate beaches, dunes, woodlands, grasslands, SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and beetles characterized by their usually and other open areas (Pearson 1988; Wildlife Service (Service), propose brilliant metallic green, blue, red, and Knisley and Hill 1992). A common endangered status pursuant to the yellow coloration highlighted by stripes habitat component appears to be open Endangered Species Act (Act) of 1973, and spots. Adults are ferocious, swift, sunny areas for hunting and as amended, for the Ohlone tiger beetle and agile predators that seize small prey thermoregulation (an adaptive behavior (Cicindela ohlone). This species is with powerful sickle-shaped jaws. to use sunlight or shade to regulate body endemic to Santa Cruz County, Tiger beetle larvae are also predatory. temperature) (Knisley et al. 1990; California, and is threatened by habitat They live in small vertical or slanting Knisley and Hill 1992). Individual fragmentation and destruction due to burrows from which they lunge and species of tiger beetle are generally urban development, habitat degradation seize passing invertebrate prey (Essig highly habitat-specific because of due to invasion of nonnative vegetation, 1926; Essig 1942; Pearson 1988). When oviposition and larval sensitivity to soil and vulnerability to local extirpations a prey item passes near a burrow, the moisture, composition, and temperature from random natural events. This larva grasps the prey with its strong (Pearson 1988; Pearson and Cassola proposal, if made final, would extend mandibles (mouthparts) and pulls it into 1992; Kaulbars and Freitag 1993). the Federal protection and recovery the burrow, and once inside the burrow, The Ohlone tiger beetle is endemic to provisions of the Act to this species. the larva will feed on the captured prey Santa Cruz County, California, where it DATES: Comments from all interested (Essig 1942; Pearson 1988). Tiger beetles is known only from coastal terraces parties received by April 11, 2000 will share similar larval body forms supporting remnant patches of native be considered. Public hearing requests throughout the world (Pearson and grassland habitat. Specimens of this must be received by March 27, 2000. Cassola 1992). The larvae, either white, species were first collected northwest of ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, yellowish, or dusky in coloration, are the City of Santa Cruz, California, in you may submit your comments and grub-like and fossorial (subterranean), 1987, and were first described in 1993 materials concerning this proposal by with a hook-like appendage on the fifth (Freitag et al. 1993). Both male and any one of several methods. abdominal segment that anchors the female specimens have been collected. (1) You may submit written comments larvae inside their burrows. The adult Ohlone tiger beetle is a to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Tiger beetle larvae undergo three relatively small beetle measuring 9.5 to Wildlife Service, Ventura Fish and instars (larval development stages). This 12.5 millimeters (mm) (0.37 to 0.49 Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola Road, period can take 1 to 4 years, but a 2-year inches (in)) long. The adults have large, Suite B, Ventura, California 93003. period is the most common (Pearson prominent eyes and metallic green (2) You may send comments by e-mail 1988). After mating, the tiger beetle elytra (leathery forewings) with small to [email protected]. Please female excavates a hole in the soil and light spots (Freitag et al. 1993). Their submit these comments as an ASCII file oviposits (lays) a single egg (Pearson legs are long, slender, and coppery- and avoid the use of special characters 1988; Kaulbars and Freitag 1993; Grey green. Freitag et al. (1993) describe and any form of encryption. Please also Hayes, University of California, Santa features that distinguish this species include ‘‘Attn: [RIN 1018–AF89]’’ and Cruz, pers. comm. 1998). Females of from closely related species of Cicindela your name and return address in your many species of Cicindela are extremely purpurea and other purpurea group e-mail message. If you do not receive a specific in choice of soil type for taxa.

