Vol. 76 Monday, No. 157 August 15, 2011

Part II

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Revised Critical Habitat for Southwestern Willow Flycatcher; Proposed Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50542 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail we are proposing, including managing or hand-delivery to: Public Comments for the potential effects of climate Fish and Wildlife Service Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2011– change; 053; Division of Policy and Directives (e) Stream segments, many of which 50 CFR Part 17 Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife are highlighted in the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Plan [Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2011–0053; MO Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS 92210–0–0009] 2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203. (Recovery Plan) (Service 2002) and We will not accept e-mail or faxes. We included in this proposed rule, that are RIN 1018–AX43 will post all comments on http:// not now known to have flycatcher www.regulations.gov. This generally nesting territories or known to only Endangered and Threatened Wildlife means that we will post any personal have few nesting flycatchers that may be and Plants; Designation of Revised information you provide us (see the capable of being improved for flycatcher Critical Habitat for Southwestern Public Comments section below for recovery purposes. We specifically seek Willow Flycatcher more information). information about streams within the AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Amargosa, Salton, Mohave, Powell, San Interior. Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S. Juan, Santa Cruz, and Hassayampa and Agua Fria Management Units. Please ACTION: Proposed rule. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Office, 2321 West provide information on flycatcher SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Royal Palm Rd., Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ distribution and abundance, habitat Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 85021; telephone 602–242–0210; quality, habitat locations, habitat improvement projects, management revise critical habitat for the facsimile 602–242–2513. If you use a actions needed to improve habitat, southwestern willow flycatcher telecommunications device for the deaf habitat quality limitations, habitat (Empidonax traillii extimus) (flycatcher) (TDD), call the Federal Information recovery potential, and any other under the Endangered Species Act of Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 1973, as amended (Act). In total, flycatcher or flycatcher-habitat-specific SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: approximately 3,364 km stream information, and; kilometers (2,090 stream miles) are Public Comments (f) Flycatcher habitat suitability in specific areas within the Santa Ana and being proposed for designation as We intend that any final action critical habitat. These areas are being San Diego Management Units in resulting from this proposed rule will be southern California. Please provide proposed as stream segments, with the based on the best scientific and lateral extent including the riparian information on flycatcher habitat commercial data available and be as suitability for recovery at the following areas and streams that occur within the accurate and as effective as possible. 100-year floodplain or flood-prone areas: (1) Entirety of Temescal Wash Therefore, we request comments or including Alberhill Creek in Riverside areas. The proposed critical habitat is information from other concerned located on a combination of Federal, County; (2) entirety of Murrieta Creek in government agencies, the scientific Riverside County; (3) Potrero Creek near State, Tribal, and private lands in community, industry, or any other Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, the city of Beaumont in Riverside interested party concerning this County; (4) Cajon Creek from Lone Pine Mono, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, proposed rule. We particularly seek San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura Canyon to California State Highway 138 comments concerning: in San Bernardino County; and (5) Counties in California; Clark, Lincoln, (1) The reasons why we should or and Nye Counties in southern Nevada; Tijuana River from Dairy Mart Road to should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical the Tijuana River Estuary in San Diego Kane, San Juan, and Washington habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 Counties in southern Utah; Alamosa, County. U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether (3) Land use designations and current Conejos, Costilla, La Plata, and Rio there are threats to the species from or planned activities in the subject areas Grande Counties in southern Colorado; human activity, the degree of which can and their possible impacts on proposed Apache, Cochise, Gila, Graham, be expected to increase due to the critical habitat. Greenlee, La Paz, Maricopa, Mohave, designation, and whether that increase (4) Information on the projected and Pima, Pinal, Santa Cruz, Yavapai, and in threat outweighs the benefit of reasonably likely impacts of climate Yuma Counties in Arizona; and Catron, designation such that the designation of change on the flycatcher, the features Cibola, Dona Ana, Grant, Hidalgo, critical habitat may not be prudent. essential to its conservation and the McKinley, Mora, Rio Arriba, Santa Fe, (2) Specific information on: areas proposed as critical habitat. San Juan, Sierra, Soccoro, Taos, and (a) The amount and distribution of (5) Any probable economic, national Valencia Counties in New Mexico. southwestern willow flycatcher habitat; security, environmental, cultural, or DATES: We will accept comments (b) What areas that were occupied at other relevant impacts of designating received or postmarked on or before the time of listing that contain features any area that may be included in the October 14, 2011. We must receive essential to the conservation of the final designation; in particular, any requests for public hearings, in writing, species should be included in the impacts on small entities, and the at the address shown in the FOR FURTHER designation and why; benefits of including or excluding areas INFORMATION CONTACT section by (c) What areas not occupied at the that exhibit these impacts. September 29, 2011. time of listing that meet our criteria for (6) Whether any specific areas we are ADDRESSES: You may submit comments being essential to the conservation of proposing for critical habitat by one of the following methods: the species should be included in the designation should be considered for (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal designation and why; exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the eRulemaking Portal: http:// (d) Special management Act, and whether the benefits of www.regulations.gov. In the Enter considerations or protection that may be potentially excluding any specific area Keyword or ID box, enter Docket No. needed for the physical or biological outweigh the benefits of including that FWS–R2–ES–2011–0053, which is the features essential to the conservation of area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, in docket number for this rulemaking. the species in the critical habitat areas particular.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50543

(a) For specific lands that we should withhold personal information such as South America (Ridgely and Gwynne consider for exclusion under section your street address, phone number, or 1989, p. 303; Stiles and Skutch 1989, 4(b)(2) of the Act, please provide us e-mail address from public review; pp. 321–322; Howell and Webb 1995, management plans, conservation however, we cannot guarantee that we pp. 496–497; Unitt 1997, pp. 70–73; easements, agreements, Habitat will be able to do so. Koronkiewicz et al. 1998, p. 12; Unitt Conservation Plans (HCP), or other Comments and materials we receive, 1999, p. 14). appropriate information, which describe as well as supporting documentation we All willow flycatcher subspecies the commitment and assurances of used in preparing this proposed rule, spend time migrating and breeding in protection of the physical or biological will be available for public inspection the United States from April to features of flycatcher critical habitat; on http://www.regulations.gov, or by September. Use of riparian habitats property boundaries; flycatcher status, appointment, during normal business along major drainages in the Southwest distribution, and abundance; and hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife during migration has been documented management actions to protect the Service, Arizona Ecological Services (Sogge et al. 1997, pp. 3–4; Yong and physical or biological features of Office in Phoenix, Arizona (see FOR Finch 1997, p. 253; Johnson and O’Brien flycatcher habitat. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). 1998, p. 2; McKernan and Braden 1999, (b) For lands we evaluated and p. 17; Koronkiewicz et al. 2004, pp. 9– Background excluded from critical habitat under 11). Many of the willow flycatchers section 4(b)(2) of the Act during the It is our intent to include only those found migrating are detected in riparian 2005 flycatcher critical habitat topics directly relevant to the habitats or patches (small areas of designation and those who wish to seek designation of critical habitat for the riparian vegetation) that would be exclusion for this re-designation, please southwestern willow flycatcher unsuitable for nest placement (the resubmit your request. In addition to (flycatcher) in this proposed rule. vegetation structure is too short or your request, please include any Background information on the sparse, or the patch of vegetation is too updated information that pertains to the flycatcher can be found in the final small). In these drainages migrating commitment and assurances of flycatcher critical habitat rule published flycatchers may use a variety of riparian protection of flycatcher habitat; the in the Federal Register on October 19, habitats, including ones dominated by physical or biological features of 2005 (70 FR 60886); our October 12, native or exotic plant species, or flycatcher critical habitat; property 2004, proposed critical habitat rule (69 mixtures of both (Service 2002, p. E–3). boundaries; flycatcher status, FR 60706); the Southwestern Willow Willow flycatchers, like most small, distribution, and abundance; and Flycatcher Recovery Plan (Recovery migratory, insect-eating birds, require management actions to protect the Plan) (Service 2002); our first flycatcher food-rich stopover areas in order to physical or biological features of critical habitat designation, published replenish energy reserves and continue flycatcher habitat. Include the specific July 22, 1997 (62 FR 39129), and August their northward or southward migration results of implementing these 20, 1997 (62 FR 44228); the final (Finch et al. 2000, pp. 71, 78, and 79; management plans since our 2005 flycatcher listing rule (60 FR 10694; Service 2002, pp. E–3 and 42). flycatcher critical habitat designation. February 27, 1995); the 10-year Migration stopover areas are likely (c) Information concerning the flycatcher study in central Arizona critically important for flycatcher benefits of excluding or retaining lands (Paxton et al. 2007a); the 2007 productivity and survival (Sogge et al. we identify in this proposed critical rangewide status report (Durst et al. 1997, p. 13; Yong and Finch 1997, p. habitat rule under consideration for 2008); and flycatcher survey protocol 253; Service 2002, pp. E–3,19). exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the and natural history summary (Sogge et The historical breeding range of the Act. We specifically seek information al. 2010). Other reports can be retrieved flycatcher includes southern California, about the possible exclusion of Elephant from the U.S. Geological Survey’s southern Nevada, southern Utah, Butte Reservoir; areas within the (USGS) flycatcher site at http:// Arizona, New Mexico, western Texas, operating pool of the reservoir may be sbsc.wr.usgs.gov/cprs/research/projects/ southwestern Colorado, and extreme subject to exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the swwf. The current 2005 critical habitat northwestern Mexico. The flycatcher’s Act if we determine that the benefits of rule remains in effect while this current range is similar to the historical excluding the area due to potential rulemaking process proceeds. range, but the quantity of suitable impacts to water operations outweigh The flycatcher is a small, insect- habitat within that range is reduced the benefits to the subspecies of eating, neotropical migrant bird, from from historical levels (Service 2002, pp. including the area as critical habitat. the taxonomic order Passeriformes. It 7–10). (7) Whether we could improve or grows to about 15 centimeters (5.8 The known geographical area modify our approach to designating inches) in length. The flycatcher is one historically occupied by this flycatcher critical habitat in any way to provide for of four subspecies of the willow subspecies was once larger (Service greater public participation and flycatcher currently recognized 2002, pp. 7–10). Historical records understanding, or to better (Hubbard 1987, pp. 3–6; Unitt 1987, pp. described nesting birds in southern accommodate public concerns and 137–144), although Browning (1993, p. California, Nevada, Utah; Arizona and comments. 248) suggests a possible fifth subspecies New Mexico; western Texas; You may submit your comments and (Empidonax traillii campestris) in the southwestern Colorado; and extreme materials concerning this proposed rule central and midwestern United States. northwestern Mexico (Hubbard 1987, by one of the methods listed in the As an insect-eating generalist (Service pp. 6–10; Unitt 1987, pp. 144–152; ADDRESSES section. We will not accept 2002, p. 26), the flycatcher eats a wide Browning 1993, pp. 248, 250). At the comments sent by e-mail or fax or to an range of invertebrate prey including time of listing in February 1995 (60 FR address not listed in the ADDRESSES flying, and ground- and vegetation- 10694), the distribution and abundance section. We will post your entire dwelling, insect species of terrestrial of nesting flycatchers, their natural comment—including your personal and aquatic origins (Drost et al. 2003, history, and areas occupied by identifying information—on http:// pp. 96–102). The flycatcher spends the nonbreeding, migrating, and dispersing www.regulations.gov. You may request winter in locations such as southern flycatchers were not well known. In at the top of your document that we Mexico, Central America, and probably February 1995, 359 territories were

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50544 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

known only from California, Arizona, The flycatcher currently breeds in is a group of geographically separate and New Mexico. Unitt (1987, p. 156) areas from near sea level to over 2,600 flycatcher breeding populations estimated the entire population was, meters (m) (8,500 feet [ft]) (Durst et al. connected to each other by immigration ‘‘well under 1,000 pairs, more likely 2008, p. 14) in vegetation alongside and emigration (Service 2002, p. 72). 500,’’ and 230 to 500 territories were rivers, streams, or other wetlands Flycatcher populations are most stable estimated to exist in the July 23, 1993, (riparian habitat). It establishes nesting where many connected sites or large flycatcher listing proposal (58 FR 39495, territories, builds nests, and forages populations exist (Service 2002, p. 72). p. 39498). where mosaics of relatively dense and Metapopulation persistence or stability At the time of listing, breeding sites expansive growths of trees and shrubs is more likely to improve by adding in California, Nevada, Utah, and are established, near or adjacent to more breeding sites than with the Colorado described by Unitt (1987, pp. surface water or underlain by saturated addition of territories to existing sites 149–152) were adopted as the soil (Sogge et al. 2010, p. 4). Habitat (Service 2002, p. 72). This would subspecies’ northern boundary. characteristics such as dominant plant distribute birds across a greater However, the collection and analysis of species, size and shape of habitat patch, geographical range, minimize risk of genetic material across this part of the tree canopy structure, vegetation height, simultaneous catastrophic population bird’s range has since refined this and vegetation density vary widely loss, and avoid genetic isolation boundary (Paxton 2000, pp. 3, 18–20), among breeding sites. Nests are (Service 2002, p. 72). and reduced the extent of the northern typically placed in trees where the plant Flycatchers have higher site fidelity boundary of this southwestern growth is most dense, where trees and (to a local area) than nest fidelity (to a subspecies in Utah and Colorado shrubs have vegetation near ground specific nest location) and can move (Service 2002, Figure 3). Territories level, and where there is a low-density among sites within stream drainages once believed to be held by canopy. Some of the more common tree and between drainages (Kenwood and southwestern willow flycatchers in Utah and shrub species currently known to Paxton 2001, pp. 29–31). Within- and Colorado are now more accurately comprise nesting habitat include drainage movements are more common known to be occupied by a different, Goodings willow (Salix gooddingii), than between-drainage movements non-listed willow flycatcher subspecies. coyote willow (Salix exigua), Geyers (Kenwood and Paxton 2001, p. 18). As a result, the southwestern willow (Salix geyerana), arroyo willow Juvenile flycatchers were the group of subspecies’ range only occurs in the (Salix lasiolepis), red willow (Salix flycatchers that moved (dispersed) the southernmost portions of Utah and laevigata), yewleaf willow (Salix farthest to new and distant breeding Colorado. This genetic work also taxifolia), boxelder (Acer negundo), sites from the area where they hatched confirmed the identity of southwestern tamarisk (also known as saltcedar, (Paxton et al. 2007a, p. 74). The USGS’s willow flycatcher subspecies throughout Tamarix ramosissima), and Russian 10-year flycatcher study in central the rest of its range. olive (Eleagnus angustifolia) (Service Arizona (Paxton et al. 2007a) is the key 2002, p. D–2). While there are The USGS has continued to collect movement study that has generated exceptions, generally flycatchers are not these conclusions, augmented by other genetic information to help refine the found nesting in areas without willows, northern boundary of the subspecies’ flycatcher banding and re-sighting tamarisk, or both. studies (Sedgwick 2004, p. 1103; range in Utah, Colorado, and New A breeding site is simply an area McLeod et al. 2008, p. 110). Mexico (Paxton et al. 2007b). They along the river that has been described reconfirmed the genetic markers that while surveying for flycatcher territories The difference in flycatcher dispersal identify differences among flycatcher (Service 2002, p. C–4; Sogge et al. 2010, distance among different study areas subspecies, with breeding sites p. 34). A breeding site can contain none, and regions reflects the varying spatial clustering into two groups separated only one, or many territories. However, arrangement of breeding habitat, approximately along the currently within this proposed rule, we refer to illustrating how dispersal tendencies are recognized boundary; however, they breeding sites as areas where flycatcher influenced by the geographic noted a distinct genetic boundary line territories were detected. A territory is distribution of habitat at the stream between the subspecies does not exist defined as a discrete area defended by segment, drainage, and landscape scales (Paxton et al. 2007b, p. 17). Instead of a resident single flycatcher or pair of (Paxton et al. 2007a, p. 75). While a distinct boundary, they suggested that flycatchers within a single breeding USGS’ study focused its effort in central the boundary should be thought of as a season (Sogge et al. 2010, p. 34). This is Arizona at two of the largest breeding ‘‘region of genetic overlap’’ (Paxton et usually evidenced by the presence of a sites, it also included multiple auxiliary al. 2007b, p. 17). They also described singing male, and possibly one or more sites (up to 444 km or 275 mi away), that this genetic overlap region will mates (Sogge et al. 2010, p. 34). along with other researchers and likely widen and contract over time At the end of 2007, 1,299 flycatcher surveyors across the flycatcher’s range based upon habitat changes (Paxton et breeding territories were estimated to paying attention to whether flycatchers al. 2007b, p. 17). An additional occur throughout southern California, were banded or not. As a result, the complication in refining the subspecies’ southern Nevada, southern Utah, broad scope of the study of flycatcher northern boundary is that this region is southern Colorado, Arizona, and New movement extends broadly beyond a sparsely populated with breeding Mexico (Durst et al. 2008, p. 4). Some localized, regional area, where habitat flycatchers, and therefore only minimal of the flycatcher breeding sites having configuration dominates the results. information is available that would help the highest number of territories are Banded flycatchers from season-to- narrow down the location of a boundary found along the middle Rio Grande and season (and sometimes within season) (Paxton et al. 2007b, p. 16). We continue upper Gila River in New Mexico, and were recorded moving from 50 m (150 to seek out territories and collect genetic Roosevelt Lake and the San Pedro and feet) to 444 km (275 mi) to try and nest. samples to further our understanding of Gila River confluence area in central Some long-distance season-to-season this area, but we currently recognize the Arizona. movement records captured flycatchers northern geographic boundary of the Flycatchers are believed to exist and moving from the Basin and Mohave flycatcher as described in the Recovery interact as groups of metapopulations Recovery Unit to the Lower Colorado Plan (Service 2002, Figures 3, 4). (Service 2002, p. 72). A metapopulation Recovery Unit and from the Lower

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50545

Colorado Recovery Unit to the Gila easements, or safe harbor agreements. New Mexico (62 FR 39129). We Recovery Unit. The second alternative approach for published a correction notice on August The USGS assimilated all of the downlisting calls for reaching a 20, 1997, on the lateral extent of critical flycatcher movement information and population of 1,950 territories also habitat (62 FR 44228). concluded that rapid colonization and strategically distributed among all As a result of a 1998 lawsuit from the increased metapopulation stability Recovery and Management Units for New Mexico Cattlegrower’s Association, could be accomplished by establishing 5 years without additional habitat on October 19, 2005 (70 FR 60886), we breeding sites within 30 to 40 km (18 to protection (Service 2002, pp. 77–78). published a revised final flycatcher 25 mi) of each other (Paxton et al. In order to delist this flycatcher critical habitat rule for portions of 2007a, p. 4). Flycatchers at breeding subspecies (to remove it from the List of Arizona, California, New Mexico, sites configured in this way would be Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Nevada, and Utah, totaling able to regularly disperse to new and Plants), the Recovery Plan approximately 48,896 ha (120,824 ac) or breeding sites or move between known recommends that a minimum of 1,950 1,186 km (737 mi). River segments were breeding sites within the same year or territories are geographically distributed designated as critical habitat in 15 of the from year-to-year. This proximity of among all Recovery and Management 32 Management Units described in the sites would increase the connectivity Units, and that twice the amount of Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 63). and stability of the metapopulation and habitat is provided to maintain these We were sued by the Center for smaller, more distant breeding sites. territories over time. Second, these Biological Diversity over our 2005 Because the breeding range of the habitats must be protected from threats critical habitat rule, and on July 13, flycatcher encompasses a broad to assure maintenance of these 2010, we agreed to redesignate critical geographic area with much site populations and habitat for the habitat. The resulting settlement left the variation, management of recovery is foreseeable future through development existing critical habitat designation from approached in the Recovery Plan by and implementation of conservation 2005 in effect, and required that we dividing the flycatcher’s range into 6 management agreements (Service 2002, deliver a proposed rule for new revised Recovery Units, each of which are pp. 79–80). Third, all of these delisting critical habitat to the Federal Register further subdivided into 4 to 7 criteria must be accomplished and their by July 31, 2011, and a final rule by July Management Units (for a total of 32 effectiveness demonstrated for a period 31, 2012. Management Units) (Service, pp. 61– of 5 years (Service 2002, pp. 79–80). Critical Habitat 63). This provides an organizational This critical habitat proposal is strategy to ‘‘characterize flycatcher structured to allow the Service to work Background populations, structure recovery goals, toward achieving the numerical, Critical habitat is defined in section 3 and facilitate effective recovery actions geographical, and habitat-related of the Act as: that should closely parallel the physical, recovery goals. (1) The specific areas within the biological, and logistical realities on the Twice the amount of suitable habitat geographical area occupied by the ground’’ (Service 2002, p. 61). Recovery is needed to support the numerical species, at the time it is listed in goals are recommended for 29 of the 32 territory goals, because the long-term accordance with the Act, on which are Management Units (see Methodology persistence of flycatcher populations found those physical or biological Overview section). Recovery Units are cannot be assured by protecting only features: defined based on large watershed and those habitats in which flycatchers (a) Essential to the conservation of the hydrologic units. Within each Recovery currently breed (Service 2002, p. 80). It species; and Unit, Management Units are based on is important to recognize that most (b) Which may require special watershed or major drainage boundaries flycatcher breeding habitats are management considerations or at the Hydrologic Unit Code Cataloging susceptible to future changes in site protection; and Unit level (standard watershed hydrology (natural or human-related), (2) Specific areas outside the boundaries which have already been human impacts such as development or geographical area occupied by the defined for other purposes). The ‘‘outer’’ fire, and natural catastrophic events species at the time it is listed, upon a boundaries of some Recovery Units and such as flood or drought (Service 2002, determination that such areas are Management Units were defined by the p. 80). Furthermore, as the vegetation at essential for the conservation of the flycatcher’s range boundaries. This sites matures, it can lose the structural species. proposed designation of critical habitat characteristics that make it suitable for Conservation, as defined under is organized geographically within these breeding flycatchers (Service 2002, p. section 3 of the Act, means to use and Recovery Units and Management Units 80). These and other factors can destroy the use of all methods and procedures (see ‘‘Methodology Overview’’ section or degrade breeding sites, such that one that are necessary to bring an below). cannot expect any given breeding site to endangered or threatened species to the The Recovery Plan (Service 2002) remain suitable in perpetuity (Service point at which the measures provided provides reasonable actions 2002, p. 80). Thus, it is necessary to under the Act are no longer necessary. recommended to recover the flycatcher have additional suitable habitat Such methods and procedures include, and provides two criteria, either of available to which flycatchers, but are not limited to, all activities which can be met, in order to consider displaced by such habitat loss or associated with scientific resources downlisting the species to threatened change, can readily move (Service 2002, management such as research, census, (Service 2002, pp. 77–78). The first p. 80). law enforcement, habitat acquisition alternative for downlisting requires and maintenance, propagation, live reaching a total population of 1,500 Previous Federal Actions trapping, and transplantation, and, in flycatcher territories geographically The flycatcher was listed as the extraordinary case where population distributed among all Recovery Units endangered on February 27, 1995 (60 FR pressures within a given ecosystem and maintained for 3 years with habitat 10694). On July 22, 1997, we published cannot be otherwise relieved, may protections (Service 2002, pp. 77–78). a final critical habitat designation for include regulated taking. Habitat protections include a variety of the flycatcher along 964 river km (599 Critical habitat receives protection options such as HCPs, conservation river mi) in Arizona, California, and under section 7 of the Act through the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50546 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

requirement that Federal agencies conservation of the species. When the actions are not likely to jeopardize the ensure, in consultation with the Service, best available scientific data do not continued existence of any endangered that any action they authorize, fund, or demonstrate that the conservation needs or threatened species, and (3) the carry out is not likely to result in the of the species require such additional prohibitions of section 9 of the Act if destruction or adverse modification of areas, we will not designate critical actions occurring in these areas may critical habitat. The designation of habitat in areas outside the geographical affect the species. Federally funded or critical habitat does not affect land area occupied by the species. An area permitted projects affecting listed ownership or establish a refuge, currently occupied by the species but species outside their designated critical wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other that was not occupied at the time of habitat areas may still result in jeopardy conservation area. Such designation listing may, however, be essential to the findings in some cases. These does not allow the government or public conservation of the species and may be protections and conservation tools will to access private lands. Such included in the critical habitat continue to contribute to recovery of designation does not require designation. this species. Similarly, critical habitat implementation of restoration, recovery, Section 4 of the Act requires that we designations made on the basis of the or enhancement measures by non- designate critical habitat on the basis of best available information at the time of Federal landowners. Where a landowner the best scientific and commercial data designation will not control the seeks or requests Federal agency available. Further, our Policy on direction and substance of future funding or authorization for an action Information Standards Under the recovery plans, HCPs, or other species that may affect a listed species or Endangered Species Act (published in conservation planning efforts if new critical habitat, the consultation the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 information available at the time of requirements of section 7(a)(2) would FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act these planning efforts calls for a apply, but even in the event of a (section 515 of the Treasury and General different outcome. destruction or adverse modification Government Appropriations Act for finding, the obligation of the Federal Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. Physical or Biological Features action agency and the landowner is not 5658)), and our associated Information In accordance with sections 3(5)(A)(i) to restore or recover the species, but to Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations implement reasonable and prudent establish procedures, and provide at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which alternatives to avoid destruction or guidance to ensure that our decisions areas within the geographical area adverse modification of critical habitat. are based on the best scientific data occupied by the species (in this case a For inclusion in a critical habitat available. They require our biologists, to subspecies) at the time of listing to designation, the habitat within the the extent consistent with the Act and designate as critical habitat, we consider geographical area occupied by the with the use of the best scientific data the physical or biological features species at the time it was listed must available, to use primary and original essential to the conservation of the contain physical or biological features sources of information as the basis for flycatcher and which may require which are essential to the conservation recommendations to designate critical special management considerations or of the species and which may require habitat. protection. These include, but are not special management considerations or When we determine which areas limited to: protection. Critical habitat designations should be designated as critical habitat, (1) Space for individual and identify, to the extent known using the our primary source of information is population growth and for normal best scientific and commercial data generally the information developed behavior; available, those physical or biological during the listing process for the (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or features that are essential to the species. Additional information sources other nutritional or physiological conservation of the species (such as may include the recovery plan for the requirements; space, food, cover, and protected species, articles in peer-reviewed (3) Cover or shelter; habitat), focusing on the principal journals, conservation plans developed (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or biological or physical constituent by States and counties, scientific status rearing (or development) of offspring; elements (primary constituent elements) surveys and studies, biological and within an area that are essential to the assessments, or other unpublished (5) Habitats that are protected from conservation of the species (such as materials and expert opinion or disturbance or are representative of the roost sites, nesting grounds, seasonal personal knowledge. historical, geographical, and ecological wetlands, water quality, tide, soil type). We recognize that critical habitat distributions of a species. Primary constituent elements are the designated at a particular point in time We derive the specific physical or elements of physical or biological may not include all of the habitat areas biological features required for the features that, when laid out in the that we may later determine are flycatcher from studies of this appropriate quantity and spatial necessary for the recovery of the subspecies’ habitat, ecology, and life arrangement to provide for a species’ species. For these reasons, a critical history as described below. The most life-history processes, are essential to habitat designation does not signal that comprehensive, current, and thorough the conservation of the species. habitat outside the designated area is documents are the Recovery Plan Under the Act, we can designate unimportant or may not be required for (Service 2002, Appendix D), Survey critical habitat in areas outside the recovery of the species. Areas that are Protocol and Natural History Summary geographical area occupied by the important to the conservation of the (Sogge et al. 2010), and 10-year central species at the time it is listed, upon a species, both inside and outside the Arizona ecology study (Paxton et al. determination that such areas are critical habitat designation, will 2007a). essential for the conservation of the continue to be subject to: (1) In general, the areas proposed for species. We designate critical habitat in Conservation actions implemented designation as critical habitat are areas outside the geographical area under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) designed to provide sufficient riparian occupied by a species only when a regulatory protections afforded by the habitat for breeding, non-breeding, designation limited to its range would requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act territorial, dispersing, and migrating be inadequate to ensure the for Federal agencies to insure their flycatchers in order to reach the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50547

geographic distribution, abundance, and summarized in the ‘‘Background’’ off, treated water outflow, irrigation or habitat-related recovery goals described section above and in more detail in the diversion ditches, reservoirs, and dam in the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. Recovery Plan (Service 2002, Chapter outflows (Service 2002, p. D–15). 77–85). We are not proposing any areas II), it is important to recognize the Although the waters provided to these as critical habitat solely because they interconnected nature of the physical or habitats might be considered serve as a migration habitat. Instead, the biological features that provide the ‘‘artificial,’’ they are often important for areas we are proposing serve a variety primary constituent elements of critical maintaining the habitat in appropriate of functions, including habitat to be habitat. Specifically, we consider the condition for breeding flycatchers used by migrating flycatchers. The relationships between river function, within the existing environment. habitat components important for hydrology, floodplains, aquifers, and In considering the specific physical or conservation of this subspecies were plant growth, which form the biological features essential for the determined from studies of flycatcher environment essential to the conservation of the flycatcher, it is also behavior and habitat use throughout the conservation of the flycatcher. important to consider longer-term bird’s range (see Background section). The hydrologic regime (stream flow processes that may influence habitat In general, the physical or biological pattern) and supply of (and interaction changes over time, such as climate features of critical habitat for nesting between) surface and subsurface water change. Climate change is a long-term flycatchers are found in the riparian is a driving factor in the long-term shift in the statistics of the weather areas within the 100-year floodplain or maintenance, growth, recycling, and (including its averages). In its Fourth flood-prone area. Flycatchers use regeneration of flycatcher habitat Assessment Report, the riparian habitat for feeding, sheltering, (Service 2002, p. 16). As streams reach Intergovernmental Panel on Climate and cover while breeding, migrating, the lowlands, their gradients typically Change (IPCC) defines climate change and dispersing. It is important to flatten and surrounding terrain opens as, ‘‘a change in the state of the climate recognize that flycatcher habitat is into broader floodplains (Service 2002, that can be identified by changes in the ephemeral in its presence, and its p. 32). In these geographic settings, the mean and/or variability of its properties distribution is dynamic in nature stream-flow patterns (frequency, and that persists for an extended period, because riparian vegetation is prone to magnitude, duration, and timing) will typically decades or longer’’ (Solomon periodic disturbance (such as flooding) provide the necessary stream-channel et al. 2007, p. 943). Changes in climate (Service 2002, p. 17). Even with the conditions (wide configuration, high already are occurring. Examples of dynamic shifts in habitat conditions, sediment deposition, periodic observed changes in the physical one or more of the primary constituent inundation, recharged aquifers, lateral environment include an increase in elements described below are found channel movement, and elevated global average sea level and declines in throughout each of the units that we are groundwater tables throughout the mountain glaciers and average snow proposing as critical habitat. floodplain) that result in the cover in both the northern and southern Flycatcher habitat may become development of flycatcher habitat (Poff hemispheres (IPCC 2007a, p. 30). At unsuitable for breeding through et al. 1997, pp. 770–772; Service 2002, continental, regional and ocean basin maturation or disturbance of the p. 16). Allowing the river to flow over scales, observed changes in long-term riparian vegetation, but it may remain the width of the floodplain, when trends of other aspects of climate suitable for use during migration or for overbank flooding occurs, is integral to include: A substantial increase in foraging. This situation may be only allow deposition of fine moist soils, precipitation in eastern parts of North temporary, and vegetation may cycle water, nutrients, and seeds that provide American and South America, northern back into suitability as breeding habitat the essential material for plant Europe, and northern and central Asia; (Service 2002, p. 17). Therefore, it is not germination and growth. An abundance declines in precipitation in the practical to assume that any given and distribution of fine sediments Mediterranean, southern Africa, and breeding habitat area will remain extending farther laterally across the parts of southern Asia; and an increase suitable over the long term or persist in floodplain and deeper underneath the in intense tropical cyclone activity in the same location (Service 2002, p. 17). surface retains much more subsurface the North Atlantic since about 1970 Over a 5-year period, flycatcher habitat water, which in turn supplies water for (IPCC 2007a, p. 30). can, in optimum conditions, germinate, the development of the vegetation that Projections of climate change globally be used for migration or foraging, provides flycatcher habitat and micro- and for broad regions through the 21st continue to grow, and eventually be habitat conditions (Service 2002, p. 16). century are based on the results of used for nesting. Thus, flycatcher The interconnected interaction between modeling efforts using state-of-the-art habitat that is not currently suitable for groundwater and surface water Atmosphere-Ocean General Circulation nesting at a specific time, but is useful contributes to the quality of riparian Models and various greenhouse gas for foraging and migration, can still be vegetation community (structure and emissions scenarios (Meehl et al. 2007, important for flycatcher conservation. plant species) and will influence the p. 753; Randall et al. 2007, pp. 596– Feeding sites and migration stopover germination, density, vigor, 599). As is the case with all models, areas are important components for the composition, and the ability of there is uncertainty associated with flycatcher’s survival, productivity, and vegetation to regenerate and maintain projections due to assumptions used health, and they can also be areas where itself (Arizona Department of Water and other features of the models. new breeding habitat develops as Resources 1994, pp. 31–32). However, despite differences in nesting sites are lost or degraded In many instances, flycatcher assumptions and other parameters used (Service 2002, p. 42). These breeding sites occur along streams in climate change models, the overall successional cycles of habitat change are where human impacts are minimized surface air temperature trajectory is one important for long-term persistence of enough to allow more natural processes of increased warming in comparison to flycatcher habitat. to create, recycle, and maintain current conditions (Meehl et al. 2007, p. Based on our current knowledge of flycatcher habitat. However, there are 762; Prinn et al. 2011, p. 527). Among the life history and ecology of the also breeding sites that are supported by the IPCC’s projections for the 21st flycatcher and the relationship of its various types of supplemental water century are the following: (1) It is life-history functions to its habitat, as including agricultural and urban run- virtually certain there will be warmer

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50548 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

and more frequent hot days and nights climate, and reduced surface water stream conditions may also occur at over most of the earth’s land areas; (2) across the flycatcher’s range. high elevations, as in the marshy it is very likely there will be increased In the recent past, drought has had mountain meadows supporting frequency of warm spells and heat both negative and positive effects on flycatchers in the headwaters of the waves over most land areas, and the breeding flycatchers and their habitat, Little Colorado River near Greer, frequency of heavy precipitation events which can provide insight into how Arizona, or the flat-gradient portions of will increase over most areas; and (3) it climate change may affect flycatchers the upper Rio Grande in south-central is likely that increases will occur in the and flycatcher habitat. For example, the Colorado and northern New Mexico incidence of extreme high sea level extreme drought of 2002 caused near (Service 2002, p. 32). Sometimes, the (excludes tsunamis), intense tropical complete reproductive failure of the 146 low-gradient wider floodplain exists cyclone activity, and the area affected flycatcher territories at Roosevelt Lake only at the habitat patch itself within a by droughts in various regions of the in central Arizona (Smith et al. 2003, stream that is otherwise steeper in world (IPCC 2007b, p. 8). pp. 8, 10), and caused a dramatic rise in gradient (Service 2002, p. D–12). Changes in climate can have a variety the prevalence of non-breeding and Relatively steep, confined streams can of direct and indirect ecological impacts unpaired flycatchers (Paxton et al. also support flycatcher breeding habitat on species, and can exacerbate the 2007a, p. 4). While extreme drought (Service 2002, p. D–13). For instance, a effects of other threats. Climate- during a single year can generate portion of the San Luis Rey River in associated environmental changes to the impacts to breeding success, drought California supports a substantial landscape, such as decreased stream can also have localized short-term flycatcher population and stands out flows, increased water temperatures, benefits in some regulated among flycatcher habitats as having a reduced snowpack, and increased fire environments. For instance, at some relatively high gradient and being frequency, affect species and their reservoirs (such as Roosevelt Lake, confined in a fairly narrow, steep-sided habitats. The vulnerability of a species Arizona, and Lake Isabella, California), valley (Service 2002, p. D–13). Even a to climate change impacts is a function drought led to reduced water storage, steep, confined canyon or mountain of the species’ sensitivity to those which increased the exposure of wet stream may present local conditions changes, its exposure to those changes, soils at the lake’s perimeter. Continued where just a small area less than a and its capacity to adapt to those drought in those areas allowed the hectare (acre) in size of flycatcher changes. The best available science is exposed areas to grow vegetation and breeding habitat may develop (Service used to evaluate the species’ response to become new flycatcher nesting habitat 2002, p. D–13). Such sites are important these stressors. We recognize that future (Ellis et al. 2008, p. 44). These short- individually and in aggregate to climate change may present a particular term and localized habitat increases are contribute to metapopulation stability, challenge evaluating habitat conditions not likely sustainable with persistent site connectivity, and gene flow (Service for species like the flycatcher because drought or long-term predictions of a 2002, p. D–13). Flycatchers can occupy the additional stressors may push drier environment, because of the very small, isolated habitat patches and species beyond their ability to survive overall importance of the presence of may occur in fairly high densities in their present location. surface water and elevated groundwater within those small patches. Exactly how climate change will needed to grow dense riparian forests Many willow flycatchers are found affect precipitation in the specific areas for flycatcher habitat. As a result, we along streams using riparian habitat with flycatcher habitat is uncertain. expect long-term climate trends during migration (Yong and Finch 1997, However, consistent with recent associated with a drier climate to have p. 253; Service 2002, p. E–3). Migration observations of regional effects of an overall negative effect on the stopover areas can be similar to climate change, the projections available rangewide habitat for breeding habitat or riparian habitats presented for the Southwest predict flycatchers. with less vegetation density and warmer, drier, and more drought-like Considering these issues and other abundance compared to areas for nest conditions (Hoerling and Eischeid 2007, information regarding the biology and placement (the vegetation structure is p. 19; Seager et al. 2007, p. 1181). For ecology of the species, we have too short or sparse or the patch is too example, climate simulations of the determined that the flycatcher requires small) (Service 2002, p. E–3). For Palmer Drought Severity Index (PSDI) (a the essential physical or biological example, many locations where migrant calculation of the cumulative effects of features described below. flycatchers were detected on the lower precipitation and temperature on Colorado River (Koronkiewicz et al. Space for Individual and Population surface moisture balance) for the 2004, pp. 9–11) and throughout Arizona Growth and for Normal Behavior Southwest for the periods of 2006 to in 2004 (Munzer et al. 2005, Appendix 2030 and 2035 to 2060 show an increase Streams of lower gradient and more C) were areas surveyed for nesting birds, in drought severity with surface open valleys with a wide and broad but no breeding was detected. Such warming. Additionally, drought still floodplain are the geological settings migration stopover areas, even though increases even during wetter that are known to support flycatcher not used for breeding, are critically simulations because of the effect of heat- breeding habitat from near sea level to important resources affecting related moisture loss through about 2,600 m (8,500 ft) in elevation in productivity and survival (Service 2002, evaporation and evapotranspiration southern California, southern Nevada, p. E–3). The variety of riparian habitat (Hoerling and Eischeid 2007, p. 19). southern Utah, southern Colorado, occupied by migrant flycatchers ranges Annual mean precipitation is likely to Arizona, and New Mexico (Service from small patches with shorter and decrease in the Southwest, as is the 2002, p. 7). Lands with moist conditions sparser vegetation to larger more length of snow season and snow depth that support riparian plant communities complex breeding habitats. (IPCC 2007b, p. 887). Most models are areas that provide flycatcher habitat. Therefore, based on the information project a widespread decrease in snow Conditions like these typically develop above, we identify streams of lower depth in the Rocky Mountains and in lower elevation floodplains as well as gradient and more open valleys with a earlier snowmelt (IPCC 2007b, p. 891). where streams enter impoundments, wide or broad floodplain an essential In summary, we expect that climate either natural (such as beaver ponds) or physical or biological feature of change will result in a warmer, drier human-made (reservoirs). Low-gradient flycatcher habitat. In some instances,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50549

