Federal Register/Vol. 81, No. 193/Wednesday, October 5, 2016
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
69312 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 265, Frankfort, KY 40601; telephone have incorporated the comments into 502–695–0468, x108; facsimile 502– this final determination. Fish and Wildlife Service 695–1024. If you use a Peer review and public comment. We telecommunications device for the deaf sought comments from seven 50 CFR Part 17 (TDD), call the Federal Information independent specialists to ensure that [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133; Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. our designation was based on 4500030113] SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: scientifically sound data, assumptions, RIN 1018–BB05 Executive Summary and analyses. We received comments Why we need to publish a rule. Under from five of the seven peer reviewers. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as The peer reviewers generally concurred and Plants; Designation of Critical amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA with our methods and conclusions and Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter or Act), when we determine that a provided additional information, clarifications, and suggestions to AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, species is threatened or endangered, we Interior. must designate critical habitat to the improve this final rule. Information we received from peer review is ACTION: Final rule. maximum extent prudent and determinable. Designations of critical incorporated into this final revised SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and habitat can only be completed by designation. We also considered all Wildlife Service (Service), designate issuing a rule. comments and information received critical habitat for the Kentucky arrow On October 8, 2015, we published in from the public during the comment darter (Etheostoma spilotum) under the the Federal Register a proposed critical period. Endangered Species Act (Act). In total, habitat designation for the Kentucky Previous Federal Actions approximately 398 stream kilometers arrow darter (80 FR 61030). Section (skm) (248 stream miles (smi)) fall 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the We proposed listing the Kentucky within the boundaries of the critical Secretary shall designate critical habitat arrow darter as threatened under the Act habitat designation. on the basis of the best available (80 FR 60902) and designation of critical DATES: This rule becomes effective on scientific data after taking into habitat for the species (80 FR 61030) on November 4, 2016. consideration the economic impact, October 8, 2015. For a complete history national security impact, and any other ADDRESSES: This final rule is available of all Federal actions related to the relevant impact of specifying any on the internet at http:// Kentucky arrow darter, please refer to www.regulations.gov and http:// particular area as critical habitat. This document consists of a final rule the October 8, 2015, proposed listing www.fws.gov/frankfort/. Comments and to designate critical habitat for the rule (80 FR 60902). materials we received, as well as Kentucky arrow darter. We list the supporting documentation we used in Summary of Comments and Kentucky arrow darter as a threatened preparing this proposed rule, are Recommendations species elsewhere in this Federal available for public inspection at http:// Register. We requested written comments from www.regulations.gov in Docket No. Summary of the rule. The critical the public on the proposed designation FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133. All of the habitat areas we are designating in this of critical habitat for the Kentucky comments, materials, and rule constitute our current best arrow darter and associated DEA during documentation that we considered in assessment of the areas that meet the this rulemaking are available by a comment period that opened with the definition of critical habitat for publication of the proposed rule (80 FR appointment, during normal business Kentucky arrow darter. Here we are hours at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 60962) on October 8, 2015, and closed designating approximately 398 stream on December 7, 2015. We also contacted Kentucky Ecological Services Field kilometers (skm) (248 stream miles Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION appropriate Federal, State, and local (smi)) in Breathitt, Clay, Harlan, agencies, scientific organizations, and CONTACT). Jackson, Knott, Lee, Leslie, Owsley, The coordinates, plot points, or both other interested parties, and invited Perry, and Wolfe Counties, Kentucky. them to comment on the proposed rule from which the maps are generated are Economic analysis. We have prepared and DEA during the comment period. included in the administrative record an economic analysis of the designation We did not receive any requests for a for this critical habitat designation and of critical habitat. In order to consider public hearing. are available at http://www.fws.gov/ economic impacts, we have prepared an frankfort/, at http://www.regulations.gov incremental effects memorandum (IEM) During the comment period, we at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133, and screening analysis which, together received 3,897 comment letters in and at the Kentucky Ecological Services with our narrative and interpretation of response to the proposed critical habitat Field Office) (see FOR FURTHER effects, constitute our draft economic designation: 5 from peer reviewers and INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional analysis (DEA) of the proposed critical 3,892 from organizations or individuals. tools or supporting information that we habitat designation and related factors Of these, 3,882 were nonsubstantive may develop for this critical habitat (Abt Associates 2015). The analysis, form letters submitted by one designation will also be available at the dated September 11, 2015, was made nongovernmental organization in Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and available for public review from October support of the proposed critical habitat field office set out above, and may also 8, 2015, through December 7, 2015 (80 designation. None of the comment be included at http:// FR 61030). Following the close of the letters objected to the proposed www.regulations.gov. comment period, we reviewed and designation of critical habitat for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: evaluated all information submitted Kentucky arrow darter. All substantive Virgil Lee Andrews, Jr., Field during the comment period that may information provided during the Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife pertain to our consideration of the comment period has either been Service, Kentucky Ecological Services probable incremental economic impacts incorporated directly into this final Field Office, 330 West Broadway, Suite of this critical habitat designation. We determination or is addressed below. VerDate Sep<11>2014 20:12 Oct 04, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\05OCR3.SGM 05OCR3 mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 193 / Wednesday, October 5, 2016 / Rules and Regulations 69313 Peer Review conditions. The best and most current darter locations, random locations, and In accordance with our peer review scientific data available to the Service locations associated with regulatory policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR indicate the species’ abundance permitting, such as mining or 34270), we solicited expert opinions decreases sharply as conductivities transportation. Nearly 245 surveys were from seven knowledgeable individuals exceed 261 mS/cm (Hitt et al. 2016, pp. conducted for the species between 2007 with scientific expertise that included 46–52), and the species is generally and 2015, and the results of these familiarity with the species, the absent when conductivities exceed 350 surveys provided an accurate depiction mS/cm (Service 2012, pp. 1–4). of the species’ current range and geographic region in which the species (3) Comment: One peer reviewer revealed a clear trend of habitat occurs, and conservation biology stated that the Service should include degradation and range curtailment for principles. We received responses from any new information on growth, the species. Kentucky arrow darters may five of the peer reviewers. feeding, reproduction, or spawning of have gone undetected in a few sampling We reviewed all comments received the Kentucky arrow darter obtained reaches, but the species’ overall decline from the peer reviewers for substantive from recent captive-propagation efforts and pattern of associated habitat issues and new information regarding by Conservation Fisheries, Inc. (CFI) in degradation (e.g., elevated conductivity) critical habitat for the Kentucky arrow Knoxville, Tennessee. was clear based on our review of darter. All of the peer reviewers Our Response: New observations on available survey data. generally concurred with our methods spawning behavior and the growth and (5) Comment: One peer reviewer and conclusions and provided viability of eggs and larvae were made commented that the Service should additional information, clarifications, by CFI during recent captive- recognize water clarity (turbidity) as a and suggestions to improve the final propagation efforts (2010 to present). factor under PCE (primary constituent critical habitat rule. Peer reviewer We have incorporated language element) 4 because the Kentucky arrow comments are addressed in the summarizing these findings under the darter is a visual feeder. following summary and incorporated Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Our Response: We concur with the into the final