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules 6953

Two principal distinguishing features Adult Ohlone tiger beetles have been entomologists commonly collect out of of the Ohlone tiger beetle are its early observed in remnant patches of native season and out of known ranges in order seasonal adult activity period and its grassland on coastal terraces where bare to find temporally and spatially outlying disjunct distribution. While other tiger areas occur among low or sparse specimens, one would expect more beetle species, such as Cicindela vegetation. Trails (e.g., foot paths, dirt specimens to have been collected if the purpurea, are active during spring, roads, and bicycle paths) are also used. Ohlone tiger beetle were more summer, or early fall (Nagano 1982; When disturbed, adults will fly to more widespread and common. Freitag et al. 1993), the Ohlone tiger densely vegetated areas (Freitag et al. Only five populations of Ohlone tiger beetle is active from late January to early 1993; Richard Arnold, private beetles are known to exist. All known April (Freitag et al. 1993). The Ohlone consultant, pers. comm. 1995). populations are located on coastal tiger beetle is the southernmost of Oviposition by females and subsequent terraces supporting remnant stands of purpurea group species in the Pacific larval development also occur in this native grassland. One population occurs coast region; its distribution is allopatric coastal prairie habitat (i.e., open areas northwest of the City of Soquel at 60 to (geographically separated) to those of among native vegetation) (D. 90 meters (m) (200 to 295 feet (ft)) similar species (Freitag et al. 1993). Kavanaugh, pers. comm. 1997; V. elevation. A second population is Ohlone tiger beetle larvae are Cheap, in litt. 1997). The density of located in the City of Scotts Valley at currently undescribed. However, tiger larval burrows decreases with 210 m (690 ft) elevation; a third is beetle burrows, measuring 4 to 6 mm in increasing vegetation cover (G. Hayes, in located west of the City of Santa Cruz diameter (0.16 to 0.23 in), were found in litt. 1997). at 110 m (360 ft) elevation on property the same habitat areas where adult The historic range of the Ohlone tiger owned by the County of Santa Cruz; a Ohlone tiger beetles were collected beetle cannot be precisely assessed fourth population is found in a preserve (David Kavanaugh, California Academy because the species was only recently northwest of the City of Santa Cruz and of Sciences, pers. comm. 1997; V. discovered, and no historic specimens owned by the City and occurs at about Cheap, in litt. 1997). The surface or records are available. The earliest 110 m (360 ft) elevation; and the fifth openings of these burrows are circular specimen recorded was collected from a population is found northwest of the and flat with no dirt piles or mounds site northwest of the City of Santa Cruz City of Santa Cruz on properties owned surrounding the circumference (Kim in 1987 (Freitag et al. 1993). Based on by the University of Santa Cruz Touneh, Service, pers. obs. 1997). These available information on topography, (University) and the California substrates, soils, and vegetation, it is Department of Parks and Recreation, at burrows are similar to larval burrows likely that suitable habitat for the about 340 m (1115 ft) elevation (Freitag belonging to other tiger beetle species. Ohlone tiger beetle was more extensive et al. 1993; R. Morgan, in litt. 1994; G. Larvae and inactive adults have been and continuous prior to the increase in Hayes, in litt. 1997). The abundance of excavated from these burrows, and the urban development and agriculture. individuals in each population is inactive adults collected from these Historically, potentially suitable habitat unknown. However, each population is burrows were fully mature and easily may have extended from southwestern localized to areas of less than 2 ha (5 ac) identified as Ohlone tiger beetles (D. San Mateo County to northwestern (G. Hayes, pers. comm. 1995). Kavanaugh, pers. comm. 1997; V. Monterey County, California (Freitag et Researchers conducted two separate Cheap, in litt. 1997). Based on these al. 1993). However, we have no surveys to assess the current collections, Kavanaugh (pers. comm. evidence or data indicating that this distribution and status of the Ohlone 1997) concluded that the larvae found species occurred beyond the present tiger beetle. Between 1990 and 1994, in these burrows were Ohlone tiger known occupied areas of Santa Cruz researchers surveyed 14 sites with beetle larvae. Further investigations of County. Currently, the extent of native grassland habitat from these recently collected larvae are being potentially suitable habitat for the southwestern San Mateo County to conducted to scientifically characterize Ohlone tiger beetle is estimated at 81 to southern Santa Cruz County for Ohlone and document the morphology of the 121 hectares (ha) (200 to 300 acres (ac)) tiger beetles. Six additional locations Ohlone tiger beetle larvae (D. in Santa Cruz County, California supporting nonnative grasslands, but Kavanaugh, pers. comm. 1997). (Freitag et al. 1993). which appeared otherwise suitable, Ohlone tiger beetle habitat is an open The available data indicate a were also surveyed. Surveys were native grassland, with California restricted range and limited distribution conducted from February to April, when oatgrass (Danthonia californica) and of the Ohlone tiger beetle. This finding Ohlone tiger beetles are active. This purple needlegrass (Stipa pulchra), on is supported by the following work documented four of the five level or nearly level slopes. The considerations. First, many tiger beetle known populations (R. Morgan, in litt. substrate is shallow, pale, poorly species are known to be restricted to 1994); the preserve population was not drained clay or sandy clay soil that specific habitats (Pearson 1988; Knisley known or found during this survey bakes to a hard crust by summer, after and Hill 1992; Pearson and Cassola effort. winter and spring rains cease (Freitag et 1992), such as the open native grassland A second survey effort, conducted al. 1993). Ohlone tiger beetle habitat is occupied by the Ohlone tiger beetle. during the 1995 activity season, associated with specific soil types in Second, tiger beetles are widely surveyed for populations of Ohlone tiger Santa Cruz County, either Watsonville collected and well studied, yet no beetles in coastal grasslands from loam or Bonnydoon soil types. Soil core historic specimens were found in the southern San Mateo County to northern analyses were conducted for three out of extensive collections of the California Monterey County. Researchers visited the five known population sites; the soil Academy of Sciences (Freitag et al. sites repeatedly through the Ohlone types for these three sites were 1993). The Ohlone tiger beetle’s tiger beetle’s season of activity. These determined to be either Watsonville specialized habitat and restricted range surveys confirmed the four previously loam or Bonnydoon (Richard Casale and may account for the absence of known populations and discovered the Ken Oster, U.S. Department of collection records prior to 1987. fifth population at the city-owned Agriculture, Natural Resources Because Cicindela is a very popular preserve (G. Hayes, in litt. 1997). All Conservation Service, pers. comm. insect genus to collect (Chris Nagano, five known populations are located 1997). Service, pers. comm. 1993), and because within the urban areas of the City of