streams in relatively steep, confined Therefore, based on the information released below a dam, held in a lake, or area can also support flycatcher above, we identify the presence of a removed from a lakebed, and breeding habitat (Service 2002, p. D–13). wide range of invertebrate prey, consequently, varying degrees of These areas support the abundance of including flying and ground- and flycatcher habitat are available as a riparian vegetation used for flycatcher vegetation-dwelling species of terrestrial result of dam operations (Service 2002, nesting, foraging, dispersal, and and aquatic origins to be an essential p. 33). The riparian vegetation that migration. physical or biological feature of constitutes flycatcher breeding habitat flycatcher habitat. requires substantial water (Service 2002, Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or p. D–12). Because flycatcher breeding Water Other Nutritional or Physiological habitat is often where there is slow- Requirements Flycatcher nesting habitat is largely moving or still water, these slow and Food associated with perennial (persistent) still water conditions may also be stream flow that can support the important in influencing the production The flycatcher is somewhat of an expanse of vegetation characteristics of insect prey base for flycatcher food insect generalist (Service 2002, p. 26), needed by breeding flycatchers, but (Service 2002, p. D–12). These slow- taking a wide range of invertebrate prey there are exceptions. Flycatcher nesting moving water situations can also be including flying, and ground- and habitat can persist on intermittent managed or mimicked through vegetation-dwelling species of terrestrial (ephemeral) streams that retain local manipulated supplemental water and aquatic origins (Drost et al. 2003, conditions favorable to riparian originating from sources such as pp. 96–102). Wasps and bees vegetation (Service 2002, p. D–12). The agricultural return flows or irrigation (Hymenoptera) are common food items, range and variety of stream flow canals (Service 2002, p. D–15). as are flies (Diptera), beetles conditions (frequency, magnitude, Therefore, based on the information (Coleoptera), butterflies, moths and duration, and timing) (Poff et al. 1997, above, we identify flowing streams with caterpillars (Lepidoptera), and pp. 770–772) that will establish and a wide range of stream flow conditions spittlebugs (Homoptera) (Beal 1912, pp. maintain flycatcher habitat can arise in that support expansive riparian 60–63; McCabe 1991, pp. 119–120). different types of both regulated and vegetation as an essential physical or Plant foods such as small fruits have unregulated flow regimes throughout its biological feature of flycatcher habitat. also been reported (Beal 1912, pp. 60– range (Service 2002, p. D–12). Also, The most common stream flow 63; Roberts 1932, p. 20; Imhof 1962, p. flow conditions that will establish and conditions are largely perennial 268), but are not a significant food maintain flycatcher habitat can be (persistent) stream flow with a natural during the breeding season (McCabe achieved in regulated streams, hydrologic regime (frequency, 1991, pp. 119–120). Diet studies of adult depending on scale of operation and the magnitude, duration, and timing). flycatchers (Drost et al. 1998, p. 1; interaction of the primary physical However, in the Southwest, DeLay et al. 1999, p. 216) found a wide characteristics of the landscape (Service hydrological conditions can vary, range of prey taken. Major prey items 2002, p. D–12). causing some flows to be intermittent, In the Southwest, hydrological were small (flying ants) (Hymenoptera) but the floodplain can retain surface conditions at a flycatcher breeding site to large (dragonflies) (Odonata) flying moisture conditions favorable to can vary remarkably within a season insects, with Diptera and Hemiptera expansive and flourishing riparian and between years (Service 2002, p. D– (true bugs) comprising half of the prey vegetation. These appropriate 12). At some locations, particularly items. Willow flycatchers also took non- conditions can be supported by during drier years, water or saturated flying species, particularly Lepidoptera managed water sources and soil is only present early in the breeding larvae. From an analysis of the hydrological cycles that mimic key season (May and part of June) (Service flycatcher diet along the South Fork of components of the natural hydrologic 2002, p. D–12). At other sites, vegetation cycle. the Kern River, California (Drost et al. may be immersed in standing water 2003, p. 98), flycatchers consumed a during a wet year, but be hundreds of Sites for Germination or Seed Dispersal variety of prey from 12 different insect meters from surface water in dry years Subsurface hydrologic conditions may groups. Flycatchers have been identified (Service 2002, p. D–12). This is in some places (particularly at the more targeting seasonal hatchings of aquatic particularly true of reservoir sites such arid locations of the Southwest) be insects along the Salt River arm of as the Kern River at Lake Isabella, equally important to surface water Roosevelt Lake, Arizona (Paxton et al. California; Roosevelt Lake, Arizona; and conditions in determining riparian 2007a, p. 75). Elephant Butte Reservoir, New Mexico vegetation patterns (Lichivar and Flycatcher food availability may be (Service 2002, p. D–12). Similarly, Wakely 2004, p. 92). Where largely influenced by the density and where a river channel has changed groundwater levels are elevated to the species of vegetation, proximity to and naturally, there may be a total absence point that riparian forest plants can presence of water, saturated soil levels, of water or visibly saturated soil for directly access those waters, it can be an and microclimate features such as several years. In such cases, the riparian area for breeding, non-breeding, temperature and humidity (Service vegetation and any flycatchers breeding territorial, dispersing, foraging, and 2002, pp. 18, D–12). Flycatchers forage within it may persist for several years migrating flycatchers. Elevated within and above the tree canopy, along (Service 2002, p. D–12). groundwater helps create moist soil the patch edge, in openings within the In some areas, natural or managed conditions believed to be important for territory, over water, and from tall trees hydrologic cycles can create temporary nesting conditions and prey populations as well as herbaceous ground cover flycatcher habitat, but may not be able (Service 2002, pp. 11, 18), as further (Bent 1960, pp. 209–210; McCabe 1991, to support it for an extended amount of discussed below. p. 124). Flycatchers employ a ‘‘sit and time, or may support varying amounts Depth to groundwater plays an wait’’ foraging tactic, with foraging of habitat at different points in the important part in the distribution of bouts interspersed with longer periods cycle. Some dam operations create riparian vegetation (Arizona Department of perching (Prescott and Middleton varied situations that allow different of Water Resources 1994, p. 31) and 1988, p. 25). plant species to thrive when water is consequently, flycatcher habitat. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50550 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

greater the depth to groundwater below regional flycatcher productivity and (Quercus agrifolia, Quercus the land surface, the less abundant the survival (Service 2002, p. D–19). chrysolepis), rose (Rosa californica, riparian vegetation (Arizona Department Therefore, based on the information Rosa arizonica, Rosa multiflora), of Water Resources 1994, p. 31). above, we identify riparian tree and sycamore (Platinus wrightii), giant reed Localized, perched aquifers (a saturated shrub species (described in more detail (Arundo donax), false indigo (Amorpha area that sits above the main water below) that provide cover and shelter californica), Pacific poison ivy table) can and do support some riparian for nesting, breeding, foraging, (Toxicodendron diversilobum), grape habitat, but these systems are not dispersing, and migrating flycatchers as (Vitus arizonica), Virginia creeper extensive (Arizona Department of Water essential physical or biological features (Parthenocissus quinquefolia), Siberian Resources 1994, p. 31). of flycatcher habitat. elm (Ulmus pumila), and walnut The abundance and distribution of (Juglans hindsii) (Service 2002, pp. D– fine sediment deposited on floodplains Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or 3, D–5, D–9). Other species used by is critical for the development, Rearing (or Development) of Offspring nesting flycatchers may become known abundance, distribution, maintenance, Reproduction and Rearing of Offspring over time as more studies and surveys and germination of the plants that grow Riparian habitat characteristics such occur. into flycatcher habitat (Service 2002, p. Canopy density (the amount of cover as dominant plant species, size and 16). Fine sediments provide seed beds provided by tree and shrub branches shape of habitat patches, tree canopy to facilitate the growth of riparian measured from the ground) at various structure, vegetation height, and vegetation for flycatcher habitat. In nest sites ranged from 50 to 100 percent almost all cases, moist or saturated soil vegetation density are important (Service 2002, p. D–3). Flycatcher is present at or near breeding sites parameters of flycatcher breeding breeding habitat can be generally during wet and non-drought years habitat, although they may vary widely organized into three broad habitat (Service 2002, p. 11). The saturated soil at different sites (Service 2002, p. D–1). types—those dominated by native and adjacent surface water may be The accumulating knowledge of vegetation (typically willow), by exotic present early in the breeding season, but flycatcher breeding sites reveals (nonnative) vegetation (typically salt only damp soil is present by late June important areas of similarity, which cedar), and those with mixed native and or early July (Service 2002, p. D–3). constitute the basic concept of what is those dominated by exotic plants Microclimate features (temperature and suitable breeding habitat (Service 2002, (typically salt cedar and willow). humidity) facilitated by moist or p. D–2). These habitat features are These broad habitat descriptors reflect saturated soil, are believed to play an generally discussed below. the fact that flycatchers inhabit riparian important role where flycatchers are Flycatchers nest in thickets of trees habitats dominated by both native and detected and nest, their breeding and shrubs ranging in height from 2 m nonnative plant species. Salt cedar and success, and availability and abundance to 30 m (6 to 98 ft) (Service 2002, p. D– Russian olive are two exotic plant of food resources (Service 2002, pp. 18, 3). Lower-stature thickets (2–4 m or 6– species used by flycatchers for nest D–12). 13 ft tall) tend to be found at higher placement and also foraging and shelter Therefore, based on the information elevation sites, with tall-stature habitats (Service 2002, p. D–4). The riparian above, we identify elevated subsurface at middle- and lower-elevation riparian patches used by breeding flycatchers groundwater tables and appropriate forests (Service 2002, p. D–2). Nest sites vary in size and shape (Service 2002, p. floodplain fine sediments as essential typically have dense foliage at least D–2). They may be relatively dense, physical or biological features of from the ground level up to linear, contiguous stands or irregularly- flycatcher habitat. These features approximately 4 m (13 ft) above ground, shaped mosaics of dense vegetation provide water and seedbeds for the although dense foliage may exist only at with open areas (Service 2002, pp. D– germination, growth, and maintenance the shrub level, or as a low, dense tree 2–D–11). of expansive growth of riparian canopy (Service 2002, p. D–3). Flycatchers use tamarisk (or salt vegetation needed by the flycatcher. Regardless of the plant species’ cedar) and Russian olive for nest composition or height, breeding sites placement, foraging, roosting, cover, Cover or Shelter usually consist of dense vegetation in migration, and dispersal. Fewer than Riparian vegetation (described more the patch interior, or an aggregate of half (44 percent) of the known in detail within the Sites for Breeding or dense patches interspersed with flycatcher territories occur in habitat Rearing (or Development) of Offspring openings creating a mosaic that is not patches that are greater than 90 percent section) also provides the flycatcher uniformly dense (Service 2002, p. 11). native vegetation in composition (Durst cover and shelter while migrating and Common tree and shrub species et al. 2008, p. 15). About 50 percent of nesting. Placing nests in dense currently known to comprise nesting all known flycatcher territories are vegetation provides cover and shelter habitat include Goodings willow, coyote located at breeding sites that include from predators or nest parasites that willow, Geyers willow, arroyo willow, mixtures of native and exotic plant would seek out flycatcher adults, red willow, yewleaf willow, pacific species (mostly tamarisk) (Durst et al. nestlings, or eggs. Similarly, using willow (Salix lasiandra), boxelder, 2008, p. 15). In many of these areas, riparian vegetation for cover and shelter tamarisk, and Russian olive (Service exotic plant species are significant during migration provides food-rich 2002, pp. D–2, D–11). Other plant contributors to the habitat structure by stopover areas, a place to rest, and species used for nesting have been providing the dense lower strata shelter or cover along migratory flights buttonbush (Cephalanthus vegetation that flycatchers prefer (Durst (Service 2002, pp. D–14, F–16). Riparian occidentalis), cottonwood, stinging et al. 2008, p. 15). A USGS comparative vegetation used by migrating flycatchers nettle (Urtica dioica), alder (Alnus study (Sogge et al. 2005, p. 1) found no can sometimes be less dense and rhombifolia, Alnus oblongifolia, Alnus difference in flycatcher physiology, abundant than areas used for nesting tenuifolia), velvet ash (Fraxinus immunology, site fidelity, productivity, (Service 2002, p. D–19). However, velutina), poison hemlock (Conium or survivorship between flycatchers migration stopover areas, even though maculatum), blackberry (Rubus nesting in tamarisk-dominated habitat not used for breeding, may be critically ursinus), seep willow (Baccharis versus native-dominated habitats. important resources affecting local and salicifolia, Baccharis glutinosa), oak Tamarisk habitats vary with respect to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50551

suitability for breeding flycatchers develops (Service 2002, p. D–11). While range in height from about 2 m to 30 m across their range, just as do native riparian vegetation too mature, too (about 6 to 98 ft). Lower-stature thickets habitats (Sogge et al. 2005, p.1). While immature, or of lesser quality in (2 to 4 m or 6 to 13 ft tall) are found the literature refutes or questions the abundance and breadth may not be used at higher elevation riparian forests and negative environmental impacts of for nesting, it can be used by breeding tall-stature thickets are found at middle- tamarisk (Glenn and Nagler 2005, pp. 1– flycatchers for foraging (especially if it and lower-elevation riparian forests; 2, USGS 2010, pp. vi–xviii), many extends out from larger patches) or and/or riparian vegetation improvement during migration for foraging, cover, and (b) Areas of dense riparian foliage at projects focus on the eradication or shelter (Sogge and Tibbitts 1994, p. 16; least from the ground level up to control of tamarisk. The implementation Sogge and Marshall 2000, p. 53). approximately 4 m (13 ft) above ground of these projects requires careful Therefore, based on the information or dense foliage only at the shrub or tree evaluation (see Special Management above, we identify a variety of riparian level as a low, dense canopy; and/or Considerations or Protections below) tree and shrub species as essential (c) Sites for nesting that contain a and success can rely on the physical or biological features of dense (about 50 percent to 100 percent) improvement of the physical or flycatcher habitat. Typically, dense tree or shrub (or both) canopy (the biological features included in this expansive riparian forests provide amount of cover provided by tree and proposal associated with river flow and habitat to place nests. Riparian shrub branches measured from the groundwater (Service 2002, Appendices vegetation of broader quality, with a ground); and/or H and K). mosaic of open spaces, typically (d) Dense patches of riparian forests Flycatchers have been recorded surround locations to place nests or that are interspersed with small nesting in patches as small as 0.1 ha along river segments and provide openings of open water or marsh or (0.25 ac) along the Rio Grande, and as vegetation for foraging, perching, areas with shorter and sparser large as 70 ha (175 ac) in the upper Gila dispersal, and migration, and habitat vegetation that creates a variety of River, New Mexico (Service 2002, p. that can develop into nesting areas habitat that is not uniformly dense. 17). The mean reported size of through time. Patch size may be as small as 0.1 ha flycatcher breeding patches was 8.6 ha (0.25 ac) or as large as 70 ha (175 ac); Primary Constituent Elements for (21.2 ac), with the majority of sites and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher toward the smaller end, as evidenced by (2) Primary Constituent Element 2— a median patch size of 1.8 ha (4.4 ac) Under the Act and its implementing Insect prey populations. A variety of (Service 2002, p. 17). Mean patch size regulations, we are required to identify insect prey populations found within or of breeding sites supporting 10 or more the physical or biological features adjacent to riparian floodplains or moist flycatcher territories was 24.9 ha (62.2 essential to the conservation of the environments, which can include: flying ac). Aggregations of occupied breeding flycatcher in areas occupied at the time ants, wasps, and bees (Hymenoptera); patches within a breeding site may of listing, focusing on the features’ dragonflies (Odonata); flies (Diptera); create a riparian mosaic as large as 200 primary constituent elements. We true bugs (Hemiptera); beetles ha (494 ac), such as areas like the Kern consider primary constituent elements (Coleoptera); butterflies, moths, and River (Whitfield 2002, p. 2), Alamo to be the elements of physical or caterpillars (Lepidoptera); and Lake, Roosevelt Lake (Paradzick et al. biological features that, when laid out in spittlebugs (Homoptera). 1999, pp. 6–7), and Lake Mead the appropriate quantity and spatial With this proposed designation of (McKernan 1997, p. 13). arrangement to provide for a species’ critical habitat, we intend to identify the Flycatchers can cluster their life-history processes, are essential to physical or biological features essential territories into small portions of riparian the conservation of the species. to the conservation of the species, sites (Whitfield and Enos 1996, p. 2; Based on our current knowledge of through the identification of the Sogge et al. 1997, p. 24), and major the physical or biological features and appropriate quantity and spatial portions of the site may only be used habitat characteristics required to arrangement of the primary constituent briefly or not at all in any given year. sustain the species’ life-history elements sufficient to support the life- Habitat modeling based on remote processes, we determine that the history processes of the species. sensing and GIS data has found that following elements are the primary breeding site occupancy at reservoir constituent elements specific to the Physical or Biological Features and sites in Arizona is influenced by flycatcher: Primary Constituent Elements Summary vegetation characteristics of habitat (1) Primary Constituent Element 1— The discussion above outlines those adjacent to the actual nesting areas Riparian vegetation. Riparian habitat in physical or biological features essential (Hatten and Paradzick 2003, pp. 774, a dynamic river or lakeside, natural or to the conservation of the flycatcher and 782); therefore, areas adjacent to nest manmade successional environment (for presents our rationale as to why those sites can be an important component of nesting, foraging, migration, dispersal, features are being proposed. The a breeding site. How size and shape of and shelter) that is comprised of trees primary constituent elements described riparian patches relate to factors such as and shrubs (that can include Gooddings above are results of the dynamic river or flycatcher nest-site selection and willow, coyote willow, Geyers willow, lakeside environment that germinates, fidelity, reproductive success, arroyo willow, red willow, yewleaf develops, maintains, and regenerates the predation, and brood parasitism is willow, pacific willow, boxelder, riparian forest and provides food for unknown (Service 2002, p. D–11). tamarisk, Russian olive, buttonbush, breeding, non-breeding, dispersing, With only some exceptions, cottonwood, stinging nettle, alder, territorial, and migrating flycatchers. flycatchers are generally not found velvet ash, poison hemlock, blackberry, Anthropogenic factors such as dams, nesting in confined floodplains seep willow, oak, rose, sycamore, false irrigation ditches, or agricultural field (typically those bound within a narrow indigo, Pacific poison ivy, grape, return flow can assist in providing or canyon) (Hatten and Paradzick 2003, p. Virginia creeper, Siberian elm, and mimic the conditions that support 780) or where only a single narrow strip walnut) and some combination of: flycatcher habitat. In regulated of riparian vegetation less than (a) Dense riparian vegetation with environments, riparian vegetation approximately 10 m (33 ft) wide thickets of trees and shrubs that can improvement projects associated with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50552 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

planting, irrigation, and cultivation may known territories and habitat to reach (such as groundwater pumping, also require manual manipulation to recovery goals. While there is still great developments, watershed condition). maintain suitability over the long term. variance in the known number of Prohibitions of section 9 of the Act also Because the flycatcher exists in territories within the Coastal California, continue to apply both inside and disjunct breeding populations across a Gila, and Rio Grande Recovery Units, outside of designated critical habitat. wide geographic and elevation range these areas are closer in number of A detailed discussion of threats to the and its habitat is subject to dynamic territories and amount of habitat to the flycatcher and its habitat can be found events, the quantity and spatial established recovery goals. The numeric in the final listing rule (60 FR 10694, arrangement of critical habitat river territory goals established per February 27, 1995), the previous critical segments described below are essential Management Unit are in denominations habitat designations (62 FR 39129, July for the flycatcher to maintain of 25. The goal for some Management 22, 1997; 70 FR 60886, October 19, metapopulation stability, connectivity, Units may be as few as 25 territories or 2005), and the final Recovery Plan and gene flow, and to protect against as many as 325. (Service 2002, pp. 33–42, Appendix F). catastrophic loss. All river segments Some of the special management actions proposed as flycatcher critical habitat Special Management Considerations or Protection that may be needed for essential features are either: (1) Within the known range of flycatcher habitat are briefly of the subspecies, representing areas When designating critical habitat, we summarized below. known to be occupied at the time of assess whether the specific areas within (1) Restore adequate water-related listing; or (2) essential areas for the the geographical area occupied by the elements to improve and expand the conservation of the species not known species at the time of listing contain quality, quantity, and distribution of to be occupied by the flycatcher at the features which are essential to the riparian habitat. Special management conservation of the species and which time of listing, but now may or may not may: increase efficiency of groundwater may require special management be known to have flycatchers present. management; use urban water outfall These areas contain at least one of the considerations or protection. As mentioned briefly or referenced in and irrigation delivery and tail waters primary constituent elements of the for vegetation improvement; maintain, physical or biological features essential this proposed rule, the flycatcher and its habitat are threatened by a multitude of improve, provide, or reestablish for the conservation of the subspecies. It instream flows to expand the quality, is important to recognize that the factors occurring at once. Threats to those features that define critical habitat distribution, and abundance of riparian primary constituent elements such as vegetation; increase the width between riparian vegetation with trees and (elements of physical or biological features) are caused by various factors. levees to expand the active channel shrubs of a certain type and insect prey during overbank flooding; and manage populations are present throughout the We believe the essential features within regulated river flows to more closely river segments selected, but the specific the areas proposed as critical habitat resemble the natural hydrologic regime. quality of riparian habitat for nesting will require some level of management (2) Retain riparian vegetation in the (which involve elements such as or protection (or both) to address the floodplain. Special management may specific configuration of riparian current and future threats and maintain include the following actions: avoid foliage, sites for nesting, and the quality, quantity, and arrangement interspersion of small openings), of the elements of physical or biological clearing channels for flood flow migration, foraging, and shelter will not features essential to flycatcher conveyance or plowing of flood plains; remain constant in condition or location conservation. and implement projects to minimize over time due to succession (plant Essential features in need of special clearing of vegetation (including exotic germination and growth) and the management occur not only at the vegetation) to help ensure that desired dynamic environment in which they immediate locations where the native species and exotic vegetation exist. flycatcher may be present, but at persist until an effective riparian In order to reach the goal of additional areas needed to reach vegetation improvement plan can be conserving the subspecies by recovering recovery goals and areas that can implemented. an adequate geographical and ecological provide for normal population (3) Manage biotic elements and distribution of the flycatcher fluctuations and habitat succession that processes. Special management may population, the distribution and may occur in response to natural and include the following actions: manage abundance of flycatcher habitat and unpredictable events. The flycatcher livestock grazing to increase flycatcher breeding populations must improve may be dependent upon habitat habitat quality and quantity by across the 29 Management Units (see components beyond the immediate determining appropriate areas, seasons, Background section). The recovery goal areas where individuals of the species and use consistent within the natural is 1,950 flycatcher territories occur if they are important in historical norm and tolerances; geographically and numerically maintaining ecological processes such reconfigure grazing units, improve distributed in the appropriate as hydrologic regimes; plant fencing, and improve monitoring and Management Units along with twice the germination, growth, maintenance, and documentation of grazing practices; habitat needed to maintain these regeneration (succession); manage wild and feral hoofed-mammals territories (see Background section). sedimentation; groundwater elevations; (ungulates) (e.g., elk, horses, burros) to Also, these areas must hold these plant health and vigor; or maintenance increase flycatcher habitat quality and populations for a number of years and of prey populations. quantity; and manage keystone species be protected through conservation The designation of critical habitat such as beaver to restore desired agreements or other means. The most does not imply that lands outside of processes to increase habitat quality and recent rangewide flycatcher assessment critical habitat do not play an important quantity. estimated that there were about 1,300 role in the conservation of the (4) Protect riparian areas from flycatcher territories (Durst et al. 2008, flycatcher. Federal activities outside of recreational impacts. Special p. 13). The Lower Colorado, Upper critical habitat are still subject to review management may include actions such Colorado, and Basin and Range under section 7 of the Act if they may as managing trails, campsites, off-road Recovery Units need the most growth in affect the flycatcher or its critical habitat vehicles, and fires to prevent habitat

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50553

development and degradation in of stressors that can improve the requirements of the species (or in this flycatcher habitat. germination, growth, and maintenance instance, a willow flycatcher (5) Manage exotic plant species, such of preferred vegetation. subspecies). In accordance with the Act as tamarisk or Russian olive, by (8) Manage or reduce the occurrence, and its implementing regulation at 50 reducing conditions that allow exotics spread, and effects of biocontrol agents CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether to be successful, and restoring or on flycatcher habitat. Exotic biocontrol designating additional areas—outside reestablishing conditions that allow tamarisk leaf beetle insects (leaf beetles) those currently occupied as well as native plants to thrive. Throughout the were brought into and released in many those occupied at the time of listing— range of the flycatcher, the success of locations throughout the western United are necessary to ensure the conservation exotic plants within river floodplains is States. This specific U.S. Department of of this flycatcher subspecies. We are largely a symptom of land and water Agriculture program was terminated in proposing to designate critical habitat in management (for example, groundwater 2010, largely because these insects are areas within the geographical area withdrawal, surface water diversion, moving farther and thriving in the known to be occupied by nesting dam operation, and unmanaged grazing) southwestern United States (within the flycatchers at the time of listing in 1995. that has created conditions favorable to flycatcher’s breeding range) where it We also are proposing to designate exotic plants over native plants. Special was initially believed they would not specific areas outside the geographical management may include the following persist (APHIS 2010, p. 2). However, area occupied by nesting flycatchers at actions: eliminate or reduce dewatering leaf beetles still exist within the United the time of listing (but that are within stressors such as surface water diversion States, and specifically within the its known historical breeding and groundwater pumping to increase northern range of the flycatcher in distribution), because such areas are stream flow and groundwater Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico. It is essential for the conservation of the elevations; reduce salinity levels by unknown to what extent these leaf species as supported by the modifying agricultural practices and beetles will continue to move geographical and numerical flycatcher restoring natural hydrologic regimes and throughout the Southwest. Their overall territory and habitat-related recovery flushing flood flows; in regulated impact or benefit to the flycatcher, goals established in the Recovery Plan streams, restore more natural hydrologic flycatcher habitat, and other wildlife (Service 2002, pp. 84–85). regimes that favor germination and species is also unknown, but there are growth of native plant species. Improve predictions that the beetles could occur Stream Segments as Critical Habitat timing of water draw down in lake throughout the western United States We are proposing to use ‘‘stream bottoms to coincide with the seed and into northern Mexico (Tracy et al. segments’’ as the descriptor for the dispersal and germination of native 2008, pp. 1–3). There is concern about designated area of flycatcher critical species; and restore ungulate herbivory effects to the flycatcher in places habitat (which, in some areas also to intensities and levels under which throughout much of its range where the includes exposed reservoir bottoms). native riparian species are more landscape does not support healthy Stream segments are appropriate for competitive. native riparian vegetation (even in the delineating critical habitat because in (6) Manage fire to maintain and absence of tamarisk). Along the Virgin addition to providing stream-side enhance habitat quality and quantity. River in southwestern Utah, flycatcher vegetation for flycatchers to place nests, Special management may include the breeding attempts have failed stream segments satisfy other various following actions: suppress fires that concurrent with leaf beetle impacts to flycatcher life needs adjacent to or occur; reduce risk of fire by restoring the vegetation (Paxton et al. 2010, p. 1). between nesting sites (foraging habitat, elevated groundwater levels, base flows, Rangewide, tamarisk is a habitat stream, elevated groundwater tables, flooding, and natural hydrologic component of over half of all known moist soils, flying insects, and other regimes in order to prevent drying of flycatcher territories (Durst et al. 2007, alluvial floodplain habitats) (see riparian areas and more flammable p. 15). Therefore, it would be beneficial Physical or Biological Features section). exotic plant species from developing; to prevent purposeful or accidental Also, the dynamic processes of riparian and reduce risk of recreational fires. intra- or interstate transport of leaf vegetation succession (loss and (7) Evaluate and conduct exotic plant beetles to locations that would increase regrowth) and river hydrology allow for species removal and native plant the likelihood of beetles dispersing to stream segments to provide both current species restoration on a site-by-site flycatcher habitat. Similarly, because and future areas for flycatcher habitat to basis. If habitat assessments reveal a insects can travel or be moved large grow. Riparian vegetation in these sustained increase in exotic plant distances, prevent the additional release segments is expected to naturally abundance, conduct an evaluation of the of leaf beetles (in all their varieties) into expand and contract from flooding, underlying causes and conduct the environment where they can inundation, drought, and the resulting vegetation improvement under eventually occur within flycatcher changes in the extent and location of measures described in the Recovery habitat. Where leaf beetle-related floodplains and river channels (Service Plan (Service 2002, Appendices H and impacts may occur or are happening, 2002, pp. 18, D–13–D–15). Therefore, K). Remove exotics only if: underlying consider the previous items in this list while one or more of the physical or causes for dominance have been and the Recovery Plan for strategies to biological features are currently present, addressed; there is evidence that exotic help improve the germination and over time these habitat features will species will be replaced by vegetation of growth of native plants (Service 2002, fluctuate in quality or location higher functional value; and the action p. Appendix K). throughout these stream segments. is part of an overall vegetation Management of stream flows and other improvement plan. Native riparian Criteria Used To Identify Critical anthropogenic (manmade) factors, such vegetation improvement plans should Habitat as agricultural practices, can also include: a staggered approach to create As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of influence the location and quality of the mosaics of different aged successional the Act, we use the best scientific and riparian vegetation in many of these tree and shrub stands; consideration of commercial data available to designate stream segments. The lateral extent of whether the sites are presently occupied critical habitat. We review available each river segment occurs within the by nesting flycatchers; and management information pertaining to the habitat 100-year floodplain (see Physical or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50554 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Biological Features section) and is facilitated by the dynamic nature of 95). Because of the wide distribution of further described below (see Lateral flycatcher habitat, changing in quality this bird and the dynamic nature of its Extent section). Therefore, designating and location over time. More dramatic habitat, it was important to propose stream segments as critical habitat will changes in habitat quality caused by critical habitat in areas throughout all of provide for the variety of flycatcher uses events such as flooding or inundation the breeding range of the flycatcher that and allow for ever-changing streamside can force flycatchers to move their have stated recovery goals. This vegetation habitat quality (in location breeding location, thus causing them to widespread distribution of habitat is and abundance). use broader locations and habitat intended to allow flycatchers to quality. function as a group of metapopulations, Occupancy at the Time of Listing Therefore, for this wide-ranging bird, realize gene flow throughout its range, We identified areas occupied at the it is difficult to precisely determine provide ecological connectivity among time of listing in 1995 as those streams known occupied areas due to the disjunct populations, allow for breeding where flycatchers were found nesting in following considerations: (1) The site colonization potential, and prevent any one season from surveys conducted flycatcher’s neotropical migratory habits catastrophic population losses. from 1991 to 1994 (Sogge and Durst of occupying stopover areas along The Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. 2008). The flycatcher rangewide streams upstream of, downstream of, 74–76) identifies important factors to database (Sogge and Durst 2008) is the and between breeding sites; and (2) the consider in minimizing the likelihood of authoritative source for determining season-to-season variation in habitat extinction. These factors were also nesting areas because our 1995 quality and subsequent lack of specific considered in our approach to flycatcher listing rule did not list all nest-site fidelity. As a result, for the proposing areas for critical habitat known data regarding flycatcher purpose of this proposed critical habitat designation: (1) The territory is the distribution and abundance. We designation, we believe it is most appropriate unit of measure for considered a broader area to be conservative and reasonable to conclude numerical flycatcher recovery goals; (2) occupied than just the specific site that any stream segment along a stream populations should be distributed where a nest was located because where flycatchers were found nesting throughout the bird’s range; (3) flycatchers are a neotropical migrant from 1991 to 1994 also be considered populations should be distributed close traveling between Central America (and occupied at the time of listing. Those enough to each other to allow for possibly northern South America) and stream segments considered occupied at movement among them; (4) large the United States, and they are known the time of listing and those considered populations contribute most to to move to different nest areas from not occupied at the time of listing that metapopulation stability, while smaller year-to-year. we are proposing as revised critical populations can contribute to Because flycatchers are neotropical habitat are organized by Recovery and metapopulation stability when arrayed migrants that occupy riparian areas Management Units listed in Table 1 and in a matrix with high connectivity; (5) along rivers while traveling between described briefly in the unit as the population of a site increases, the wintering and breeding grounds, we descriptions below. All of the stream potential to disperse and colonize expect that abundant small areas along segments occupied at the time of listing increases; (6) increase and decrease in long stretches of stream can be contain one or more of the elements of one population affects other irregularly occupied by migrant physical or biological features which populations; (7) some Recovery and flycatchers from year-to-year. North- may require special management Management units have stable and south-bound migrating flycatchers considerations or protection as metapopulations, but others do not; (8) are frequently found occupying stopover described above. We also include maintaining or augmenting (or both) areas along streams upstream of, whether flycatcher territories were existing populations is a greater priority downstream of, and between known detected on proposed stream segments than establishing new populations; and breeding sites (Yong and Finch 1997, not known to be occupied at the time of (9) establishing habitat close to existing pp. 265–266; Service 2002, pp. E2–E3; listing (but are essential for the breeding sites increases the chance of Koronkiewicz et al. 2004, pp. 9–11). In conservation of the flycatcher). colonization. Arizona, migrant flycatchers were detected at 204 sites Statewide along 15 Recovery Plan Guidance Methodology Overview of 19 river drainages surveyed for We relied heavily on the Recovery Our goal is to propose stream nesting flycatchers over a 10-year period Plan (Service 2002) to help us identify segments as critical habitat within 29 of (Ellis et al. 2008, p. 26). Over 600 the areas that we are proposing as the 32 Management Units (which are migrant willow flycatchers (subspecies revised critical habitat because the geographic areas clustered within 6 not known) were detected along the Recovery Plan represents a compilation Recovery Units) in order to meet the length of the lower Colorado River in of the best scientific data available to us. specific numerical flycatcher territory 2004 (Ellis et al. 2008, p. 26), where We particularly used the information and habitat-related recovery goals only a relatively few known breeding from the Recovery Plan, such as (Service 2002, pp. 84–85), which are the sites exist. distribution and abundance of same criteria that we are using to Similarly, flycatchers are known to flycatchers, flycatcher natural history identify physical or biological features have fidelity to a larger area along and habitat needs, and stream segments and designate areas that are essential to stream drainages (rather than specific with substantial recovery value, to help flycatcher conservation. Three of the 32 nest site fidelity), and can regularly identify stream segments that should be Management Units (Lower Gila, Pecos, move their nesting locations about 30 to proposed as critical habitat because they and Texas) do not have any goals 40 km (18 to 25 mi) from year-to-year are essential to flycatcher conservation. identified in the Recovery Plan because (Paxton et al. 2007a, p. 4). And The Recovery Plan’s strategy, of either the lack of habitat, the inability sometimes, flycatchers can even move rationale, and science for conservation for habitat to recover, or the to a very distant location, dispersing as of the flycatcher guided our efforts to determination that meaningful far as 444 km (275 mi) from a previous identify the quantity and spatial populations could not be established year’s nesting area (Paxton et al. 2007a, arrangement of features and areas of and persist. Therefore, no critical p. 2). These year-to-year movements are critical habitat (Service 2002, pp. 61– habitat is proposed for these three

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50555

Management Units. Numerical New Mexico (Durst et al. 2008, p. 4). population. We defined a large flycatcher territory recovery goals for Additional sites have been detected in population as a single breeding site or each of the 29 Management Unit vary the following years, but an updated collection of smaller connected breeding throughout the flycatcher’s range from rangewide estimate has not yet been sites that support 10 or more territories as few as 25 territories to as many as 325 compiled. in a single year. We selected 10 or more (Service 2002, pp. 84–85). The locations of breeding sites were territories to identify a large population In relying on these recovery goals and generated from standardized flycatcher because the flycatcher population strategies, we used a methodology with surveys conducted from 1991 to 2010. viability analysis indicates a breeding two basic strategies to identify areas There has been a standardized survey site exhibits greatest long-term stability and, subsequently, river segments protocol since the 1995 listing of the with at least 10 territories (Service 2002, within those areas to propose as critical flycatcher that biologists have used to p. 72). Large populations persist longer habitat. First, we identified areas based confirm the presence of flycatcher than small ones, and produce more upon the presence of large breeding territories that has produced reliable dispersers capable of emigrating to other populations and areas with multiple and accurate information (Tibbitts et al. populations or colonizing new areas small breeding populations that when 1994, p. 1; Sogge et al. 1997, p. 1; Sogge (Service 2002, p. 74). In addition, found in proximity, form a large et al. 2010, p. 1). To help ensure the smaller populations with high population. Once these areas were protocol is being used properly, the connectivity to other small populations established, we identified the specific Service and our partners provide annual can provide as much or more stability end points of the stream segments of training on protocol implementation than a single isolated larger population flycatcher habitat. Second, for those and flycatcher status, identification, and with the same number of territories Management Units with a specific natural history. because of the potential to disperse number of territories required to meet A variety of sources were used to colonizers throughout the network of recovery goals, but no, or very few, determine breeding site location and breeding sites (Service 2002, p. 75). known flycatcher territories, we used information from 1991 to 2010. The Once the distribution and abundance information from the Recovery Plan Recovery Plan (Service 2002), the U.S. of flycatcher breeding sites were (Service 2002, pp. 86–92) and other Geological Survey flycatcher rangewide identified and mapped, we considered relevant sources to identify river database (Sogge and Durst 2008), the the degree of connectivity to assign segments with flycatcher habitat. The 2007 flycatcher rangewide report (Durst smaller separate flycatcher breeding results of this strategy were the et al. 2008), and recent survey sites and the distance from large identification of streams that: (1) Were information for the 2008, 2009, and populations to evaluate these areas as known to be occupied by flycatchers at 2010 breeding seasons were all used as proposed critical habitat. In other the time of listing with the physical or authoritative sources of information on words, how much area around breeding biological features; (2) the identification breeding flycatcher distribution and sites should be considered as proposed of essential areas that were not known abundance. The flycatcher rangewide critical habitat? To determine these to be occupied by flycatchers at the time database developed and maintained by distances, we examined the known of listing but that also include elements USGS (Sogge and Durst 2008) compiles between-year movements of banded of the physical or biological features of the results of surveys conducted adult and juvenile flycatchers. The critical habitat; and (3) the identification throughout the bird’s range since 1991. USGS’s 10-year flycatcher study in of areas for critical habitat that have We also examined 2008 to 2010 data central Arizona is the key movement never been known to be occupied by that the Service in Arizona, Nevada, study that has generated these flycatchers but are essential for the Utah, and Colorado compiled and conclusions (Paxton et al. 2007a, pp. conservation of the flycatcher in order entered into separate databases and 59–80), augmented by other flycatcher to meet recovery goals. spreadsheets. The USGS and U.S. banding and re-sighting studies Bureau of Reclamation provided the (Sedgwick 2004, p. 1103; McLeod et al. Areas With Large Populations post-2007 Statewide database results for 2008, pp. 93–112). These studies found To identify the areas with flycatcher California and New Mexico, that flycatchers have higher site fidelity habitat in each Management Unit, we respectively. However, these post-2007 than nest fidelity and can move among first considered specific areas that are flycatcher data were difficult to breeding sites within drainages and known since 1991 to have had large comprehensively incorporate into this between drainages (Kenwood and populations of nesting flycatchers. Since proposed rule because they have not yet Paxton 2001, pp. 30–31). Within- the time of listing in 1995, the known been analyzed and synthesized into the drainage movements are more common distribution and abundance of overall rangewide database. Therefore, than between-drainage movements flycatcher territories has increased much of our compiled rangewide (Paxton et al. 2007a, p. 77). Juveniles primarily due to increased survey effort information ends following the 2007 disperse the farthest and were the only (Durst et al. 2008, p. 4). Population breeding season. A summary of known group of flycatchers to connect very increases have also been detected at historical breeding records can be found distant populations (Paxton et al. 2007a, specific areas where habitat quality and in the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. p. 74). Banded flycatchers from season- quantity improved. As a result of more 8–10). We also evaluated data in reports to-season were recorded moving across extensive surveys and research, and in submitted during section 7 a wide area from 50 m (150 feet) to 444 particular re-establishing known consultations and by biologists holding km (275 mi) (Paxton et al. 2007a, p. 2). occupancy of breeding sites in Nevada, section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery permits; Because of the broad range of Utah, and Colorado, the extent of research published in peer-reviewed flycatcher movements, it is a challenge streams known to be used by migrating, articles, agency reports, and databases; to apply a single distance to characterize non-breeding, and dispersing and regional Geographic Information the degree of connectivity of separated flycatchers has also expanded. System (GIS) coverages and habitat flycatcher breeding sites. However, Following the most recent rangewide models. USGS (Paxton et al. 2007a, pp. 4, 76, 84, estimate in 2007, 1,299 territories were In order to identify areas with large 139, 140) assimilated all of the described occurring in California, flycatcher populations, we first movement information and concluded Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and considered and defined a ‘‘large’’ that rapid colonization of flycatcher

