Vol. 77 Tuesday, No. 118 June 19, 2012

Part III

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of Critical Habitat for the Pacific Coast Population of the Western Snowy ; Final Rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36728 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR approximately 12,377 ac (5,009 ha) from 822–7201; facsimile 707–822–8411. the 2005 designation of critical habitat Persons who use a telecommunications Fish and Wildlife Service for the Pacific Coast WSP. A taxonomic device for the deaf (TDD) may call the name change has occurred and been Federal Information Relay Service 50 CFR Part 17 accepted for the . (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. Throughout the remainder of this [Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070; SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 4500030114] document, we will use the currently recognized name for the subspecies, Executive Summary RIN 1018–AX10 Charadrius nivosus nivosus, to which Why we need to publish a rule. This the listed entity (Pacific Coast WSP) is a final rule to revise the designation Endangered and Threatened Wildlife belongs for references to the Pacific of critical habitat for the threatened and Plants; Revised Designation of Coast WSP. Pacific Coast population of the western Critical Habitat for the Pacific Coast DATES: This rule becomes effective on snowy plover under the Act. Under the Population of the Western Snowy July 19, 2012. Act, any species that is determined to be Plover ADDRESSES: This final rule, final endangered or threatened requires AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, economic analysis, and maps of critical designated critical habitat. We must Interior. habitat will be available on the Internet issue a rule to designate critical habitat. ACTION: Final rule. at http://www.regulations.gov at Docket In total, approximately 24,527 acres No. FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070, and at (9,926 hectares) of critical habitat for the SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and http://www.fws.gov/arcata/. Comments Pacific Coast WSP in Washington, Wildlife Service (Service), designate and materials received, as well as Oregon, and , fall within the revised critical habitat for the Pacific supporting documentation used in boundaries of the critical habitat Coast distinct population segment (DPS) preparing this final rule, are available designation. (Pacific Coast WSP) of the western for public inspection, by appointment, We designated critical habitat for this snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus during normal business hours, at the species in 1999 and again in 2005. As nivosus, formerly C. alexandrinus U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata part of a settlement agreement, we nivosus) under the Endangered Species Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon agreed to reconsider the designations. A Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone 707– proposed revised critical habitat was approximately 24,527 acres (9,926 822–7201; facsimile 707–822–8411. published in the Federal Register on hectares) of critical habitat for the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046). This Pacific Coast WSP in Washington, Nancy Finley, Field Supervisor, or Jim constitutes our final revised designation Oregon, and California, fall within the Watkins, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, for the Pacific Coast WSP. boundaries of the critical habitat U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Arcata We are making the following changes designation. This revised final Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon to the critical habitat designation. See designation constitutes an increase of Road, Arcata, CA 95521; telephone 707– Table 2 for details.

State Current critical habitat designation Revised designation Factors affecting revised designation

Washington .... 2,526 acres (1,023 hectares) of Federal, Four units in Washington, totaling 6,077 We are excluding 425 acres (172 hec- State, and Private lands. acres (2,460 hectares). tares) of Tribal lands from designation based on partnerships. Oregon ...... 2,147 acres (869 hectares) of Federal, 9 units in Oregon, totaling 2,112 acres We are excluding 3,106 acres (1,257 State, and Private lands. (856 hectares). hectares) of lands from designation based on partnerships with land- owners. California ...... 7,477 acres (3,030 hectares) of Federal, 47 units in California, totaling 16,337 We are excluding 266 acres (108 hec- State, and Private lands. acres (6,612 hectares). tares) of lands from designation based on partnerships with landowners.

The basis for our action. Under the draft economic analysis (77 FR 2243). Information we received from peer Endangered Species Act, any We received public comments on the review is incorporated in this final endangered or threatened species must draft economic analysis and revised it revised designation. have a designated critical habitat. We based on input from the public. The Background are required to base the designation on economic analysis did not identify any the best available scientific data after areas with disproportionate costs It is our intent to discuss in this final taking into consideration economic and associated with the designation, and no rule only those topics directly relevant other impacts. The Secretary can areas were excluded from the final to the development and designation of exclude an area from critical habitat if designation based on economic reasons. revised critical habitat for the Pacific the benefits of exclusion outweigh the We incorporated peer review. We Coast WSP under the Act (16 U.S.C. benefits of designation, unless the sought comments and information from 1531 et seq.). For more information on exclusion will result in the extinction of independent specialists to ensure that the taxonomy, biology, and ecology of the species. our critical habitat designation was the Pacific Coast WSP, refer to the final We prepared an economic analysis. based on scientifically sound data, listing rule published in the Federal To ensure that we consider the assumptions, and analyses. We had Register on March 5, 1993 (58 FR economic impacts, we prepared a new invited these peer reviewers to comment 12864); the 12-month finding on a economic analysis of the proposed on our specific assumptions and petition to delist the Pacific Coast WSP revised designation. On January 17, conclusions in the proposed revision of (71 FR 20607, April 21, 2006); and the 2012, we made available our revised the critical habitat designation. revised proposed critical habitat rule