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 6954 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Santa Cruz and surrounding any species determined to face a thermoregulation, and support a prey communities. significant and imminent risk to its base of other invertebrate species. The Based on the results of the two survey well-being (Priority 1). Second priority poorly drained clay or sandy clay efforts and the above considerations, we (Priority 2) is processing final substrate of the coastal terraces provides conclude that the Ohlone tiger beetle is determinations on proposed additions the soil moisture, composition, and restricted to remnant patches of native to the lists of endangered and temperature conditions necessary for grassland on coastal terraces in the mid- threatened wildlife and plants. Third oviposition and larval development county portion of coastal Santa Cruz priority is processing new proposals to (Pearson 1988; Kaulbars and Freitag County, California. add species to the lists. The processing 1993). The five known populations of the Previous Federal Action of administrative petition findings (petitions filed under section 4 of the Ohlone tiger beetle are threatened by On February 18, 1993, we received a Act) is the fourth priority. The habitat destruction by urban petition from Randall Morgan of Soquel, processing of critical habitat development and/or habitat California, requesting that we add the determinations (prudency and modification by invasive nonnative Ohlone tiger beetle to the list of determinability decisions) and proposed vegetation. Disturbance of the substrate threatened and endangered species or final designations of critical habitat and removal or elimination of pursuant to the Act. The petition will no longer be subject to vegetation by urban development kills contained information indicating that prioritization under the Listing Priority or injures individuals and precludes the Ohlone tiger beetle has a limited Guidance. This proposed rule is a others from feeding, sheltering, or distribution and specialized habitat Priority 3 action and is being completed reproducing. Historically, potentially requirements and is threatened by in accordance with the current Listing suitable habitat is believed to have proposed development projects and Priority Guidance. extended from southwestern San Mateo recreational activities. Our 90-day County to northwestern Monterey petition finding, published on January Peer Review County, California (Freitag et al. 1993). 27, 1994, in the Federal Register (59 FR In accordance with interagency policy Most of this habitat has been modified 3330), determined that substantial published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR or destroyed by human actions such as information was presented in the 34270), upon publication of this urbanization and agriculture (Freitag et petition indicating that listing may be proposed rule in the Federal Register al. 1993). warranted. Our 12-month petition we will solicit expert reviews by at least About 6,060 to 8,080 ha (15,000 to finding, published on March 1, 1996, in three specialists regarding pertinent 20,000 ac) of native grassland remain in the Federal Register (61 FR 8014), scientific or commercial data and Santa Cruz County, and not more than concluded a not-warranted assumptions relating to the taxonomic, 81 to 121 ha (200 to 300 ac) contain the determination due to inadequate life biological, and ecological information proper combination of substrate, slope, history information and survey data to for the Ohlone tiger beetle. The purpose and exposure (bare areas between conclusively determine that the beetle is of such a review is to ensure that listing patches of grasses) to be considered restricted to the described habitat. decisions are based on scientifically suitable habitat for the Ohlone tiger On April 30, 1997, we received a sound data, assumptions, and analyses, beetle (Freitag et al. 1993). Nearly all of second petition from Grey Hayes of including the input of appropriate this suitable habitat is located within or Santa Cruz, California, to emergency-list experts. adjacent to urbanized areas in the the Ohlone tiger beetle as an endangered coastal mid-county area of Santa Cruz. Summary of Factors Affecting the species under the Act. The petition Much of the City of Santa Cruz and its Species specified endangered status because of adjacent towns were built on these the beetle’s limited distribution and Section 4 of the Act and regulations marine terrace grassland habitats threats from proposed development (50 CFR part 424) issued to implement (Freitag et al. 1993). Within suitable projects, invasion of nonnative plants, the listing provisions of the Act set forth habitat, the beetle occupies only and recreational activities. Based on the the procedures for adding species to the sparsely vegetated areas and bare areas, information provided by the petitioner Federal lists. A species may be which are artifacts of trails or past and additional information gathered determined to be an endangered or grazing sites. The total extent of the area since the first petition in 1993, we threatened species due to one or more occupied by the beetle is estimated to be determined that emergency-listing the of the five factors described in section 10 ha (25 ac) or less. Ohlone tiger beetle was not justified but 4(a)(1). These factors and their The Ohlone tiger beetle population that listing of this species as endangered application to the Ohlone tiger beetle northwest of the City of Soquel is is warranted. Therefore, in our most (Cicindela ohlone) are as follows: threatened by a proposed 21-lot recent Notice of Review, published on A. The present or threatened residential development. The preferred October 25, 1999 (64 FR 57534), we destruction, modification, or alternative of the proposed project included the Ohlone tiger beetle as a curtailment of its habitat or range. Loss would completely extirpate the Ohlone candidate species. Candidate species are of habitat is the principal threat to tiger beetle population by eliminating those species for which listing is insect species worldwide because of all of the known occupied habitat and warranted but precluded by other their close associations with, and most of the extant grassland habitat pending listing actions, in accordance dependence on, specific habitats (Pyle found on this site. One alternative in the with section 4(b)(3)(B)(iii) of the Act. et al. 1981). The effects of habitat final environmental impact report for The processing of this proposed rule destruction and modification on tiger the project does propose that the conforms with our current Listing beetle species have been documented by majority of suitable habitat for the Priority Guidance published in the Knisley and Hill (1992) and Nagano Ohlone tiger beetle be set-aside and Federal Register on October 22, 1999 (1982). The Ohlone tiger beetle is managed to reduce nonnative vegetation (64 FR 57114). The guidance clarifies restricted to remnant patches of native and enhance habitat quality. The county the order in which we will process grassland on coastal terraces where low is currently waiting for the applicant to rulemakings. Highest priority is and sparse vegetation provide space for submit design reviews in a processing emergency listing rules for foraging, reproduction, and supplemental environmental impact