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50556 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

breeding sites and increased Management Units were identified as a The streams included as proposed metapopulation stability could be large population area. critical habitat for the flycatcher are accomplished by establishing breeding Also, our methodology discussed described below. Those streams sites within 30 to 40 km (18 to 25 mi) above was unable to distinguish areas included in this proposal that were not of each other. Flycatchers at these within some Management Units where occupied at the time of listing were breeding sites would regularly disperse neither large populations nor small determined to be essential for the or move between sites within the same populations with high connectivity conservation of the flycatcher. year or from year-to-year. This were known to occur. For example, in proximity of these sites would increase the Amargosa, Santa Cruz, San Migratory Habitat the connectivity and stability of the Francisco, Hassayampa and Agua Fria, Habitat for migrating flycatchers is metapopulation and smaller, more San Juan, Powell, and Lower Rio Grande captured in this proposal by our distant breeding sites. Management Units, there are no known approach to propose critical habitat as As a result of USGS’s conclusion, we breeding sites with 10 or more ‘‘river segments’’ and distributing decided to use 35 km (22 mi), the flycatcher territories, nor are any known average of the reported range, as a territories in high connectivity that segments across 29 Management Units radius to identify an area surrounding create a large population. Similarly, in throughout the southwestern United known large flycatcher breeding sites some Management Units a large States. We are currently unable to and the distance to connect smaller population and surrounding area was distinguish the value of specific populations to identify a large identified, but that area was found not locations along particular streams for population. Because there was no to be of adequate size to include enough flycatcher migration because stopover distinction by USGS of a distance river segments needed to support the areas contain broad habitat quality in within this 30 to 40 km (18 to 25 mi) number of territories called for in the wide-ranging locations, are only for range that was more valuable to recovery goals. This situation occurred short-term use, and have uncertain flycatchers, we believe the average is the in the Little Colorado, Santa Ynez, and occurrence from year-to-year (Finch et best representation. After a large Santa Clara Management Units. In all of al. 2000, pp. 73, 76–77). Additionally, population area was established, we these cases, we used the guidance from southwestern willow flycatchers are determined whether other breeding sites the Recovery Plan, local knowledge difficult to distinguish from other in proximity occurred. If so, this would about habitat, and other information flycatcher species and subspecies add to our large population area, available to identify additional stream during migration (Finch et al. 2000, pp. generate an additional 35-km (22-mi) segments to propose as critical habitat to 71–72). Migrant flycatchers can radius and extend our area, and so on. meet recovery goals. When generating the river segments in sometimes be found in unusual We also used this 35-km (22-mi) radius the situations where there were few locations away from riparian areas to identify those highly connected territories to help guide us, we relied (Finch et al. 2000, p. 76), but many, if breeding sites with a small number of heavily upon recommendations and not most, are detected while searching territories that together equaled a large strategies provided in the Recovery Plan for nesting flycatchers (McLeod et al. flycatcher population. and local knowledge of habitat 2005, pp. 9–11; Ellis et al. 2008, pp. 26– Following the identification of these conditions, maps, and flycatcher natural 27). An extensive look at flycatcher use areas that surround large flycatcher history. The Recovery Plan identified along the Lower Colorado River (from populations, we determined where portions of streams for each Lake Mead to Mexico) and some of its flycatcher habitat occurred on streams Management Unit that would contribute major tributaries in Arizona and and where to establish end points for significantly toward recovery (Service southern Nevada and Utah found proposed critical habitat. We used the 2002, pp. 86–92). These streams were migrating flycatchers in consecutive Recovery Plan and other literature not listed for the purpose of proposing years occurring in nearly all of their sources and local knowledge to identify critical habitat nor were they intended study areas and over half of their survey stream segments. In combination with to be the only streams that were sites (McLeod et al. 2005, pp. 9–11; these areas of flycatcher habitat, we then important for recovery, but they did Koronkiewicz et al. 2006, pp. 11–13). considered the numerical and habitat- identify streams of substantial recovery Similarly, regular migratory movement related recovery goals, and current and value. Also, we have generated of flycatchers was detected along the previous number of known territories. additional information since the Middle Rio Grande (Yong and Finch We also considered site-specific Recovery Plan was completed about 1997, p. 255). As a result of these knowledge of these streams, aerial river segments and whether they have or factors, we expect similar flycatcher photography, agency reports, and input do not have substantial recovery value. from other resource managers. The migration behavior for the other major Still, the list of stream segments drainages where flycatchers breed proximity and connectivity of segments described in the Recovery Plan (Service throughout its range and where these to known populations and 2002, pp. 86–92) provides important locations are included within this metapopulation stability were also key guidance, especially for Management aspects of the flycatcher’s natural Units where there are few known designation. Therefore, flycatcher history we considered in delineating flycatcher sites, to guide our critical migration habitat is captured within our river segment end points. habitat proposal. Site-specific methods for designating critical habitat Our methods were unable to knowledge of these streams, aerial to reach recovery goals, because: (1) We distinguish a more specific area, in photography, agency reports, and input are designating areas as broader river contrast to other Management Units, from other resource managers were also segments; (2) our areas will be within the San Diego and Santa Ana considered. The proximity and geographically located across a broad Management Units in the Coastal connectivity of segments to known area of the Southwest encompassing California Recovery Unit. Instead, populations and metapopulation most of the range of the flycatcher; and because of the wide distribution and stability were also key aspects of the (3) we are proposing areas surrounding proximity of occupied streams flycatcher’s natural history we nesting sites where migrant flycatchers segments, nearly these entire considered in delineating these areas. are most often detected.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50557

Lateral Extent zones, visual interpretation of remotely respect to critical habitat and the For the lateral extent of flycatcher sensed data was used to define the prohibition of adverse modification proposed critical habitat stream lateral extent. Data sources used in this unless the specific action would affect segments, we considered the variety of included: (1) Terraserver online Digital the physical or biological features in the purposes riparian habitat serves the Orthophoto Quarter Quads (DOQQs), adjacent critical habitat. Similarly, flycatcher; the dynamic nature of rivers black and white, 1990s era and 2001; (2) where there are long stretches of and riparian habitat; the relationship USGS DOQQs 1997; (3) USGS aerial canyons or other portions of rivers that between the location of rivers, flooding, photographs, 1 meter, color-balanced, we know lack the physical or biological and riparian habitat; and the expected and true color, 2002; (4) Landsat 5 and features within a river segment, we boundaries, over time, of these habitats. Landsat 7 Thematic Mapper, bands 4, 2, attempted to remove those areas from Flycatchers use riparian habitat in a 3, 1990–2000; (5) Emerge Corp, 1 meter, our proposed river segments. true color imagery, 2001; (6) Local variety of conditions for breeding, Summary Agency Partnership, 2 foot, true color, feeding, sheltering, cover, dispersal, and 2000; and (7) National Wetlands Our initial steps and approach in migration stopover areas. Riparian Inventory aerial photographs, 2001– proposing areas for flycatcher critical habitat is dependent on the location of 2002. habitat were to identify areas: (1) river channels, floodplain soils, We refined all lateral extents for this Known to be within the specific subsurface water, and floodplain shape, proposed designation by creating geographic area occupied by the and is driven by the wide variety of electronic maps of the lateral extent and flycatcher at the time of listing (from high, medium, and low flow events. In attributing them according to the surveys occurring from 1991 to 1994) addition, manmade factors such as following riparian sub-classifications. that contain the essential physical or diversion ditches or return flows can Riparian developed areas, as defined biological features which may require also influence riparian vegetation below, are not included in our proposed special management; and (2) that are distribution. Rivers can and do move critical habitat designation since these essential to the conservation of the from one side of the floodplain to the areas do not contain the primary flycatcher based on the Recovery Plan other. Flooding occurs at periodic constituent elements (see Primary goals. frequencies that recharge aquifers and Constituent Elements for the Following the evaluation of the two that deposit and moisten fine floodplain Southwestern Willow Flycatcher section factors above, our goal was to soils which create seedbeds for riparian above), are not considered essential to incorporate the conservation strategies vegetation germination and growth the conservation of the flycatcher and, described in the Recovery Plan. These within these boundaries. therefore, do not meet the definition of strategies describe the importance of In this proposal, we consider the critical habitat. We separated riparian flycatcher habitat to support stable and riparian zone to be the area surrounding areas into the following two categories: growing breeding populations, to the select river segment that is directly (1) Riparian Vegetated: This class is provide migration stopover areas, to influenced by river functions. The used to describe areas still in natural protect against simultaneous present boundaries, for mapping unvegetated wetlands, water bodies, and catastrophic loss, to maintain gene flow, purposes, of the lateral extent or any undeveloped or unmanaged lands to prevent isolation and extirpation, and riparian zone (in other words, the within the approximate riparian zone. to provide colonizers to use new areas. surrogate for the delineation of the (2) Riparian Developed: This class is Also, the Recovery Plan describes the lateral boundaries of critical habitat used to describe all developed areas, importance of habitat that supports large within proposed stream segments) were such as urban and suburban breeding populations of flycatchers and derived by one of two methods. The development, agriculture, utilities, small populations that, when in area was either captured from existing mining, and extraction. proximity, equal a large population. To digital data sources (listed below) or achieve these goals, the Recovery Plan created through expert visual Mapping describes a recovery strategy of interpretation of remotely sensed data When determining proposed critical distributing flycatcher habitat that could (aerial photographs and satellite habitat boundaries, we made efforts to hold a specific minimum number of imagery—also listed below). Geographic avoid including developed areas such as breeding territories across 29 different Information System technology was lands covered by buildings, pavement, Management Units in portions of utilized throughout the lateral extent and other structures because such lands California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, determination. ESRI, Inc. ArcInfo 8.3 lack physical or biological features for Arizona, and New Mexico. was used to perform all mapping the flycatcher. These types of We therefore created criteria and functions and image interpretation. Pre- developments are not often found methodology to identify areas existing data sources used to assist in adjacent to rivers within floodplains, surrounding large populations and the process of delineating the lateral and may not be found on recent maps. small populations, in proximity, that extent of the riparian zones for this Also, the scale of the maps we prepared equaled a large population. We used a designation included: (1) National under the parameters for publication 35-km (22-mi) distance as a radius to Wetlands Inventory (NWI) digital data within the Code of Federal Regulations identify areas around large flycatcher from the mid 1980s, 2001, and 2002; (2) may not reflect the removal of such populations (those with at least 10 Federal Emergency Management Agency developed lands. Any such developed territories) and small populations in (FEMA) 1995, Q3 100 year flood data; lands left inside critical habitat high connectivity that together equal a (3) U.S. Census Bureau Topologically boundaries shown on the maps of this large population. Integrated Geographic Encoding and proposed rule have been excluded by We chose to generate critical habitat Referencing (TIGER); and (4) 2000 text in the proposed rule and are not in ‘‘river segments’’ to account for the digital data. The riparian zone is proposed for designation as critical dynamic aspects of flycatcher riparian anticipated to occur within the 100-year habitat. Therefore, if the critical habitat habitat, the changing locations of floodplain. is finalized as proposed, a Federal flycatcher habitat due to these dynamic Where pre-existing data may not have action involving these lands would not conditions, population growth, and the been available to readily define riparian trigger section 7 consultation with variety of other life-history needs such

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50558 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

as nest placement, foraging, dispersing, (69 FR 60706). Our 1997 designation of between breeding sites that USGS cover, shelter, and migration habitat. flycatcher critical habitat was completed described (30 to 40 km, 18 to 25 mi) as Once these broad areas were without extensive current knowledge being highly connected. In our 2004 established, we identified stream about flycatcher distribution and proposal, we used 30 km (18 mi) as the segments with flycatcher habitat that we abundance and prior to the finalization radius. Because USGS did not describe believe will support the numerical of the Recovery Plan (Service 2002). a value within this 30 to 40 km range territory and habitat-related recovery Subsequently, in our 2004 flycatcher (18 to 25 mi) that is more or less goals for the 29 Management Units critical habitat proposal, we had more beneficial for the flycatcher, we believe described in the Recovery Plan. information about flycatcher using the average accurately reflects the Some Management Units with distribution and abundance; population range of distance between highly recovery goals do not have large dynamics; year-to-year movements; and connected breeding sites. populations or small populations that defined conservation objectives, (4) To assist in generating critical equal a large population in high strategies, and recovery criteria. In 2004, habitat in Management Units where connectivity. Also, in some our approach to determining essential there are recovery goals, but there are no Management Units an area may not flycatcher habitat was protecting large known large flycatcher population or contain enough habitat to reach the populations and those smaller collection of small populations in number of territories stated in the populations that, in proximity, equaled proximity that equaled a large Recovery Plan. In these instances, we a large population. population, we are using Recovery Plan relied heavily upon the Recovery Plan For this 2011 proposal, we have guidance in this proposed rule to guidance (recovery strategy, stream refined our definition of what areas are propose stream segments with identification, and habitat descriptions), considered to be essential for the substantial recovery value (Service flycatcher detections, and local conservation of the species (see 2002, pp. 86–92), known breeding sites expertise in habitat quality to identify discussion below), and we continued to (Durst et al. 2008; Sogge and Durst river segments considered essential for improve our knowledge about flycatcher 2008), and other literature, reports, and the conservation of the species. habitat, distribution, and abundance. local knowledge about flycatcher The lateral extent of river segments Because we will be re-analyzing population dynamics and habitat. In proposed as critical habitat represent potential exclusions, we present below contrast, in 2004, we did not attempt to the riparian zone, which is an area that the differences between our 2004 is most directly influenced by river propose critical habitat in these areas flycatcher proposed critical habitat rule because our definition of essential functions and is anticipated to occur and this 2011 flycatcher proposed within the 100-year floodplain. We habitat was focused on the presence of critical habitat rule. We are comparing large populations (69 FR 60715–60716). created these boundaries from existing this proposal to the 2004 proposal (5) In 2004 we identified the digital sources and visual interpretation. instead of the final 2005 flycatcher following stream segments as essential Overall, these proposed stream critical habitat designation because that segments represent flycatcher habitat final designation had a number of areas to the conservation of the flycatcher and known to be occupied at the time of excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the proposed them as critical habitat. These listing and essential areas that have high Act. Our approach to conservation of segments are not included in this value for recovery. The proposed areas the flycatcher and definition of essential proposal because of further evaluation support stable and growing breeding habitat are the primary differences of habitat quality, additional populations, provide migration stopover between the two proposals. We information about flycatcher territories, areas, protect against simultaneous summarize the changes below. and our revised definition of essential catastrophic loss, maintain gene flow, (1) For this 2011 proposal, we define habitat. prevent isolation and extirpation, and the critical habitat that is not occupied Coastal California Recovery Unit encourage colonizers to use new areas. at the time of listing, but that is essential • All proposed stream segments provide for the conservation of the species, as Santa Ana Management Unit, CA: habitat for a wide distribution of areas needed to support the distribution Yucaipa Creek and Wilson Creek. breeding flycatchers, including areas for and abundance of territories and • San Diego Management Unit, CA: population growth to meet numerical habitat-related recovery goals described Cuyamaca Reservoir and Agua and habitat-related recovery goals. The in the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. Hedionda Lagoon. proposed areas also support other 77–85). In contrast, in 2004, we Lower Colorado Recovery Unit— important flycatcher needs such as determined essential habitat was based Nevada, California and Arizona Border, migration, dispersal, foraging, and on only those areas that supported large Arizona, New Mexico shelter to reach the geographic flycatcher populations (69 FR 60715– • distribution and habitat-related recovery 60716). Little Colorado Management Unit, goals established within the Recovery (2) For this 2011 proposal, we are AZ: East and South Forks Little Plan’s 29 Management Units with proposing stream segments in all 29 Colorado River. recovery goals. Management Units where there are Gila Recovery Unit—Arizona flycatcher territories and habitat-related Summary of Changes Between recovery goals stated in the Recovery • Roosevelt Management Unit, AZ: Flycatcher Critical Habitat Proposals Plan, in contrast to our 2004 proposal Pinto Creek. Our improved knowledge about the where we proposed stream segments in (6) The following stream segments flycatcher’s distribution and abundance, only 21 Management Units. were not proposed as flycatcher critical development of a Recovery Plan (3) In this proposed rule we are using habitat in 2004 but are now being (Service 2002), and our approach to 35 km (22 mi) as the radius to guide our proposed as flycatcher critical habitat. determining essential habitat led to critical habitat areas surrounding large These areas are now identified as differences between the 1997 final populations (equal or greater than 10 flycatcher critical habitat primarily due flycatcher critical habitat designation territories) and proximity of sites with to the change in our criteria and (62 FR 39129) and our approach in the smaller numbers that could equal a large consideration of the recovery goals (see 2004 flycatcher critical habitat proposal population. This is the average distance items 1–4 above).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50559

Coastal California Recovery Unit Rio Grande Recovery Unit—New Mexico total of approximately 3,364 km (2,090 • Santa Ynez Management Unit: and Colorado mi) of streams. Table 1 lists all the Mono Creek. • Upper Rio Grande Management streams included in this proposal and • At Vandenberg Air Force Base, a Unit: Rio Fernando, NM. whether they are considered occupied at portion of the Santa Ynez River is • Lower Rio Grande Management the time of listing and whether they are exempted under section 4(a)(3) of the Unit: Rio Grande, NM. currently considered occupied. Act. (7) We are exempting, under section Approximate land ownership in each • Santa Clara Management Unit: 4(a)(3) of the Act, areas that meet the State where the proposed critical habitat Santa Clara River, Ventura River, Piru definition of flycatcher critical habitat occurs is provided in Table 2. The Creek, Castaic Creek, Big Tujunga found on three military installations in critical habitat areas described below Canyon, Little Tujunga Canyon, and San the Coastal California Recovery Unit: constitute our best assessment of areas Gabriel River. Vandenberg Air Force Base; Naval that meet the definition of flycatcher • Santa Ana Management Unit: Weapons Station Seal Beach critical habitat. In order to help further Bautista Creek. Detachment Fallbrook; and Marine understand the location of these • San Diego Management Unit: Corps Base, Camp Pendleton based on proposed stream segments, please see Canada Gobernadora Creek, Fallbrook these military installations having the associated maps found within this Creek, Sweetwater River (near Service approved Integrated Natural proposed rule. Maps in GIS format that Sweetwater Reservoir). Resources Management Plans (INRMP) include the lateral extent areas being • At Marine Corps Base, Camp which are being implemented to proposed for designation can be found Pendleton, portions of Cristianitos, San conserve flycatchers and their habitat in the supplementary materials Mateo, San Onofre, Las Flores, Las (see Exemptions). associated with this proposed rule at Pulgas, and DeLuz Creeks and Santa (8) The end points of similar stream http://www.regulations.gov. Margarita River are exempted from segments we proposed in 2004 have Coastal California Recovery Unit in critical habitat under section 4(a)(3) of changed in many instances within this California the Act. 2011 proposal, making some segments • At Naval Weapons Station Seal longer and others shorter. This is (1) Santa Ynez Management Unit— Beach Detachment Fallbrook, portions primarily due to: our goal of proposing Santa Ynez River and Mono Creek. of Pilgrim Creek and Santa Margarita stream segments that could reach Portions of Santa Ynez River within River are exempted from critical habitat recovery goals; changing the distance Vandenberg Air Force Base are under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. used to identify critical habitat and exempted (see Exemptions). Basin and Mohave Recovery Unit— connect more distant populations (2) Santa Clara Management Unit— California and Nevada (increased from 30 km [18 mi] to 35 km Santa Clara River, Ventura River, Piru [22 mi]); and continuing to improve and Creek, Castaic Creek, Big Tujunga • Kern Management Unit: Canebrake document our knowledge about Canyon, Little Tujunga Canyon, and San Creek, CA. flycatcher distribution, abundance, and Gabriel River. • Mohave Management Unit: West habitat. Please see the maps included at Fork Mohave River, CA. (3) Santa Ana Management Unit— the end of this proposal for the specific • Amargosa Management Unit: Bear Creek, Mill Creek, Oak Glen Creek, stream segment end points and also in Willow Creek, CA; Amargosa River CA, San Timoteo Creek, Santa Ana River, the supplementary documents NV; and unnamed riparian areas and Waterman Creek, and Bautista Creek. associated with this proposed rule Carson Slough within Ash Meadows (4) San Diego Management Unit— found at http://www.regulations.gov. National Wildlife Refuge, NV. Canada Gobernadora Creek, Cristianitos (9) The length and area of some Creek, Las Flores Creek, Las Pulgas Lower Colorado Recovery Unit— stream segments may be different in this Creek, San Mateo Creek, San Onofre Nevada, California and Arizona Border, 2011 proposal, even when the same end Creek, Santa Margarita River, Fallbrook Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico points occur under both the 2004 and Creek, DeLuz Creek, San Luis Rey River, 2011 proposals. When the end points • Little Colorado Management Unit: Pilgrim Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, are the same, the newer Geographic Rio Nutria and Zuni River, NM. San Dieguito River, Santa Ysabel Creek, Information System (GIS) software used Temescal Creek, Temecula Creek, Upper Colorado Recovery Unit— in 2011 was more accurate in Sweetwater River, and San Diego River. Arizona, Utah, Colorado, and New calculating the bends and turns of Entire segments of San Mateo, San Mexico streams resulting in larger calculations Onofre, Cristianitos, Las Flores, Las • of stream length for some critical habitat San Juan Management Unit: Los Pulgas, and Fallbrook Creeks are stream segments. We also used updated Pinos River, CO; San Juan River, NM, exempted, and portions of Santa information to generate the lateral UT. Margarita River and DeLuz and Pilgrim • extent of stream segments. Powell Management Unit: Paria Creeks that occur within Marine Corps (10) We are also proposing to correct River, UT. Base Camp Pendleton and Naval the information in the historic range Weapons Station Seal Beach Gila Recovery Unit—Arizona and New column for the flycatcher in the table at Detachment Fallbrook are exempted (see Mexico 50 CFR 17.11(h). The historic range for Exemptions). • Roosevelt Management Unit: Pinal the flycatcher should include Nevada. Creek, AZ. Basin and Mohave Recovery Unit in Proposed Critical Habitat Designation • Santa Cruz Management Unit: Santa California and Nevada Cruz River and Cienega Creek, AZ. We are proposing stream segments in • San Francisco Management Unit: 29 Management Units found in six (5) Owens Management Unit—Owens San Francisco River, AZ, NM. Recovery Units as critical habitat for the River, CA. • Hassayampa and Agua Fria flycatcher. These stream segments occur (6) Kern Management Unit—South Management Unit: Hassayampa River in California, Nevada, Utah, Colorado, Fork Kern River (including upper Lake and Gila River, AZ. Arizona and New Mexico and include a Isabella) and Canebrake Creek, CA.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50560 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(7) Mohave Management Unit—Deep Santa Maria River (including upper (21) Middle Gila and San Pedro Creek, Holcomb Creek, Mohave River, Alamo Lake), AZ. Management Unit—Gila River and San and West Fork Mohave River, CA. (15) Hoover to Parker Dam Pedro River, AZ. (8) Salton Management Unit—San Management Unit— Bill Williams River, (22) Upper Gila Management Unit— Felipe Creek and Mill Creek, CA. AZ; Colorado River, CA and AZ. Gila River in AZ and NM. (23) Santa Cruz Management Unit— (9) Amargosa Management Unit— (16) Parker Dam to Southerly Willow Creek, CA; Amargosa River CA Santa Cruz River and Cienega Creek, International Border Management AZ. and NV; Carson Slough and unnamed Unit—Colorado River, CA and AZ. riparian areas within Ash Meadows (24) San Francisco Management National Wildlife Refuge, NV. Upper Colorado Recovery Unit in Unit—San Francisco River, AZ and NM. Arizona, Utah, Colorado, and New (25) Hassayampa and Agua Fria Lower Colorado Recovery Unit in Mexico Management Unit—Hassayampa River Nevada, California and Arizona border, and Gila River, AZ. Arizona, Utah, and New Mexico (17) San Juan Management Unit—Los Rio Grande Recovery Unit in New Pinos River, CO; San Juan River, NM (10) Little Colorado Management Mexico and Colorado Unit—Little Colorado River and West and UT. Fork Little Colorado River, AZ; Rio (18) Powell Management Unit—Paria (26) San Luis Valley Management Nutria and Zuni River, NM. River, UT. Unit—Conejos River and Rio Grande, CO. (11) Virgin Management Unit—Virgin Gila Recovery Unit in Arizona and New (27) Upper Rio Grande Management River, NV, AZ, and UT. Mexico Unit—Coyote Creek, Rio Grande, Rio (12) Middle Colorado Management Grande del Rancho, and Rio Fernando, Unit—Colorado River, AZ. (19) Verde Management Unit—Verde NM. (13) Pahranagat Management Unit— River (including Horseshoe Lake), AZ. (28) Middle Rio Grande Management Pahranagat River and Muddy River, NV. (20) Roosevelt Management Unit— Unit—Rio Grande, NM. (14) Bill Williams Management Unit— Salt River, Tonto Creek (including (29) Lower Rio Grande Management Big Sandy River, Bill Williams River, Roosevelt Lake), and Pinal Creek, AZ. Unit—Rio Grande, NM.

TABLE 1—STREAMS PROPOSED FOR FLYCATCHER CRITICAL HABITAT (1) OCCUPIED AT TIME OF LISTING BASED UPON OUR CRITERIA (1991–1994) AND (2) TERRITORIES DETECTED (1991–2010)

Known to be occupied at Recovery unit Management unit Stream time of listing Territories detected (1991–1994) (1991–2010)

Coastal California ...... Santa Ynez ...... Mono Creek ...... No ...... No. Santa Ynez River (portion exempted) Yes ...... Yes. Santa Clara ...... Big Tujunga Canyon ...... No ...... No. Castaic Creek ...... No ...... No. Little Tujunga Canyon ...... No ...... No. Piru Creek ...... No ...... Yes. San Gabriel River ...... No ...... Yes. Santa Clara River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Ventura River ...... No ...... No. Santa Ana ...... Bear Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Mill Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Oak Glen Creek ...... No ...... Yes. San Timoteo Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Santa Ana River ...... No ...... Yes. Waterman Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Bautista Creek ...... No ...... Yes. San Diego ...... Agua Hedionda Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Canada Gobernadora Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Cristianitos Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... No. DeLuz Creek (portion exempted) ...... No ...... Yes. Fallbrook Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... Yes. Las Flores Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... Yes. Las Pulgas Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... No. Pilgrim Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. (portion exempted) ...... San Dieguito River ...... No ...... Yes. San Diego River ...... No ...... Yes. San Luis Rey River ...... Yes ...... Yes. San Mateo Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... Yes. San Onofre Creek (exempted) ...... No ...... No. Santa Margarita River (portion ex- No ...... Yes. empted). Santa Ysabel Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Sweetwater River ...... No ...... Yes. Temecula Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Temescal Creek ...... No ...... No. Basin and Mohave ...... Owens ...... Owens River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Kern ...... Canebrake Creek ...... No ...... Yes.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50561

TABLE 1—STREAMS PROPOSED FOR FLYCATCHER CRITICAL HABITAT (1) OCCUPIED AT TIME OF LISTING BASED UPON OUR CRITERIA (1991–1994) AND (2) TERRITORIES DETECTED (1991–2010)—Continued

Known to be occupied at Recovery unit Management unit Stream time of listing Territories detected (1991–1994) (1991–2010)

South Fork Kern River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Mohave ...... Deep Creek ...... No ...... No. West Fork Mohave River ...... No ...... No. Holcomb Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Mohave River ...... No ...... Yes. Salton ...... San Felipe Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Mill Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Amargosa ...... Amargosa River ...... No ...... Yes. Willow Creek ...... No ...... No. Ash Meadows Riparian Areas ...... No ...... Yes. Carson Slough ...... No ...... Yes. Lower Colorado ...... Little Colorado ...... Little Colorado River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Rio Nutria ...... Yes ...... Yes. West Fork Little Colorado River ...... No ...... No. Zuni River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Virgin ...... Virgin River ...... No ...... Yes. Middle Colorado ...... Colorado River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Pahranagat ...... Muddy River ...... No ...... Yes. Pahranagat River ...... No ...... Yes. Bill Williams ...... Big Sandy River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Bill Williams River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Santa Maria River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Hoover to Parker Dam .. Colorado River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Bill Williams River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Parker Dam to Southerly Colorado River ...... Yes ...... Yes. International Border. Upper Colorado ...... San Juan ...... San Juan River ...... No ...... Yes. Los Pinos River ...... No ...... Yes. Powell ...... Paria River ...... No ...... No. Gila ...... Verde ...... Verde River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Roosevelt ...... Tonto Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. Salt River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Pinal Creek ...... No ...... Yes. Middle Gila and San San Pedro River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Pedro. Gila River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Upper Gila ...... Gila River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Santa Cruz ...... Santa Cruz ...... No ...... No. Cienega Creek ...... No ...... Yes. San Francisco ...... San Francisco River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Hassayampa and Agua Hassayampa River ...... No ...... Yes. Fria. Gila River ...... Yes ...... Yes. Rio Grande ...... San Luis Valley ...... Rio Grande ...... Yes ...... Yes. Conejos River ...... No ...... Yes. Upper Rio Grande ...... Coyote Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. Rio Fernando ...... No ...... Yes. Rio Grande ...... Yes ...... Yes. Rio Grande Del Rancho ...... Yes ...... Yes. Middle Rio Grande ...... Rio Grande ...... Yes ...... Yes. Lower Rio Grande ...... Rio Grande ...... Yes ...... Yes. Note: Recovery Units and Management Units are from the 2002 Recovery Plan.

TABLE 2—LAND OWNERSHIP, BY STATE, OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS FOR SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER, LISTED AS APPROXIMATE STREAM LENGTHS IN KM (MI)

Other/ State Federal State Tribal Private unclassified

AZ ...... 478 (297) 53 (33) 112 (69) 378 (235) 0 (0) CA ...... 188 (117) 14 (9) 24 (15) 0 (0) 656 (407) CA/AZ ...... 190 (118) 19 (12) 110 (68) 45 (28) 12 (7) CO ...... 29 (18) 0 (0) 26 (16) 210 (131) 9 (6) NV ...... 120 (75) 14 (8) 0 (0) 22 (13) 0 (0) NM ...... 127 (79) 64 (40) 122 (76) 330 (205) 0 (0) UT ...... 68 (42) 0 (0) 52 (32) 42 (26) 0 (0)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50562 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 2—LAND OWNERSHIP, BY STATE, OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT AREAS FOR SOUTHWESTERN WILLOW FLYCATCHER, LISTED AS APPROXIMATE STREAM LENGTHS IN KM (MI)—Continued

Other/ State Federal State Tribal Private unclassified

Total ...... 1199 (745) 164 (102) 445 (277) 1027 (638) 525 (326) Notes: Totals do not sum because some stream segments have different ownership on each side of the bank resulting in those segments being counted twice. CA/AZ includes the stream segments along the Colorado River where California is on one stream bank and Arizona is on the other. Other/Unclassified includes some local government ownership and unclassified segments (where land ownership was not available).

We present brief descriptions below stream segments we propose that were habitat-related goals identified in the of all proposed critical habitat units, not known to be occupied at the time of Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. 77– and reasons why they meet the listing, we described as an ‘‘essential’’ 92). Most of the proposed segments are definition of critical habitat for the segment for flycatcher conservation in a subset of those identified in the flycatcher. The units are organized by order to reach the stated recovery goals Recovery Plan as areas that provide Recovery Unit and then Management for this Management Unit. We reiterate substantial recovery value (Service Unit. For each Recovery Unit we the description of those proposed 2002, pp. D–12—D–15). Since provide a broad overview of the recent segments that were known to be completion of the Recovery Plan, distribution and abundance of occupied by flycatchers at the time of additional segments of substantial flycatcher territories. Based upon our listing. Finally, we explain how the recovery value have been identified criteria, we also specifically list those proposed designation of stream through continued survey, analysis, and streams we will propose as critical segments supports the science and habitat evaluation, and are included in habitat within that Recovery Unit that conservation goals established in the this proposal when needed to reach were known to be occupied by Recovery Plan, and for those streams not recovery goals. The distribution and flycatchers at the time of listing, and occupied at the time of listing, we offer abundance of territories and habitat possess the physical or biological information supporting why they are within each proposed segment are features that may require special considered essential for the expected to shift over time as a result of management considerations or conservation of the flycatcher. natural disturbance events such as protection. Detailed site and territory For each stream segment being flooding that reshape floodplains, river summary information used for Recovery proposed as critical habitat, we identify channels, and riparian habitat (Service and Management Units are primarily the State and County where it occurs 2002, pp. 18, D–11–D—13, D–15). generated from the USGS Rangewide and list the length rounded up to the Database (Sogge and Durst 2008) and nearest tenth of a kilometer or mile. The Coastal California Recovery Unit Flycatcher Rangewide Report (Durst et specific beginning and ending points of This Recovery Unit stretches along al. 2008). each proposed stream segment can be the coast of southern California from Because of the abundance of found below in the combination of just north of Point Conception south to information presented in each textual descriptions and associated the Mexico border. In 2002, 167 Management Unit description, we are maps for each proposed critical habitat flycatcher territories were estimated to providing a brief overview of the unit in the Proposed Regulation occur in this Recovery Unit (14 percent information presented in each Promulgation section of this document. of the rangewide total) (Sogge et al. description. For each Management Unit, In addition, GIS data for all proposed 2003); however the most recent 2007 we begin by stating the numerical stream segments, which include more rangewide assessment estimated that the territory goal described in the Recovery specific lateral extent critical habitat number of territories has declined to Plan, and in many instances, a brief note information, may be downloaded online 120 (9 percent of rangewide total) (Durst about flycatcher territory distribution. at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/ et al. 2008, p. 12). Since the completion We next explain whether the arizona/southwes.htm. We also note in of the Recovery Plan, territories have Management Unit supported a large our descriptions which stream segments been distributed along 15 relatively flycatcher nesting population (as are being exempted under section small watersheds, mostly in the defined in the Criteria Used To Identify 4(a)(3) under the Act or are being southern third of the Recovery Unit Critical Habitat, Areas with Large considered for possible exclusion from (Service 2002, p. 64; Durst and Sogge Populations section) in order to critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of 2008). Unlike most other Recovery establish the areas where we initially the Act. For more explanation of why Units, the Coastal California Unit focused our selection of stream any stream is being exempted or possesses many streams in proximity to segments to propose as critical habitat. considered for exclusion, see the one another. However, most breeding For Management Units where there was discussions under the Exemptions and sites are small (fewer than five a large population, we provide more Exclusions sections below. territories); the largest populations specific information about the All of the proposed stream segments occur along the San Luis Rey, Santa occurrence of flycatcher territories provide flycatcher habitat for breeding, Margarita, and Santa Ynez Rivers within that large population area. If feeding, sheltering, and migration, and (Service 2002, p. 64). In 2001, all there was no known large flycatcher subsequently provide metapopulation territories occurred in habitats nesting population, we provide stability, gene flow of the subspecies, dominated by native plants, and over 60 information about known flycatcher protection against catastrophic percent were on government-managed distribution and abundance with that population losses, and connectivity lands (Federal, State, and local) (Service Management Unit. We next present between neighboring Management Units 2002, p. 64). This Recovery Unit those stream segments we are proposing and Recovery Units (Service 2002, pp. contains the Santa Ynez, Santa Clara, as critical habitat and appropriate 74, 75, 86–92). They also provide Santa Ana, and San Diego Management location and length descriptions. Any habitat to help meet the numerical and Units. The stream segments proposed as