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules 6955 report, which would then be available grazing to a vineyard (G. Hayes, pers. French broom (Cytisus for public review. When this report will comm. 1998). Whether the species has monspessulanus), velvet grass (Holcus be available for review or whether the been completely extirpated from this spp.), filaree (Erodium spp.), and alternatives will contain changes that site is not known. Eucalyptus spp.) (R. Morgan, in litt. might affect the Ohlone tiger beetle is The fourth population of Ohlone tiger 1992; G. Hayes, in litt. 1997; G. Hayes, not known (Kim Tschantz, County of beetles occurs northwest of Santa Cruz pers. comm. 1997). These nonnative Santa Cruz, pers. comm. 1999). on land managed as a preserve by the plants are aggressive invaders that The population site located in the California Department of Parks and convert sunny, native grassland needed City of Scotts Valley was proposed for Recreation (CDPR). The CDPR wants to by Ohlone tiger beetles to habitat development of 233 residential homes develop their property and has a dominated by an overstory that shades and an open park containing two proposal for the opening of existing the bare areas among the low or sparse ballfields. This proposed project would trails and the construction of a vehicle native vegetation, thus covering the have set aside most of the beetle’s entrance road and parking area. The open sunny areas required by the occupied habitat by fencing a 30-m entrance road would be developed over Ohlone tiger beetle to thermoregulate, (100-ft) wide area between the two a portion of occupied habitat. The forage, and oviposit. In addition to ballfields, but construction would still vehicle parking area would be shading these areas used by the beetle, have occurred on adjacent occupied constructed adjacent to the Ohlone tiger the nonnative vegetation fills in the areas and known grassland habitat beetle’s occupied habitat. However, in open spaces among the low or sparse would have been eliminated. The the public works plan for this site, vegetation creating an unsuitable adjacent development could have led to CDPR established a policy that road densely vegetated habitat. Nonnative potential disturbance, such as pesticide maintenance or other activities will be vegetation may also affect the numbers drift, soil erosion, and vegetation scheduled to minimize impacts on and diversity of the beetle’s prey, alteration. In addition, the isolated burrows, larval habitat, foraging predators, and parasites (see Factor C of population would have been more activities, or other aspects of the this section). Increased vegetation vulnerable to random extinction (see population (CDPR 1997). encroachment is the primary factor Factor E of this section). A final Property adjacent to the CDPR land is attributed to the extirpation of several environmental impact report for this managed by the University of California, populations of other Cicindela species project was completed in the summer of Santa Cruz (University), and a (e.g., C. abdominalis and C. debilis) 1998 (Impact Sciences, Inc. 1998). population of the beetle is known to (Knisley and Hill 1992). Without However, this proposed development occur on this property. Areas that the management efforts to reduce and was voted down in a referendum, thus Ohlone tiger beetle inhabit are control nonnative species, the halting the development of this property designated in the University’s Long populations of Ohlone tiger beetle will for the present time. The landowner is Range Development Plan for Site- likely decline because of habitat now considering both alternative Specific Research, Campus Resource degradation. development plans and the sale of the Lands, and Environmental Reserve Areas that may once have been land. Local agencies and conservation (University of California 1992). suitable for Ohlone tiger beetles have groups are interested in purchasing the Although some development is possible been converted to nonnative grasslands, land as open space, but funding sources in site-specific research areas and or have been developed because the have not been identified. The future campus resource lands, no development firm, level substrate of the coastal plans for the site are not known (Laura projects are anticipated at this time terraces afforded good building sites Kuhn, City of Scotts Valley, pers. comm. (Graham Bice, University of California, with scenic views of the Pacific Ocean. 1999). pers. comm. 1995; G. Hayes, pers. For the same reasons that other terraces A portion of the third population site comm. 1997). have already been developed, remaining for the Ohlone tiger beetle, located west In addition to the development threats areas of suitable habitat are under great of the City of Santa Cruz, was proposed to the Ohlone tiger beetle, the invasion development pressure. as a residential housing development. of nonnative vegetation threatens the B. Overutilization for commercial, The property was originally zoned as already reduced extent of suitable recreational, scientific, or educational part of the Santa Cruz Greenbelt. habitat for this species. Despite being purposes. Members of the genus However, that designation expired in relatively free of development threats, Cicindela may be the subject of more 1994, and the property owners began to the fifth population site, located intense collecting and study than any consider developing the property. In the northwest of the City of Santa Cruz and other single insect genus. Tiger beetle spring of 1999, the City of Santa Cruz owned by the City, is threatened by specimens are highly sought by amateur purchased the property, and it will be habitat degradation due to the invasion collectors (C. Nagano, pers. comm. managed as open space by the City. The of nonnative plant species into the 1993). In light of the recent discovery of State of California will hold a coastal prairie. Nonnative vegetation the Ohlone tiger beetle, and concerns conservation easement on the land. A and forest vegetation are encroaching regarding its continued existence, the management plan will be developed by into grassland habitats and out- desirability of this species to private the City of Santa Cruz, and the Ohlone competing native grassland habitats and collectors may increase, leading to tiger beetle will be considered in the out-competing native grassland increased collection of specimens. The plan. At the present time, the site is vegetation (S. Harris, pers. comm. 1998). original petitioner for the Ohlone tiger closed to public use except for officially The City is attempting to maintain the beetle has been contacted by several escorted hikes (Susan Harris, City of species’ habitat by mowing parts of it to people from such places as France, Santa Cruz, pers. comm. 1999). provide bare ground, and trails near Wisconsin, and California, looking for The rest of the third population site where the Ohlone tiger beetle occurs Ohlone tiger beetle specimens they can is still on private land. In September will be closed to bicycles (S. Harris, add to their private collections, as well 1998, the property owners tilled up a pers. comm. 1999). as those asking where the colonies are large percentage of the area the Ohlone The other four populations of Ohlone located and indicating they want to tiger beetle occupied, in preparation for tiger beetle are also threatened by collect the species at those locations (R. converting the land from livestock invasion of nonnative vegetation (e.g., Morgan, pers. comm. 1998). Listing this