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50563

critical habitat are described below flycatchers at the time of listing and Piru Creek and the San Gabriel River under their appropriate Management contain the physical or biological (Sogge and Durst 2008). Units. features essential to the conservation of We are proposing as critical habitat a Based upon our occupancy criteria the species which may require special segment (79.6 km, 49.4 mi) of the Santa (see above), within the Coastal management considerations or Clara River in Ventura and Los Angeles California Recovery Unit, the Santa protection, for the reasons described Counties. This segment was known to Ynez (1991), Santa Clara (1994), and above. The proposed area of Mono be occupied by flycatchers at the time San Luis Rey (1993) Rivers, and Pilgrim Creek was not occupied at the time of of listing (Sogge and Durst 2008) and Creek (1994) are streams that were listing, but is an essential area for has the physical or biological features known to be occupied at the time of flycatcher conservation in order to help essential to the conservation of the listing (1991–1994) (Sogge and Durst meet recovery goals (see below). species which may require special 2008) where we are proposing critical The Santa Ynez River and unnamed management consideration or habitat segments. Below we identify that tributaries (including Mono Creek) were protection, for the reasons described each listed item described in our described as having substantial recovery above. We are also proposing as Special Management Considerations or value in the Recovery Plan (Service flycatcher critical habitat segments of Protection section (see above) applies to 2002, p. 86). These proposed Santa Ynez the Ventura River (27.5 km, 17.1 mi) in the streams described in each River and Mono Creek segments are Ventura County; and segments of Piru Management Unit within the Coastal anticipated to provide habitat for Creek (41.8 km, 26.0 mi), Castaic Creek California Recovery Unit. metapopulation stability, gene (4.8 km, 3.0 mi), Little Tujunga (2.2 km, connectivity through this portion of the 1.4 mi) and Big Tujunga (4.9 km, 3.0 mi) Santa Ynez Management Unit flycatcher’s range, protection against Canyons, and the San Gabriel River The Recovery Plan describes a goal of catastrophic population loss, and (14.2 km, 8.8 mi) in Los Angeles 75 flycatcher territories in the Santa population growth and colonization County. These segments were not Ynez Management Unit (Service 2002, potential. As a result, these river occupied at the time of listing, but are p. 84). The Santa Ynez River is the only segments and associated flycatcher essential for flycatcher conservation in stream in this Management Unit known habitat are anticipated to support the order to help meet recovery goals, as to have flycatcher territories (Sogge and strategy, rationale, and science of explained below. Durst 2008). flycatcher conservation in order to meet The Santa Clara, Ventura, and San We identified a large flycatcher territory and habitat-related recovery Gabriel Rivers, Piru Creek and Big nesting population surrounding the goals. Tujunga Canyon, were identified in the lowest portion of the Santa Ynez River Although a 14.7-km (9.1-mi) portion Recovery Plan as having substantial in Santa Barbara County, California. of the lower Santa Ynez River segment recovery value in the Santa Clara Flycatcher territories were detected on was occupied at the time of listing, it Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 86). the Santa Ynez River in 1991 (Sogge and occurs within the boundaries of Together with the Little Tujunga Durst 2008). A total of four breeding Vandenberg Air Force Base (AFB). We Canyon and Castaic Creeks, these seven sites are known to occur within our are exempting this portion of the river stream segments are essential to large population area. A high of 26 from designation as critical habitat, flycatcher conservation because they are flycatcher territories was detected on under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, based anticipated to provide habitat for the lower Santa Ynez River in 1996, but on their INRMP which provides a metapopulation stability, gene the known number of territories has benefit to the flycatcher (see connectivity through this portion of the fluctuated greatly from year-to-year Exemptions). flycatcher’s range, protection against (from 1 to 26) (Sogge and Durst 2008). catastrophic population loss, and Santa Clara Management Unit As a result, more critical habitat than population growth and colonization just the large population area is being The Recovery Plan describes a goal of potential. As a result, these river proposed to meet the Recovery Plan goal 25 flycatcher territories in the Santa segments and associated flycatcher of 75 territories. Clara Management Unit (Service 2002, habitat are anticipated to support the To help reach the Recovery Plan p. 84). Flycatcher territories have been strategy, rationale, and science of goals, we identified two additional areas detected in small numbers and flycatcher conservation in order to meet of flycatcher habitat on the upper Santa sporadically over a broad area in this territory and habitat-related recovery Ynez River that are considered occupied Management Unit. goals. at the time of listing and a short segment There are no large flycatcher nesting of Mono Creek farther upstream outside populations in the Santa Clara Santa Ana Management Unit of our large population area (near Management Unit to help guide us The Recovery Plan describes a goal of Gibraltar Reservoir) that was not toward a critical habitat area. As a 50 flycatcher territories in the Santa Ana occupied at the time of listing. As a result, we sought known flycatcher Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). result, we are proposing three Santa territories and breeding sites, guidance Flycatcher territories have been detected Ynez River segments and a segment of from the Recovery Plan, and knowledge from the headwaters and tributaries of Mono Creek as flycatcher critical about stream habitat to determine the Santa Ana River in the San habitat. The lower 27.6-km (17.2-mi) critical habitat segments that may be Bernardino Mountains in San Santa Ynez River segment occurs known to be occupied at the time of Bernardino County, California, down to immediately upstream from Vandenberg listing and others essential for flycatcher breeding sites in Riverside County at AFB. The upper 6.1-km (3.8-mi) and conservation (see below). Flycatcher Prado Basin and other nearby separate 7.6-km (4.7-mi) segments of the Santa territories have been detected in small streams. Ynez River occur near Gibraltar numbers in the Santa Clara Management We identified a large flycatcher Reservoir. We are also proposing the Unit, ranging from 0 to 7 territories nesting population that surrounds the lowest 2.6 km (1.6 mi) of Mono Creek, annually between 1995 and 2001 (Sogge Santa Ana River and its tributaries in also in Santa Barbara County. and Durst 2008). Three breeding sites San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The stream segments along the Santa have been detected on the Santa Clara Because of the wide distribution and Ynez River were occupied by River and two breeding sites each on close proximity of flycatcher territories,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50564 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

nearly all the streams within the Santa habitat are anticipated to support the Diego and Riverside Counties and a Ana Management Unit were included in strategy, rationale, and science of Canada Goberandora Creek segment the large population area. Flycatcher flycatcher conservation in order to meet occurs in Orange County. territories have been detected along the territory and habitat-related recovery The San Luis Rey River and Pilgrim Santa Ana River drainage at about 20 goals. Creek were the only streams in this known breeding sites. Since 1995, We will consider excluding portions management unit known to be occupied flycatcher territories have been detected of the Santa Ana River, San Timoteo by flycatchers at the time of listing. The along the Santa Ana River, and Creek, Bautista Creek and Temecula remaining proposed critical habitat tributaries such as Bear Creek, Mill Creek (including Vail Lake) within the stream segments will help reach Creek, Oak Glen Creek, Waterman planning area boundary for the Western flycatcher recovery goals within the San Creek, San Timoteo Creek, and Bautista Riverside MSHCP from the final Diego Management Unit. Creek (Sogge and Durst 2008). While designation of flycatcher critical habitat Because of the large number of breeding sites are numerous, the under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We proposed stream segments within this number of territories detected at each intend to exclude critical habitat from Management Unit, unlike other site was typically less than five (Sogge areas covered by the Western Riverside Management Unit descriptions within and Durst 2008). Throughout the entire MSHCP based on the protections this proposed rule, the descriptions of Management Unit, a high of 49 described below (see Exclusions) and proposed critical habitat segments territories was detected in 2001 (Sogge per the provisions laid out in the within the San Diego Management Unit and Durst 2008), but limited on-the- MSHCP’s implementing agreement, to are separated into smaller groups. We ground surveys only detected one the extent consistent with the will describe the length and general territory in 2007 (Sogge and Durst 2008). requirements of 4(b)(2) of the Act. location of each proposed stream Also, a portion of Bautista Creek In 2007, Durst et al. (2008, p. 12) segment, the status of flycatcher occurs on Tribal lands managed by the estimated that 28 territories occurred in territories, and whether a portion is Ramona Band of Cahuilla, California. this Management Unit. exempted under section 4(a)(3) of the We will also consider our partnership We are proposing as critical habitat Act or identified for possible exclusion with this Tribe and evaluate the segments of the Santa Ana River and under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. tributaries and other nearby streams. conservation planning and management None of these areas was known to be that occurs for potential exclusion San Luis Rey River under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see occupied at the time of listing, but are Flycatcher territories were first Exclusions). essential for flycatcher conservation in detected on San Luis Rey River, in San order to meet recovery goals, as San Diego Management Unit Diego County, California, in 1993. In explained below. On the Santa Ana 2001, a high of 62 territories were River, we are proposing an upper 42.3- The Recovery Plan describes a goal of detected at the 7 known breeding sites km (26.3-mi) segment and a lower 47.8- 125 flycatcher territories in the San found on this river. A single site on the km (29.7-mi) segment that occur in San Diego Management Unit (Service 2002, upper San Luis Rey River typically Bernardino and Riverside Counties. p. 84). Flycatcher territories have been represents a large proportion of all Also occurring in both San Bernardino detected throughout this Management territories known to occur. For example, and Riverside Counties, we are Unit primarily along the rivers and total of 53 flycatcher territories were proposing a 25.6-km (15.9-mi) segment tributaries of the largest river drainages detected at this site in 2001. of San Timoteo Creek. We are also in the area, such as the San Luis Rey, proposing segments of the following Santa Margarita, and San Diego Rivers. We are proposing as critical habitat Santa Ana River tributaries in San We identified a large flycatcher two river segments of the San Luis Rey Bernardino County: a 14.8-km (9.2-mi) nesting population that includes nearly River in San Diego County, California. segment of Bear Creek; a 19.2-km (11.9- all of the streams within the San Diego The upper San Luis Rey River segment mi) segment of Mill Creek; a 4.6-km Management Unit. Within the San Diego (28.6 km, 17.8 mi) extends from Lake (2.9-mi) segment of Oak Glen Creek; and Management Unit, about 24 breeding Henshaw to Wilson Way, while the a 5.2-km (3.2-mi) segment of Waterman sites are known to occur (Durst et al. lower segment (52.3 km, 32.5 mi) Creek (including small portions of the 2008, p. 12). A high of 86 flycatcher extends from near the downstream end left and right forks). In Riverside territories were detected in 2001 (Sogge of the Pauma Country Club to near County, we are proposing a 23.0-km and Durst 2008), and an estimated 77 Interstate 5. These segments are known (14.3-mi) segment of Bautista Creek. territories occurred in 2007 (Durst et al. to be occupied at the time of listing, and This diverse and widely distributed 2008, p. 12). contain the physical or biological group of seven streams (eight stream Within this large population area, we features essential for the conservation of segments) was identified in the identified flycatcher habitat on 18 the species which may require special Recovery Plan (although Oak Glen Creek different streams within the San Diego management considerations or was not specifically named as a Management Unit that occur in San protection, as described above. tributary to the Santa Ana River) as Diego, Riverside, and Orange Counties, The Rincon and La Jolla Bands of areas of substantial recovery value California. The streams we identified in Luiseno Indians have developed (Service 2002, p. 86). Together, these San Diego County are: San Mateo Creek, Management Plans that we will consider eight stream segments are essential to Cristianitos Creek, San Onofre Creek, for possible exclusion under section flycatcher conservation because they are Las Flores Creek, Las Pulgas Creek, 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions). The anticipated to provide habitat for Fallbrook Creek, Santa Margarita River, Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians metapopulation stability, gene DeLuz Creek, San Luis Rey River (2 also have Tribal lands on the San Luis connectivity through this portion of the segments), Pilgrim Creek, Agua Rey River, therefore we will consider flycatcher’s range, protection against Hedionda Creek, San Dieguito River, our partnership with this Tribe and catastrophic population loss, and Santa Ysabel Creek, San Diego River (2 evaluate conservation planning and population growth and colonization segments), Temescal Creek, and management that occurs for potential potential. As a result, these river Sweetwater River. A segment of exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the segments and associated flycatcher Temecula Creek travels across San Act (see Exclusions).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50565

Santa Margarita River and Pilgrim, De are proposing as flycatcher critical 2008). We are proposing two separate Luz, Las Flores, Las Pulgas, and habitat. The remaining proposed segments of Agua Hedionda Creek. The Fallbrook Creeks flycatcher critical habitat includes a 9.4- upstream segment of Agua Hedionda With the exception of Las Pulgas km (5.8-mi) Santa Margarita River Creek includes small portions of the Creek, single flycatcher breeding sites segment, a 3.3-km (2.1-mi) De Luz Creek north (1.0 km, 0.6 mi) and south forks have been detected on each of these segment, and a 5.0-km (3.1-mi) Pilgrim (0.4 km, 0.2 mi). The upstream segment stream segments. Small numbers of Creek segment. extends from La Miranda Drive (south flycatcher territories at a single known Canada Gobernadora Creek fork) and Sycamore Avenue (north fork) and extends along the mainstem Agua breeding site have been detected Canada Gobernadora Creek has had annually on Pilgrim Creek (0–4 Hedionda Creek for 5.9 km (3.7 mi) one to two territories detected annually downstream to just east of the Rancho territories), Las Flores Creek (0–3 between 1999 and 2003 (Sogge and territories), De Luz Creek (0–1 Carlsbad Golf Course. The downstream Durst 2008). We are proposing as segment of Agua Hedionda Creek territories), and Fallbrook Creek (0–2 flycatcher critical habitat a 5.9-km (3.6- territories) (Sogge and Durst 2008). In extends from Cannon Road for 2.1 km mi) segment of Canada Gobernadora (1.3 mi) to Agua Hedionda Lagoon. contrast, the lone known flycatcher Creek in Orange County, California. breeding site on the Santa Margarita These segments were not known to be This segment was not known to be occupied at the time of listing, but are River had as many as 23 flycatcher occupied at the time of listing, but is territories in 2003 (Sogge and Durst essential for flycatcher conservation essential for flycatcher conservation in because they will help meet recovery 2008). order to help meet recovery goals. We are proposing as critical habitat an goals in this Management Unit. We will consider excluding a portion We will consider excluding portions 18.5-km (11.5-mi) segment along Pilgrim of Canada Gobernadora Creek within the Creek (including portions of its left and of Agua Hedionda Creek within the planning area boundary for the Orange Carlsbad HMP from the final right forks). This segment is known to County Southern Subregion HCP from be occupied at the time of listing, and designation of flycatcher critical habitat the final designation of flycatcher under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We contains the physical or biological critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of features essential for the conservation of intend to exclude critical habitat from the Act. We intend to exclude critical areas covered by the Carlsbad HMP the species which may require special habitat from areas covered by the management considerations or based on the protections described Orange County Southern Subregion HCP below (see Exclusions) and per the protection, as described above. based on the protections described We are also proposing segments of provisions laid out in the HCP’s below (see Exclusions) and per the implementing agreement, to the extent flycatcher habitat along the Santa provisions laid out in the HCP’s Margarita River (41.3 km, 25.6 mi), consistent with the requirements of implementing agreement, to the extent 4(b)(2) of the Act. We encourage any Fallbrook Creek (5.3 km, 3.3 mi), De Luz consistent with the requirements of Creek (11.1 km, 6.9 mi), and a public comment in relation to this 4(b)(2) of the Act. We encourage any consideration. continuous Las Flores Creek-Las Pulgas public comment in relation to this Creek segment (9.6 km, 6.0 mi) in San consideration. San Diego, San Dieguito, and Diego County, California. These Sweetwater Rivers and Santa Ysabel and segments were not known to be San Mateo, Cristianitos, and San Onofre Temescal Creeks occupied at the time of listing, but are Creeks essential for flycatcher conservation in We identified segments of flycatcher We identified and are proposing as order to help meet recovery goals in this habitat along San Mateo Creek (8.4 km, flycatcher critical habitat segments of Management Unit. 5.2 mi), Cristianitos Creek (3.9 km, 2.4 the San Diego River, San Dieguito River, The portions of the Santa Margarita mi), and San Onofre Creek (6.6 km, 4.1 Santa Ysabel Creek, Temescal Creek, River (31.8 km, 19.8 mi), De Luz Creek mi) in San Diego County, California. A and Sweetwater River that occur within (7.8 km, 4.8 mi), Fallbrook Creek (5.3 single breeding site was detected on San San Diego County, California. km, 3.3 mi), Las Flores Creek-Las Pulgas Mateo Creek, with a lone territory Three flycatcher breeding sites are Creek (9.6 km, 6.0 mi), and Pilgrim detected in 1995, 1997, and 2007 (Sogge known on the San Dieguito River and Creek (including its left and right forks) and Durst 2008). No flycatcher Santa Ysabel and Temescal Creeks (13.5 km, 8.4 mi) that fall within the territories have been detected on within San Diego County, California. boundaries of Marine Corps Base Camp Cristianitos and San Onofre Creeks. Flycatcher territories were first detected Pendleton and Naval Weapons Station Because these segments of there in 1996 (and annually between Seal Beach Detachment Fallbrook will Cristianitos, San Mateo, and San Onofre 1996 and 2003), with a high of 5 be exempted from this critical habitat Creeks occur entirely within the territories in 1997 (Sogge and Durst designation under section 4(a)(3) of the boundaries of Marine Corps Base Camp 2008). We are proposing a continuous Act because Camp Pendleton and Pendleton, these stream segments will 10.3 km (6.3 mi) segment of that extends Fallbrook’s INRMPs provide benefits to be exempted from this critical habitat along Santa Ysabel Creek from Ysabel the flycatcher (see Exemptions). proposal under section 4(a)(3) of the Act Creek Road downstream (1.1 km, 0.7 mi) Because all the flycatcher habitat of because Camp Pendleton’s INRMP to the San Dieguito River and continues Las Flores, Las Pulgas, and Fallbrook provides benefits to the flycatcher (see downstream (9.2 km, 5.7 mi) until it Creeks occurs entirely within the Exemptions). Therefore, no portions of terminates at Interstate 15 and Lake boundaries of Marine Corps Base Camp San Mateo, Cristianitos, or San Onofre Hodges in San Diego County, California. Pendleton and Naval Weapons Station Creeks are proposed as flycatcher At the headwaters of the San Dieguito Seal Beach Detachment Fallbrook, no critical habitat. River, we are proposing connected portions of these three streams are segments of Santa Ysabel Creek (9.8 km, proposed as flycatcher critical habitat. Agua Hedionda Creek 6.1 mi) and Temescal Creek (7.6 km, 4.7 However, there are remaining upstream A single site and flycatcher territory mi). These segments were not known to segments of the Santa Margarita River, was detected on Agua Hedionda Creek be occupied at the time of listing, but and DeLuz and Pilgrim Creeks that we in 1998 and 1999 (Sogge and Durst are essential for flycatcher conservation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50566 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

because they will help meet recovery habitat a 23.9-km (14.8-mi) segment of described below in their appropriate goals. Temecula Creek in Riverside and San Management Units. A lone breeding site was detected on Diego Counties, California, from Vail Based upon our occupancy criteria the San Diego River in 2001, with 2 Lake (including Vail Lake) to Chihuahua (see above), within the Basin and territories (Sogge and Durst 2008). We Creek. This segment was not known to Mohave Recovery Unit, the South Fork are proposing two essential segments of be occupied at the time of listing, but is Kern (1993) and Owens Rivers (1993) the San Diego River that are separated essential for the flycatcher conservation are streams that were known to be by El Capitan Reservoir and a long because it will help meet recovery goals. occupied at the time of listing (1991– stretch of stream downstream from El Where Temecula Creek occurs within 1994) (Sogge and Durst 2008) where we Capitan Reservoir in San Diego County, the Western Riverside MSHCP, it will be are proposing critical habitat segments. California. The upper 7.0-km (4.3-mi) considered for exclusion under section Below we identify that each listed item San Diego River segment extends from 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions). described in our Special Management just north of the Cedar Creek confluence San Diego Management Unit Summary Considerations or Protection section down to El Capitan Reservoir. The lower (see above) applied to the streams 9.5-km (5.9-mi) San Diego River The Santa Margarita River, DeLuz described in each Management Unit segment begins at Magnolia Avenue and Creek, San Luis Rey River, Pilgrim within the Basin and Mohave Recovery Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, San ends at Mission Trails Regional Park. Unit. These segments were not known to be Dieguito River, San Diego River, occupied at the time of listing, but are Sweetwater River, Temecula Creek, and Owens Management Unit, CA essential for the flycatcher conservation Canada Gobernadora Creek were The Recovery Plan describes a goal of identified in the Recovery Plan as because they will help meet recovery 50 flycatcher territories in the Owens having substantial recovery value goals. Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). (Service 2002, p. 87). The Temescal and A single site and flycatcher territory The Owens River is the only stream in Santa Ysabel Creeks were also found to were detected on the Sweetwater River the Management Unit known to have have substantial recovery value. (located south of the San Diego River) flycatcher territories and is the most Together these segments are anticipated from 1997 to 1999 (Sogge and Durst northern in the Basin and Mohave to provide habitat for metapopulation 2008). We are proposing as critical Recovery Unit. habitat a 6.6-km (4.1-mi) segment of the stability, gene connectivity through this We identified a large flycatcher Sweetwater River in San Diego County, portion of the flycatcher’s range, nesting population along the Owens California, from the Rancho San Diego protection against catastrophic River within Mono and Inyo Counties, Golf Course downstream to Sweetwater population loss, and population growth California. Nesting flycatchers have Reservoir. and colonization potential. As a result, We will consider excluding portions these 12 river segments and associated been detected at four sites within this of the San Dieguito, San Diego, and flycatcher habitat are anticipated to area, with a high of 29 territories Sweetwater Rivers and Santa Ysabel support the strategy, rationale, and detected in 1999 (Sogge and Durst Creek within the planning area science of flycatcher conservation in 2008). Within this large population area, boundary for the San Diego MSCP and order to meet territory and habitat- we are proposing as critical habitat a HCP from the final designation of related recovery goals. 128.5-km (79.9-mi) continuous segment of the Owens River (from Long Lake flycatcher critical habitat under section Basin and Mohave Recovery Unit 4(b)(2) of the Act. We intend to exclude Dam to just north of Tinemaha critical habitat from areas covered by The Basin and Mohave Recovery Unit Reservoir) within Inyo and Mono the San Diego MSHCP and HCP based is comprised of a broad geographic area Counties, California. on the protections described below (see including the arid interior lands of The segment of the Owens River Exclusions) and per the provisions laid southern California and a small portion proposed as critical habitat is known to out in the HCP’s implementing of extreme southwestern Nevada. In be occupied by flycatchers at the time agreement, to the extent consistent with 2002, there were a total of 69 known of listing, and contains the physical or the requirements of 4(b)(2) of the Act. flycatcher territories estimated to occur biological features essential to the We encourage any public comment in (7 percent of the rangewide total), but conservation of the species which may relation to this consideration. have declined to an estimated 51 require special management Also, a portion of the San Diego River territories in 2007 (Durst et al. 2008. p. considerations or protection, for the occurs within the land of the Capitan 12). With the exception of breeding sites reasons described above. Grande Band of Diegueno Mission on the Owens and Kern Rivers, all The Owens River is the only stream Indians of California (jointly managed known breeding sites have fewer than identified in the Recovery Plan as by the Barona Group of Capitan Grande five territories (Service 2002, p. 64). As having substantial recovery value Band of Mission Indians and the Viejas of 2002, all flycatcher territories were in within the Owens Management Unit [Baron Long] Group of Capitan Grande riparian habitats dominated by native (Service 2002, p. 88). The Owens River Band of Mission Indians). We will also plants, and approximately 70 percent segment we are proposing is anticipated consider our partnership with this Tribe are on privately owned lands (Service to provide habitat for metapopulation and evaluate the conservation planning 2002, p. 64). Because there has been stability, gene connectivity through this and management that occurs for little change in the amount of known portion of the flycatcher’s range, potential exclusion under section 4(b)(2) flycatcher breeding sites since protection against catastrophic of the Act (see Exclusions). completion of the Recovery Plan and the population loss, and population growth number of estimated territories has and colonization potential. As a result, Temecula Creek declined, flycatcher habitat use and this river segment and associated A total of two breeding sites, holding land ownership are likely similar today. flycatcher habitat is anticipated to one flycatcher territory each in 1997 and The Recovery Unit contains the Owens, support the strategy, rationale, and 1998, are known from Temecula Creek Kern, Mohave, Salton, and Amargosa science of flycatcher conservation in (Sogge and Durst 2008). We have Management Units. The stream order to meet territory and habitat- identified and are proposing as critical segments proposed as critical habitat are related recovery goals.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50567

This entire Owens River segment potential. As a result, these river Three of these streams (Mohave River, occurs within the boundaries of land segments and associated flycatcher West Fork Mohave River, and Deep owned and managed by the Los Angeles habitat are anticipated to support the Creek) were identified as having Department of Water and Power that we strategy, rationale, and science of substantial recovery value in the are considering for exclusion under flycatcher conservation in order to meet Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 88). section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see territory and habitat-related recovery Holcomb Creek was not specifically Exclusions). goals. identified in the Recovery plan, but Kern Management Unit, CA Because the South Fork Kern River is since flycatcher territories have been located within the South Fork Kern detected there we find it also important The Recovery Plan describes a goal of River Wildlife Area (which includes the to meet recovery goals. Together, these 75 flycatcher territories in the Kern upper portion of Lake Isabella), four proposed critical habitat segments Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). Haffenfeld Ranch, and Sprague Ranch, are essential to flycatcher conservation The South Fork Kern River and this segment will be considered for because they are anticipated to provide Canebrake Creek within Kern County, exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the habitat for metapopulation stability, California, are the only streams known Act (see Exclusions). gene connectivity through this portion to have flycatcher territories within this of the flycatcher’s range, protection Management Unit. Mohave Management Unit, CA against catastrophic population loss, We identified a large flycatcher The Recovery Plan describes a goal of and population growth and colonization nesting population along the lower 25 territories in the Mohave potential. As a result, these river portion of the South Fork Kern River. Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). segments and associated flycatcher Flycatchers were first detected nesting The Mohave River and Holcomb Creek habitat are anticipated to support the on the South Fork Kern River in 1993 are the only streams known to have strategy, rationale, and science of and have been detected annually flycatcher territories within the Mohave flycatcher conservation in order to meet through at least 2007 (Sogge and Durst Management Unit (Sogge and Durst territory and habitat-related recovery 2008). A high of 38 territories were 2008). goals. detected in 1997 within this Management Unit (Sogge and Durst There are no large flycatcher nesting Salton Management Unit, CA 2008). The South Fork Kern River is populations in the Mohave Management The Recovery Plan describes a goal of known to be occupied by flycatchers at Unit to help guide us toward a critical 25 flycatcher territories in the Salton the time of listing, and contains the habitat area, and no areas were known Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). physical or biological features essential to be occupied at the time of listing. A single known flycatcher breeding site to the conservation of the species which Therefore, to identify the areas that occurs along San Felipe Creek in this may require special management would contribute to meeting recovery Management Unit. considerations or protection, as goals for this Management Unit, we described above. used information based on currently There are no large flycatcher nesting Because of the need to increase the known flycatcher territories and populations solely in the Salton abundance of flycatcher territories to breeding sites, guidance from the Management Unit, and no areas were reach recovery goals in the Kern Recovery Plan, and knowledge about known to be occupied at the time of Management Unit, we also identified a stream habitat to determine areas listing. However, portions of the Salton small portion of Canebrake Creek in essential for flycatcher conservation (see Management Unit were part of a large Kern County within our large below). population area because of the population areas as being essential to Flycatchers were first detected nesting proximity of flycatcher territories in the flycatcher conservation (see below). on the Mohave River in 1995 and adjacent San Diego and Santa Ana Canebrake Creek (a tributary to the Holcomb Creek in 1999. A total of five Management Units. Therefore, to South Fork Kern River) was not known breeding sites occur along the Mohave identify the areas that would contribute to be occupied at the time of listing, but River and one site at Holcomb Creek to meeting recovery goals for this territories were detected in 1998 (Sogge (Sogge and Durst 2008). A high of 12 Management Unit, we used information and Durst 2008). territories were detected at these based on currently known flycatcher We are proposing as critical habitat a breeding sites in 2001 (Sogge and Durst territories and breeding sites, guidance 23.8-km (14.8-mi) portion of the South 2008). In addition, we found additional from the Recovery Plan, and knowledge Fork Kern River (including the upper areas that would contribute to meeting about stream habitat to determine areas 1.0-km, 0.6-mi, of Lake Isabella) and a recovery goals in the West Fork Mohave essential for flycatcher conservation (see 1.7-km (1.0-mi) segment of Canebrake River and Deep Creek. below). From 1998 to 2002, flycatcher Creek in Kern County, California. We are proposing as critical habitat a territories were detected in small The South Fork Kern River segment 35.7-km (22.2-mi) segment of the numbers (2 to 4 territories) at single was the lone segment identified within Mojave River, an 11.2-km (6.9-mi) breeding site on San Felipe Creek this Management Unit as having segment of the West Fork Mohave River, within this Management Unit (Sogge substantial recovery value in the a 19.6-km (12.2-mi) segment of Holcomb and Durst 2008). Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 88). Creek, and a 20.0-km (12.5-mi) segment We are proposing as critical habitat a This South Fork Kern River segment of Deep Creek (including Mohave River 21.2-km (13.2-mi) segment of San Felipe and the additional Canebrake Creek Forks Reservoir) in San Bernardino Creek and a short 1.0-km (0.6 mi) segment are essential to flycatcher County, California, near the Town of segment of Mill Creek in San Diego conservation because they are Victorville. Deep Creek connects County, California. This short portion of anticipated to provide habitat for Holcomb Creek with the Mohave Forks Mill Creek is connected to the proposed metapopulation stability, gene Reservoir. All of these segments were Mill Creek segment within the Santa connectivity through this portion of the not known to be occupied at the time of Ana Management Unit. We find that flycatcher’s range, protection against listing, but are essential for flycatcher both of the segments are essential for catastrophic population loss, and conservation because they will help flycatcher conservation because they population growth and colonization meet recovery goals. will help meet recovery goals.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50568 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Although the San Felipe Creek detected at these breeding sites within territories were estimated to occur segment proposed as critical habitat was this Management Unit (Sogge and Durst within this Recovery Unit (also 11 the only river segment identified in the 2008). Therefore, we sought additional percent of the rangewide total) (Durst et Recovery Plan as having substantial areas for critical habitat that could al. 2008, p. 12). Most sites included recovery value (Service 2002, p. 88), the contribute to recovery goals in this fewer than 5 territories; the largest additional Mill Creek segment was Management Unit. populations (most of which are fewer identified within the Santa Ana We are proposing, as flycatcher than 10 territories) are found on the Bill Management Unit as having substantial critical habitat, segments of the Williams, Virgin, and Pahranagat Rivers recovery value (Service 2002, p. 88). As Amargosa River (12.3 km, 7.7 mi) and (Service 2002, p. 64). Approximately 69 a result, the San Felipe and Mill Creek Willow Creek (3.5 km, 2.2 mi) in Inyo percent of territories are found on segments, along with the other and San Bernardino Counties, government-managed lands and 8 populations and river segments in California. We are also proposing percent are on Tribal lands (Service proximity within the adjacent San Diego approximately 5.7 km (3.5 mi) of Carson 2002, p. 64). Habitat characteristics and Santa Ana Management Units are Slough and 100.1 km (62.2 mi) of range from purely native (including essential to flycatcher conservation associated unnamed riparian areas that high-elevation and low-elevation because they are anticipated to provide occur within the Ash Meadows National willow) to exotic (primarily tamarisk)- habitat for metapopulation stability, Wildlife Refuge in Nye County, Nevada. dominated stands (Service 2002, p. 64). gene connectivity through this portion No known breeding sites have yet to be Because of the similarity in abundance of the flycatcher’s range, protection detected on the Amargosa River and and distribution of territories since against catastrophic population loss, Willow Creek segments in California. 2002, these land ownership and habitat- and population growth and colonization None of the proposed segments were use statistics are likely similar today. potential. As a result, these river known to be occupied at the time of This Recovery Unit contains the Little segments and associated flycatcher listing. Colorado, Middle Colorado, Virgin, habitat are anticipated to support the Carson Slough and the unnamed Pahranagat, Bill Williams, Hoover to strategy, rationale, and science of riparian areas within the Ash Meadows Parker Dam, and Parker Dam to flycatcher conservation in order to meet National Wildlife Refuge, and the Southerly International Border territory and habitat-related recovery Amargosa River in California, were Management Units. described in the Recovery Plan as goals. Based upon our occupancy criteria Part of San Felipe Creek occurs within having substantial recovery value (see above), within the Lower Colorado the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel, (Service 2002, p. 88). Willow Creek was Recovery Unit, the Colorado (1993), California (formerly the Santa Ysabel also determined to be essential in order Little Colorado (1993), Bill Williams Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of to reach recovery goals in this (1994), Big Sandy (1994), Santa Maria the Santa Ysabel Reservation), so we Management Unit. Together, these four (1994), and Zuni (1993) Rivers, and Rio will consider our Tribal partnership and proposed critical habitat segments are Nutria (1993) are streams that were evaluate the conservation and essential to flycatcher conservation management of the area for exclusion because they are anticipated to provide known to be occupied at the time of under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see habitat for metapopulation stability, listing (1991–1994) (Sogge and Durst Exclusions). gene connectivity through this portion 2008) where we are proposing critical of the flycatcher’s range, protection habitat segments. At the time of listing Amargosa Management Unit, CA and against catastrophic population loss, only specific sites on the Colorado River NV and population growth and colonization within the Middle Colorado The Recovery Plan describes a goal of potential. As a result, these river Management Unit were known to be 25 flycatcher territories in the Amargosa segments and associated flycatcher specifically occupied by nesting birds, Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). habitat are anticipated to support the but based upon our criteria and the Flycatcher territories have been detected strategy, rationale, and science of wide-ranging nature of this bird as a in small numbers within this flycatcher conservation in order to meet neotropical migrant and its use of Management Unit. territory and habitat-related recovery migration stop-over habitat, we also There are no large flycatcher nesting goals. consider the Colorado River within the populations in the Amargosa Hoover to Parker Dam and Parker Dam Management Unit to help guide us Lower Colorado Recovery Unit to Southerly International Border toward a critical habitat area, and no This is a geographically large and Management Units occupied at the time areas were known to be occupied at the ecologically diverse Recovery Unit, of listing. Below we identify that each time of listing. Therefore, to identify the encompassing the Colorado River and listed item described in our Special areas that would contribute to meeting its major tributaries (such as the Virgin, Management Considerations or recovery goals for this Management Pahranagat, Muddy, and Little Colorado Protection section (see above) applies to Unit, we used information based on Rivers) from the high-elevation streams the streams described in each currently known flycatcher territories in White Mountains of East-Central Management Unit within the Lower and breeding sites, guidance from the Arizona and Central Western New Colorado Recovery Unit. Recovery Plan, and knowledge about Mexico to the mainstem Colorado River Little Colorado Management Unit, AZ stream habitat to determine areas through the Grand Canyon downstream and NM essential for flycatcher conservation (see through the arid lands along the lower below). Colorado River to the Mexico border The Recovery Plan describes a goal of Within the Amargosa Management (Service 2002, p. 64). 50 flycatcher territories in the Little Unit, one breeding site has been In 2002, despite its size, the Lower Colorado Management Unit (Service detected on the Amargosa River and two Colorado Recovery Unit had only 127 2002, p. 84). Flycatcher territories have breeding sites are known within the Ash known flycatcher territories (11 percent been detected on the Little Colorado and Meadows National Wildlife Refuge of the rangewide total), most of which Zuni Rivers and Rio Nutria within this (Sogge and Durst 2008). From 1998 to occur away from the mainstem Colorado large area along the New Mexico and 2007, one to seven territories were River (Sogge et al. 2003). In 2007, 150 Arizona border (Sogge and Durst 2008).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50569

We identified a large flycatcher within the Little Colorado Management The Virgin River was identified as nesting population surrounding the Unit are anticipated to provide habitat having substantial recovery value in the Little Colorado River, near the Town of for metapopulation stability, gene Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 89). Greer in Apache County, Arizona. connectivity through this portion of the This essential segment of the Virgin Flycatcher territories have been detected flycatcher’s range, protection against River we are proposing as critical along the Little Colorado River, Zuni catastrophic population loss, and habitat within the Virgin River River, and Rio Nutria since 1993. A high population growth and colonization Management Unit is anticipated to of 16 territories were detected on these potential. As a result, these river provide habitat for metapopulation river segments in 1996, but known segments and associated flycatcher stability, gene connectivity through this territories have declined, with only 2 habitat are anticipated to support the portion of the flycatcher’s range, and 6 territories detected in 2005 and strategy, rationale, and science of protection against catastrophic 2006, respectively (Sogge and Durst flycatcher conservation in order to meet population loss, and population growth 2008). Because of the need to increase territory and habitat-related recovery and colonization potential. As a result, the abundance of flycatcher territories to goals. this river segment and associated reach recovery goals, we also identified We will consider our partnership and flycatcher habitat are anticipated to the Zuni River and Rio Nutria in evaluate the conservation and support the strategy, rationale, and McKinley County, New Mexico, and the management of the Zuni River and Rio science of flycatcher conservation in West Fork Little Colorado River, in Nutria where they occur within the order to meet territory and habitat- Apache County, Arizona (see below). No Navajo Nation and the Zuni Pueblo for related recovery goals. flycatcher territories are known from the exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Where the Virgin River occurs West Fork Little Colorado River. Act (see Exclusions). through the planning area of the Clark We are proposing as critical habitat a County Multiple Species HCP and the Virgin Management Unit, UT, AZ, and contiguous 8.8-km (5.5-mi) segment of Overton State Wildlife Area, we will NV the West Fork Little Colorado River and consider those segments for exclusion a 17.6-km (10.9-mi) segment of the Little The Recovery Plan describes a goal of under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Colorado River. This West Fork and 100 flycatcher territories in the Virgin Exclusions). Little Colorado River segment begins Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). Middle Colorado Management Unit, AZ where U.S. Forest Service (Forest Flycatcher territories have been detected Service) Road 113 crosses the West Fork along a broad area of the Virgin River The Recovery Plan describes a goal of and extends downstream to its within this Management Unit through 25 flycatcher territories in the Middle confluence with the Little Colorado the States of Utah, Arizona, and Nevada Colorado Management Unit (Service River, through the Town of Greer, and (Sogge and Durst 2008). 2002, p. 84). ends at the Diversion Ditch. The Little We identified a large flycatcher We identified a large flycatcher Colorado River was known to be nesting population along an essential nesting population along the lower occupied at the time of listing, and segment of the Virgin River where it portion of the Colorado River within the contains the physical or biological occurs through Washington County, Grand Canyon (including upper Lake features essential to the conservation of Utah; Mohave County, Arizona; and Mead) in Mohave County, Arizona. the species which may require special Clark County, Nevada. Flycatchers were Flycatchers were first detected nesting management considerations or first detected nesting on this portion of along the Colorado River within the protection, as described above. The the Virgin River in 1995. A total of Middle Colorado Management Unit in West Fork Little Colorado River was not seven breeding sites have been detected 1993. A total of 16 breeding sites have known to be occupied at the time of within this large population area been detected in our selected segment listing, but is essential to flycatcher through 2007 (Durst et al. 2008, p. 12). through 2007. Also, a high of 16 conservation of the flycatcher in order Also, a high of 43 territories were territories was detected within this to meet recovery goals, as described estimated to occur within this Management Unit in 1998 (Sogge and above. Management Unit in 2007 (Durst et al. Durst 2008), but has declined to an We are also proposing as critical 2008, p. 12), most occurring within the estimated 4 territories in 2007 (Durst et habitat a contiguous segment of the Rio State of Nevada, although territories are al. 2008, p. 12). Nutria (35.8 km, 22.2 mi) and the Zuni also known along the Virgin River in We are proposing as critical habitat a River (55.4 km, 34.4 mi) in McKinley Utah and Arizona. 74.1-km (46.0-mi) segment of the County, New Mexico. The Rio Nutria We are proposing as critical habitat a Colorado River that extends from the segment begins at the Nutria Diversion 152.0-km (94.4-mi) segment (total middle of Lake Mead upstream to Dam, extends to the Zuni River, and length) of the Virgin River that begins at Colorado River Mile 243. This entire continues along the Zuni River to the Berry Springs in Washington County, segment is within the full pool elevation Arizona and New Mexico State Line. Utah, continues 47.5 km (29.5 mi) of Lake Mead. The Colorado River in Both of these segments were known to through the State of Utah, then extends Mohave County, Arizona, is known to be occupied at the time of listing, and 56.0 km (34.8 mi) through the Town of be occupied by flycatchers at the time contain the physical or biological Littlefield and the State of Arizona, and of listing, and contains the physical or features essential to the conservation of then 48.4 km (30.0 mi) through the State biological features essential to the the species which may require special of Nevada until it ends at Colorado conservation of the species which may management considerations or River Mile 280 at the upper end of Lake require special management protection, as described above. Mead, Clark County, Nevada. This considerations or protection, as The Little Colorado River, Rio Nutria, segment was not known to be occupied described above. and Zuni River, and the West Fork Little at the time of listing, but is being This Middle Colorado River segment Colorado River segments were all proposed as critical habitat because it is was identified as having substantial identified in the Recovery Plan as areas essential for the conservation of the recovery value in the Recovery Plan with substantial recovery value (Service flycatcher in the Virgin River (Service 2002, p. 89). The portion of the 2002, p. 89). These four stream segments Management Unit in order to meet Colorado River we are proposing as that we are proposing as critical habitat recovery goals. critical habitat within the Middle

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50570 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Colorado Management Unit is population growth and colonization contain the physical or biological anticipated to provide habitat for potential. As a result, these river features essential for the conservation of metapopulation stability, gene segments and associated flycatcher the species which may require special connectivity through this portion of the habitat are anticipated to support the management considerations or flycatcher’s range, protection against strategy, rationale, and science of protection, as described above. catastrophic population loss, and flycatcher conservation in order to meet The Big Sandy, Santa Maria, and Bill population growth and colonization territory and habitat-related recovery Williams Rivers were all identified as potential. As a result, this river segment goals. having substantial recovery value in the and associated flycatcher habitat are We will consider excluding the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 90). anticipated to support the strategy, Pahranagat River where it occurs within These river segments we are proposing rationale, and science of flycatcher the Key Pittman State Wildlife Area and within the Bill Williams Management conservation in order to meet territory the Muddy River within the Overton Unit are anticipated to provide habitat and habitat-related recovery goals. State Wildlife Area as result of for: Metapopulation stability, gene Where the Colorado River occurs completed Management Plans under connectivity through this portion of the within the planning area of the Lower section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see flycatcher’s range, protection against Colorado River Multi-Species Exclusions). catastrophic population loss, and Conservation Plan (LCR MSCP) (due to Bill Williams Management Unit, AZ population growth and colonization the completed HCP) and Hualapai potential. As a result, these river The Recovery Plan describes a goal of Indian Tribal land (due to their segments and associated flycatcher 100 flycatcher territories in the Bill Management Plan), it will be considered habitat is anticipated to support the Williams Management Unit (Service for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of strategy, rationale, and science of 2002, p. 84). Flycatcher territories are the Act (see Exclusions). flycatcher conservation in order to meet distributed across a broad area of this territory and habitat-related recovery Pahranagat Management Unit, NV Management Unit. goals. The Recovery Plan describes a goal of We identified a large flycatcher 50 flycatcher territories in the nesting population in this Management We will consider excluding the Bill Pahranagat Management Unit (Service Unit. It encompasses areas along the Big Williams, Santa Maria, and Big Sandy 2002, p. 84). Sandy River near the Town of Wikieup Rivers at the upper end of Alamo Lake We identified a large flycatcher in Mohave County; the Big Sandy, Santa within the Alamo Lake Wildlife Area nesting population along the Pahranagat Maria, and Bill Williams Rivers at the due to a completed Management Plan River and the Muddy River. Flycatchers upper end of Alamo Lake in La Paz and the Bill Williams River where it were first detected nesting on these County; and along the Bill Williams occurs within the planning area of the portions of the Pahranagat and Muddy River between Alamo Dam and the Lower Colorado River MSCP under Rivers in 1997. Through 2007, a total of Colorado River in La Paz and Mohave section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see three breeding sites were know to occur Counties. Flycatchers were first detected Exclusions). within these segments, with a high of 38 nesting on the Big Sandy, Santa Maria, Hoover to Parker Dam Management territories detected in 2006 (Durst and and Bill Williams Rivers in 1994 (Sogge Unit, AZ and CA Sogge 2008). and Durst 2008). Through 2007, a total We are proposing as critical habitat a of 9 breeding sites occurred within these The Recovery Plan describes a goal of 6.3-km (3.9-mi) river segment of the segments with a high of 61 territories 50 flycatcher territories in the Hoover to Pahranagat River through the Key detected in 2004 (Durst and Sogge Parker Dam Management Unit (Service Pittman Wildlife Area in Lincoln 2008). Since 2007, an additional 2002, p. 84). County, Nevada, and a 17.3-km (10.8- breeding site was discovered on the We identified a large flycatcher mi) segment of the Pahranagat River upper Big Sandy River and an nesting population along the Colorado through the Pahranagat National additional two sites discovered along River within Mohave and La Paz Wildlife Refuge in Clark County, the Bill Williams River. Counties, Arizona, and San Bernardino Nevada. We are also proposing as We are proposing as critical habitat a County, California. Flycatchers were critical habitat a 3.1-km (1.9 mi) 35.3-km (21.9-mi) segment of the upper first detected nesting on this portion of segment of the Muddy River within the Big Sandy River from the Town of the Colorado River in 1995 (Sogge and Overton Wildlife Area in Clark County, Wikieup to Groom Peak Wash in La Paz Durst 2008). Through 2007, a total of 6 Nevada. These segments were not County, Arizona. At upper Alamo Lake breeding sites occurred within this known to be occupied at the time of where the Big Sandy, Santa Maria, and segment (Durst 2008, p. 12) with a high listing, but are being proposed as critical Bill Williams Rivers converge, we are of 34 territories detected in 2004 (Durst habitat because they are essential for proposing, collectively, a 23.4-km (14.5- and Sogge 2008). flycatcher conservation in order to meet mi) portion of these three streams in La We are proposing as critical habitat a recovery goals in the Pahranagat Paz County. Between Alamo Dam and 106.9-km (66.4-mi) river segment of the Management Unit. the Colorado River, we are proposing as Colorado River from near Davis Dam The Pahranagat and Muddy River critical habitat a 17.8-km (11.0-mi) downstream through Lake Havasu to segments were identified as having segment of the Bill Williams River near Parker Dam. We are also proposing a substantial recovery value in the Lincoln Ranch in La Paz and Mohave small 1.7-km, (1.0-mi) portion of the Bill Recovery Plan (Service 2002, pp. 89– Counties, Arizona. Also below Alamo Williams River immediately adjacent to 90). These essential river segments we Dam, we are proposing as critical the Colorado River. Both of these are proposing as critical habitat within habitat the last 21.3 km (13.2 mi) of the segments are known to be occupied by the Pahranagat Management Unit are Bill Williams River before it reaches the flycatchers at the time of listing, and anticipated to provide habitat for Colorado River at Lake Havasu, from contain the physical or biological metapopulation stability, gene Planet Ranch through the Bill Williams features essential to the conservation of connectivity through this portion of the National Wildlife Refuge. All of these the species which may require special flycatcher’s range, protection against areas are known to be occupied by management considerations or catastrophic population loss, and flycatchers at the time of listing, and protection, as described above.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50571

These segments of the Colorado River flycatcher habitat for metapopulation San Juan Management Unit, CO, NM, and Bill Williams River were identified stability, gene connectivity through this AZ, and UT as having substantial recovery value in portion of the flycatcher’s range, The Recovery Plan describes a goal of the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 90). protection against catastrophic 25 flycatcher territories in the San Juan These river segments are anticipated to population loss, and population growth Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). provide flycatcher habitat for and colonization potential. As a result, Flycatcher territories have been detected metapopulation stability, gene these river segments and associated in small numbers over a broad area of connectivity through this portion of the flycatcher habitat are anticipated to the southwestern Colorado and flycatcher’s range, protection against support the strategy, rationale, and northwestern New Mexico within the catastrophic population loss, and science of flycatcher conservation in Management Unit. population growth and colonization order to meet territory and habitat- There were no large flycatcher nesting potential. As a result, these river related recovery goals. populations in the San Juan segments and associated flycatcher We will consider excluding portions Management Unit to help guide us habitat are anticipated to support the toward a critical habitat area, and no strategy, rationale, and science of of the Colorado River that occur within the planning area of the LCR MSCP and areas were known to be occupied at the flycatcher conservation in order to meet time of listing. Therefore, to identify the territory and habitat-related recovery that occur on Colorado Indian and Quechan (Fort Yuma) Tribal lands as areas that would contribute to meeting goals. recovery goals for this Management We will consider excluding portions result of their Management Plans under Unit, we used information based on of the Colorado and Bill Williams Rivers section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see known flycatcher territories and in this segment that occur within the Exclusions). planning area of the LCR MSCP and breeding sites, guidance from the those portions of the Colorado River that Upper Colorado Recovery Unit Recovery Plan, and knowledge about stream habitat to determine critical occur on Fort Mohave and Chemehuevi The Upper Colorado Recovery Unit is Tribal lands as a result of their habitat segments that may be essential comprised of a broad geographic area for flycatcher conservation (see below). Management Plans under section 4(b)(2) covering much of the Four Corners area of the Act (see Exclusions). In 2007, 10 territories were estimated to of southeastern Utah and southwestern occur (within a total of 3 breeding sites) Parker Dam to Southerly International Colorado, with smaller portions of along the Los Pinos River in Border Management Unit, AZ and CA northwestern Arizona and northeastern southwestern Colorado in La Plata The Recovery Plan describes a goal of New Mexico. Ecologically, this area may County, Colorado, and along the San 150 flycatcher territories in the Parker be an intergradation area between the Juan River in San Juan County, New Dam to Southerly International Border southwestern willow flycatcher Mexico (Durst et al. 2008, p. 13). Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). subspecies and the Great Basin willow Through 2007, no known breeding sites We identified a large flycatcher flycatcher subspecies (Service 2002, p. have yet to be detected in the Utah nesting population along the Colorado 64). Flycatchers are only known to portion of this Management Unit (Sogge River within La Paz and Yuma Counties, breed at five breeding sites across this and Durst 2008). Arizona, and San Bernardino, Riverside, broad Recovery Unit, representing an We are proposing as critical habitat a and Imperial Counties, California. estimated high of 10 territories segment of the Los Pinos River in La Flycatcher territories were first detected occurring in 2007 (Durst et al. 2008, p. Plata County, Colorado (46.0 km, 28.6 nesting on this portion of the Colorado 13). However, this low number of mi); a segment of the San Juan River in River in 1995 (Sogge and Durst 2008). breeding sites and territories (less than San Juan County, New Mexico (3.5 km, Through 2007, a total of 16 breeding 1 percent of the rangewide total) is 2.2 mi); and a segment of the San Juan sites occurred within this Management probably a function of relatively low River in San Juan County, Utah (51.7 Unit (Durst 2008, p.12), with a high of survey effort rather than an accurate km, 32.1 mi). The Los Pinos River 15 territories detected in 1996 (Durst reflection of the bird’s actual numbers segment begins near County Road 501 and Sogge 2008). In 2007, it was and distribution (Service 2002, p. 64). and occurs through the Town of estimated that only one territory Much willow riparian habitat occurs Bayfield and ends near the Colorado occurred within these two river along drainages within this Recovery and New Mexico State Line. The San segments (Durst and Sogge 2008). Unit and remains to be surveyed Juan River segment in New Mexico We are proposing as critical habitat (Service 2002, p. 64). The Upper occurs in northwestern New Mexico, two Colorado River segments: (1) A Colorado Recovery Unit contains the just upstream and downstream of 65.0-km (40.4-mi) river segment from Powell and San Juan Management Malpais Arroyo near the Town of Parker Dam downstream past Highway Units. The stream segments proposed as Shiprock. The San Juan River, Utah, 62, (2) a more southern 148.0-km (92.0- critical habitat are described below in segment occurs from upstream of the mi) segment from near Highway 10 their appropriate Management Units. State Route 262 Bridge downstream to downstream to near the Town of Yuma. Chinle Creek. These segments were not The Colorado River is known to be Based upon our occupancy criteria known to be occupied at the time of occupied by flycatchers at the time of (see above), within the Upper Colorado listing, but are essential for flycatcher listing, and contains the physical or Recovery Unit, no streams were known conservation in order to help meet biological features essential to flycatcher to be occupied at the time of listing recovery goals in this Management Unit. conservation which may require special (1991–1994) (Sogge and Durst 2008). These segments of the San Juan and management considerations or Below we identify that each listed item Los Pinos Rivers were identified as protection, as described above. described in our Special Management having substantial recovery value in the These segments of the Colorado River Considerations or Protection section Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 88). were identified as having substantial (see above) applies to the streams These essential river segments are recovery value in the Recovery Plan described in each Management Unit anticipated to provide flycatcher habitat (Service 2002, p. 90). These river within the Upper Colorado Recovery for metapopulation stability, gene segments are anticipated to provide Unit. connectivity through this portion of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50572 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

flycatcher’s range, protection against portion of the flycatcher’s range, territories) or exotic-dominated (108 catastrophic population loss, and protection against catastrophic territories) vegetation (primarily population growth and colonization population loss, and population growth tamarisk). Because the current potential. As a result, these river and colonization potential. As a result, distribution of breeding sites in this segments and associated flycatcher this river segment and associated Recovery Unit is similar, we believe habitat are anticipated to support the flycatcher habitat are anticipated to these statistics are mostly accurate strategy, rationale, and science of support the strategy, rationale, and today. This Recovery Unit contains the flycatcher conservation in order to meet science of flycatcher conservation in Verde, Hassayampa and Agua Fria, territory and habitat-related recovery order to meet territory and habitat- Roosevelt, San Francisco, Upper Gila, goals. related recovery goals. Middle Gila and San Pedro, and Santa We will consider our partnership and Cruz Management Units. evaluate the conservation and Gila Recovery Unit Based upon our occupancy criteria management of the Los Pinos River in The Gila Recovery Unit includes the (see above), within the Gila Recovery Colorado, where it occurs within the Gila River watershed, from its Unit, the Gila (1993), San Pedro (1993), Southern Ute Tribal Land, and the San headwaters in southwestern New San Francisco (1993), Verde (1993), and Juan River where it occurs on the Mexico downstream across the State of Salt (1993) Rivers, and Tonto Creek Navajo Nation for exclusion under Arizona toward the confluence with the (1993) are streams that were known to section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Colorado River, in southwest Arizona be occupied at the time of listing (1991– Exclusions). (Service 2002, p. 65). In 2002, 588 1994) (Sogge and Durst 2008) where we flycatcher territories (51 percent of the are proposing critical habitat segments. Powell Management Unit, UT and AZ estimated rangewide total) were At the time of listing, only specific sites The Recovery Plan describes a goal of estimated to occur, distributed primarily on the Gila River within the Middle Gila 25 flycatcher territories in the Powell on the Gila and lower San Pedro Rivers and San Pedro and Upper Gila Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). (Sogge et al. 2003, pp. 10–11). From the Management Units were known to be No flycatcher territories have been latest rangewide estimate, the number of specifically occupied by nesting birds, detected in this Management Unit known territories grew to 659 within but based upon our criteria and the (Sogge and Durst 2008). this Recovery Unit (50 percent of the wide-ranging nature of this neotropical There were no large flycatcher nesting estimated rangewide total) (Durst et al. migrant, the Gila River within the populations in the Powell Management 2008, p. 12). Hassayampa and Agua Fria Management Unit to help guide us toward a critical Many breeding sites have small Unit is also considered occupied at the habitat area, and no areas were known numbers of territories within the Gila time of listing. Below we identify that to be occupied at the time of listing. Recovery Unit, but along sections of the each listed item described in our Therefore, to identify the areas that upper and middle Gila River, lower San Special Management Considerations or would contribute to meeting recovery Pedro River, lower Tonto Creek, and the Protection section (see above) applies to goals for this Management Unit, we Tonto Creek and Salt River confluence the streams described in each used information based on guidance within the water conservation space of Management Unit within the Gila from the Recovery Plan and available Roosevelt Lake, abundant breeding sites Recovery Unit. information about stream habitats to occur over a relatively broad geographic determine critical habitat segments that range that together comprise many Verde Management Unit, AZ may be essential for flycatcher flycatcher territories. The Upper Gila, The Recovery Plan describes a goal of conservation (see below). Middle Gila and San Pedro, and 50 flycatcher territories in the Verde We are proposing as critical habitat a Roosevelt Management Units had, Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 85). segment of the Paria River in Kane following the 2007 rangewide estimate We identified a large flycatcher County, Utah (19.0 km, 11.8 mi). This (Durst et al. 2008, p. 12), surpassed nesting population along the Verde Paria River segment occurs from its numerical recovery goals. Within the River within Yavapai, Gila, and confluence with Cottonwood Wash and Gila Recovery Unit, there are Maricopa Counties, Arizona. ends at Highway 89. This segment was concentrations of flycatcher territories Flycatchers were first detected nesting not known to be occupied by flycatchers in the Cliff-Gila Valley, New Mexico, on the Verde River in 1993; a total of six at the time of listing. This river segment and at Roosevelt Lake, Arizona, that can breeding sites are known and are spread may be able develop and sustain be some of the largest across its range. out from the Verde Valley near the flycatcher habitat and territories and Flycatcher territories in the Gila towns of Clarkdale and Camp Verde and therefore is essential to flycatcher Recovery Unit occurred primarily on downstream near Horseshoe Lake conservation in order to help meet lands managed by private and Federal (Sogge and Durst 2008). A high of 23 recovery goals in this Management Unit. land managers and in a variety of territories were detected within this As noted earlier in this proposed rule habitat types dominated by both native Management Unit in 2005 (Sogge and (see Public Comments), we are and exotic plants. In 2001, private lands Durst 2008). specifically seeking information about hosted 50 percent of the territories We are proposing as critical habitat this proposed Paria River segment, as (mostly on the San Pedro River and Gila two segments of the Verde River. We are well as information about other River), including one of the largest proposing an upper 74.0-km (46.0-mi) flycatcher habitat, management, and known flycatcher populations, in the segment of the Verde River that occurs detections in the Powell Management Cliff-Gila Valley, New Mexico (Service in the Verde Valley in Yavapai County Unit. 2002, p. 65). Almost the remaining 50 from above Tuzigoot National This segment of the Paria River was percent of the territories were on Monument near the Town of Clarkdale, identified as having substantial recovery government-managed lands (Service downstream through the towns of value in the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 65). While in 2001 (Service Cottonwood and Camp Verde to Beasley 2002, p. 88). This essential river 2002, p. 65), 58 percent of territories Flat. We are also proposing a 62.7-km segment is anticipated to provide were in habitats dominated by native (38.9-mi) segment in the middle Verde flycatcher habitat for metapopulation plants, flycatchers in this Recovery Unit River that extends from the East Verde stability, gene connectivity through this also make extensive use of exotic (77 River confluence down through

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50573

Horseshoe Lake and a short distance years after the lake level was raised, the considered for exclusion under section along the river below Horseshoe Dam to known number of territories declined to 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions). the USGS gauging station and cable 75 in 2007 (Sogge and Durst 2008). Middle Gila and San Pedro crossing. These segments of the Verde Since the raising of the water level in Management Unit, AZ River are known to be occupied by Roosevelt Lake, flycatchers have flycatchers at the time of listing, and expanded their known distribution The Recovery Plan describes a goal of contain the physical or biological throughout adjacent areas along Tonto 150 flycatcher territories in the Middle features essential to the conservation of Creek, Salt River, and Pinal Creek Gila and San Pedro Management Unit the species which may require special (Sogge and Durst 2008). (Service 2002, p. 85). management considerations or We are proposing as critical habitat We identified a large flycatcher protection, as described above. segments of Tonto Creek, the Salt River, nesting population surrounding the Gila The Verde River was the lone river the confluence of these two streams that and San Pedro River confluence area identified within this Management Unit comprise Roosevelt Lake, and Pinal within Cochise, Pima, Pinal, and Gila as having substantial recovery value in Creek. The proposed lower 49.1-km Counties, Arizona. Flycatchers were the Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 91). (30.5-mi) segment of Tonto Creek first detected nesting in this These river segments are anticipated to extends from near the Town of Gisela Management Unit in 1993, with provide flycatcher habitat for downstream to the western high-water- abundant breeding sites occurring metapopulation stability, gene mark side of the conservation space of throughout this Management Unit. A connectivity through this portion of the Roosevelt Lake. On the eastern side of high of 195 territories was detected in flycatcher’s range, protection against Roosevelt Lake, we are proposing a 39.0- 2005 (Sogge and Durst 2008). catastrophic population loss, and km (24.2-mi) portion of the Salt River We are proposing as critical habitat population growth and colonization from the confluence with Cherry Creek the lowest 127.2-km (79.0-mi) segment potential. As a result, these river to the high water mark of the of the middle and lower San Pedro segments and associated flycatcher conservation space of Roosevelt Lake. River across portions of Cochise, Pima, habitat are anticipated to support the Joining these Tonto Creek and Salt River and Pinal Counties, Arizona, and a 80.6- strategy, rationale, and science of segments, we are proposing as critical km (50.1-mi) Gila River segment that flycatcher conservation in order to meet habitat the 29.1-km (18.1-mi) lakebed at extends from near Dripping Springs territory and habitat-related recovery Roosevelt Lake (comprised of the Tonto Wash downstream past the San Pedro goals. Creek and Salt River confluence). These and Gila River confluence to the We will consider excluding the water three areas were known to be occupied Ashehurst Hayden Diversion Dam in conservation space of the Verde River by flycatchers at the time of listing, and Gila and Pinal Counties, Arizona. The within Horseshoe Lake due to the contain the physical or biological Gila and San Pedro Rivers are known to conservation included in the Horseshoe features essential to the conservation of be occupied by flycatchers at the time and Bartlett Dam HCP and those the species which may require special of listing, and contain the physical or portions of the Verde River that occur management considerations or on Yavapai Apache Tribal land as result protection, as described above. biological features essential to the of their Management Plan under section Additionally, we are proposing a conservation of the species which may 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions). separate 5.7-km (3.5-mi) essential require special management segment of Pinal Creek that occurs considerations or protection, as Roosevelt Management Unit, AZ downstream of the water treatment described above. The Recovery Plan describes a goal of plant north of the Town of Globe. This The San Pedro and Gila Rivers were 50 flycatcher territories in the Roosevelt segment was not known to be occupied the only two rivers identified within Management Unit (Service 2002, p. 85). at the time of listing, but it currently this Management Unit as having We identified a large flycatcher supports nesting flycatchers and was substantial recovery value in the nesting population surrounding the determined to be essential for flycatcher Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 91). Roosevelt Lake area in Gila and Pinal conservation in order to help meet These river segments are anticipated to Counties, Arizona. Flycatchers were recovery goals in this Management Unit. provide flycatcher habitat for first detected nesting on Tonto Creek The segments of Tonto Creek, the Salt metapopulation stability, gene and the Salt River within the River, and their confluence that makes connectivity through this portion of the conservation space of Roosevelt Lake in up Roosevelt Lake were identified as flycatcher’s range, protection against 1993 (Sogge and Durst 2008). having substantial recovery value in the catastrophic population loss, and Because of the anticipated water level Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 91). population growth and colonization fluctuations at Roosevelt Lake, which Together, these segments, along with the potential. As a result, these river inundates many flycatcher territories essential Pinal Creek segment, are segments and associated flycatcher and limits the number of territories that anticipated to provide flycatcher habitat habitat are anticipated to support the can be sustained over time, this is the for metapopulation stability, gene strategy, rationale, and science of only Management Unit within the connectivity through this portion of the flycatcher conservation in order to meet flycatcher’s range where the recovery flycatcher’s range, protection against territory and habitat-related recovery goal was smaller than the known catastrophic population loss, and goals. number of territories at the time of the population growth and colonization Upper Gila Management Unit, AZ and Recovery Plan completion. As a result, potential. As a result, these river NM river segments and the lakebed together segments and associated flycatcher provide habitat that allow flycatcher habitat are anticipated to support the The Recovery Plan describes a goal of territories to persist over time due to strategy, rationale, and science of 325 flycatcher territories in the Upper dynamic river and lake flooding events. flycatcher conservation in order to meet Gila Management Unit (Service 2002, p. For example, a high of 196 flycatcher territory and habitat-related recovery 85). Flycatcher territories are known territories occurred in 2004 (mostly goals. throughout the Gila River in New within the conservation space of The conservation space of Roosevelt Mexico and Arizona within this Roosevelt Lake), but in the following Lake, due to the Roosevelt HCP, will be Management Unit.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50574 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Based upon our methodology, we science of flycatcher conservation in catastrophic population loss, and identified a large flycatcher nesting order to meet territory and habitat- population growth and colonization population across a broad area of the related recovery goals. potential. As a result, these river upper Gila River occurring within Gila, We will consider the Gila River segments and associated flycatcher Pinal, Graham, and Greenlee Counties, (including the lakebed of San Carlos habitat are anticipated to support the Arizona, and Grant and Hildalgo Lake), where it occurs within San Carlos strategy, rationale, and science of Counties, New Mexico. Flycatchers Apache Tribal land in Arizona, and the flycatcher conservation in order to meet were first detected nesting in this U–Bar Ranch in the Cliff-Gila Valley, territory and habitat-related recovery Management Unit in 1993 (Sogge and New Mexico, for exclusion due to goals. Durst 2008). Flycatcher territories at 22 Management Plans under section 4(b)(2) San Francisco Management Unit, AZ breeding sites occur throughout three of the Act (see Exclusions). and NM separate river segments of the Gila Santa Cruz Management Unit, AZ River, with a high of 329 territories The Recovery Plan describes a goal of estimated following the 2007 breeding The Recovery Plan describes a goal of 25 flycatcher territories in the San season (Durst et al. 2008, p. 12). A single 25 flycatcher territories in the Santa Francisco Management Unit (Service breeding site along the most upstream Cruz Management Unit (Service 2002, 2002, p. 84). Small numbers of segment in the Cliff-Gila Valley in Grant p. 84). flycatcher territories are known to occur County, New Mexico, has held over 200 There were no large flycatcher nesting along the San Francisco River in this flycatcher territories in a single season populations in the Santa Cruz Management Unit in both Arizona and (Sogge and Durst 2008). Management Unit to help guide us New Mexico. We are proposing as proposed critical toward a critical habitat area, and no There were no known large flycatcher habitat three segments of the Gila River areas were known to be occupied at the nesting populations in the San that occur between the Turkey Creek time of listing. Therefore, to identify the Francisco Management Unit to help confluence on the Gila National Forest, areas that would contribute to meeting guide us toward a critical habitat area. New Mexico, and Coolidge Dam recovery goals for this Management Therefore, to identify the areas that (creating San Carlos Lake) on San Carlos Unit, we used information based on would contribute to meeting recovery Apache Tribal land. The most upstream known flycatcher territories and goals for this Management Unit, we 49.3-km (30.6-mi) Gila River segment breeding sites, guidance from the used information based on known extends from Turkey Creek through the Recovery Plan, and knowledge about flycatcher territories and breeding sites, Cliff-Gila Valley to the upstream stream habitat to determine critical guidance from the Recovery Plan, and entrance of the middle Gila Box Canyon habitat segments that may be essential knowledge about stream habitat to on the Gila National Forest. The second for flycatcher conservation (see below). determine critical habitat segments for 62.2-km (38.7-mi) Gila River segment A single flycatcher territory was flycatcher conservation (see below). occurs from the downstream end of the detected on Cienega Creek in 2001 Four flycatcher breeding sites have been Middle Gila Box Canyon near the Town (Sogge and Durst 2008). No flycatcher detected on these river segments, with of Red Rock and extends downstream territories have been detected on the the first territories found in 1993 (Sogge across the Arizona State line through Santa Cruz River. and Durst 2008). The number of the Town of Duncan, Arizona (this We are proposing as critical habitat a territories detected has fluctuated segment spans Grant and Hidalgo 7.0-km (4.4-mi) segment of Cienega annually between one and seven from Counties, New Mexico, and Greenlee Creek (including part of Las Cienegas 1993 to 2007 (Sogge and Durst 2008). County, Arizona). The third 134.5-km National Conservation Area) in Pima We are proposing as critical habitat (83.5-mi) Gila River segment occurs County, Arizona, and a 26.7-km (16.6- three segments of the San Francisco from the upper end of Earven Flat, near mi) segment of the Santa Cruz River River in Arizona and New Mexico. We the Bonita Creek confluence, above the (Nogales Waste Water Treatment Plant are proposing a 42.6-km (26.5-mi) Town of Safford, Arizona, and extends to Chavez Siding Road) in Santa Cruz segment on the San Francisco River that through the Town of Safford and San County, Arizona. These segments were extends from near the Town of Alpine, Carlos Apache Land until it ends at not known to be occupied at the time of Arizona, to Centerfire Creek in Catron Coolidge Dam. The Gila River is known listing; however, they are essential to County, New Mexico; a second 36.4-km to be occupied by flycatchers at the time flycatcher conservation because they (22.6-mi) segment that extends from the of listing, and contains the physical or may be able to develop and sustain Deep Creek confluence to San Francisco biological features essential to the flycatcher habitat and territories to help Hot Springs, in Catron County, New conservation of the species which may meet recovery goals in this Management Mexico; and a third 36.9-km (22.9-mi) require special management Unit. As noted earlier in this proposed segment from the Arizona and New considerations or protection, as rule (see Public Comments), we are Mexico border to the western boundary described above. specifically seeking information about of the Apache-Sitgreaves National The Gila River segments were these proposed Santa Cruz and Cienega Forest, in Apache County, Arizona. The identified in the Recovery Plan as areas Creek segments, as well as information San Francisco River is known to be with substantial recovery value (Service about other flycatcher habitat, occupied by flycatchers at the time of 2002, p. 91). These three Gila River management, and detections in the listing, and contains the physical or segments are anticipated to provide Santa Cruz Management Unit. biological features essential for the flycatcher habitat for metapopulation The Santa Cruz River and Cienega conservation of the species which may stability, gene connectivity through this Creek segments were identified in the require special management portion of the flycatcher’s range, Recovery Plan as areas with substantial considerations or protection, as protection against catastrophic recovery value (Service 2002, p. 91). described above. population loss, and population growth These two segments are anticipated to These three San Francisco River and colonization potential. As a result, provide flycatcher habitat for segments were identified in the these river segments and associated metapopulation stability, gene Recovery Plan as having substantial flycatcher habitat are anticipated to connectivity through this portion of the recovery value (Service 2002, pp. 90– support the strategy, rationale, and flycatcher’s range, protection against 91). These three San Francisco River

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50575

segments are anticipated to provide 2002, p. 91). These two river segments numerical goal of 100 territories has flycatcher habitat for metapopulation are anticipated to provide flycatcher been surpassed with about 350 stability, gene connectivity through this habitat for metapopulation stability, territories detected in 2009 (Moore and portion of the flycatcher’s range, gene connectivity through this portion Ahlers 2010, p.1). protection against catastrophic of the flycatcher’s range, protection Most sites are in habitats dominated population loss, and population growth against catastrophic population loss, by native plants, while habitat and colonization potential. As a result, and population growth and colonization dominated by exotic plants include these river segments and associated potential. As a result, these river primarily tamarisk or Russian olive flycatcher habitat are anticipated to segments and associated flycatcher (Service 2002, p. 65). In 2001, 43 of the support the strategy, rationale, and habitat are anticipated to support the 56 nests (77 percent) that were science of flycatcher conservation in strategy, rationale, and science of described in the middle and lower Rio order to meet territory and habitat- flycatcher conservation in order to meet Grande in New Mexico, used tamarisk related recovery goals. territory and habitat-related recovery as the nest substrate (Service 2002, p. goals. 65). In 2001, government-managed lands Hassayampa and Agua Fria The Gila River segment within the accounted for 63 percent of the Management Unit, AZ Tres Rios Safe Harbor Agreement Area territories in this unit; Tribal lands The Recovery Plan describes a goal of will be considered for exclusion under supported an additional 23 percent 25 flycatcher territories in the section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see (Service 2002). While the number of Hassayampa and Agua Fria Management Exclusions). territories has increased, the known Unit (Service 2002, p. 84). distribution of sites is similar. As a Rio Grande Recovery Unit There were no large flycatcher nesting result, we expect a larger proportion of populations in the Hassayampa and This Recovery Unit primarily territories to occur on government- Agua Fria Management Unit to help includes the Rio Grande watershed from managed lands in the Middle Rio guide us toward a critical habitat area. its headwaters in southern Colorado Grande Management Unit. Therefore, to identify the areas that downstream to the Pecos River This Recovery Unit contains the San would contribute to meeting recovery confluence in Texas. Other areas and Luis Valley, Upper Rio Grande, Middle goals for this Management Unit, we drainages that occur within this Rio Grande, and Lower Rio Grande used information based on known Recovery Unit include the Rio Grande Management Units. flycatcher territories and breeding sites, in Texas and Pecos watershed in New Based upon our occupancy criteria guidance from the Recovery Plan, and Mexico and Texas. No recovery goals (see above), within the Rio Grande knowledge about stream habitat to were established for Management Units Recovery Unit, the Rio Grande (1993), determine critical habitat segments that in those areas, so no critical habitat is Rio Grande del Rancho (1993), and may be essential for flycatcher being proposed in those areas. Coyote Creek (1993) are streams that conservation (see below). A single There have been large increases in the were known to be occupied at the time breeding site has been detected on the number of estimated and known of listing (1991–1994) (Sogge and Durst Gila River and Hassayampa River in this territories within the Rio Grande 2008) where we are proposing critical Management Unit, with the first Recovery Unit, primarily due to habitat segments. These streams have territories found in 1997 (Sogge and increasing population numbers within the physical or biological features of Durst 2008). The number of territories the Middle Rio Grande Management critical habitat that may require special detected has ranged from one and three Unit. In 2002, a total of 197 territories management considerations or from 1997 to 2007 (Sogge and Durst (17 percent of the rangewide total) were protection. 2008). estimated to occur within the Recovery At the time of listing, only specific We are proposing as critical habitat an Unit, primarily occurring along the sites on the Rio Grande within the 8.7-km (5.4-mi) segment of the Gila mainstem Rio Grande (Sogge et al. Upper, Middle, and Lower Rio Grande River, downstream from its confluence 2003). At the end of the 2007 breeding Management Units were known to be with the Salt River from 107th Avenue season, the Recovery Unit had increased specifically occupied by nesting birds, to Bullard Avenue in Maricopa County, to an estimated 230 territories (17 but based upon our criteria and the Arizona. The Gila River is known to be percent of the rangewide total), wide-ranging nature of this neotropical occupied by flycatchers at the time of primarily due to territory increases in migrant, the Rio Grande within the San listing, and contains the physical or the Middle Rio Grande (Durst et al. Luis Valley Management Unit is also biological features essential for the 2008, p.13). In the subsequent years, the considered occupied at the time of conservation of the species which may number of known territories has listing. Below we identify that each require special management continued to increase within the Middle listed item described in our Special considerations or protection, as Rio Grande Management Unit with Management Considerations or described above. approximately 350 territories detected Protection section (see above) applies to We are also proposing as critical in 2009, with most territories detected the streams described in each habitat a 7.4-km (4.6 mi) segment of the within the San Marcial reach near Management Unit within the Rio Hassayampa River that occurs south of Elephant Butte Reservoir (Moore and Grande Recovery Unit. the Town of Wickenburg and Highway Ahlers 2010, p. 1). 60 Bridge in Maricopa County, Arizona. Both the San Luis Valley Management San Luis Valley Management Unit, CO This segment was not known to be Unit in southern Colorado and Middle The Recovery Plan describes a goal of occupied at the time of listing; however, Rio Grande Management Unit in New 50 flycatcher territories in the San Luis it is essential for flycatcher conservation Mexico have surpassed their numerical Valley Management Unit (Service 2002, because it will help meet recovery goals territory goals. A total of 50 territories p. 85). in this Management Unit. are needed in the San Luis Valley We identified a large flycatcher These segments of the Gila River and Management Unit and 56 territories nesting population in the San Luis Hassayampa Rivers were both identified were estimated to occur in 2007 (Durst Valley in Costilla, Conejos, Alamosa, in the Recovery Plan as having et al. 2008, p. 13). In the Middle Rio and Rio Grande Counties, Colorado. substantial recovery value (Service Grande Management Unit, the Flycatchers were first detected nesting

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50576 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

in this Management Unit in 1997, and Grande in Taos, Santa Fe, and Mora exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the a high of 71 territories were detected Counties, New Mexico. Flycatchers Act (see Exclusions). along the Rio Grande and Conejos River were first detected nesting in this Middle Rio Grande Management Unit, in 2003 (Sogge and Durst 2008). Management Unit in 1993, and a high of NM We are proposing as critical habitat a 39 territories were detected in 2000 segment of the Rio Grande and a along the Rio Grande, Rio Grande Del The Recovery Plan describes a goal of segment of the Conejos River within the Rancho, and Coyote Creek (Sogge and 100 flycatcher territories in the Middle San Luis Valley. The 159.4-km (99.0-mi) Durst 2008). Flycatcher territories were Rio Grande Management Unit (Service upper Rio Grande segment extends from recently detected on the Rio Fernando, 2002, p. 85). the Hanna Lane County Road 17 Bridge which occurs within our large We identified a large flycatcher downstream through the Alamosa population area. nesting population on the middle Rio National Wildlife Refuge to the County We are proposing as critical habitat a Grande in Valencia, Soccorro, and Road G Bridge. The Rio Grande is 75.1-km (46.7-mi) segment of the Rio Sierra Counties, New Mexico. known to be occupied by flycatchers at Grande that extends from the Taos Flycatcher territories were first detected the time of listing, and contains the Junction Bridge (State Route 520) in this Management Unit in 1993. In physical or biological features essential downstream to the Otowi Bridge (State 2007, a high of 230 territories were for the conservation of the species Route 502). We are proposing as critical detected (Sogge and Durst 2008), and which may require special management habitat an 11.9-km (7.4-mi) segment of since then the population has grown to considerations or protection, as the Rio Grande del Rancho from Sarco about 350 territories (Moore and Ahlers described above. Canyon downstream to the Arroyo 2010, p. 1). We are also proposing as critical Miranda confluence. We are also We are proposing as critical habitat a habitat a 69.8-km (43.4-mi) segment of proposing as critical habitat a 10.7-km 211.8-km (131.6 mi) segment of the Rio the Conejos River from near where the (6.6-mi) segment of Coyote Creek from Grande that extends from below the D5 Road crosses the Conejos River (just above Coyote Creek State Park Bernalillo and Valencia County line downstream from Fox Creek) and downstream to the second bridge on downstream past Bosque del Apache extends down to its confluence with the State Route 518, upstream from Los and Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuges Rio Grande. This segment was not Cocas. These segments are known to be and through Elephant Butte Reservoir in known to be occupied at the time of occupied by flycatchers at the time of Valencia, Soccorro, and Sierra Counties, listing; however, it is essential for listing, and contain the physical or New Mexico. The Rio Grande is known flycatcher conservation because it will biological features essential for the to be occupied by flycatchers at the time help meet recovery goals in this conservation of the species which may of listing, and contains the physical or Management Unit. require special management biological features essential for the The Rio Grande and the Conejos River considerations or protection, as conservation of the species which may segments were identified within this described above. require special management Management Unit as having substantial We are also proposing as critical considerations or protection, as recovery value in the Recovery Plan habitat a 0.4-km (0.2-mi) segment of the described above. (Service 2002, p. 92). These two river Rio Fernando that is about 3.2 km (2.0 This Rio Grande segment was segments are anticipated to provide mi) upstream from the Rio Lucero identified as having substantial recovery flycatcher habitat for metapopulation confluence. This segment was not value in the Recovery Plan (Service stability, gene connectivity through this known to be occupied at the time of 2002, p. 92). This segment of the Rio portion of the flycatcher’s range, listing; however, it is essential for Grande is anticipated to provide protection against catastrophic flycatcher conservation because it will flycatcher habitat for metapopulation population loss, and population growth help meet recovery goals in this stability, gene connectivity through this and colonization potential. As a result, Management Unit. portion of the flycatcher’s range, these river segments and associated Rio Grande, Rio Grande del Rancho, protection against catastrophic flycatcher habitat are anticipated to and Coyote Creek were identified within population loss, and population growth support the strategy, rationale, and this Management Unit as having and colonization potential. As a result, science of flycatcher conservation in substantial recovery value in the this river segment and associated order to meet territory and habitat- Recovery Plan (Service 2002, p. 92). flycatcher habitat are anticipated to related recovery goals. These three segments, along with the support the strategy, rationale, and Both the Rio Grande and Conejos essential Rio Fernando segment, are science of flycatcher conservation in River occur within the conservation anticipated to provide flycatcher habitat order to meet territory and habitat- planning area established by the San for metapopulation stability, gene related recovery goals. The population Luis Valley Partnership and within their connectivity through this portion of the of flycatchers in this segment is developing HCP; as a result, we will flycatcher’s range, protection against currently the largest population of consider the Conejos River and Rio catastrophic population loss, and flycatchers in their range, with a total of Grande within this conservation and population growth and colonization 221 pairs and 291 nests documented planning area for exclusion under potential. As a result, these river within the Elephant Butte Reservoir section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see segments and associated flycatcher conservation pool, according to a 2009 Exclusions). habitat are anticipated to support the study (Moore and Ahlers 2010, p. 43). strategy, rationale, and science of Based on an initial evaluation of Upper Rio Grande Management Unit, flycatcher conservation in order to meet potential impacts on water operations of NM territory and habitat-related recovery the Elephant Butte Dam and Reservoir, The Recovery Plan describes a goal of goals. we will consider excluding the portion 75 flycatcher territories in the Upper Rio Due to the our partnership with the of this segment that occurs within the Grande Management Unit (Service 2002, Santa Clara, San Juan, and San Ildefonso reservoir pool of Elephant Butte p. 85). Pueblos and their conservation and Reservoir from the final designation of We identified a large flycatcher planning efforts on the Rio Grande, we flycatcher critical habitat under section nesting population on the upper Rio will consider these Pueblos for 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50577