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 6956 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules species as endangered will likely to consider and manage for species of E. Other natural or manmade factors increase its attractiveness to private concern. affecting its continued existence. The collectors. Unrestricted collecting is At the State and local levels, five populations of the Ohlone tiger considered a threat to the species. regulatory mechanisms are also beetle are isolated and restricted to Although the reproductive rate for the inadequate. The California Endangered relatively small patches of habitat. Ohlone tiger beetle is unknown, females Species Act does not allow for the Because a direct correlation exists of other species of Cicindela produce listing of invertebrate species. State and between increased extinction rates with between 3.7 and 7.7 (mean range) eggs local agencies may consider the Ohlone the reduction of available habitat area (Kaulbers and Freitag 1993). If the tiger beetle when evaluating certain and increased distances between small Ohlone tiger beetle has a similarly low activities for compliance with the populations (Gilpin 1987), the small, reproductive rate, even limited California Environmental Quality Act isolated populations of the Ohlone tiger collecting could have harmful effects on (CEQA) and local zoning regulations. If beetle are more vulnerable to local its reproductive or genetic viability and an activity is identified as having a extinction from random genetic and lead to extinction of the species. significant impact on this species, demographic events or environmental The Ohlone tiger beetle is not likely mitigation measures may be required by catastrophes. The small sizes of to be used as a model organism for State and local regulatory agencies to occupied habitat also reduce the ability general research projects because it is a offset these impacts. However, CEQA of the habitats to buffer against edge rare and limited species. It may be the and local regulations do not provide effects and other influences from subject of studies intended to improve specific protection measures to ensure adjacent developed areas, such as understanding of the species’ ecology the continued existence of the Ohlone pesticide drift, soil erosion, and and to improve management strategies tiger beetle. In addition, CEQA vegetation alteration. for its conservation. Although such provisions for ‘‘Statements of Although some species of tiger beetles studies would directly benefit the Overriding Considerations’’ can allow are known to disperse over sizable recovery of the Ohlone tiger beetle, they projects to proceed despite unmitigated distances (Pearson 1988), species from may contribute cumulatively to other adverse impacts. the purpurea group of the genus threats to the species. Ohlone tiger beetle habitat occurs on Cicindela typically do not disperse properties owned by the University, the C. Disease or Predation. No diseases widely, usually 12 to 18 m (40 to 60 ft) CDPR, and the City of Santa Cruz. The are known to threaten the Ohlone tiger (David Pearson, Arizona State University does not have a management University, pers. comm. 1997). The beetle. However, the Ohlone tiger beetle plan that specifically protects the dispersal capabilities of Ohlone tiger may be affected by any of several Ohlone tiger beetle or its habitat (G. beetles are unknown; however, because predators and parasites known to prey Hayes, pers. comm. 1997). The CDPR the Ohlone tiger beetle belongs to the upon, and afflict, other tiger beetle has an existing Public Works Plan that purpurea group, its dispersal distance is species. The parasites are considered to calls for surveys to verify the occupied most likely narrow. Assuming have greater effects than predators habitat boundary of the Ohlone tiger individuals to be capable of dispersing (Nagano 1982; Pearson 1988). Known beetle and proposes to minimize the distances comparable to those between tiger beetle predators include birds, impacts of disturbance to the Ohlone populations, the likelihood of successful shrews (Soricidae), raccoons (Procyon tiger beetle during road maintenance emigration or colonization is greatly lotor), lizards (Lacertilia), toads and other scheduled activities in the reduced by the small size of suitable (Bufonidae), ants (Formicidae), robber plan (G. Gray, CDPR, pers. comm. 1997). habitat patches and the unavailability of flies (Asilidae) and dragonflies However, a local citizen has expressed even marginal habitat among the (Anisoptera) (Lavigne 1972; Nagano concern that surveys and minimization extensive urban development in the 1982; Pearson 1988). Known tiger beetle measures are not being adequately region. parasites include ant-like wasps of the carried out (G. Hayes, in litt. 1999). For Some recreational uses of Ohlone family Typhiidae, especially the genera the site northwest of Santa Cruz, the tiger beetle habitat (i.e., off-road motor Mathoca, Karlissa, and Pterombrus, and City of Santa Cruz Parks and Recreation vehicle use or heavy bicycling) may the Bombyliid flies of the genus Anthrax Department’s Proposed Master Plan for pose a threat to the Ohlone tiger beetles. (Nagano 1982; Pearson 1988). These the preserve proposes increased usage of The beetles require open ground to insect parasites are distributed existing trails, but identifies the Ohlone maneuver, take prey, and lay eggs. They worldwide and specialize on tiger beetle tiger beetle and its habitat as sensitive use the hard-packed bicycle trails for larvae. resources. The proposed master plan foraging, thermoregulation, and laying Predators and parasites play includes a management program for their eggs (R. Morgan, pers. comm. important roles in the natural dynamics Ohlone tiger beetle habitat; however, 1998). Bicycle traffic on a trail through of populations and ecosystems. implementation of any management the University site has been observed to However, the effects of predation and actions will depend on future funding result in the crushing of several parasitism may pose substantial threats (S. Harris, per. comm. 1999). individual beetles (R. Morgan, in litt. to Ohlone tiger beetle populations For the site west of the City of Santa 1993). Similar mortality has been already affected by other factors, Cruz, a management plan will observed in the species’ habitat west of especially limited distribution and eventually be developed since this the City of Santa Cruz (R. Morgan, in small, isolated populations. At this property has been purchased as open litt. 1993) and may occur in other time, the magnitude of predation and space. The property is officially closed Ohlone tiger beetle populations. Also, parasitism on the Ohlone tiger beetle is to public use except for officially bicycle and foot traffic could potentially not known. escorted hikes. However, the collapse larval tunnels and crush the D. The inadequacy of existing enforcement of this closure may not be larvae. The significance of such regulatory mechanisms. Regulatory adequate. mortality for population viability is not mechanisms currently in effect do not Because the Ohlone tiger beetle is not known at this time, but is considered a provide adequate protection for the listed at the State or Federal levels, potential threat to the Ohlone tiger Ohlone tiger beetle and its habitat. nothing prohibits importing, exporting, beetle, particularly if bicycle traffic Federal agencies are not legally required sale, or trade of the species. through the habitat increases. Heavy