Lower Rio Grande Management Unit, the Service on any agency action which would avoid the likelihood of jeopardy NM is likely to jeopardize the continued or destruction or adverse modification The Recovery Plan describes a goal of existence of any species proposed to be of critical habitat. We define 25 flycatcher territories in the Lower Rio listed under the Act or result in the ‘‘reasonable and prudent alternatives’’ Grande Management Unit (Service 2002, destruction or adverse modification of (at 50 CFR 402.02) as alternative actions p. 84). proposed critical habitat. identified during consultation that: There were no large flycatcher nesting Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit (1) Can be implemented in a manner populations in the lower Rio Grande Courts of Appeals have invalidated our consistent with the intended purpose of Management Unit to help guide us regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or the action, toward a critical habitat area. Therefore, adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) (2) Can be implemented consistent to identify the areas that would (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. with the scope of the Federal agency’s contribute to meeting recovery goals for Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F. 3d legal authority and jurisdiction, this Management Unit, we used 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. (3) Are economically and information based on known flycatcher U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 technologically feasible, and (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, territories and breeding sites, guidance F.3d 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the from the Recovery Plan, and knowledge do not rely on this regulatory definition continued existence of the listed species about stream habitat to determine when analyzing whether an action is and/or avoid the likelihood of critical habitat segments that may be likely to destroy or adversely modify destroying or adversely modifying essential for flycatcher conservation (see critical habitat. Under the statutory critical habitat. below). Three breeding sites have been provisions of the Act, we determine Reasonable and prudent alternatives detected along the Rio Grande, with the destruction or adverse modification on can vary from slight project first territories found in 1993 (Sogge and the basis of whether, with modifications to extensive redesign or Durst 2008). The number of flycatcher implementation of the proposed Federal relocation of the project. Costs territories detected annually has action, the affected critical habitat associated with implementing a fluctuated between zero and eight from would continue to serve its intended reasonable and prudent alternative are 1993 to 2007 (Sogge and Durst 2008). conservation role for the species. similarly variable. We are proposing as critical habitat a If a Federal action may affect a listed Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require 74.2-km (46.1-mi) segment of the Rio species or its critical habitat, the Federal agencies to reinitiate Grande in Sierra and Dona Ana responsible Federal agency (action consultation on previously reviewed Counties, New Mexico, from Caballo agency) must enter into consultation actions in instances where we have Dam to Leasburg Dam. The Rio Grande with us. Examples of actions that are subject to the section 7 consultation listed a new species or subsequently is known to be occupied by flycatchers process are actions on State, Tribal, designated critical habitat that may be at the time of listing, and contains the local, or private lands that require a affected and the Federal agency has physical or biological features essential Federal permit (such as a permit from retained discretionary involvement or for the conservation of the species the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under control over the action (or the agency’s which may require special management section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 discretionary involvement or control is considerations or protection, as U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the authorized by law). Consequently, described above. Federal agencies sometimes may need to This Rio Grande segment was Service under section 10 of the Act) or request reinitiation of consultation with identified as having substantial recovery that involve some other Federal action us on actions for which formal value in the Recovery Plan (Service (such as funding from the Federal consultation has been completed, if 2002, p. 92). This Rio Grande segment Highway Administration, Federal those actions with discretionary is anticipated to provide flycatcher Aviation Administration, or the Federal involvement or control may affect habitat for metapopulation stability, Emergency Management Agency). subsequently listed species or gene connectivity through this portion Federal actions not affecting listed designated critical habitat. of the flycatcher’s range, protection species or critical habitat, and actions against catastrophic population loss, on State, Tribal, local, or private lands Application of the ‘‘Adverse and population growth and colonization that are not Federally funded or Modification’’ Standard authorized, do not require section 7 potential. As a result, this river segment The key factor related to the adverse and associated flycatcher habitat are consultation. As a result of section 7 consultation, modification determination is whether, anticipated to support the strategy, we document compliance with the with implementation of the proposed rationale, and science of flycatcher requirements of section 7(a)(2) through Federal action, the affected critical conservation in order to meet territory our issuance of: habitat would continue to serve its and habitat-related recovery goals. (1) A concurrence letter for Federal intended conservation role for the Effects of Critical Habitat Designation actions that may affect, but are not species. Activities that may destroy or likely to adversely affect, listed species adversely modify critical habitat are Section 7 Consultation or critical habitat; or those that alter the physical or Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires (2) A biological opinion for Federal biological features to an extent that Federal agencies, including the Service, actions that may affect, or are likely to appreciably reduces the conservation to ensure that any action they fund, adversely affect, listed species or critical value of critical habitat for the authorize, or carry out is not likely to habitat. flycatcher. As discussed above, the role jeopardize the continued existence of When we issue a biological opinion of critical habitat is to support life- any endangered species or threatened concluding that a project is likely to history needs of the species and provide species or result in the destruction or jeopardize the continued existence of a for the conservation of the species. adverse modification of designated listed species or destroy or adversely Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us critical habitat of such species. In modify critical habitat, we provide to briefly evaluate and describe, in any addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act reasonable and prudent alternatives to proposed or final regulation that requires Federal agencies to confer with the project, if any are identifiable, that designates critical habitat, activities

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50578 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

involving a Federal action that may vigor of riparian vegetation and implementation of the military mission destroy or adversely modify such microhabitat components necessary for of the installation with stewardship of habitat, or that may be affected by such nesting, migrating, food, cover, and the natural resources found on the base. designation. shelter. Each INRMP includes: Activities that may affect critical (4) Actions that permanently destroy (1) An assessment of the ecological habitat, when carried out, funded, or or alter flycatcher habitat. Such needs on the installation, including the authorized by a Federal agency, should activities could include, but are not need to provide for the conservation of result in consultation for the flycatcher. limited to, discharge of fill material, listed species; These activities include, but are not draining, ditching, tiling, pond (2) A statement of goals and priorities; limited to: construction, and stream channelization (3) A detailed description of (1) Actions that would remove, thin, (due to roads, construction of bridges, management actions to be implemented or destroy riparian flycatcher habitat, impoundments, discharge pipes, to provide for these ecological needs; without implementation of an effective stormwater detention basins, dikes, and riparian restoration plan resulting in the levees, and others). These activities (4) A monitoring and adaptive development of riparian vegetation of could permanently eliminate available management plan. equal or better flycatcher quality in riparian habitat and food availability or Among other things, each INRMP abundance and extent. Such activities degrade the general suitability, quality, must, to the extent appropriate and could include, but are not limited to structure, abundance, longevity, and applicable, provide for fish and wildlife removing, thinning, or destroying vigor of riparian vegetation and management; fish and wildlife habitat riparian vegetation by mechanical, microhabitat components necessary for enhancement or modification; wetland chemical (herbicides or burning), or nesting, migrating, food, cover, and protection, enhancement, and biological (grazing, biocontrol agents) shelter. restoration where necessary to support means. These activities could reduce the (5) Actions that result in alteration of fish and wildlife; and enforcement of amount or extent of riparian habitat flycatcher habitat from improper applicable natural resource laws. needed by flycatchers for sheltering, livestock or ungulate management. Such The National Defense Authorization feeding, breeding, and migrating. activities could include, but are not Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– (2) Actions that would appreciably limited to, unrestricted ungulate access 136) amended the Act to limit areas diminish habitat value or quality and use of riparian vegetation; excessive eligible for designation as critical through direct or indirect effects. Such ungulate use of riparian vegetation habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) activities could include, but are not during the non-growing season (i.e., leaf of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) limited to, degradation of watershed and drop to bud break); overuse of riparian now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not soil characteristics; diminishing river habitat and upland vegetation due to designate as critical habitat any lands or surface and subsurface flow; negatively insufficient herbaceous vegetation other geographical areas owned or altering river flow regimes; introduction available to ungulates; and improper controlled by the Department of of exotic plants, animals, or insects; or herding, water development, or other Defense, or designated for its use, that habitat fragmentation from recreation livestock management actions. These are subject to an integrated natural activities. These activities could reduce activities can reduce the volume and resources management plan prepared or fragment the amount or extent of composition of riparian vegetation, under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 riparian habitat needed by flycatchers prevent regeneration of riparian plant U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines for sheltering, feeding, breeding, and species, physically disturb nests, alter in writing that such plan provides a migrating. floodplain dynamics, facilitate brood benefit to the species for which critical (3) Actions that would negatively alter parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds, habitat is proposed for designation.’’ the surface or subsurface river flow. alter watershed and soil characteristics, We consult with the military on the Such activities could include, but are alter stream morphology, and facilitate development and implementation of not limited to, water diversion or the growth of flammable exotic plant INRMPs for installations with listed impoundment, groundwater pumping, species. species. We analyzed INRMPs dam construction and operation, or any Exemptions developed by military installations other activity which negatively changes located within the range of the proposed the frequency, magnitude, duration, Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act critical habitat designation for the timing, or abundance of surface flow The Sikes Act Improvement Act of flycatcher to determine if they are (and also subsurface groundwater 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) exempt under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. elevation). These activities could requires each military installation that The following areas in southern permanently eliminate available includes land and water suitable for the California (Table 3) are Department of riparian habitat and food availability or conservation and management of Defense lands with completed, Service- degrade the general suitability, quality, natural resources to complete an approved INRMPs within the proposed structure, abundance, longevity, and INRMP. An INRMP integrates critical habitat designation.

TABLE 3—AREAS EXEMPTED FROM CRITICAL HABITAT UNDER SECTION 4(B)(3) OF THE ACT BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT

Areas meeting the definition of Management unit Specific area critical habitat in km (mi) Areas exempted in km (mi)

Santa Ynez ...... Vandenberg AFB INRMP ...... 14.7 km (9.1 mi) 14.7 km (9.1 mi). San Diego ...... Camp Pendleton INRMP ...... 76.1 km (47.3 mi) 76.1 km (47.3 mi). San Diego ...... Camp Pendleton INRMP/Fallbrook 7.5 km (4.7 mi) 7.5 km (4.7 mi). Naval Base INRMP shared boundary. San Diego ...... Fallbrook Naval Base INRMP ...... 3.2 km (2.0 mi) 3.2 km (2.0 mi).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50579

Approved INRMPs has an approved INRMP that provides a Parks, which includes a 50-year real benefit to the flycatcher, and VAFB has estate lease granted on September 1, Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB)— committed to work closely with the 1971, for 809 ha (2,000 ac) that Santa Ynez Management Unit, CA Service and the State wildlife agency to encompasses San Onofre State Beach. Vandenberg Air Force Base has an continually refine their existing INRMP Requirements to the lessees are to approved INRMP. The U.S. Air Force is as part of the Sikes Act’s INRMP review manage natural resources on leased committed to working closely with the process. lands in support of objectives and Service and California Department of Based on the above considerations, consistent with the philosophies of Fish and Game to continually refine the and in accordance with section MCB Camp Pendleton’s INRMP (USMC existing INRMP as part of the Sikes 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have 2007, pp. 2–29). Act’s INRMP review process. Based on determined that conservation efforts The MCB Camp Pendleton INRMP our review of the INRMP for this identified in the 2011 INRMP for VAFB was prepared to assist installation staff military installation, and in accordance provide a benefit to the flycatcher and and users in their efforts to rehabilitate with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we its habitat. Therefore, lands subject to and conserve natural resources while have determined that the portion of the the INRMP for VAFB, which includes maintaining consistency with the use of Santa Ynez River within this the lands leased from the Department of MCB Camp Pendleton to train Marines, installation, identified as meeting the Defense by other parties, are exempt and sets the agenda for managing definition of critical habitat, is subject to from critical habitat designation under natural resources on MCB Camp the INRMP, and that conservation section 4(a)(3) of the Act, and we are not Pendleton (USMC 2007, p. ES–1). The efforts identified in this INRMP will including approximately 14.7 km (9.1 INRMP also provides ecosystem-based provide a benefit to the flycatcher. mi) of the Santa Ynez River in this management to preserve, improve, and Therefore, lands within this installation proposed revised critical habitat enhance ecosystem integrity on the are exempt from critical habitat designation because of this exemption. installation (USMC 2007, pp. 1–13). designation under section 4(a)(3)(B) of MCB Camp Pendleton completed its Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton the Act. We are not including INRMP in 2001, followed by a revised (MCB Camp Pendleton)—San Diego approximately 14.7 km (9.1 mi) of and updated version in 2007 (USMC Management Unit, CA riparian habitat on VAFB in this 2007), to address conservation and proposed revised critical habitat The primary mission of Marine Corps management recommendations within designation because of this exemption. Base Camp Pendleton (MCB Camp the scope of the installation’s military VAFB completed an INRMP in 2011, Pendleton) is military training. It is the mission, including conservation which includes benefits for flycatchers Marine Corps’ premier amphibious measures for flycatchers (USMC 2007, through: (1) Avoidance of flycatchers training installation and its only west Appendix F, Section F.1, pp. F1–F5). and their habitat, whenever possible, in coast amphibious assault training Additionally, Marine Corps Air Station project planning; (2) scheduling of center. The installation has been Camp Pendleton (MCAS Camp activities that may affect flycatchers conducting air, sea, and ground assault Pendleton) is fully encompassed within outside of the peak breeding period; (3) training since World War II. MCB Camp MCB Camp Pendleton and recognizes measures for protection of riparian Pendleton occupies over 50,586 ha itself as a separate installation with its zones (see Wetlands and Riparian (125,000 ac) of coastal southern own INRMP that also provides a benefit Habitats Management Plan Section in California in the northwest corner of to the flycatcher and its habitat. MCAS INRMP); (4) removal of exotic plant San Diego County. Aside from nearly Camp Pendleton and its INRMP is species; and (5) implementation of 4,047 ha (10,000 ac) that is developed, assumed part of this discussion within brown-headed cowbird management. most of the installation is largely the remainder of this exemption Further, VAFB’s environmental staff undeveloped land that is used for discussion for flycatcher due to its reviews projects and enforces existing training. MCB Camp Pendleton is overlapping and close association with regulations and orders that, through situated between two major MCB Camp Pendleton and its INRMP, their implementation, avoid and metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, 132 km and both reference and inclusion of minimize impacts to natural resources, (82 mi) to the north; and San Diego, 61 conservation described in MCB Camp including flycatchers and their habitat. km (38 mi) to the south. Nearby urban Pendleton’s riparian biological opinion In addition, VAFB’s INRMP provides areas include the City of Oceanside to (1–6–95–F–02; see USMC 2006, pp. 2– protection to riparian habitats for the south, the unincorporated 4 and discussion below). flycatchers by excluding cattle from community of Fallbrook to the east, and The MCB Camp Pendleton INRMP wetlands and riparian areas through the the City of San Clemente to the incorporates measures outlined in a installation and maintenance of fencing. northwest. Aside from a portion of the riparian biological opinion (Biological VAFB’s INRMP specifies periodic MCB Camp Pendleton’s border that is Opinion for Programmatic Activities monitoring of the distribution and shared with the San Mateo Canyon and Conservation Plans in Riparian, abundance of flycatcher populations on Wilderness Area on the Cleveland Estuarine, and Beach Ecosystems on the base. National Forest and the Naval Weapons Marine Corps Base, Camp Pendleton Habitat features essential to the Station Seal Beach—Detachment (also known as ‘‘Riparian BO’’; (1–6–95– conservation of the flycatcher exist on Fallbrook (Fallbrook Naval Weapons F–02)), which includes addressing the VAFB; however, designating critical Station), surrounding land use is urban installation’s Riparian Ecosystem habitat on this military installation may development, rural residential Conservation Plan (USMC 2007, impact its mission of launching and development, and agricultural farming Appendix C). The Riparian Ecosystem tracking of satellites and testing and and ranching. In addition to military Conservation Plan was designed to evaluating missile systems, and training and associated activities and maintain and enhance the biological therefore affect the nation’s military infrastructure to support training, diversity of the riparian ecosystem on readiness. Activities occurring on VAFB portions of MCB Camp Pendleton are MCB Camp Pendleton, including habitat are currently being conducted in a leased to private and public entities and areas used by flycatchers. The manner that minimizes impacts to agencies. The largest single leaseholder conceptual approach behind this flycatchers. This military installation on the installation is California State conservation plan is to sustain and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50580 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

restore riparian ecosystem dynamics so take-off or landing, from March 15 to located within the southern foothills of that natural plant and animal August 31; the Santa Ana Mountains of northern communities on MCB Camp Pendleton (4) Restricting ground troops San Diego County, adjacent to the are sufficiently resilient to coexist with movement in riparian areas to existing unincorporated community of current and future military training crossings, trails, and roads; and Fallbrook, California. It is bounded to activities (Service 1995, Appendix 1, (5) Prohibiting bivouacking in the north, west, and much of the south p. 44). Under the reasonable and riparian areas. by MCB Camp Pendleton, with the prudent measures of the Riparian BO, Current environmental regulations Santa Margarita River forming the implementation of the Riparian and restrictions apply to all endangered common border on the north between Ecosystem Conservation Plan by the and threatened species on the the two properties. Other than training Marine Corps is nondiscretionary installation (including flycatcher) and lands on MCB Camp Pendleton, (Service 1995, p. 31; USMC 2007, are provided to all users of ranges and surrounding land use includes semi- Appendix L; USMC 2006, Appendix E, training areas to guide activities and rural agricultural lands that include pp. 63–64). Areas or habitat containing protect the species and its habitat. First, plant nurseries, avocado and citrus features essential to the conservation of specific conservation measures are groves, vineyards, and limited urban flycatchers addressed by the applied to flycatcher and its habitat (as development. conservation plan, the Riparian BO, or outlined above). Second, MCB Camp In the previous final critical habitat MCB Camp Pendleton’s INRMP include Pendleton’s environmental security staff designation for flycatcher, we exempted the Santa Margarita River and portions reviews projects and enforces existing Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station from of the following creeks: Cristianitos, San regulations and orders that, through the designation under section 4(a)(3)(B) Mateo, San Onofre, Los Flores, Las their implementation, avoid and of the Act because it was subject to an Pulgas, Fallbrook, Pilgrim, and DeLuz minimize impacts to natural resources, INRMP prepared under section 101 of (70 FR 60920; October 19, 2005). including the flycatcher and its habitat. the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a) that we As described in Appendix F of the Third, MCB Camp Pendleton provides determined to provide a benefit to the MCB Camp Pendleton INRMP (USMC training to personnel on environmental flycatcher (70 FR 60927; October 19, 2007, pp. F–58—F–67), the following awareness for sensitive resources on the 2005). The INRMP was prepared to management practices and conservation base, including the flycatcher and its assist installation staff and users in their measures provide an indirect or direct habitat. As a result of these regulations efforts to support mission operations benefit for the flycatcher: and restrictions, activities occurring on and accommodate increased military (1) Annual monitoring of population MCB Camp Pendleton are currently mission requirements for national levels and distributions of the conducted in a manner that minimizes security and emergency homeland flycatcher; impacts to flycatcher habitat. security, while meeting all (2) Incorporating survey data into the Based on the above considerations, environmental compliance GIS species distribution database to and in accordance with section responsibilities. The INRMP also update the Environmental Operations 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have provides ecosystem-based management Maps and utilize in conservation determined that conservation efforts to preserve, protect, and enhance awareness and education programs; identified in the 2007 INRMP for MCB natural resources on the installation, (3) Exotic vegetation control including Camp Pendleton (and MCAS Camp and provides the organizational support Arundo donax and Tamarix spp. Pendleton INRMP as outlined above) and communication links necessary for removal and control; will provide a benefit to the flycatcher effective planning, implementation, and (4) Exotic animal control (annual and riparian habitat on MCB Camp administration of the installation’s cowbird control activities); Pendleton. Therefore, lands within this natural resources. The Fallbrook Naval (5) Programmatic instructions that installation are exempt from critical Weapons Station completed its INRMP limit impacts to flycatcher and its habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) in 2006 (which was updated from an habitat; and of the Act. We are not including INRMP developed by the Naval (6) Monitoring groundwater levels approximately 76.1 km (47.3 mi) of Ordnance Center Pacific Division in and basin withdrawals managed to habitat on MCB Camp Pendleton and an 1996) to address conservation and avoid degradation and loss of habitat additional 7.5 km (4.7 mi) area shared management of its natural resources, quality. with the adjacent Naval Weapons including conservation measures for the These measures are established or Station Seal Beach—Detachment flycatcher (Navy 2006, Chapter 3, pp. ongoing aspects of existing programs, Fallbrook (Fallbrook Naval Weapons 110–112). Areas or habitat containing Base directives (such as the Riparian Station) in this proposed revised critical features essential to the conservation of Ecosystem Conservation Plan), or habitat designation because of this flycatchers within the boundaries of measures that are being implemented as exemption. Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station occur a result of previous consultations. MCB along portions of Pilgrim Creek and the Naval Weapons Station Seal Beach— Camp Pendleton implements Santa Margarita River. Detachment Fallbrook (Fallbrook Naval installation directives to avoid and The flycatcher primarily receives Weapons Station)—San Diego minimize adverse effects to the protection from activities at Fallbrook Management Unit, CA flycatcher, such as: Naval Weapons Station because no (1) Assuring that aircraft operations Fallbrook Naval Weapons is the training occurs on the installation. The shall not be conducted lower than an primary west coast supply point of INRMP’s management and conservation altitude of 300 ft (91 m) over occupied ordnance for the U.S. Marine Corps and measures for the flycatcher consist of riparian areas, to the maximum extent the large deck amphibious assault ships avoidance and minimization measures, practical; of the Pacific Fleet. Fallbrook Naval applied to infrastructure development (2) Limiting vehicle operations to Weapons Station also has the only west and maintenance to protect the existing roads in riparian areas; coast maintenance facility for air- flycatcher, that are part of the National (3) Requiring helicopters to operate in launched missiles for the Pacific Fleet. Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. excess of 200 ft (61 m) above ground The installation encompasses 4321 et seq.) approval process (Navy level over riparian areas except during approximately 3,582 ha (8,852 ac) and is 2006, Chapter 3, pp. 110–112). The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50581

flycatcher also receives indirect determines, based on the best scientific consulting with Federal agencies on protection through management and data available, that the failure to their effects to the flycatcher since the conservation measures for the least designate such area as critical habitat subspecies was listed. These Bell’s vireo such as: (1) Protection of will result in the extinction of the consultations have, in some instances, flycatcher habitat through protection of species. In making that determination, resulted in comprehensive conservation a subset of least Bell’s vireo priority the statute on its face, as well as the planning for specific areas across its management areas; (2) fencing that legislative history, are clear that the range (i.e., Sprague Ranch in Kern protects priority areas from cattle Secretary has broad discretion regarding Management Unit). These plans can grazing; (3) a Fire Management Plan that which factor(s) to use and how much provide sufficient flycatcher habitat provides a higher priority protection for weight to give to any factor. protection for recovery of the species. riparian habitat, due to the limited In considering whether to exclude a When we evaluate the existence of a amount of riparian habitat on Fallbrook particular area from the designation, we conservation plan when considering the Naval Weapons Station, such as core identify the benefits of including the benefits of exclusion, we consider a areas of least Bell’s vireo and flycatcher area in the designation, identify the variety of factors, including but not habitat; (4) consideration of prescribed benefits of excluding the area from the limited to, whether the plan is finalized; burns and livestock grazing as tools for designation, and evaluate whether the how it provides for the conservation of the establishment of a buffer area benefits of exclusion outweigh the the essential physical or biological between riparian habitat and benefits of inclusion. If the analysis features; whether there is a reasonable shrublands; (5) timing and location indicates that the benefits of exclusion expectation that the conservation protections associated with prescribed outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the management strategies and actions burns; (6) assessment and mapping of Secretary may exercise his discretion to contained in a management plan will be riparian habitat to determine suitability exclude the area only if such exclusion implemented into the future; whether for least Bell’s vireo occupation; and (7) would not result in the extinction of the the conservation strategies in the plan implementation of nonnative vegetation species. are likely to be effective; and whether control measures, including removal of When identifying the benefits of the plan contains a monitoring program Arundo donax (giant reed) (Navy 2006, inclusion for an area, we consider the or adaptive management to ensure that pp. 3–118). additional regulatory benefits that area the conservation measures are effective Based on the above considerations, would receive from the protection from and in accordance with section and can be adapted in the future in adverse modification or destruction as a response to new information. 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have result of actions with a Federal nexus; determined that conservation efforts the educational benefits of mapping After identifying the benefits of identified in the 2006 INRMP for critical habitat for recovery of the listed inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station species; and any benefits that may result we carefully weigh the two sides to provide a benefit to the flycatcher and from a designation due to State or evaluate whether the benefits of riparian habitat on the installation. Federal laws that may apply to critical exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. Therefore, lands subject to the INRMP habitat. If our analysis indicates that the benefits for the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station When identifying the benefits of of exclusion outweigh the benefits of are exempt from critical habitat exclusion, we consider, among other inclusion, we then determine whether designation under section 4(a)(3) of the things, whether exclusion of a specific exclusion would result in extinction. If Act. We are not including area is likely to result in conservation; exclusion of an area from critical habitat approximately 3.2 km (2.0 mi) of habitat the continuation, strengthening, or will result in extinction, we will not on Pilgrim Creek and portions of the encouragement of partnerships; or exclude it from the designation. Santa Margarita River that lie within the implementation of a management plan Based on the information provided by boundaries of the Fallbrook Naval that provides equal to or more entities seeking exclusion, as well as Weapons Station in this proposed conservation than a critical habitat any additional public comments we revised critical habitat designation designation would provide. receive, we will evaluate whether because of this exemption. In the case of the flycatcher, the certain lands in the proposed critical Exclusions benefits of critical habitat include habitat designation (Table 4) are public awareness of flycatcher presence appropriate for exclusion from the final Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and the importance of habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that protection, and in cases where a Federal Act. The mapped location of these lands the Secretary shall designate and make nexus exists, increased habitat we are considering for exclusion can be revisions to critical habitat on the basis protection for the flycatcher due to the viewed in the supplementary of the best available scientific data after protection from adverse modification or documents associated with this taking into consideration the economic destruction of critical habitat. In proposed rule found at http:// impact, national security impact, and practice, a Federal nexus exists www.regulations.gov. If the analysis any other relevant impact of specifying primarily on Federal lands or for indicates that the benefits of excluding any particular area as critical habitat. projects undertaken by Federal agencies. lands from the final designation The Secretary may exclude an area from Since the flycatcher was listed in 1995, outweigh the benefits of designating critical habitat if he determines that the we have had some projects on privately those lands as critical habitat, then the benefits of such exclusion outweigh the owned lands that had a Federal nexus Secretary may exercise his discretion to benefits of specifying such area as part to trigger consultation under section 7 of exclude the lands from the final of the critical habitat, unless he the Act. On Federal lands, we have been designation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50582 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4—PLAN TYPE, STREAM SEGMENTS, AND APPROXIMATE STREAM LENGTH BEING CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION FROM FLYCATCHER CRITICAL HABITAT UNDER SECTION 4(B)(2) OF THE ACT BY MANAGEMENT UNIT

Streams segments Approximate stream length considered for exclu- Basis for possible exclusion considered for exclusion sion in km (mi)

Santa Ana Management Unit

Western Riverside County Multiple Spe- Santa Ana River ...... 34.1 km (21.2 mi). cies HCP. San Timoteo Creek ...... 21.4 km (13.3 mi). Bautista Creek ...... 22.6 km (14.0 mi). Temecula Creek (see San Diego Management Unit). Ramona Band of Cahuilla ...... Bautista Creek ...... 0.44 km (0.27 mi).

San Diego Management Unit

San Diego County Multiple Species San Dieguito River ...... 9.2 km (5.7 mi). HCP. San Diego River ...... 9.5 km (5.9 mi). Santa Ysabel Creek (upper) ...... 2.4 km (1.5 mi). Santa Ysabel Creek (lower) ...... 1.0 km (0.6 mi). Sweetwater River ...... 6.6 km (4.1 mi). Western Riverside County Multiple Spe- Temecula Creek (including Vail Lake) ...... 18.7 km (11.6 mi). cies HCP. Orange County Southern Subregional Canada Gobernadora Creek ...... 5.9 km (3.7 mi). HCP. City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Agua Hedionda Creek (upper) ...... 3.4 km (2.1 mi). Plan. Agua Hedionda Creek (lower) ...... 2.1 km (1.3 mi). La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians Man- San Luis Rey River ...... 11.5 km (7.2 mi). agement Plan. Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Indi- San Luis Rey River ...... 2.4 km (1.5 mi). ans Management Plan. Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians .. San Luis Rey River ...... 3.7 km (2.3 mi). The Barona and Viejas Groups of Capi- San Diego River ...... 4.7 km (2.9 mi). tan Grande Band of Diegueno Mis- sion Indians.

Owens Management Unit

Los Angeles Department of Water and Owens River ...... 128.5 km (79.9 mi). Power Management Plan.

Kern Management Unit

Sprague Ranch Management Plan ...... South Fork Kern River (north side) ...... 4.0 km (2.5 mi). Haffenfeld Ranch Management Plan ..... South Fork Kern River (south side) ...... 0.80 km (0.50 mi). South Fork Kern River Wildlife Area South Fork Kern River ...... 2.5 km (1.5 mi). Management Plan. South Fork Kern River (Lake Isabella) ...... 0.29 km (0.18 mi).

Salton Management Unit

Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel ...... San Felipe Creek ...... 1.6 km (0.98 mi).

Little Colorado Management Unit

Zuni Pueblo ...... Rio Nutria ...... 35.8 km (22.2 mi). Zuni River ...... 39.9 km (24.8 mi). Navajo Nation ...... Zuni River ...... 15.5 km (9.6 mi).

Virgin River Management Unit

Clark County MSHCP ...... Virgin River ...... 42.0 km (26.1 mi). Overton State Wildlife Area Manage- Virgin River ...... 6.5 km (4.0 mi). ment Plan.

Middle Colorado Management Unit

Lower Colorado River MSCP ...... Colorado River (Lake Mead) ...... 24.1 km (15.0 mi). Hualapai Tribe Management Plan ...... Colorado River ...... 50.0 km (31.0 mi).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50583

TABLE 4—PLAN TYPE, STREAM SEGMENTS, AND APPROXIMATE STREAM LENGTH BEING CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION FROM FLYCATCHER CRITICAL HABITAT UNDER SECTION 4(B)(2) OF THE ACT BY MANAGEMENT UNIT—Continued

Streams segments Approximate stream length considered for exclu- Basis for possible exclusion considered for exclusion sion in km (mi)

Pahranagat Management Unit

Key Pittman State Wildlife Area Man- Pahranagat River ...... 4.0 km (2.5 mi). agement Plan. Overton State Wildlife Area Manage- Muddy River ...... 3.1 km (1.9 mi). ment Plan.

Bill Williams Management Unit

Alamo Lake State Wildlife Area Man- Bill Williams River (Alamo Lake) ...... 5.4 km (3.3 mi). agement Plan. Santa Maria River (Alamo Lake) ...... 8.4 km (5.2 mi). Big Sandy River (Alamo Lake) ...... 9.6 km (6.0 mi). Lower Colorado River MSCP ...... Bill Williams River ...... 0.7 km (0.5 mi).

Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit

Lower Colorado River MSCP ...... Colorado River (two segments) ...... 24.7 km (15.3 mi). Fort Mohave Tribe Management Plan ... Colorado River ...... 17.0 km (10.6 mi). Chemehuevi Tribe Management Plan ... Colorado River ...... 21.9 km (13.6 mi). Lower Colorado River MSCP ...... Bill Williams River ...... 1.7 km (1.0 mi).

Parker Dam to Southerly International Border Management Unit

Lower Colorado River MSCP ...... Colorado River (two segments) ...... 70.5 km (43.8 mi). Colorado River Indian Tribes Manage- Colorado River ...... 47.7 km (29.7 mi). ment Plan. Quechan (Fort Yuma) Indian Tribe Colorado River ...... 23.0 km (14.3 mi). Management Plan.

San Juan Management Unit

Navajo Nation ...... San Juan River (New Mexico) ...... 3.5 km (2.2 mi). San Juan River (Utah) ...... 51.7 km (32.1 mi). Southern Ute Tribe ...... Los Pinos River ...... 25.9 km (16.1 mi).

Verde Management Unit

Salt River Project Horseshoe and Bart- Verde River (Horseshoe Lake) ...... 9.6 km (6.0 mi). lett Dams HCP. Yavapai Apache Tribal Management Verde River ...... 2.7 km (1.7 mi). Plan.

Roosevelt Management Unit

Salt River Project Roosevelt Lake HCP Tonto Creek (Roosevelt Lake) ...... 12.8 km (7.9 mi). Salt River (Roosevelt Lake) ...... 16.3 km (10.1 mi).

Upper Gila Management Unit

U–Bar Ranch Management Plan ...... Gila River ...... 14.0 km (8.7 mi). San Carlos Apache Tribal Management Gila River ...... 31.3 km (19.5 mi). Plan. Gila River (San Carlos Lake) ...... 26.8 km (16.6 mi).

Hassayampa and Agua Fria Management Unit

Tres Rios Safe Harbor Agreement ...... Gila River ...... 8.7 km (5.4 mi).

San Luis Valley Management Unit

San Luis Valley Partnership ...... Rio Grande ...... 159.4 km (99.0 mi). Conejos River ...... 69.8 km (43.4 mi).

Upper Rio Grande Management Unit

San Ildefonso Pueblo Partnership ...... Rio Grande ...... 7.7 km (4.8 mi). Santa Clara Pueblo Partnership ...... Rio Grande ...... 10.3 km (6.4 mi). San Juan Pueblo (Ohkay Owingue) Rio Grande ...... 9.3 km (5.8 mi). Partnership.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50584 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

TABLE 4—PLAN TYPE, STREAM SEGMENTS, AND APPROXIMATE STREAM LENGTH BEING CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION FROM FLYCATCHER CRITICAL HABITAT UNDER SECTION 4(B)(2) OF THE ACT BY MANAGEMENT UNIT—Continued

Streams segments Approximate stream length considered for exclu- Basis for possible exclusion considered for exclusion sion in km (mi)

Middle Rio Grande Management Unit

Elephant Butte Reservoir ...... Rio Grande ...... 45.7 km (28.4 mi).

Total ...... 1,254.3 km (779.4 mi).

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts Exclusions Based on Other Relevant and Agreements; however, at this time, Impacts we are not proposing the exclusion of Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we any areas in this proposed revised consider the economic impacts of consider any other relevant impacts, in critical habitat designation for the specifying any particular area as critical addition to economic impacts and flycatcher. However, we specifically habitat. In order to consider economic impacts on national security. We solicit comments on the inclusion or impacts, we are preparing an analysis of consider a number of factors, including exclusion of such areas. In the paragraphs below, organized by the economic impacts of the proposed whether the landowners have developed Recovery Unit and Management Unit, critical habitat designation and related any HCPs or other management plans we identify lands we are considering for factors. for the area, or whether there are exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the We will announce the availability of conservation partnerships that would be Act. the draft economic analysis as soon as encouraged by designation of, or it is completed, at which time we will exclusion from, critical habitat. In Coastal California Recovery Unit addition, we look at Tribal management seek public review and comment. At Santa Ana Management Unit that time, copies of the draft economic in recognition of their capability to analysis will be available for appropriately manage their own Habitat Conservation Plans downloading from the Internet at resources, and consider the government- Western Riverside County Multiple http://www.regulations.gov, or by to-government relationship of the Species Habitat Conservation Plan contacting the Arizona Ecological United States with Tribal entities. We (MSHCP) Services Office directly (see FOR also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the designation. The Western Riverside County FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). MSHCP is a regional, multi- During the development of a final Land and Resource Management Plans, jurisdictional HCP encompassing designation, we will consider economic Conservation Plans, or Agreements approximately 1.26 million ac (510,000 impacts, public comments, and other Based on Conservation Partnerships ha) of land in western Riverside County. new information, and areas may be We consider a current land The Western Riverside County MSHCP excluded from the final critical habitat management or conservation plan (HCPs addresses 146 listed and unlisted designation under section 4(b)(2) of the as well as other types) to provide ‘‘covered species,’’ including the Act and our implementing regulations at adequate management or protection if it southwestern willow flycatcher. The 50 CFR 424.19. meets the following criteria: Western Riverside County MSHCP is a (1) The plan is complete and provides multispecies conservation program Exclusions Based on National Security designed to minimize and mitigate the Impacts the same or better level of protection from adverse modification or expected loss of habitat and associated Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we destruction than that provided through incidental take of covered species consider whether there are lands owned a consultation under section 7 of the resulting from covered development or managed by the Department of Act; activities in the Plan area. On June 22, 2004, the Service issued a single Defense (DOD) where a national security (2) There is a reasonable expectation incidental take permit under section impact might exist. In preparing this that the conservation management 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act to 22 permittees proposal, we have exempted from the strategies and actions will be under the Western Riverside County designation of critical habitat those implemented for the foreseeable future, based on past practices, written MSHCP to be in effect for a period of 75 Department of Defense lands with years (Service 2004). The Service completed INRMPs determined to guidance, or regulations; and (3) The plan provides conservation anticipates the proposed actions will provide a benefit to the southwestern strategies and measures consistent with affect the southwestern willow willow flycatcher. We have also currently accepted principles of flycatcher, including the loss of up to 23 determined that the remaining lands conservation biology. percent of the modeled habitat for this within the proposed designation of We believe that the following HCPs, species in the plan area (Service 2004, critical habitat for the species are not Plans, Partnerships, and Agreements p. 227). Within the Plan, and through owned or managed by the Department of may fulfill the above criteria, and will implementation of the Riparian/ Defense, and, therefore, we anticipate consider the exclusion of these Federal Riverine Areas and Vernal Pools policy, no impact on national security. and non-Federal lands covered by these we anticipate no loss of occupied Consequently, the Secretary does not plans that provide for the conservation southwest willow flycatcher habitats or propose to exert his discretion to of the flycatcher. areas otherwise determined to have exclude any areas from the final We are requesting comments on the long-term conservation value for the designation based on impacts on benefit to flycatcher from these species (Service 2004, p. 227). We national security. following HCPs, Plans, Partnerships, concluded in our biological opinion

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50585

(Service 2004b, p. 227) that under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We affecting this species, and breeding implementation of the Plan, as intend to exclude critical habitat from habitat will be identified and avoided. proposed, was not likely to jeopardize areas covered by the Western Riverside Specific management directives include the continued existence of the County MSHCP based on the measures to provide appropriate southwestern willow flycatcher. Our protections outlined above and per the flycatcher habitat, upland buffers for all determination was based on our provisions laid out in the HCP’s known flycatcher populations, cowbird conclusion that based on the low level implementing agreement, to the extent control, specific measures to protect of impact anticipated to individuals of consistent with the requirements of against detrimental edge effects, and this species and because the impacts 4(b)(2) of the Act. We encourage any monitoring. associated with loss of the southwestern public comment in relation to this We will consider excluding portions willow flycatcher’s modeled habitat, consideration. of the San Dieguito, San Diego, Santa when viewed in conjunction with the Ysabel, and Sweetwater Rivers within Tribal Management Plans and protection and management of the the San Diego MSCP and HCP from the Partnerships MSHCP Conservation Area, are not final designation of flycatcher critical anticipated to result in an appreciable Ramona Band of Cahuilla, California habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. reduction in the numbers, reproduction, The Ramona Band of Cahuilla, We intend to exclude critical habitat or distribution of this subspecies California, occurs within the Santa Ana from areas covered by the San Diego throughout its range (Service 2004, Management Unit, California. A MSCP and HCP based on the protections p. 227). proposed essential segment of Bautista outlined above and per the provisions Species-specific conservation Creek occurs on lands managed by the laid out in the HCP’s implementing objectives are included in the Western Ramona Band of Cahuilla. We will agreement, to the extent consistent with Riverside County MSHCP for coordinate with the Ramona Band of the requirements of 4(b)(2) of the Act. southwestern willow flycatcher. The Cahuilla and examine what flycatcher We encourage any public comment in MSHCP Conservation Area will include conservation actions, management relation to this consideration. at least 4,282 ha (10,580 ac) of flycatcher plans, and commitments and assurances Orange County Southern Subregional habitat (breeding and migration habitat) occur on these lands for potential HCP including six core areas of high-quality exclusion from the final designation of The Orange County Southern habitat and interconnecting linkages, flycatcher critical habitat under section Subregional HCP was issued permits including essential segments of the 4(b)(2) of the Act. Santa Ana River, San Timoteo Creek, based on the plan by the Service on and Temecula Creek (including Vail San Diego Management Unit January 10, 2007, that covers a 75-year period. The Orange County Southern Lake). The plan aims to conserve 100 Habitat Conservation Plans percent of breeding habitat for the Subregion HCP encompasses flycatcher, including buffer areas 100 m San Diego County MSCP approximately 34,811 ha (86,021 ac) in (328 ft) adjacent to breeding areas. In In southwestern San Diego County, southern Orange County. The Southern addition, the Western Riverside County the San Diego MSCP and HCP Subregional HCP was developed in MSHCP requires compliance with a encompasses more than 236,000 ha support of applications for incidental Riparian and Riverine Areas and Vernal (582,000 ac) and involves the take permits for 32 covered species, Pool policy that contains provisions participation of the County of San Diego including the flycatcher, by the Orange requiring 100 percent avoidance and and 11 cities, including the City of San County, Rancho Mission Viejo, and the long-term management and protection Diego. This regional HCP is also a Santa Margarita Water District in of breeding habitat not included in the regional subarea plan under the NCCP connection with proposed residential conservation areas, unless a Biologically program and has been developed in development and related actions in Equivalent or Superior Preservation cooperation with California Department southern Orange County. Determination can demonstrate that a of Fish and Game. The MSCP provides The Orange County Southern proposed alternative will provide equal for the establishment of approximately Subregional HCP provides for the or greater conservation benefits than 69,573 ha (171,000 ac) of preserve areas conservation of covered species, avoidance. to provide conservation benefits for 85 including southwestern willow We completed an internal Federally listed and sensitive species, flycatcher, through the establishment of consultation on the effects of the plan including the flycatcher, over the life of an approximately 12,313 ha (30,426 ac) on the flycatcher and its habitat that is the permit (50 years). habitat reserve and 1,803 ha (4,456 ac) found within the plan boundaries, and Portions of lands within the of supplemental open space areas determined that implementation of the boundaries of the San Diego MSCP and (Service 2007, pp 10, 19). The Southern plan provides for the conservation of the HCP contain essential areas for the Subregional HCP is expected to species because it provides for the conservation of the flycatcher, including conserve the flycatcher through conservation of breeding and migration stream segments along the San Dieguito, implementing the following flycatcher habitat, the conservation of San Diego, and Sweetwater Rivers. conservation measures: (1) Conservation dispersal habitat and adjacent upland These particular areas lie within the of 57 percent of nesting and foraging areas, surveys for undiscovered boundaries of the approved subarea habitat within the Habitat Reserve and populations, and the maintenance and plans. adaptively managed on Rancho Mission potential restoration of suitable habitat Conservation measures specific to the Viejo lands; (2) inclusion in the Habitat areas within the conservation area. flycatcher within the San Diego MSCP Reserve of 100 percent of flycatcher We will consider excluding portions and HCP include the preservation and locations in the Lower Canada of the Santa Ana River, San Timoteo management of 3,845 ha (9,500 ac) (81 Gobernadora ‘‘important’’ population in Creek, Bautista Creek, and Temecula percent) of the riparian habitat within a ‘‘key’’ location; (3) creation of 2 ha (6 Creek (including Vail Lake) within the the planning area, as well as eight of the ac) of willow riparian habitat within a planning area boundary for the Western nine known breeding locations at the Supplemental Open Space area on the Riverside County MSHCP from the final time of the plan’s development. Surveys Prima Deshecha Landfill; (4) designation of flycatcher critical habitat are required for projects potentially management of nonnative invasive plant

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50586 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

species (Tamarisk ramosissima preserve areas, mandatory surveys will breeding flycatcher habitat, measured (tamarisk), Arundo donax (arundo), and be conducted, with impacts to breeding from the outer edge of riparian Ricinus communis (castor bean)); (5) flycatchers completely avoided or vegetation. Within this 30-m (100-ft) assessment of effects from and trapping reduced, as described in the paragraph buffer, no new development shall be of nonnative animal species (cowbird); below. Flycatcher habitat will be allowed, and the area shall be managed (6) and managing livestock grazing managed to restrict activities that cause for natural biological values as part of (Service 2007, pp. 120–123). degradation, including livestock the preserve system; (8) Suitable We will consider excluding a portion grazing, human disturbance clearing or unoccupied breeding habitat preserved of Canada Gobernadora Creek within the alteration of riparian vegetation, brown- within the protected areas shall be Orange County Southern Subregional headed cowbird parasitism, and managed to maintain or mimic effects of HCP from the final designation of insufficient water levels leading to loss natural stream or river processes (e.g., flycatcher critical habitat under section of riparian habitat and surface water. periodic substrate scouring and 4(b)(2) of the Act. We intend to exclude Area-specific management directives depositions); and (9) Natural riparian critical habitat from areas covered by shall include measures to provide connections with upstream riparian the Orange County Southern appropriate flycatcher habitat, cowbird habitat shall be maintained to ensure Subregional HCP based on the control, specific measures to protect linkage to suitable occupied and protections outlined above and per the against detrimental edge effects, and unoccupied breeding habitat. provisions laid out in the HCP’s removal of invasive, exotic species We will consider excluding portions implementing agreement, to the extent (Arundo donax). Human access to of Agua Hedionda Creek within the consistent with the requirements of flycatcher-occupied breeding habitat Carlsbad HMP from the final 4(b)(2) of the Act. We encourage any will be restricted during the breeding designation of flycatcher critical habitat public comment in relation to this season (May 1 to September 15), except under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We consideration. for qualified researchers or land intend to exclude critical habitat from managers performing essential preserve City of Carlsbad Habitat Management areas covered by the Carlsbad HMP management, monitoring, or research Plan (HMP) based on the protections outlined above functions. Projects that cannot be and per the provisions laid out in the The City of Carlsbad’s HMP was conducted without placing equipment HCP’s implementing agreement, to the approved October 15, 2004. This plan is or personnel in or adjacent to sensitive extent consistent with the requirements one of seven subarea plans being habitats shall be timed to ensure that of 4(b)(2) of the Act. We encourage any developed under the umbrella of the exotic vegetation habitat (Arundo public comment in relation to this North County Multiple Habitat donax) is removed prior to the initiation consideration. Conservation Plan (MHCP) in northern of the breeding season. San Diego County. Participants in this Projects having direct or indirect Tribal Management Plans and regional conservation planning effort impacts to the flycatcher shall adhere to Partnerships include the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, the following measures to avoid or La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, reduce impacts: (1) The removal of Solana Beach, and Vista. The subarea native vegetation and habitat shall be The La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians plans in development are also proposed avoided and minimized to the have a segment of proposed flycatcher as subregional plans under the State’s maximum extent practicable; (2) For critical habitat along the San Luis Rey Natural Community Conservation temporary impacts, the work site shall River within the San Diego Management Planning program and are being be returned to pre-existing contours and Unit, in northern San Diego County, developed in cooperation with the revegetated with appropriate native California. The La Jolla Tribe has California Department of Fish and Game species; (3) Revegetation specifications developed a Southwestern Willow (CDFG). We have determined that shall ensure creation and restoration of Flycatcher Management Plan (SWFMP). portions of lands within the boundaries riparian woodland vegetation to a The La Jolla Band of Luiseno Indian’s of the HMP contain lands with features quality that eventually is expected to SWFMP described a collection of essential to the conservation of the support nesting flycatchers, recognizing measures, protections, and efforts they flycatcher, including portions of Agua that it may take many years (depending are and will be undertaking to protect Hedionda Creek. on type of activity and timing of flood flycatchers and their riparian habitat. To Approximately 9,943 ha (24,570 ac) of events, etc.) to achieve this state; (4) address environmental issues, the La land are within the Carlsbad HMP Construction noise levels at the riparian Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians maintains planning area, with about 3,561 ha canopy edge shall be kept below 60 dBA permanent staff, which includes a (8,800 ac) remaining as natural habitat Leq (measured as Equivalent Sound professional biologist. The Tribe will for species covered under the plan. Of Level) from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. during the work to maintain open space along the this remaining habitat, the Carlsbad peak nesting period of March 15 to July river, with a particular emphasis on the HMP proposes to establish a preserve 15. For the balance of the day or season, western 2-km (3.5-mi) stretch of the San system for approximately 2,746 ha the noise levels shall not exceed 60 Luis Rey River. The La Jolla Band of (6,786 ac). Conservation measures decibels, averaged over a 1-hour period Luiseno Indians are working to establish specific to the flycatcher within the on an A-weighted decibel (dBA) (i.e., this piece of river as a reserve for Carlsbad HMP include the conservation 1 hour Leq/dBA); (5) Brown-headed environmental and cultural purposes. of 200 ha (494 ac) (86 percent) of the cowbirds and other exotic species that Management of native riparian riparian vegetation in the city and 10 ha impact the flycatcher shall be removed vegetation and removal of exotic (25 ac) (86 percent) of oak woodland. from the site; (6) For new developments vegetation is occurring that could Preserved lands include the four highest adjacent to preserve areas that create improve the quality and abundance of quality habitat areas for flycatchers conditions attractive to brown-headed native plants, and decrease the risk of identified within the plan area, cowbirds, jurisdictions shall require wildfire. They will actively reduce the including lands along Agua Hedionda monitoring and control of cowbirds; (7) impact of recreation in riparian areas by Creek. For proposed projects in or Biological buffers of at least 30 m (100 continuing to educate Tribal Members adjacent to suitable habitat outside of ft) shall be maintained adjacent to through outreach programs and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50587

newsletters. Additionally, they are Grande Band of Diegueno Mission Kern Management Unit working to discourage use of off-road Indians of California (jointly managed Partnerships, Conservation Plans, or vehicles in riparian areas through by the Barona Group of Capitan Grande Conservation Easements on Private education, movement of roads, closures, Band of Mission Indians and the Viejas Lands and development of ordinances. The La [Baron Long] Group of Capitan Grande Jolla Band of Luiseno Indians will Band of Mission Indians). Haffenfeld Ranch Conservation explore future opportunities for research Easement to determine how to best manage for We will coordinate with these Tribes and examine what flycatcher The Haffenfeld Ranch owns and flycatchers. manages a segment of proposed We will consider excluding The La conservation actions, management plans, and commitments and assurances flycatcher critical habitat along the Jolla Band of Luiseno Indian’s land from South Fork Kern River within the Kern occur on these lands for potential the final designation of flycatcher River Management Unit, in Kern exclusion from the final designation of critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of County, California. the Act. flycatcher critical habitat under section The Haffenfeld Ranch has developed 4(b)(2) of the Act. Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission a Conservation Easement and Plan with Indians of the Rincon Reservation Basin and Mohave Recovery Unit, CA the Natural Resources Conservation Service that provides management and The Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission and NV protections for flycatcher habitat. The Indians land contains a proposed Owens Management Unit Haffenfeld Parcel completes a segment of flycatcher critical habitat continuous corridor of willow- along the San Luis Rey River within the Partnerships, Conservation Plans, or cottonwood riparian habitat along the San Diego Management Unit, in Conservation Easements on Private South Fork of the Kern River that northern San Diego County, California. Lands connects the east and west segments of The Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission the Audubon Society’s Kern River Indians have developed a SWFMP. Los Angeles Department of Water and The Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission Power (LADWP) Conservation Strategy Preserve. The Conservation Easement and Plan establishes that these lands are Indian’s SWFMP addresses The LADWP owns and manages a implementation of a variety of managed for the benefit of the flycatcher proposed segment of flycatcher critical protective flycatcher habitat measures. by restoring, improving, and protecting habitat along the Owens River within The Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission its habitat. Management activities the Owens Management Unit, in Inyo Indians will monitor and remove include: (1) Limiting public access to introduced exotic plants that could County, California. It is believed that the site, (2) winter-only grazing reduce the quality and abundance of LADWP owns and manages the entire practices (outside of the flycatcher native species, and increase the risk of extent of flycatcher habitat within this nesting season), (3) protection of the site wildfire. They will exclude activities in Management Unit needed to reach from development or encroachment, (4) the floodplain that could remove or recovery goals. maintenance of the site as permanent reduce riparian habitat quality such as The Service and the LADWP signed a open space that has been left predominantly in its natural vegetative mining and livestock grazing. The memorandum of understanding in 2005 state, and (5) the spreading of flood Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission to implement a flycatcher conservation waters to promote the moisture regime Indians will exclude unauthorized strategy designed to proactively manage recreational uses and off-road vehicle and wetland and riparian vegetation for flycatchers in the Owens Management the conservation of the flycatcher. Other use. Signs, boundaries, and other Unit. The conservation strategy measures will be taken to educate the prohibitions of the easement that would addresses three elements, livestock benefit the conservation of the public and prevent unauthorized grazing, recreational activities, and recreational use. The Rincon Band of flycatcher include: (1) Haying, mowing, wildfires that have the potential to or seed harvesting; (2) altering the Luiseno Mission Indians will dedicate adversely affect flycatcher habitat. The funding to this effort, report progress, grassland, woodland, wildlife habitat, or conservation strategy provides specific and coordinate with the Service on other natural features; (3) dumping measures that: (1) Are designed to create SWMP updates. refuse, wastes, sewage, or other debris; We will consider excluding The suitable breeding habitat for the (4) harvesting wood products; (5) Rincon Band of Luiseno Mission flycatcher; and (2) avoid and minimize draining, dredging, channeling, filling, Indian’s land from the final designation potential adverse effects, such as the leveling, pumping, diking, or of flycatcher critical habitat under degradation or loss of habitat that may impounding water features or altering section 4(b)(2) of the Act. be associated with grazing activities, the existing surface water drainage or recreational activities, and wild land flows naturally occurring within the Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indians fires. The document also states the easement area; and (6) building or and the Capitan Grande Band of LADWP will implement the placing structures on the easement. Diegueno Mission Indians of California aforementioned measures with the goal We will consider excluding The Pala Band of Luiseno Mission of promoting the establishment of 50 Haffenfeld Ranch lands from the final Indians and the Capitan Grande Band of flycatcher territories, which is the designation of flycatcher critical habitat Diegueno Mission Indians of California number of territories needed to reach under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. occur within the San Diego Management recovery goals identified in the Federal Wildlife Conservation Areas Unit, San Diego County, California. The Recovery Plan. Pala Band of Luiseno Mission Indian’s Sprague Ranch Tribal Land occurs along a segment of We will consider excluding LADWP The Sprague Ranch is an proposed flycatcher critical habitat on lands from the final designation of approximately 1,003-ha (2,479-ac) the San Luis Rey River. A proposed flycatcher critical habitat under section parcel, which includes approximately essential segment of the San Diego River 4(b)(2) of the Act. 395 ha (975 ac) of flycatcher floodplain occurs on the land of the Capitan habitat located along the South Fork of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50588 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

the Kern River in Kern County, F–0067) and on-the-ground management Creek in the Salton Management Unit, California. The Sprague Ranch was by the Forest Service. These opinions San Diego County, California. purchased by the U.S. Army Corps of resulted in the long-term management of We will coordinate with The Iipay Engineers (Corps) as a result of Lake Isabella Dam that maintains the Nation and examine what flycatcher biological opinions for the long-term dynamic processes to establish conservation actions, management operation of Lake Isabella Dam and flycatcher habitat over the long term and plans, and commitments and assurances Reservoir (Service File Nos. 1–1–96–F– resulted in the acquisition of the occur on these lands for potential 27; 1–1–99–F–216; and 1–1–05–F–0067) Sprague Ranch (immediately upstream exclusion from the final designation of specifically to provide habitat and of the SFWA) to compensate for short- flycatcher critical habitat under section conservation for the flycatcher. During term losses in habitat, and management 4(b)(2) of the Act. the periods of time flycatcher habitat is of SFWA for flycatchers. Lower Colorado Recovery Unit, NV, Lake Isabella Dam operations that not available as a result of short-term AZ, CA, UT, and NM inundation from Isabella Dam periodically inundate and create operations, the Sprague Ranch is conditions for flycatcher habitat Little Colorado River Management Unit establishment are managed by the Corps expected to provide habitat for the Tribal Management Plans and in accordance with the terms and flycatcher. Partnerships As a result of the expertise of the conditions of the biological opinions. National Audubon Society (Audubon) These terms and conditions require Navajo Nation and Zuni Pueblo and the California Department of Fish conservation actions for flycatchers, The Navajo Nation and Zuni Pueblo and Game (CDFG) in management of including long-term studies of contain segments of the Rio Nutria and flycatcher habitat on adjacent and flycatcher habitat and demographics; Zuni River proposed as flycatcher nearby properties along the Kern River, implementation and monitoring of a critical habitat in McKinley County, management of the Sprague Ranch is a cowbird trapping program; a nest- New Mexico. Both river segments occur joint venture between these two parties moving protocol to prevent inundation within the Little Colorado River and the Corps. The Sprague Ranch is of nests during high water events; Management Unit. important flycatcher habitat and is measures to control watercraft in We will coordinate with these Tribes located immediately north and adjacent coordination with the Forest Service; and examine what flycatcher to the Kern River Preserve (KRP), which and the acquisition of 465 ha (1,150 ac) conservation actions, management is owned and operated by Audubon, of land to compensate for incidental plans, and commitments and assurances and shares a common border with the take resulting from the periodic occur on these lands for potential KRP of over 4.8 km (3 mi). The Sprague inundation of the SFWA. Funding for exclusion from the final designation of Ranch contains existing riparian forest the implementation of these measures is flycatcher critical habitat under section that can support and maintain nesting provided by the Corps in accordance 4(b)(2) of the Act. territories and migrating and dispersing with terms and conditions of the Virgin Management Unit flycatchers. But other portions of the biological opinions. Ranch are believed to require restoration The SFWA is managed by the Forest Habitat Conservation Plans and management in order become Service within Lake Isabella (after the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat nesting flycatcher habitat. Activities water recedes) and along the Kern River Conservation Plan such as cowbird trapping, exotic immediately upstream. Through vegetation control, and native tree consultation with the Forest Service, The Clark County Multiple Species plantings are other management measures for the conservation of Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) was activities expected to occur. Sprague flycatchers have been implemented, completed in November 2000, and the Ranch is currently being managed in including: restricting the speed of incidental take permit was issued on accordance with the terms and watercraft to 8 km per hour (5 mi per January 9, 2001. The flycatcher, as well conditions of the biological opinions hour) within 30.5 m (100 ft) of the as five additional riparian obligate specifically for the flycatcher. SFWA; and prohibition of overnight species, was included in the MSHCP We will consider excluding the South camping, motorized vehicles, and and permit application. The permit Fork Kern River on the Sprague Ranch campfires in the South Fork Wildlife issued for the MSHCP covered the from the final designation of flycatcher Area. The SFWA is fenced, and the County, the Cities of Clark County, and critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of fencing is maintained to enforce the Nevada Department of Transportation the Act. exclusion of unauthorized uses, (permittees) for take of the covered including cattle grazing. species on all non-Federal Land with South Fork Kern River Wildlife Area the County, up to a maximum loss of (SFWA) We will consider excluding the South Fork Kern River and upper end of Lake 58,681 ha (145,000 ac) of habitat within The SFWA is an approximately 514- Isabella within the SFWA from the final a 30-year period. ha (1,270-ac) parcel of mature willow- designation of flycatcher critical habitat Due to the relatively large percentage cottonwood, riparian flycatcher habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. of riparian habitat that occurs on non- located along the South Fork of the Kern Federal lands, the permit obligated the River, Kern County, California, west of Salton Management Unit County to fulfill certain conditions prior historic Patterson Lane, including a Tribal Management Plans and to authorization of take of the avian portion of upper Lake Isabella. The Partnerships riparian obligate species. These SFWA is jointly managed by the Corps conditions include: (1) The and the Forest Service. Isabella Dam and Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel development of conservation flycatcher habitat in the SFWA is The Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel, management plans that identify the managed as a result of long-term California (formerly the Santa Ysabel management and monitoring actions biological opinions for Corps operation Band of Diegueno Mission Indians of needed for desert riparian habitats along of Lake Isabella Dam and Reservoir the Santa Ysabel Reservation), occurs the Muddy River, Virgin River, and (Service File Nos. 1–1–96–F–27; 1–1– along an essential segment of proposed Meadow Valley Wash; and (2) the 96–F–150; 1–1–99–F–216; and 1–1–05– flycatcher critical habitat on San Felipe acquisition of private lands in desert

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50589

riparian habitats along the Muddy River, partnership in the management of the years. The plan went through Virgin River, and Meadow Valley Wash, lower Colorado River, including those stakeholder meetings and public review. with the total number and location of associated with the LCR MSCP (see We determined that essential hectares (acres) within each watershed Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit segments of the Muddy and Virgin to be identified in the conservation section describing potential Habitat Rivers (located within both the management plans. Conservation Plan exclusions). Pahranagat and Virgin Management In 2005, these two conditions were We will consider excluding the Units) for the conservation of the not yet fulfilled during our previous Colorado River alongside Hualapai flycatcher occur through the boundaries designation of flycatcher critical habitat; Tribal land from the final designation of of the Overton State Wildlife Area. A therefore, the permittees were not flycatcher critical habitat under section minimum of a quarter-acre willow patch authorized for incidental take of the 4(b)(2) of the Act. and varying amount of cottonwood, mesquite, and hackberry will be planted flycatcher, and were subsequently short Pahranagat Management Unit of meeting the criteria for exclusion annually in locations able to support under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Clark State Wildlife Areas native riparian trees, and water is being managed to improve and maintain County is currently in the process of Key Pittman State Wildlife Area amending their MSHCP, but the plan is riparian habitat. Riparian habitat is under development and decisions The Key Pittman State Wildlife Area protected from livestock grazing, regarding the conservation strategy for is located in Lincoln County, Nevada, because no grazing occurs in the riparian birds will not be made until the and contains a wide diversity of habitats Wildlife Area. This Wildlife Area was amendment to the plan and the permit within its 539 ha (1,332 ac). Essential developed primarily for wetland habitat are approved. Habitat conservation flycatcher habitat occurs along the and waterfowl activities (including planning has been initiated for the Pahranagat River as it travels through a hunting). Virgin River as part of the development portion of the Key Pittman State Within the Overton Wildlife Area, we of the Virgin River Habitat Conservation Wildlife Area, including Nesbitt Lake, will consider excluding the Virgin and and Recovery Program, but, similar to an impounded area along the river. The Muddy Rivers from the final designation the Clark County MSHCP amendment, State of Nevada’s Department of of flycatcher critical habitat under the Program has not yet been approved Wildlife owns and manages this section 4(b)(2) of the Act. property. The Nevada Fish and Game and permitted. We will re-evaluate Bill Williams Management Unit flycatcher conservation planning and Commission purchased portions of the implementation progress along the area in 1962 and 1966, primarily for State Wildlife Areas Virgin River within these two planning waterfowl hunting, and as a secondary Alamo Lake State Wildlife Area (AWA) goal, habitat for other wetland species. efforts during this critical habitat The Alamo Lake State Wildlife Area designation process. A draft management plan was completed in November 2003, and (AWA) in La Paz and Mohave Counties, State Wildlife Areas provided the framework for the next Arizona, was created under provisions of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Overton State Wildlife Area 10 years. The plan went through stakeholder meetings and public review. Act (16 U.S.C. 661 et seq.), Public Land The Overton State Wildlife Area The State of Nevada fences the known Order 492 (PLO 492), and the General contains segments of both the Virgin flycatcher habitat in order to protect it Plan agreement between the Secretary of River (Virgin Management Unit) and from livestock grazing, manages water to the Army, Secretary of the Interior, and Muddy River (Pahranagat Management maintain habitat, monitors the status of Director of Arizona Game and Fish, Unit). Please see our description of this flycatchers, and is actively planting signed January 19, 1968 (Arizona Game area in the Pahranagat Management riparian plants to improve the and Fish Department—Arizona State Unit. distribution of riparian habitat. The area Parks 1997). A lease agreement between the Arizona Game and Fish Department Middle Colorado Management Unit has been under management for wildlife since the 1960s, with conservation Commission and the U.S. Army Corps of Tribal Management Plans and efforts targeted toward waterfowl, Engineers was signed in 1970, Partnerships wetland species, and specifically the establishing the AWA for fish and wildlife conservation and management Hualapai Tribe flycatcher. Within the Key Pittman Wildlife Area, purposes (Arizona Game and Fish Hualapai Tribal land contains a we will consider excluding the Department—Arizona State Parks 1997). proposed flycatcher critical habitat Pahranagat River from the final The present lease area encompasses segment of the Colorado River on the designation of flycatcher critical habitat approximately 9,140 ha (22,586 ac). south side of the channel in the Middle under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Public input was solicited and Colorado Management Unit above Lake addressed in development of the AWA Mead in Mohave County, Arizona. The Overton State Wildlife Area Management Plan through scoping and Hualapai Tribe has finalized a SWFMP The Overton State Wildlife Area is the NEPA (Arizona Game and Fish that was adopted by the Hualapai Tribal located in Clark County, Nevada, and Department—Arizona State Parks 1997). Council. contains a wide diversity of habitats Proposed flycatcher critical habitat The Hualapai Tribe’s SWFMP’s within its 7,146 ha (17,657 ac). The occurs along the Big Sandy, Santa objectives are to manage riparian Muddy River and Virgin River (in the Maria, and Bill Williams Rivers, which vegetation to maximize continued Virgin Management Unit) travel through make up the upper portion of Alamo presence of native plant species suitable a small portion of the State Wildlife Lake. for use by flycatchers, ensure that Management Area near Lake Mead. The The AWA Management Plan describes existing land uses (which presently State of Nevada’s Department of the unique riparian, wetland, and include recreational activities) will not Wildlife owns and manages this aquatic aspects of the area for a variety result in net loss or reduction in quality property. A management plan was of species, specifically identifying the of flycatcher habitat, and continue their completed in December 2000, and flycatcher. As a result, two of the Department of Natural Resources provides the framework for the next 10 specific resources that management

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50590 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

emphasizes are directed toward the Arizona Water Conservation District; Hoover to Parker Dam and Parker Dam habitat needs of the flycatcher: (1) Cibola Valley Irrigation and Drainage to Southerly International Border Maintain and enhance aquatic and District; City of Bullhead City; City of Management Units, and is expected to riparian habitats to benefit wildlife; and Lake Havasu City; City of Mesa; City of meet conservation goals of the (2) restore, manage, and enhance Somerton; City of Yuma; Electrical flycatcher identified in the Recovery habitats for wildlife of special concern. District No. 3, Pinal County, Arizona; Plan by increasing numbers of territories In order to accomplish this goal, no Golden Shores Water Conservation in appropriate Management Units. cattle grazing is allowed in the riparian District; Mohave County Water Portions of tributaries to the Colorado areas on the upper end of Alamo Lake Authority; Mohave Valley Irrigation and River, such as the Virgin and Muddy and the lower portions of the Santa Drainage District; Mohave Water Rivers, may occur within the LCR MSCP Maria and Big Sandy Rivers. Also, Conservation District, North Gila Valley planning area. Management and tasks management of recreation (i.e., off-road Irrigation and Drainage District; Salt associated with the HCP will result in vehicles) is identified as an important River Project Agricultural Improvement improving and maintaining important management objective. and Power District; Town of Fredonia; migration stopover habitat, improving We will consider excluding the Bill Town of Thatcher; Town of metapopulation stability, and reducing Williams, Santa Maria, and Big Sandy Wickenburg; Unit ‘‘B’’ Irrigation and the risk of catastrophic losses due to Rivers within the Alamo Lake State Drainage District; Wellton-Mohawk fire. In addition to creation and Wildlife Area from the final designation Irrigation and Drainage District; Yuma subsequent management of flycatcher of flycatcher critical habitat under County Water Users’ Association; Yuma habitats, provision is made in the LCR section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Irrigation District; and Yuma Mesa MSCP to provide funds to ensure the Irrigation and Drainage District. The maintenance of existing flycatcher Habitat Conservation Plans permittees covered in California are: habitats within the Management Units. Lower Colorado River MSCP The City of Needles, the Coachella Flycatcher management associated with Valley Water District, the Colorado A portion of the Bill Williams River the LCR MSCP works in conjunction River Board of California, the Imperial with management occurring on the at the Colorado River confluence occur Irrigation District, the Los Angeles within the planning area of the Lower National Wildlife Refuges (Bill Department of Water and Power, the Williams, Havasu, Cibola, and Imperial) Colorado River MSCP. Please see the Palo Verde Irrigation District, the San Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit and Tribal lands (Hualapai, Fort Diego County Water Authority, the Mohave, Chemehuevi, Colorado River, below for a description of the LCR Southern California Edison Company, MSCP. and Quechan Tribes) along the LCR. the Southern California Public Power We will consider excluding portions Hoover to Parker Dam Management Authority, Bard Water District, and The of the Colorado River from the Unit Metropolitan Water District of Southern uppermost storage space of Lake Mead California. The permittees covered in Habitat Conservation Plans (in the Middle Colorado River Nevada are: The Colorado River Management Unit) downstream through Lower Colorado River MSCP Commission of Nevada, the Nevada the Hoover to Parker Dam Management Department of Wildlife, Basic Water Unit to the Southerly International The LCR MSCP was developed for Company, and the Southern Nevada areas along the lower Colorado River Border and portions of tributaries Water Authority. (Virgin, Muddy, and Bill Williams along the borders of Arizona, California, The LCR MSCP primarily surrounds and Nevada from the conservation space Rivers) to the Colorado River that may proposed flycatcher critical habitat occur within the LCR MSCP planning of Lake Mead to Mexico, in the Counties along the Colorado River within the of La Paz, Mohave, and Yuma in area that are located in other Hoover to Parker Dam and Parker Dam Management Units (Virgin, Pahranagat, Arizona; Imperial, Riverside, and San to Southerly International Border and Bill Williams) from the final Bernardino Counties in California; and Management Units. Streams in the designation of flycatcher critical habitat Clark County in Nevada. The LCR MSCP Middle Colorado (Colorado River and under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. primarily covers activities associated Lake Mead), Virgin (Virgin River), and with water storage, delivery, diversion, Pahranagat (Muddy River) Management Tribal Management Plans and and hydroelectric production. The Units in Arizona, Utah, and Nevada, are Partnerships Record of Decision was signed by the briefly represented where they surround Fort Mojave Tribe Secretary of the Interior on April 2, Lake Mead (including the conservation 2005. Discussions began on the space of Lake Mead which extends up Fort Mojave Tribal land contains a development of this HCP in 1994, but an the Colorado River to Separation proposed Colorado River segment of important catalyst was a 1997 jeopardy Canyon). Also, a portion of the Bill flycatcher critical habitat in the Hoover biological opinion for the flycatcher Williams River at the Colorado River to Parker Dam Management Unit above issued to the Bureau of Reclamation for confluence at Lake Havasu (Bill Lake Havasu in Mohave County, lower Colorado River operations. Williams Management Unit) occurs Arizona. The Fort Mojave Tribe has The Federal agencies involved in the within the LCR MSCP planning area. finalized a SWFMP. LCR MSCP include the Bureau of The flycatcher is a key species in the The Fort Mojave Tribe’s SWFMP Reclamation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, LCR MSCP, where the permittees will describes that within the Tribe’s National Park Service, Bureau of Land create and maintain 1,639 ha (4,050 ac) budgetary constraints, they commit Management, Western Area Power of flycatcher habitat over the 50-year life management to sustain the current value Administration, and U.S. Fish and of the permit (2005 to 2055). Additional of saltcedar, willow, and cottonwood Wildlife Service. The permittees research, management, monitoring, and vegetation that meets moist soil covered in Arizona are: The Arizona protection of flycatchers and flycatcher conditions necessary to maintain Department of Water Resources; Arizona habitat from fire, nest predators, and flycatcher habitat; to carry out Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.; brood parasites will occur. The monitoring to determine flycatcher Arizona Game and Fish Department; development of flycatcher habitat will presence and vegetation status in Arizona Power Authority; Central occur specifically throughout the cooperation with the Service; and to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50591

continue to provide wildfire response We will consider excluding the Any permanent land use changes for and law enforcement to protect Colorado River within Chemehuevi recreation or other reasons will consider flycatcher habitats. In addition, Tribal land from the final designation of and support flycatcher needs, as long as flycatcher management on Tribal Land flycatcher critical habitat under section consistent with Tribal cultural and may work in conjunction with 4(b)(2) of the Act. economic needs. The Tribe will consult additional flycatcher management with the Service to develop and design Parker Dam to Southerly International associated with the LCR MSCP (see the plans that minimize impacts to Border Management Unit Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit flycatcher habitat. The Tribe will above for a description). Tribal Management Plans and establish collaborative relationships We will consider excluding the Partnerships with the Service to benefit the Colorado River within Fort Mojave Colorado River Indian Tribes (CRIT) flycatcher, including monitoring for Tribal land from the final designation of flycatcher presence and habitat flycatcher critical habitat under section The CRIT contains a proposed condition, all within the constraints of 4(b)(2) of the Act. Colorado River segment of flycatcher available funds to the Tribe. In addition, habitat in the Parker Dam to Southerly Chemehuevi Tribe flycatcher management on Tribal Land International Border Management Unit may work in conjunction with Chemehuevi Tribal land contains a in La Paz County, Arizona. The additional flycatcher management proposed Colorado River segment of Colorado River Indian Tribes have associated with the LCR MSCP (see the flycatcher critical habitat along the on finalized a SWFMP. Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit the west side of the channel in the The CRIT’s SWFMP describes a above for a description). Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit commitment to conduct a variety of We will consider excluding the adjacent to the Colorado River and Lake flycatcher and flycatcher habitat Colorado River within Quechan Tribal Havasu in Mohave County, Arizona. management actions. The SWFMP land from the final designation of The Chemehuevi Tribe has finalized a identifies schedules for breeding habitat flycatcher critical habitat under section SWFMP. surveys and monitoring flycatcher 4(b)(2) of the Act. The Chemehuevi Tribe’s SWFMP nesting activity. The SWFMP also describes that within funding limits, identifies the assessment, identification, Upper Colorado Recovery Unit, AZ, they will commit to conduct a variety of and protection of flycatcher migration UT, CO, and NM flycatcher and flycatcher habitat habitat. The SWFMP identifies San Juan Management Unit management actions. The management protecting breeding habitat with the actions include wildfire control, Ahakhav Tribal Preserve and in any Tribal Management Plans and improvement of native riparian plants areas established for flycatchers with Partnerships through vegetation improvement the LCR MSCP. Seasonal closures of Navajo Nation and Southern Ute Tribe projects, minimization of impacts occupied flycatcher habitat during the The Navajo Nation contains two associated with recreational or other use breeding season may be necessary and different essential segments of the San along the river and lake shorelines, and established by the CRIT. Protection of Juan River in San Juan County, Utah, collaboration with the Service to flycatcher habitat from fire is and San Juan County, New Mexico. improve conditions for the flycatcher by established in the SWFMP, as well as Additionally, the Southern Ute Tribe discussing and implementing projects to protections from other possible stressors contains an essential segment of the Los reduce burro damage. The SWFMP such as overgrazing, recreation, and Pinos River in La Plata County, identifies the management of riparian development. In addition, flycatcher Colorado. All three of these river saltcedar and native willow, management on Tribal Land may work segments occur within the San Juan cottonwood, and mesquite to maximize in conjunction with additional Management Unit. native plant presence. Management will flycatcher management associated with We will coordinate with these Tribes be done in cooperative work effort with the LCR MSCP (see the Hoover to Parker and examine what flycatcher the Service to identify restoration sites Dam Management Unit above for a conservation actions, management and provide early control response to description). plans, and commitments and assurances wildfires that would result in no net We will consider excluding the occur on these lands for potential loss or permanent modification Colorado River within CRIT land from exclusion from the final designation of detrimental to the flycatcher or its the final designation of flycatcher flycatcher critical habitat under section habitat as specified by the Recovery critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of 4(b)(2) of the Act. Plan. Any river or lakeshore land use the Act. changes, such as recreational or other Gila Recovery Unit, AZ and NM developments, will take flycatcher Quechan (Fort Yuma) Indian Tribe habitat needs into account and will be Quechan Tribal land contains a Verde Management Unit done in mutual consultation with the proposed Colorado River segment of Habitat Conservation Plans Service to minimize detrimental flycatcher critical habitat in the Parker impacts to flycatcher habitat. The Dam to Southerly International Border Horseshoe and Bartlett Dam HCP SWFMP identifies continued Management Unit near the City of Yuma Salt River Project (SRP) developed the cooperation between the Tribe and in Yuma County, Arizona. The Quechan 50-year Horseshoe and Bartlett Dam Service to ensure continued Tribe has completed a SWFMP. HCP to provide habitat conservation for management of or improvement to The Quechan Tribe’s SWFMP Federally listed, candidate, and other flycatcher habitat. In addition, describes a commitment to conduct a species of concern that inhabit flycatcher management on Tribal Land variety of flycatcher and flycatcher Horseshoe and Bartlett lakes and the may work in conjunction with habitat management actions. The Tribe Verde River above and below the two additional flycatcher management will manage riparian saltcedar that is dams in Gila and Maricopa Counties, associated with the LCR MSCP (see the intermixed with cottonwood, willow, while allowing the continued operation Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit mesquite, and arrowweed to maximize of the two reservoirs. The Record of above for a description). potential value for nesting flycatchers. Decision was signed by the Service’s

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50592 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Region 2 Director on June 13, 2008. SRP Tribal Management Plans and proposed as flycatcher critical habitat. provides water from Horseshoe and Partnerships Operation of Roosevelt Dam during low Bartlett directly to various beneficiaries Yavapai Apache Nation water years can yield as much as 506 ha of these storage facilities for irrigation (1,250 ac) of occupied flycatcher habitat and other uses. Water from Horseshoe, The Yavapai Apache Nation contains within the perimeter of the high water Bartlett, and SRP’s other reservoirs is Verde River segments of proposed mark. Annually, the total available provided directly by SRP to shareholder flycatcher critical habitat in the Verde habitat varies as reservoir levels lands for irrigation and other uses, and Management Unit in Yavapai County, fluctuate depending on annual is delivered to the cities of Avondale, Arizona. The Yavapai Apache Nation precipitation with dry years yielding Chandler, Gilbert, Glendale, Mesa, has completed a SWFMP. proportionally more habitat. Peoria, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, and The Yavapai Apache Nation’s Flycatcher habitat at Roosevelt Lake Tolleson for municipal use on SWFMP addresses and presents varies depending on how and when the shareholder lands. Water deliveries are assurances for flycatcher habitat lake recedes as a result of water in-flow also made under specific water rights in conservation. The Nation will, through and subsequent storage capacity and Horseshoe and Bartlett held by the City zoning, Tribal ordinances and code delivery needs. As the lake recedes, flat of Phoenix, Salt River Pima Maricopa requirements, and measures identified gradient, fine moist soils are exposed Indian Community, and Fort McDowell in the Recovery Plan, take all which provide seed beds for riparian Yavapai Nation. In addition, water is practicable steps to protect known vegetation. However, even in the delivered from the SRP reservoir system flycatcher habitat located along the expected high-water years, we to the cities, Gila River Indian Verde River. The Nation will take all determined that some flycatcher habitat Community, Buckeye Irrigation reasonable measures to assure that no would persist at Roosevelt Lake. Company, RWCD, and others in net habitat loss or permanent The HCP covers Roosevelt Dam satisfaction of their independent water modification of flycatcher habitat will operations for 50 years and involves the rights. Finally, exchange agreements result from recreational and road conservation of a minimum of 607 ha between a number of entities and SRP construction activities, or habitat (1,500 ac) of flycatcher habitat off-site, pursuant to State and Federal law are restoration activities, and will take all outside of the Roosevelt Management facilitated by stored water from reasonable steps to coordinate with the Unit, on the San Pedro, Verde, and Gila Horseshoe and Bartlett. Service so that flycatcher habitat is Rivers, and possibly other streams in The Verde Management Unit, and protected. Within funding limitations Arizona, and implementation of specifically the water storage space and under confidentiality guidelines conservation measures to protect up to within Horseshoe Reservoir, is the established by the Tribe, the Tribe will an additional 304 ha (750 ac) of primary area where impacts to the cooperate with the Service to monitor flycatcher habitat. Measures in the HCP flycatcher are anticipated to occur and survey habitat for breeding and to protect habitat at Roosevelt Lake through periodic inundation and drying migrating flycatchers, conduct research, include having the Forest Service hire a of flycatcher habitat. Water storage and and perform habitat restoration, cowbird Forest Service employee to patrol and periodic inundation of an annual trapping, or other beneficial flycatcher improve protection of flycatcher habitat average of up to 200 acres of flycatcher management activities. in the Roosevelt lakebed from adverse We will consider excluding the Verde habitat would likely result in delayed or activities such as fire ignition from River segments within Yavapai Apache lost breeding attempts, decreased human neglect, improper vehicle use, Nation from the final designation of productivity and survivorship of etc., and to develop habitat at the off- flycatcher critical habitat under section dispersing adults in search of suitable site Rock House Farm Site. 4(b)(2) of the Act. We will consider excluding the water breeding habitat, and decreased storage area of Roosevelt Lake from the productivity of adults that attempt to Roosevelt Management Unit final designation of flycatcher critical breed at Horseshoe Lake. Habitat Conservation Plans habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The conservation goals of the HCP for the flycatcher would be accomplished Roosevelt Lake HCP Upper Gila Management Unit by a number of minimization and An HCP for Salt River Project (SRP) Partnerships, Conservation Plans, or mitigation measures, including was completed for the operation of Conservation Easements on Private maintaining and managing riparian Roosevelt Dam in Gila and Maricopa Lands habitat within Horseshoe Lake, Counties, Arizona, which included as minimizing water storage impacts, and the action area the perimeter of U-Bar Ranch mitigating water storage impacts by Roosevelt Lake’s high water mark (ERO Pacific Western Land Company acquiring and managing flycatcher 2002). The Record of Decision for the (PWLC), a Freeport McMorran (formerly habitat along the Verde River, Gila HCP was dated February 27, 2003. The Phelps Dodge) subsidiary, owns and River, or elsewhere in central Arizona to land within the Roosevelt Lake manages the U-Bar Ranch (Ranch) near provide a diversity of geographic perimeter is Federal land withdrawn by Cliff, in Grant County, New Mexico, locations. Impacts within the lake’s the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation and where a proposed segment of flycatcher water storage space will be minimized managed by the Forest Service. critical habitat occurs along the Gila by modifying reservoir operations to The flycatcher population at River within the Upper Gila make riparian habitat available earlier in Roosevelt Lake, depending on the year, Management Area. the nesting season and also to maintain can be the largest population of nesting The U-Bar Ranch has developed a riparian vegetation at higher elevations flycatchers across the subspecies’ range plan that provides measures to in the reservoir, which are farther away (approximately 150 territories, plus an conserve, protect, and manage one of from inundation impacts. unknown number of unmated, the largest known nesting flycatcher We will consider excluding the water nonbreeding flycatchers and fledglings). populations. Many of the flycatcher storage area of Horseshoe Lake from the The confluence of Tonto Creek and the territories on the Ranch are found final designation of flycatcher critical Salt River, which comprise the outside of the flood-prone area, off- habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Roosevelt Lake water storage area, is channel in a unique situation, where