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules 6957 vehicular traffic in areas with extensive Critical Habitat determinations and designations during use of public trails, such as on Santa Critical habitat is defined in section 3, FY 1999 and FY 2000 as allowed by our Cruz University, City of Santa Cruz, and paragraph (5)(A) of the Act as the funding allocation for that year. As CDPR land, may also create soil specific areas within the geographical explained in detail in the Listing compaction and rutting, damaging area occupied by a species, at the time Priority Guidance, our listing budget is potential oviposition sites. Populations it is listed in accordance with the Act, currently insufficient to allow us to of another tiger beetle species found in on which are found those physical or immediately complete all of the listing the northeastern United States, biological features essential to the actions required by the Act. We propose that critical habitat is Cicindela dorsalis dorsalis, were conservation of the species and which prudent for the Ohlone tiger beetle. In extirpated in several localities that were may require special management the last few years, a series of court subjected to heavy recreational use (i.e., considerations or protection; and decisions have overturned Service heavy pedestrian foot traffic and specific areas outside the geographical determinations regarding a variety of vehicular use) but survived at other sites area occupied by the species at the time species that designation of critical that had received little or no it is listed in accordance with the habitat would not be prudent (e.g., recreational disturbance (Knisley and provisions of section 4 of the Act, upon Natural Resources Defense Council v. Hill 1992). a determination by the Secretary that U.S. Department of the Interior 113 F. Pesticides could pose a threat to the such areas are essential for the 3d 1121 (9th Cir. 1997); Conservation conservation of the species. Ohlone tiger beetle. The effects of Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. ‘‘Conservation’’ means the use of all insecticides on other tiger beetle species 2d 1280 (D. Hawaii 1998)). Based on the methods and procedures needed to are referenced by Nagano (1982). Local standards applied in those judicial bring the species to the point at which land owners may use pesticides to opinions, we believe that designation of listing under the Act is no longer control targeted invertebrate species critical habitat would be prudent for the necessary. Ohlone tiger beetle. around their homes and gardens. These Critical habitat designation, by pesticides may drift aerially or be Due to the small number of definition, directly affects only Federal populations, Ohlone tiger beetle is transported by water runoff into Ohlone agency actions through consultation tiger beetle habitat where they may kill vulnerable to unrestricted collection, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Section vandalism, or other disturbance. We are nontargeted organisms including the 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to concerned that these threats might be Ohlone tiger beetle or its prey species. ensure that activities they authorize, exacerbated by the publication of As urban development increases near or fund, or carry out are not likely to critical habitat maps and further in Ohlone tiger beetle habitat, negative jeopardize the continued existence of a dissemination of locational information. impacts from pesticides may become listed species or destroy or adversely However, at this time we do not have more frequent. The significance of modify its critical habitat. specific evidence for Ohlone tiger beetle pesticide effects is not known at this Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as of taking, vandalism, collection, or trade time, but they are recognized as a amended, and implementing regulations of this species or any similarly situated substantial potential threat to the (50 CFR 424.12) require that, to the species. Consequently, consistent with species. maximum extent prudent and applicable regulations (50 CFR In making this proposed rule determinable, we designate critical 424.12(a)(1)(i)) and recent case law, we determination, we have carefully habitat at the time the species is do not expect that the identification of assessed the best scientific and determined to be endangered or critical habitat will increase the degree commercial information available threatened. Our regulations (50 CFR of threat to this species of taking or 424.12(a)(1)) state that the designation regarding the past, present, and future other human activity. of critical habitat is not prudent when threats faced by the Ohlone tiger beetle. In the absence of a finding that critical one or both of the following situations Threats to the five populations of habitat would increase threats to a exist—(1) the species is threatened by Ohlone tiger beetle, including habitat species, if any benefits would derive taking or other human activity, and from critical habitat designation, then a fragmentation and destruction due to identification of critical habitat can be prudent finding is warranted. In the urban development, habitat degradation expected to increase the degree of threat case of this species, designation of due to invasion of nonnative vegetation, to the species, or (2) such designation of critical habitat may provide some vulnerability to random local critical habitat would not be beneficial benefits. The primary regulatory effect extirpations, and potential threats due to the species. of critical habitat is the section 7 to collection, pesticides, and The Final Listing Priority Guidance requirement that Federal agencies recreational use of habitat, imperil the for FY 1999/2000 (64 FR 57114) states, refrain from taking any action that continued existence of this species. that the processing of critical habitat destroys or adversely modifies critical Much of the habitat of this species is determinations (prudency and habitat. While a critical habitat suitable for development and is determinability decisions) and proposed designation for habitat currently unprotected from these threats. The or final designations of critical habitat occupied by this species would not be Ohlone tiger beetle is known from only will no longer be subject to likely to change the section 7 five populations. This species is in prioritization under the Listing Priority consultation outcome because an action danger of extinction ‘‘throughout all or Guidance. Critical habitat that destroys or adversely modifies such a significant portion of its range’’ determinations, which were previously critical habitat would also be likely to (section 3(6) of the Act) and, therefore, included in final listing rules published result in jeopardy to the species, there meets the Act’s definition of in the Federal Register, may now be may be instances where section 7 endangered. Because of the high processed separately, in which case consultation would be triggered only if potential for these threats, if realized, to stand-alone critical habitat critical habitat is designated. Examples result in the extinction of the Ohlone determinations will be published as could include unoccupied habitat or tiger beetle, the preferred action is to list notices in the Federal Register. We will occupied habitat that may become this species as endangered. undertake critical habitat unoccupied in the future. Designating

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 6958 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules critical habitat may also produce some critical habitat, if any is being our agents and State conservation educational or informational benefits. designated. Regulations implementing agencies. Therefore, we propose that critical this interagency cooperation provision Permits may be issued to carry out habitat is prudent for Ohlone tiger of the Act are codified at 50 CFR part otherwise prohibited activities beetle. However, the deferral of the 402. Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires involving endangered wildlife under critical habitat designation for Ohlone Federal agencies to confer with us on certain circumstances. Regulations tiger beetle will allow us to concentrate any action that is likely to jeopardize governing permits are codified at 50 our limited resources on higher priority the continued existence of a species CFR 17.22 and 17.23. For endangered critical habitat and other listing actions, proposed for listing or result in species, such permits are available for while allowing us to put in place destruction or adverse modification of scientific purposes, to enhance the protections needed for the conservation proposed critical habitat. If a species is propagation or survival of the species, of Ohlone tiger beetle without further listed subsequently, section 7(a)(2) of and for incidental take in connection delay. We anticipate in FY 2000 and the Act requires Federal agencies to with otherwise lawful activities. beyond giving higher priority to critical ensure that activities they authorize, As published in the Federal Register habitat designation, including fund, or carry out are not likely to on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34272), it is our designations deferred pursuant to the jeopardize the continued existence of policy to identify to the maximum Listing Priority Guidance, such as the the species or destroy or adversely extent practicable at the time a species designation for this species, than we modify its critical habitat. If a Federal is listed those activities that would or have in recent fiscal years. action may affect a listed species or its would not constitute a violation of We plan to employ a priority system critical habitat, the responsible Federal section 9 of the Act. The intent of this for deciding which outstanding critical agency must enter into formal policy is to increase public awareness of habitat designations should be consultation with us. the effect of this listing on proposed and addressed first. We will focus our efforts Federal involvements are not known ongoing activities within the species’ on those designations that will provide to exist within the habitat of the Ohlone range. the most conservation benefit, taking tiger beetle. If any Federal agency were We believe that, based on the best into consideration the efficacy of critical to fund or issue permits for a project available information, if the Ohlone habitat designation in addressing the that may affect the Ohlone tiger beetle, tiger beetle is listed under the Act, the threats to the species, and the that agency would be required to following actions are not likely to result magnitude and immediacy of those consult with us. Possible nexuses in a violation of section 9, provided threats. We will make the final critical include the Department of Housing and these activities are carried out in habitat determination with the final Urban Development and the Department accordance with existing regulations listing determination for Ohlone tiger of Commerce’s Small Business and permit requirements: beetle. If this final critical habitat (1) Possession, delivery, or movement, Administration for funding, and the determination is that critical habitat is including interstate transport and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for prudent, we will develop a proposal to import into or export from the United permits authorized under section 404 of designate critical habitat for Ohlone States, involving no commercial the Clean Water Act. tiger beetle as soon as feasible, activity, of dead specimens of this taxon Listing the Ohlone tiger beetle as considering our workload priorities. that were collected prior to the date of endangered will provide for the Unfortunately, for the immediate future, publication in the Federal Register of a development of a recovery plan. Such a most of Region 1’s listing budget must final regulation adding this taxon to the plan will bring together Federal, State, be directed to complying with list of endangered species; and (2) and local efforts for its conservation. numerous court orders and settlement Activities conducted in accordance with The plan will establish a framework for agreements, as well as due and overdue reasonable and prudent measures cooperation and coordination in final listing determinations. identified by us in a biological opinion conservation efforts. The plan will set issued pursuant to section 7 of the Act, Available Conservation Measures recovery priorities and estimate costs of and activities authorized under section various tasks necessary to accomplish Conservation measures provided to 10 of the Act. species listed as endangered or them. It also will describe site-specific We believe that the following actions threatened under the Act include management actions necessary to could result in a violation of section 9; recognition, recovery actions, achieve the conservation and survival of however, possible violations are not requirements for Federal protection, and the Ohlone tiger beetle. limited to these actions alone: prohibitions against certain activities. The Act and implementing (1) Collection of specimens of this Recognition through listing results in regulations set forth a series of general taxon for private possession or public awareness and conservation prohibitions and exceptions that apply deposition in an institutional collection; actions by Federal, State, and local to all endangered wildlife. These (2) Sale or purchase of specimens of agencies, private organizations, and prohibitions, in part, make it illegal for this taxon, except for properly individuals. The Act provides for any person subject to the jurisdiction of documented antique specimens of this possible land acquisition and the United States to take (includes taxon at least 100 years old, as defined cooperation with the States and requires harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, by section 10(h)(1) of the Act; that recovery actions be carried out for wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or (3) The unauthorized release of all listed species. The protection to attempt any of these), import or biological control agents that attack any required of Federal agencies and the export, ship in interstate commerce in life stage of this taxon; and prohibitions against taking and harm are the course of commercial activity, or sell (4) Noncompliance with the discussed, in part, below. or offer for sale in interstate or foreign California Department of Parks and Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, commerce any endangered wildlife Recreation management plans that requires Federal agencies to evaluate species. It is also illegal to possess, sell, restrict recreational uses (i.e., biking and their actions with respect to any species deliver, carry, transport, or ship any foot traffic) of areas designated as that is proposed or listed as endangered such wildlife that has been taken occupied habitat by the Ohlone tiger or threatened, and with respect to its illegally. Certain exceptions apply to beetle.

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules 6959

Questions regarding whether specific (1) Biological, commercial, trade, or 3501 et seq., is required. Any activities would constitute a violation of other relevant data concerning threat (or information collection related to the section 9 should be directed to our lack thereof) to the Ohlone tiger beetle. rule pertaining to permits for Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see (2) The location of any additional endangered and threatened species has ADDRESSES section). populations of Ohlone tiger beetle and OMB approval and is assigned clearance To request copies of the regulations the reasons why any habitat should or number 1018–0094. This rule does not concerning listed wildlife or to inquire should not be determined to be critical alter that information collection about prohibitions of section 9, contact habitat for this species pursuant to requirement. For additional information our Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office section 4 of the Act. concerning permits and associated (see ADDRESSES section). Requests for (3) Additional information concerning requirements for endangered wildlife copies of regulations for issuing permits the essential habitat features (biotic and species, see 50 CFR 17.22. may be addressed to the U.S. Fish and abiotic), range, distribution, population Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, size of this taxon, and information References Cited Endangered Species Permits, 911 N.E. relating to the distributions of A complete list of all references cited 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon, 97232– genetically distinct individuals within in this rulemaking is available upon 4181 (telephone 503/231–2063; the population. request from the Ventura Fish and facsimile 503/231–6243). (4) Current or planned activities in the Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section). subject area and their possible impacts Public Comments Solicited on this taxon. Author Our intent is for any final action Final promulgation of the regulations The primary author of this proposed resulting from this proposal to be as on Ohlone tiger beetle will take into rule is Colleen Sculley, Ventura Fish accurate and as effective as possible. consideration any comments and any and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES Therefore, we solicit comments or additional information we receive section) (telephone 805/644–1766). suggestions from the public, other during the comment period, and such concerned governmental agencies, the communications may lead to a final List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 scientific community, industry, or any regulation that differs from this Endangered and threatened species, other interested party concerning this proposal. proposed rule. Our practice is to make The Act provides for a public hearing Exports, Imports, Reporting and comments, including names and home on this proposal, if requested. Requests recordkeeping requirements, addresses of respondents, available for must be received within 45 days of the Transportation. public review during regular business date of publication of the proposal in Proposed Regulation Promulgation hours. Individual respondents may the Federal Register. Such requests request that we withhold their home must be made in writing and be For the reasons given in the preamble, address from the rulemaking record, addressed to the Field Supervisor of the we propose to amend part 17, which we will honor to the extent Service’s Ventura, Fish and Wildlife subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the allowable by law. In certain Office (see ADDRESSES section). Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth circumstances, we would withhold from below: the rulemaking record a respondent’s National Environmental Policy Act identity, as allowable by law. If you We have determined that PART 17Ð[AMENDED] wish us to withhold your name and/or Environmental Assessments, as defined 1. The authority citation for part 17 address, you must state this under the authority of the National continues to read as follows: prominently at the beginning of your Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need comment. However, we will not not be prepared in connection with Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. consider anonymous comments. We regulations adopted pursuant to Section 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201—4245; Pub. L. will make all submissions from 99–625, 100 Stat. 3500, unless otherwise 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining our noted. organizations or businesses, and from reasons for this determination was individuals identifying themselves as published in the Federal Register on 2. Amend section 17.11(h) by adding representatives or officials of October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). the following, in alphabetical order organizations or businesses, available under INSECTS, to the List of Required Determinations for public inspection in their entirety. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife: All comments, including written and e- This rule does not contain any mail, must be received in our Ventura information collection requirements for § 17.11 Endangered and threatened Fish and Wildlife Office by April 11, which Office of Management and wildlife. 2000. We particularly seek comments Budget (OMB) approval under the * * * * * concerning: Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. (h) * * *