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50593

flycatchers nest in the canopy of mature guidelines established by the Tribe, the designation of flycatcher critical habitat box elder trees along irrigation ditches. Tribe will cooperate with the Service to under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Through the efforts of PWLC and its monitor and survey habitat for breeding Rio Grande Recovery Unit, CO and NM long-time lessee, Mr. David Ogilvie, and migrating flycatchers, conduct Freeport McMorran has demonstrated a research, and perform habitat San Luis Valley Management Unit commitment to management practices restoration, cowbird trapping, or other Partnerships, Conservation Plans, and on the Ranch that have conserved and beneficial flycatcher management Conservation Easements on Private benefited flycatcher populations in that activities. Lands area for over a decade. In addition, We will consider excluding San privately funded scientific research at Carlos Apache Tribal land from the final San Luis Valley Partnership and in the vicinity of the Ranch has designation of flycatcher critical habitat The San Luis Valley in south-central developed data that have contributed to under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Colorado surrounds all proposed the understanding of flycatcher habitat flycatcher critical habitat along the Rio Hassayampa and Agua Fria selection, distribution, prey base, and Grande and Conejos Rivers within the Management Unit threats. Some specific management San Luis Valley Management Unit. practices, varying in different grazing Partnerships, Conservation Plans, or A partnership within the San Luis pastures, which relate to the flycatcher Conservation Easements on Private Valley has been formed between a and its habitat are: (1) Grazing is limited Lands collection of south-central Colorado to November through April to avoid cities, counties, communities, and the Tres Rios Safe Harbor Agreement negative impacts during migration and State of Colorado toward conservation. nesting season; (2) animal units are The City of Phoenix is in the process This partnership is developing an HCP adjusted to protect and maintain the of developing a programmatic Safe in the San Luis Valley. The State of riparian vegetation needed by the Harbor Agreement with the Service for Colorado received a $384,000 HCP flycatcher; (3) the irrigation ditches are a continuous section (about 11 km, 7 Section 6 Planning Grant on behalf of maintained, along with the vegetation, mi) of the Gila River immediately the Rio Grande Water Conservation to benefit flycatcher habitat; (4) downstream from its confluence with District in 2004 to develop the HCP for restoration efforts follow flood events the Salt River (Tres Rios). This area five counties, two cities, the State of that destroy habitat; and (5) herbicide would encompass a segment of Colorado, and 14 other smaller and pesticides are only used in rare proposed flycatcher critical habitat communities. In September 2005 and circumstances and are not used near along the Gila River in the Hassayampa April 2009, the State received Section 6 occupied territories during breeding and Agua Fria Management Unit in grants of $120,000 each to draft NEPA season. Maricopa County, Arizona. documents and finalize the HCP. We will consider excluding U-Bar The draft Tres Rios Safe Harbor Preliminary drafts of the San Luis Ranch lands from the final designation Agreement currently describes that the Valley Regional HCP have been of flycatcher critical habitat under City of Phoenix will enhance or developed and submitted to the Service section 4(b)(2) of the Act. maintain (or both) approximately 927 for review. The HCP as proposed would acres of City of Phoenix-owned land, cover nearly 809,000 ha (2 million ac) Tribal Management Plans and and 241 km (150 mi) of habitat for the Partnerships and seek to enroll another 150 acres owned by the State of Arizona through flycatcher and yellow-billed cuckoo. San Carlos Apache Tribe a certificate of inclusion for a period of The acreage covered by the HCP encompasses the entire Colorado San Carlos Apache Tribe land contain 50 years. The Permittee would agree to portion of the San Luis Valley proposed flycatcher critical habitat enhance and maintain Sonoran Desert Management Unit, as described in the within the conservation space of San and riparian biotic communities, which Recovery Plan, and extends well beyond Carlos Lake and the Gila River upstream would include, but are not necessarily the two stream segments along the Rio from San Carlos Lake, all within the limited to, planting and maintaining Grande and Conejos Rivers that we have Upper Gila Management Unit in Gila native riparian vegetation. The proposed as flycatcher critical habitat. County, Arizona. The San Carlos flycatcher would be one of the primary targets of this agreement. We will consider excluding San Luis Apache Tribe has finalized a Valley lands from the final designation The enrolled lands are owned by the Southwestern Willow Flycatcher of flycatcher critical habitat under Permittee and are being managed for the Management Plan (SWFMP). section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Implementation of the San Carlos purposes of riparian habitat recovery, Apache Tribe’s SWFMP will protect all flood protection, and passive recreation. Upper Rio Grande Management Unit Improvements include installing several known flycatcher habitat on San Carlos Tribal Management Plans and types of wetland and riparian biotic Tribal Land and assure no net habitat Partnerships loss or permanent modification will communities, including mesquite result. All habitat restoration activities bosque, cottonwood and willow forest, San Ildefonso Pueblo (whether to rehabilitate or restore native freshwater marsh, floodplain terrace, The San Ildefonso Pueblo contains plants) will be conducted under open water, and aquatic strand. Prior to proposed flycatcher habitat along the reasonable coordination with the the Permittee’s conservation efforts, Rio Grande within the Upper Rio Service. All reasonable measures will be most areas of the enrolled lands were Grande Management Unit in Santa Fe taken to ensure that recreational agricultural or contained mostly County, New Mexico. activities do not result in a net habitat nonnative species with minimal wildlife The San Ildefonso Pueblo has loss or permanent modification. All habitat value. After the conservation conducted a variety of voluntary reasonable measures will be taken to measures are implemented, the lands measures, restoration projects, and conduct livestock grazing activities will be managed with the primary goal management actions to conserve the under the guidelines established in the of habitat conservation. flycatcher and its habitat on their lands. Recovery Plan. Within funding We will consider excluding Tres Rios Multiple-use practices of the river and limitations and under confidentiality lands along the Gila River from the final riparian habitat resources are an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50594 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

important component of Tribal activities increase habitat for breeding flycatchers, critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of and culture, and as a result, the Pueblo as well as implement innovative the Act. has taken steps to manage all the restoration techniques, decrease fire Peer Review components of the riparian habitat. The hazards by restoring native vegetation, Pueblo has implemented vegetation share information with other restoration In accordance with our joint policy on management actions to reduce practitioners, utilize restoration projects peer review published in the Federal flammable exotic vegetation within the in the education of the Tribal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), floodplain and replace it with native community and surrounding we will seek the expert opinions of at riparian trees and shrubs. The Pueblo’s community, and provide a working and least three appropriate and independent long-term management objectives training environment for the people of specialists regarding this proposed rule. include efforts to reestablish and the Pueblo. The purpose of peer review is to ensure maintain sustainable native plant We will consider excluding San Juan that our critical habitat designation is communities in the Rio Grande Pueblo (Ohkay Owingue) lands from the based on scientifically sound data, floodplain and improve habitat, final designation of flycatcher critical assumptions, and analyses. We will including wetland restoration, for habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. invite these peer reviewers to comment culturally important plant and wildlife Middle Rio Grande Management Unit during this public comment period on species, including the flycatcher. our specific assumptions and We will consider excluding San Federal Land Management conclusions in this proposed Ildefonso Pueblo land from the final Elephant Butte Reservoir designation of critical habitat. designation of flycatcher critical habitat We will consider all comments and The Middle Rio Grande Management under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. information we receive during this Unit includes Elephant Butte Reservoir, comment period on this proposed rule Santa Clara Pueblo a reservoir on the Rio Grande in New during our preparation of a final Mexico, 5 miles (8.0 km) north of Truth The Santa Clara Pueblo contains determination. Accordingly, the final or Consequences. It is impounded by proposed flycatcher critical habitat decision may differ from this proposal. along the Rio Grande within the Upper Elephant Butte Dam, owned and Rio Grande Management Unit in Rio operated by the U.S. Bureau of Required Determinations Reclamation, and is the largest reservoir Arriba County, New Mexico. Regulatory Planning and Review— in New Mexico. The reservoir is part of The Santa Clara Pueblo has conducted Executive Order 12866 a variety of voluntary measures, the Rio Grande Project, a project to restoration projects, and management provide power and water for irrigation The Office of Management and Budget actions to conserve the flycatcher and to south-central New Mexico and west (OMB) has determined that this rule is its habitat on their lands. Santa Clara Texas. It can hold 2,065,010 acre-feet not significant and has not reviewed Pueblo made a commitment to develop (2,547,152,330 m3) of water from a this proposed rule under Executive an integrated resources management drainage of 28,900 square miles (74,850 Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and plan to address multi-use, enhancement, km2), and provides irrigation to 178,000 Review). OMB bases its determination and management of their natural acres (720 km2) of land. upon the following four criteria: resources. The Pueblo has implemented The gradual recession of Elephant (1) Whether the rule will have an fuel reduction of flammable exotic Butte Reservoir during the late 1990s annual effect of $100 million or more on riparian vegetation and native tree exposed an additional 32 km of lake the economy or adversely affect an restoration projects in the riparian area bottom in this unit. Riparian habitat economic sector, productivity, jobs, the since 2001, carefully progressing in developed alongside the Rio Grande environment, or other units of the incremental stages to reduce the overall within the exposed conservation space. government. effects to wildlife. Since 1999, this riparian vegetation has (2) Whether the rule will create We will consider excluding Santa developed into flycatcher nesting inconsistencies with other Federal Clara Pueblo lands from the final habitat and the number of flycatcher agencies’ actions. designation of flycatcher critical habitat territories dramatically increased. The (3) Whether the rule will materially under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. area within the conservation space of affect entitlements, grants, user fees, Elephant Butte Reservoir is currently loan programs, or the rights and San Juan Pueblo (Ohkay Owingue) the largest known flycatcher population obligations of their recipients. The San Juan Pueblo contains in their range; in 2009, a total of 221 Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 proposed flycatcher critical habitat pairs and 291 nests were documented et seq.) along the Rio Grande within the Upper (Moore and Ahlers 2010, p. 43). The Rio Grande Management Unit in Rio Bureau of Reclamation develops plans Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act Arriba County, New Mexico. for the operation of the reservoir, the (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the The San Juan Pueblo has conducted a most recent being Elephant Butte Small Business Regulatory Enforcement variety of voluntary measures, Reservoir Five-Year Operational Plan: Fairness Act (SBREFA), whenever an restoration projects, and management Biological Assessment (Reclamation agency is required to publish a notice of actions to conserve the flycatcher and 2009), which includes an assessment of rulemaking for any proposed or final its habitat on their lands. The Pueblo the recent flycatcher population rule, it must prepare and make available has engaged in riparian vegetation and numbers within Elephant Butte for public comment a regulatory wetland improvement projects, while Reservoir and the near reach of the Rio flexibility analysis that describes the managing to reduce the occurrence of Grande. effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., wildfire due to the abundance of exotic Based on an initial evaluation of small businesses, small organizations, flammable riparian vegetation. Project potential impacts on water operations of and small government jurisdictions). implementation included conservation, the Elephant Butte Dam and Reservoir, However, no regulatory flexibility monitoring, and management for the we will consider excluding the water analysis is required if the head of an flycatcher. The long-term goal of the storage area of Elephant Butte Reservoir agency certifies the rule will not have a Pueblo’s riparian management is to from the final designation of flycatcher significant economic impact on a

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50595

substantial number of small entities. (1) This rule would not produce a in a voluntary Federal aid program, the SBREFA amended RFA to require Federal mandate. In general, a Federal Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would Federal agencies to provide a statement mandate is a provision in legislation, not apply, nor would critical habitat of the factual basis for certifying that the statute, or regulation that would impose shift the costs of the large entitlement rule will not have a significant an enforceable duty upon State, local, or programs listed above onto State economic impact on a substantial Tribal governments, or the private governments. number of small entities. sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal (2) Based in part on an analysis At this time, we lack the available intergovernmental mandates’’ and conducted for the previous designation economic information necessary to ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ of flycatcher critical habitat (70 FR provide an adequate factual basis for the These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 60886, October 19, 2005) and required RFA finding. Therefore, we 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental extrapolated to this designation, we do defer the RFA finding until completion mandate’’ includes a regulation that not expect this rule to significantly or of the revised draft economic analysis ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty uniquely affect small governments. prepared under section 4(b)(2) of the upon State, local, or Tribal Small governments will be affected only Act and Executive Order 12866. We governments’’ with two exceptions. It to the extent that any programs having previously conducted an economic excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal Federal funds, permits, or other analysis in 2005 for the 2004 proposed assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty authorized activities must ensure that critical habitat for flycatchers, which arising from participation in a voluntary their actions will not adversely affect included an analysis of the effects on Federal program,’’ unless the regulation the critical habitat. Therefore, a Small small entities. We will revise the draft ‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal Government Agency Plan is not economic analysis for this proposed rule program under which $500,000,000 or required. However, we will further to provide the required factual basis for more is provided annually to State, evaluate these issues as we conduct our the RFA finding for this revised critical local, and Tribal governments under economic analysis, and review and habitat proposal. Upon completion of entitlement authority,’’ if the provision revise this assessment as warranted. the revised draft economic analysis, we would ‘‘increase the stringency of Takings—Executive Order 12630 will announce availability of the draft conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps In accordance with Executive Order economic analysis of the proposed upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal 12630 (‘‘Government Actions and designation in the Federal Register and Government’s responsibility to provide Interference with Constitutionally reopen the public comment period for funding,’’ and the State, local, or Tribal Protected Private Property Rights’’), this the proposed designation. We will governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust rule is not anticipated to have include with this announcement, as accordingly. At the time of enactment, appropriate, an initial regulatory significant takings implications. As these entitlement programs were: discussed above, the designation of flexibility analysis or a certification that Medicaid; Aid to Families with the rule will not have a significant critical habitat affects only Federal Dependent Children work programs; actions. Although private parties that economic impact on a substantial Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social number of small entities accompanied receive Federal funding, assistance, or Services Block Grants; Vocational require approval or authorization from a by the factual basis for that Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, determination. Federal agency for an action may be Adoption Assistance, and Independent indirectly impacted by the designation Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— Living; Family Support Welfare of critical habitat, the legally binding Executive Order 13211 Services; and Child Support duty to avoid destruction or adverse On May 18, 2001, the President issued Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector modification of critical habitat rests an Executive Order (E.O. 13211) on mandate’’ includes a regulation that squarely on the Federal agency. Due to regulations that significantly affect ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty current public knowledge of the species energy supply, distribution, and use. upon the private sector, except (i) a protections and the prohibition against Executive Order 13211 requires agencies condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a take of the species both within and to prepare Statements of Energy Effects duty arising from participation in a outside of the proposed areas, we do not when undertaking certain actions. This voluntary Federal program.’’ anticipate that property values would be proposed rule to designate revised The designation of critical habitat affected by this revised critical habitat critical habitat for the flycatcher is not does not impose a legally binding duty designation. However, we have not yet expected to significantly affect energy on non-Federal Government entities or completed the economic analysis for supplies, distribution, or use because private parties. Under the Act, the only this proposed rule. Once the revised there are no pipelines, distribution regulatory effect is that Federal agencies economic analysis is available, we will facilities, power grid stations, etc., must ensure that their actions do not review and revise this preliminary within the boundaries of proposed destroy or adversely modify critical assessment as warranted, and prepare a revised critical habitat. Therefore, this habitat under section 7. While non- Takings Implication Assessment. action is not a significant energy action Federal entities that receive Federal Federalism—Executive Order 13132 and no Statement of Energy Effects is funding, assistance, or permits, or that required. We will, however, further otherwise require approval or In accordance with Executive Order evaluate this issue as we conduct our authorization from a Federal agency for 13132 (Federalism), this proposed rule economic analysis and, as appropriate, an action, may be indirectly impacted does not have significant Federalism review and revise this assessment as by the designation of critical habitat, the effects. A Federalism assessment is not warranted. legally binding duty to avoid required. In keeping with Department of destruction or adverse modification of the Interior and Department of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 critical habitat rests squarely on the Commerce policy, we requested U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) Federal agency. Furthermore, to the information from, and coordinated In accordance with the Unfunded extent that non-Federal entities are development of, this proposed critical Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et indirectly impacted because they habitat designation with appropriate seq.), we make the following findings: receive Federal assistance or participate State resource agencies in Arizona,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50596 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Utah, Nevada, California, New Mexico, individuals, businesses, or (Government-to-Government Relations and Colorado. The designation of organizations. An agency may not with Native American Tribal critical habitat in areas currently conduct or sponsor, and a person is not Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive occupied by the flycatcher may impose required to respond to, a collection of Order 13175 (Consultation and nominal additional regulatory information unless it displays a Coordination With Indian Tribal restrictions to those currently in place currently valid OMB control number. Governments), and the Department of and, therefore, may have little the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we incremental impact on State and local National Environmental Policy Act (42 readily acknowledge our responsibility governments and their activities. The U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to communicate meaningfully with designation may have some benefit to It is our position that, outside the recognized Federal Tribes on a these governments because the areas jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals government-to-government basis. In that contain the physical or biological for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 features essential to the conservation of prepare environmental analyses of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal the species are more clearly defined, pursuant to the National Environmental Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust and the elements of the features of the Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et Responsibilities, and the Endangered habitat necessary to the conservation of seq.) in connection with designating Species Act), we readily acknowledge the species are specifically identified. critical habitat under the Act. We our responsibilities to work directly This information does not alter where published a notice outlining our reasons with Tribes in developing programs for and what Federally sponsored activities for this determination in the Federal healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that may occur. However, it may assist local Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR Tribal lands are not subject to the same governments in long-range planning 49244). This position was upheld by the controls as Federal public lands, to (rather than having them wait for case- U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth remain sensitive to Indian culture, and by-case section 7 consultations to Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 to make information available to Tribes. occur). F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied There are Tribal lands in California, Where State and local governments 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). However, when Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New require approval or authorization from a the range of the species includes States Mexico included in this proposed Federal agency for actions that may within the Tenth Circuit, such as that of designation of critical habitat. At the affect critical habitat, consultation flycatcher, under the Tenth Circuit end of the 2007 flycatcher breeding under section 7(a)(2) would be required. ruling in Catron County Board of season, 5 percent of all known breeding While non-Federal entities that receive Commissioners v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife sites were administered by Native Federal funding, assistance, or permits, Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), American Tribes (Durst et al. 2007, p. or that otherwise require approval or we will undertake a NEPA analysis for 17). Using the criteria found in the authorization from a Federal agency for critical habitat designation and notify Criteria Used To Identify Critical an action, may be indirectly impacted the public of the availability of the draft Habitat section, we have determined by the designation of critical habitat, the environmental assessment for this that all of the areas proposed for legally binding duty to avoid proposal when it is finished. designation on Tribal lands are essential destruction or adverse modification of to the conservation of the species. We Clarity of the Rule critical habitat rests squarely on the will seek government-to-government Federal agency. We are required by Executive Orders consultation with these Tribes Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 12866 and 12988 and by the throughout the proposal and 12988 Presidential Memorandum of June 1, development of the final designation of 1998, to write all rules in plain flycatcher critical habitat. We will In accordance with Executive Order language. This means that each rule we consider these areas for exclusion from 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office publish must: final critical habitat designation to the of the Solicitor has determined that the (1) Be logically organized; extent consistent with the requirements rule does not unduly burden the judicial (2) Use the active voice to address of 4(b)(2) of the Act. We recently system and that it meets the readers directly; informed Tribes of how we are requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) (3) Use clear language rather than evaluating section 4(b)(2) of the Act and of the Order. We have proposed jargon; of our interest in consulting with them designating critical habitat in (4) Be divided into short sections and on a government-to-government basis. accordance with the provisions of the sentences; and Act. This proposed rule uses standard (5) Use lists and tables wherever References Cited property descriptions and identifies the possible. A complete list of references cited in elements of physical or biological If you feel that we have not met these this rulemaking is available on the features essential to the conservation of requirements, send us comments by one Internet at http://www.regulations.gov the flycatcher within the designated of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES and upon request from the Arizona areas to assist the public in section. To better help us revise the Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR understanding the habitat needs of the rule, your comments should be as FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). species. specific as possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the Authors Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 sections or paragraphs that are unclearly The primary authors of this package U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) written, which sections or sentences are are the staff members of the Arizona This rule does not contain any new too long, the sections where you feel Ecological Services Field Office. collections of information that require lists or tables would be useful, etc. approval by OMB under the Paperwork List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 Government-to-Government Endangered and threatened species, et seq.). This rule will not impose Relationship With Tribes Exports, Imports, Reporting and recordkeeping or reporting requirements In accordance with the President’s recordkeeping requirements, on State or local governments, memorandum of April 29, 1994 Transportation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50597

Proposed Regulation Promulgation PART 17—ENDANGERED AND 2. In § 17.11(h), revise the entry for THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS ‘‘Flycatcher, southwestern willow’’ Accordingly, we propose to amend under ‘‘BIRDS’’ in the List of part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 1. The authority citation for part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, continues to read as follows: read as follows: as set forth below: Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. § 17.11 Endangered and threatened 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– wildlife. 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. * * * * * (h) * * *

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

******* BIRDS

******* Flycatcher, south- Empidonax traillii U.S.A. (AZ, CA, CO, Entire ...... E 577 17.95(b) NA western willow. extimus. NM, NV, TX, UT), Mexico.

*******

3. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (b) by manmade successional environment (for (0.25 ac) or as large as 70 ha (175 ac); revising the entry for ‘‘Southwestern nesting, foraging, migration, dispersal, and Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax traillii and shelter) that is comprised of trees (ii) Primary Constituent Element 2— extimus),’’ in the same alphabetical and shrubs (that can include Gooddings Insect prey populations. A variety of order that the species appears in the willow, coyote willow, Geyers willow, insect prey populations found within or table at § 17.11(h), to read as follows: arroyo willow, red willow, yewleaf adjacent to riparian floodplains or moist willow, pacific willow, boxelder, § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. environments, which can include: flying tamarisk, Russian olive, buttonbush, ants, wasps, and bees (Hymenoptera); * * * * * cottonwood, stinging nettle, alder, dragonflies (Odonata); flies (Diptera); (b) Birds. velvet ash, poison hemlock, blackberry, true bugs (Hemiptera); beetles * * * * * seep willow, oak, rose, sycamore, false (Coleoptera); butterflies, moths, and indigo, Pacific poison ivy, grape, Southwestern Willow Flycatcher caterpillars (Lepidoptera); and Virginia creeper, Siberian elm, and (Empidonax traillii extimus) spittlebugs (Homoptera). walnut) and some combination of: (3) Critical habitat does not include (1) Critical habitat units are depicted (A) Dense riparian vegetation with manmade structures (such as buildings, for Imperial, Inyo, Kern, Los Angeles, thickets of trees and shrubs that can aqueducts, runways, roads, and other Mono, Orange, Riverside, Santa Barbara, range in height from about 2 m to 30 m paved areas) and the land on which they San Bernardino, San Diego, and Ventura (about 6 to 98 ft). Lower-stature thickets are located existing within the legal Counties in California; Clark, Lincoln, (2 to 4 m or 6 to 13 ft tall) are found boundaries on the effective date of this and Nye Counties in Nevada; Kane, San at higher elevation riparian forests and rule. Juan, and Washington Counties in Utah; tall-stature thickets are found at middle- Alamosa, Conejos, Costilla, La Plata, and lower-elevation riparian forests; (4) Critical habitat map units. Data and Rio Grande Counties in Colorado; and/or layers defining map units were created Apache, Cochise, Gila, Graham, (B) Areas of dense riparian foliage at in two steps. First, the linear segments Greenlee, La Paz, Maricopa, Mohave, least from the ground level up to were mapped from the National Pima, Pinal, Santa Cruz, Yavapai, and approximately 4 m (13 ft) above ground Hydrologic Dataset using USA Yuma Counties in Arizona; and Catron, or dense foliage only at the shrub or tree Contiguous Equidistant Conic (North Cibola, Dona Ana, Grant, Hidalgo, level as a low, dense canopy; and/or American Datum 1983) coordinates. McKinley, Mora, Rio Arriba, Santa Fe, (C) Sites for nesting that contain a Next, the lateral extents were digitized San Juan, Sierra, Soccoro, Taos, and dense (about 50 percent to 100 percent) over the most recent available aerial Valencia Counties in New Mexico on tree or shrub (or both) canopy (the photography using Albers Equal Area the maps and as described below. amount of cover provided by tree and Conic (North American Datum 1983) (2) Within these areas, the primary shrub branches measured from the coordinates. The textual description for constituent elements of the physical and ground); and/or each critical habitat unit below includes biological features essential to the (D) Dense patches of riparian forests the Universal Transverse Mercator conservation of the southwestern that are interspersed with small (UTM) zone and UTM easting (E) and willow flycatcher consist of two openings of open water or marsh or northing (N) coordinate pairs for the components: areas with shorter and sparser starting and ending points. (i) Primary Constituent Element 1— vegetation that creates a variety of Note: (5) Index map of southwestern Riparian vegetation. Riparian habitat in habitat that is not uniformly dense. willow flycatcher critical habitat units a dynamic river or lakeside, natural or Patch size may be as small as 0.1 ha follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 50598 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(6) Santa Ynez Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Santa Ynez River (upper) ...... 11, 259890, 3821926 11, 255550, 3823716 Santa Ynez River (middle) ...... 11, 253343, 3823606 11, 249967, 3824847 Santa Ynez River (lower) ...... 10, 759116, 3832075 10, 732972, 3839168

VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:06 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.000 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50599

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Mono Creek ...... 11, 258529, 3824766 11, 258310, 3822974 (ii) Note: Map of Santa Ynez Management Unit follows:

(7) Santa Clara Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Ventura River ...... 11, 287996, 3818329 11, 287559, 3794961 Santa Clara River ...... 11, 358481, 3810219 11, 291354, 3790556

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.001 50600 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Piru Creek ...... 11, 339998, 3831805 11, 335776, 3807951 Castaic Creek ...... 11, 351629, 3813373 11, 350055, 3809756 Big Tujunga Canyon Creek ...... 11, 376326, 3792941 11, 372432, 3792049 Little Tujunga Canyon Creek ...... 11, 375223, 3795681 11, 373846, 3794336 San Gabriel River ...... 11, 418737, 3781999 11, 410558, 3775011 (ii) Note: Map of Santa Clara Management Unit follows:

(8) Santa Ana Management Unit. (i)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.002 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50601

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Santa Ana River (upper) ...... 11, 524293, 3778965 11, 491603, 3775416 Santa Ana River (lower) ...... 11, 476054, 3771257 11, 440482, 3750310 Waterman Creek ...... 11, 474905, 3782822 11, 473755, 3785448 Waterman Creek (left fork) ...... 11, 473453, 3785826 11, 473755, 3785448 Waterman Creek (right fork) ...... 11, 474240, 3786803 11, 473755, 3785448 Bear Creek ...... 11, 502121, 3788996 11, 498606, 3779948 Mill Creek ...... 11, 514496, 3770619 11, 496356, 3772092 Oak Glen Creek ...... 11, 505534, 3767595 11, 501351, 3768018 San Timoteo Creek ...... 11, 501075, 3753255 11, 481625, 3764986 Bautista Creek ...... 11, 528791, 3720143 11, 514049, 3727872 (ii) Note: Map of Santa Ana Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.003 50602 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(9) San Diego Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Canada Gobernadora Creek ...... 11, 443758, 3709886 11, 445478, 3713561 DeLuz Creek ...... 11, 469888, 3700258 11, 470085, 3697512 Santa Margarita River ...... 11, 481662, 3699235 11, 476206, 3695949 Temecula Creek ...... 11, 517749, 3695379 11, 502050, 3704986 Pilgrim Creek ...... 11, 471495, 3681452 11, 468703, 3677979 San Luis Rey (upper) ...... 11, 522199, 3678133 11, 502102, 3684334 San Luis Rey (lower) ...... 11, 500948, 3684975 11, 464169, 3674286 Agua Hedionda Creek (upper) ...... 11, 473644, 3667656 11, 478368, 3668540 Agua Hedionda Creek (lower) ...... 11, 470613, 3666848 11, 472211, 3667859 Agua Hedionda Creek (right fork) ...... 11, 478544, 3668255 11, 478368, 3668540 Agua Hedionda Creek (left fork) ...... 11, 479102, 3668675 11, 478368, 3668540 Temescal Creek ...... 11, 514095, 3671020 11, 513763, 3664632 Santa Ysabel River (upper) ...... 11, 508395, 3661105 11, 513763, 3664632 San Dieguito River/Santa Ysabel River (lower) ...... 11, 500998, 3660643 11, 493522, 3657877 San Diego River (upper) ...... 11, 524742, 3650609 11, 521804, 3645772 San Diego River (lower) ...... 11, 495073, 3632262 11, 502847, 3634390 Sweetwater River ...... 11, 506745, 3622685 11, 502808, 3618825 (ii) Note: Map of San Diego Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50603

(10) Owens Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Owens River ...... 11, 350379, 4161519 11, 765571, 4009492 (ii) Note: Map of Owens Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.004 50604 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(11) Kern Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

South Fork Kern River ...... 11, 393579, 3955510 11, 375779, 3947268 Canebrake Creek ...... 11, 395263, 3954472 11, 393671, 3954409 (ii) Note: Map of Kern Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.005 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50605

(12) Mojave Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Mojave River ...... 11, 469646, 3844680 11, 476583, 3814381 West Fork Mojave River ...... 11, 469339, 3796375 11, 478190, 3800025 Deep Creek ...... 11, 478190, 3800025 11, 488326, 3794046 Holcomb Creek ...... 11, 503127, 3796007 11, 488326, 3794046 (ii) Note: Map of Mojave Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.006 50606 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(13) Salton Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

San Felipe Creek ...... 11, 535067, 3671838 11, 549258, 3662280 Mill Creek ...... 11, 514496, 3770619 11, 496356, 3772092 (ii) Note: Map of Salton Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.007 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50607

(14) Amargosa Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Amargosa River ...... 11, 569473, 3967513 11, 570730, 3958035 Willow Creek ...... 11, 574000, 3962736 11, 572077, 3960419

(ii) Ash Meadows Riparian Areas and 559058.51, 4038462.72; 559169.18, 559388.34, 4037661.69; 559778.65, Carson Slough (UTM zone 11, E, N): 4038088.61; 559257.50, 4037821.45; 4037503.73; 560038.12, 4037505.53;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.008 50608 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

559928.15, 4037772.53; 560533.55, 4029411.15; 562704.34, 4030642.95; 557767.10, 4031117.32; 556641.56, 4037776.76; 560493.50, 4037321.28; 564305.88, 4030627.93; 564333.69, 4031163.43; 556566.66, 4032689.17; 560571.70, 4035420.70; 560182.40, 4029798.07; 564658.52, 4029773.72; 555701.11, 4032710.32; 555755.65, 4035417.98; 559813.81, 4035549.30; 564738.26, 4027792.87; 561469.58, 4034317.23; 556166.45, 4034346.67; 559773.33, 4035147.38; 558519.07, 4027769.05; 561442.43, 4028545.36; 556120.93, 4034694.46; 556964.48, 4035112.01; 558573.22, 4033505.81; 561052.25, 4028622.93; 560229.19, 4034699.98; 556891.48, 4035931.20; 559395.43, 4033484.65; 559465.49, 4028697.49; 560263.14, 4026930.51; 557323.83, 4035960.84; 557319.38, 4032735.40; 560244.32, 032740.79; 559895.10, 4026927.96; 559857.36, 4036630.21; 557687.18, 4036605.88; 560271.74, 4031910.92; 560986.12, 4026124.42; 559055.73, 4026199.25; 557638.92, 4037355.30; 558417.16, 4031862.37; 561078.15, 4031086.51; 558941.05, 4030321.96; 558616.44, 4037387.30; 558393.18, 4037735.23; 561424.94, 4031008.64; 561397.41, 4030319.75; 558621.57, 4032756.41; 558760.75, 4037737.73; 558755.83, 4031838.51; 561873.41, 4031841.90; 558232.15, 4032753.78; 558180.93, 4038460.66; 559058.51, 4038462.72. (iii) Note: Map of Amargosa Management 561890.65, 4029432.17; 562691.62, 4030718.45; 557791.43, 4030715.84; Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50609

(15) Little Colorado Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Little Colorado River ...... 12, 647842, 3773009 12, 642537, 3763668 West Fork Little Colorado River ...... 12, 636971, 3758442 12, 642537, 3763668 Zuni River ...... 12, 678602, 3860436 12, 708162, 3887682 Rio Nutria ...... 12, 721505, 3906369 12, 708162, 3887682 (ii) Note: Map of Little Colorado Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:34 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.009 50610 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(16) Virgin Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Virgin River ...... 12, 288341, 4116050 11, 738928, 4046898 (ii) Note: Map of Virgin Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.010 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50611

(17) Middle Colorado Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Colorado River ...... 12, 263719, 3969968 11, 765571, 4009492 (ii) Note: Map of Middle Colorado Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.011 50612 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(18) Pahranagat Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Pahranagat River (upper) ...... 11, 657017, 4161188 11, 656269, 4155884 Pahranagat River (lower) ...... 11, 673597, 4118506 11, 665370, 4131144 Muddy River ...... 11, 730143, 4046415 11, 731860, 4044267 (ii) Note: Map of Pahranagat Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.012 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50613

(19) Bill Williams Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Big Sandy River ...... 12, 261621, 3843406 12, 259631, 3818574 Big Sandy River (Alamo Lake) ...... 12, 266124, 3806764 12, 267166, 3799203 Santa Maria River (Alamo Lake) ...... 12, 274410, 3798130 12, 267166, 3799203 Bill Williams River (Alamo Lake) ...... 12, 263610, 3795533 12, 267166, 3799203 Bill Williams River (middle) ...... 12, 254565, 3788878 12, 240599, 3791815 Bill Williams River (lower) ...... 12, 229050, 3794316 11, 769317, 3798440 (ii) Note: Map of Bill Williams Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.013 50614 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(20) Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Colorado River ...... 11, 715649, 3876762 11, 727771, 3757030 Bill Williams River ...... 11, 769317, 3798440 11, 769317, 3798440 (ii) Note: Map of Hoover to Parker Dam Management Unit, follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.014 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50615

(21) Parker Dam to Southerly International Border Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Colorado River (upper) ...... 11, 727771, 3757030 11, 724019, 3709582 Colorado River (lower) ...... 11, 724019, 3709582 11, 713921, 3622846 (ii) Note: Map of Parker Dam to Southerly International Border Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.015 50616 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(22) San Juan Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Los Pinos River ...... 13, 267242, 4134582 13, 268541, 4098153 San Juan River (New Mexico) ...... 12, 699204, 4081392 12, 696480, 4082859 San Juan River (Utah) ...... 12, 654810, 4123395 12, 613885, 4117721 (ii) Note: Map of San Juan Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.016 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50617

(23) Powell Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Paria River ...... 12, 417429, 4120619 12, 419459, 4107235 (ii) Note: Map of Powell Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.017 50618 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(24) Verde Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Verde River (upper) ...... 12, 402583, 3854022 12, 428120, 3814335 Verde River (lower) ...... 12, 438102, 3793821 12, 436961, 3756352 (ii) Note: Map of Verde Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.018 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50619

(25) Roosevelt Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Tonto Creek ...... 12, 474349, 3773074 12, 477856, 3734906 Roosevelt Lake ...... 12, 477856, 3734906 12, 500594, 3724174 Salt River ...... 12, 518565, 3725825 12, 500594, 3724174 Pinal Creek ...... 12, 511992, 3710574 12, 509313, 3714692 (ii) Note: Map of Roosevelt Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.019 50620 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(26) Middle Gila and San Pedro Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Gila River ...... 12, 527193, 3660545 12, 476979, 3662407 San Pedro River ...... 12, 566945, 3554766 12, 520287, 3649594 (ii) Note: Map of Middle Gila San Pedro Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.020 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50621

(27) Upper Gila Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Gila River (upper) ...... 12, 734274, 3662473 12, 724979, 3631107 Gila River (middle) ...... 12, 639563, 3639230 12, 544025, 3670779 Gila River (lower) ...... 12, 717951, 3623479 12, 677635, 3622749 (ii) Note: Map of Upper Gila Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.021 50622 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(28) Santa Cruz Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Santa Cruz River ...... 12, 502742, 3480432 12, 502742, 3480432 Cienega Creek ...... 12, 538826, 3519337 12, 540238, 3524746 (ii) Note: Map of Santa Cruz Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.022 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50623

(29) San Francisco Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM Zone, E, N

San Francisco River (upper) ...... 12, 681827, 3679571 12, 661571, 3670502 San Francisco River (middle) ...... 12, 693857, 3703486 12, 697331, 3680357 San Francisco River (lower) ...... 12, 666982, 3748335 12, 699562, 3745269 (ii) Note: Map of San Francisco Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.023 50624 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(30) Hassayamapa and Agua Fria Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Hassayampa River ...... 12, 342308, 3757092 12, 345848, 3751261 Gila River ...... 12, 379985, 3694255 12, 372194, 3695509 (ii) Note: Map of Hassayamapa and Agua Fria Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.024 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50625

(31) San Luis Valley Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Conejos River ...... 13, 394419, 4101506 13, 434790, 4128834 Rio Grande ...... 13, 371291, 4172297 13, 432747, 4103848 (ii) Note: Map of San Luis Valley Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.025 50626 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(32) Upper Rio Grande Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Rio Grande ...... 13, 434154, 4021496 13, 396993, 3970707 Coyote Creek ...... 13, 479246, 4005468 13, 480419, 3997620 Rio Grande del Rancho ...... 13, 447971, 4012369 13, 446044, 4021640 Rio Fernando ...... 13, 447152, 4028423 13, 446856, 4028320 (ii) Note: Map of Upper Rio Grande Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.026 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50627

(33) Middle Rio Grande Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Rio Grande ...... 13, 343067, 3856213 13, 298922, 3683834 (ii) Note: Map of Middle Rio Grande Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.027 50628 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules

(34) Lower Rio Grande Management Unit. (i)

Stream segment Start: UTM zone, E, N End: UTM zone, E, N

Rio Grande ...... 13, 285590, 3642144 13, 319325, 3597154 (ii) Note: Map of Lower Rio Grande Management Unit follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.028 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 157 / Monday, August 15, 2011 / Proposed Rules 50629

* * * * * Dated: July 22, 2011. Rachel Jacobsen, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2011–19713 Filed 8–12–11; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 20:18 Aug 12, 2011 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\15AUP2.SGM 15AUP2 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS2 EP15AU11.029