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

INSECTS

******* Beetle, Ohlone tiger Cicindela ohlone ..... U.S.A. (CA) ...... NA ...... E NA NA

*******

VerDate 272000 16:06 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 11FEP1 6960 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 29 / Friday, February 11, 2000 / Proposed Rules

Dated: January 20, 2000. proposed rule to list this ESU as available, NMFS published a proposed Jamie Rappaport Clark, threatened under the ESA. listing determination (61 FR 41541, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. DATES: A public hearing on this August 9, 1996) that identified 15 ESUs [FR Doc. 00–3277 Filed 2–10–00; 8:45 am] proposal will be held on March 15, of steelhead in the states of Washington, BILLING CODE 4310±55±P 2000, from 6:30 p.m.–9:00 p.m. Requests Oregon, Idaho, and California. Ten of for additional public hearings must be these ESUs, including the Northern received by March 27, 2000. Comments California ESU, were proposed for DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE on this proposal must be received at the listing as threatened or endangered appropriate address or fax number (See species, four were found not warranted National Oceanic and Atmospheric ADDRESSES), no later than 5 p.m. pacific for listing, and one was identified as a Administration standard time, on April 11, 2000. candidate for listing. Comments will not be accepted if On August 18, 1997, NMFS published 50 CFR Part 223 submitted via e-mail or Internet. a final rule listing five ESUs as ADDRESSES: The public hearing will be threatened and endangered under the [Docket No. 000202022±0022±01; I.D. ESA (62 FR 43937, August 18, 1997). In 012100F] held at the Eureka Inn, 518 Seventh St., Eureka, California. Comments on this a separate document published on the RIN 0648±AN58 proposed rule and requests for same day, NMFS determined substantial additional public hearings or reference scientific disagreement remained for Endangered and Threatened Species: materials should be sent to the Chief, five proposed ESUs, including the Threatened Status for One Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Northern California steelhead ESU (62 Evolutionarily Significant Unit of Southwest Region, 401 West Ocean FR 43974, August 18, 1997). In Steelhead in California Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA accordance with section 4(b)(6)(B)(i) of the ESA, NMFS deferred its decision on AGENCY: 90802–4213. Comments may also be National Marine Fisheries these five steelhead ESUs for 6 months Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and sent via facsimile (fax) to 562–980– 4027. for the purpose of soliciting additional Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), data. During this 6-month period of Commerce. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: deferral, NMFS received new scientific ACTION: Proposed rule; request for Craig Wingert, 562–980-4021, or Chris information regarding the status of these comments. Mobley, 301–713–1401. proposed steelhead ESUs. This new SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: information was evaluated by NMFS’ SUMMARY: Based on a comprehensive BRT which prepared both an updated status review of west coast steelhead Previous Federal ESA Actions Related to West Coast Steelhead status review for these five ESUs (Oncorhynchus mykiss, or O. mykiss) [Memorandum to William Stelle and populations throughout Washington, The history of petitions NMFS has William Hogarth from M. Schiewe, Oregon, Idaho, and California, NMFS received regarding west coast steelhead December 18, 1997, Status of Deferred proposed to list 10 Evolutionarily is summarized in a final rule and notice and Candidate ESUs of West Coast Significant Units (ESUs) as threatened of determination for five steelhead ESUs Steelhead (NMFS, 1997a), and a review or endangered under the Endangered (Lower Columbia River; Central Valley, of the associated hatchery populations Species Act (ESA) in 1996. One of these California; Oregon Coast; Klamath [Memorandum to William Stelle and steelhead ESUs, the Northern California Mountains Province; and Northern William Hogarth from Michael Schiewe, ESU, was proposed for listing as a California ESUs) that was published on January 13, 1998, Status Review Update threatened species. Because of scientific March 19, 1998 (63 FR 13347). The most for Deferred ESUs of West Coast disagreements, NMFS deferred its final comprehensive petition was submitted Steelhead: Hatchery Populations listing determination for five of these by Oregon Natural Resources Council (NMFS, 1998a). steelhead ESUs, including the Northern and 15 co-petitioners on February 16, Based on a review of the updated California ESU, in August 1997. After 1994. In response to this petition, NMFS scientific information for these ESUs, as soliciting and reviewing additional assessed the best available scientific and well as a review and evaluation of information to resolve these commercial data, including technical Federal, State, and local conservation disagreements, NMFS issued a final information from Pacific Salmon measures reducing the threats to these determination in March 1998 that the Biological Technical Committees ESUs, NMFS issued a final rule (63 FR Northern California ESU did not (PSBTCs) and interested parties in 13347, March 19, 1998) listing two ESUs warrant listing under the ESA because Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and as threatened (Lower Columbia River available scientific information and California, and convened a Biological and Central Valley California), and a conservation measures indicated the Review Team (BRT), composed of staff notice of determination that three ESUs ESU was at a lower risk of extinction from NMFS’ Northwest and Southwest (Oregon Coast, Klamath Mountains than at the time of the proposed rule. Fisheries Science Centers and Province, and Northern California) did Because the State of California has Southwest Regional Office, as well as a not warrant listing. NMFS’ failed to implement conservation representative of the U.S. Geological determination that these three ESUs did measures that NMFS considered Survey Biological Resources Division not warrant listing was based on the critically important in its decision not to (formerly the National Biological best available scientific and commercial list the Northern California steelhead Service) to conduct a coast-wide status data, which indicated these ESUs were ESU, NMFS completed an updated review for west coast steelhead (Busby at a lower risk of extinction than at the status review and has reconsidered the et al., 1996). time of the proposed listing status of this ESU under the ESA. Based on the results of the BRT’s determination. Even though the risks Based on this review, NMFS has status review, an analysis of Federal, confronting these ESUs had been determined that the Northern California state, and local conservation measures, reduced to a point at which listing was steelhead ESU warrants listing as a and other information which NMFS not warranted, NMFS still expressed threatened species at this time. determined constituted the best concerns about the status of these three Accordingly, NMFS is now issuing a scientific and commercial data ESUs in the notice of determination,

VerDate 272000 18:48 Feb 10, 2000 Jkt 190000 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4702 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\11FEP1.SGM pfrm11 PsN: 11FEP1