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36729

published in the Federal Register on Climate Change more than twice earlier projections. March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046). Our analyses under the Act include Combined with California’s normal Additional information on this species consideration of ongoing and projected dramatic tidal fluctuations and can also be found in the Recovery Plan changes in climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ coincidental storms, the severity of the for the Pacific Coast Population of the and ‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the latter increasing with more frequent El Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Nin˜ o Southern Oscillations due to alexandrinus nivosus) finalized on Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the increasing surface water temperature August 13, 2007, which is available mean and variability of different types (Cayan et al. 2006, p. 17), the effects of from the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office of weather conditions over time, with 30 sea level rise are expected to reach (see ADDRESSES section) (Service 2007). years being a typical period for such farther inland than previously Information on the associated draft measurements, although shorter or anticipated (Cayan et al. 2006, pp. 48– 49; Cayan et al. 2009, p. 40). Similar economic analysis for the revised longer periods also may be used (IPCC effects are expected to occur along the proposed critical habitat was published 2007, p. 78). The term ‘‘climate change’’ Oregon and Washington coastlines in the Federal Register on January 17, thus refers to a change in the mean or variability of one or more measures of (Galbraith et al. 2002, pp. 173–183; 2012 (77 FR 2243). The nomenclature Huppert et al. 2009, pp. 285–309; for the listed entity has changed to the climate (e.g., temperature or precipitation) that persists for an Ruggiero et al. 2010, 211–262). ‘‘Pacific Coast population of the western For the Pacific Coast WSP and other extended period, typically decades or snowy plover (Charadrius nivosus shorebird habitat, Galbraith et al. (2002, longer, whether the change is due to nivosus),’’ but this change does not alter pp. 173–183) in a study of sites in the description or distribution of the natural variability, human activity, or Washington (Willapa Bay) and species. both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types California (Humboldt Bay and San of changes in climate can have direct or Francisco Bay) projected losses of Change in Taxonomic Nomenclature indirect effects on species. These effects intertidal habitat could range between may be positive, neutral, or negative, 20 and 70 percent of the existing In our January 17, 2012, Federal and they may change over time, Register publication (77 FR 2243), habitat. In addition, sea-level rise may depending on the species and other result in coastal areas to lose their which made available the draft relevant considerations, such as the economic analysis on the March 22, ability to continue to support the effects of interactions of climate with current number of shorebirds. Areas 2011, revised proposed critical habitat other variables (e.g., habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP, we proposed with steep topography (Northern fragmentation) (IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, California to Washington State) or a taxonomic and nomenclatural change 18–19). In our analyses, we use our seawalls (Southern California) with for the Pacific Coast WSP from expert judgment to weigh relevant limited beach habitat are expected to Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus to C. information, including uncertainty, in have the most severe losses (Galbraith et nivosus nivosus and for that change to our consideration of various aspects of al. 2002, pp. 173–183). Additionally be published in the Code of Federal climate change. sea-level rise would cause: (1) Regulations (CFR). Based on Sea level rise and hydrological Inundation of low-lying areas by high information presented in that notice (see changes associated with climate change tides; (2) flooding of coastal areas during the notice’s section entitled Taxonomic are having and will continue to have major storm events, especially near river and Nomenclatural Changes Affecting significant effects on Pacific Coast WSP mouths; (3) acceleration of erosion of Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) and and its habitat over the next several coastal bluffs; and (4) a shift in beach acceptance of the change by the decades. Sea level rise is a result of two profiles, move the position of the mean scientific community, we are amending phenomena: Thermal expansion high water line landward (Huppert et al. the List of Endangered and Threatened (increased sea water temperatures) and 2009, p. 285). Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11(h) to identify global ice melt (Cayan et al. 2006, p. 5). In our development of this critical the listed entity as the western snowy Between 1897 and 2006, the observed habitat designation, we evaluated plover (Pacific Coast population DPS) sea level rise has been approximately numerous climate change models of (Charadrius nivosus nivosus), to update 0.08 inches (in) (2 millimeters (mm)) per varying scope and scale. Due to the the ‘‘Historic Range’’ column to clarify year, or a total of 8 in (20 centimeters wide range of the Pacific Coast WSP that the historical range of the Pacific (cm)) over that period (Heberger et al. (Washington to Mexico) we selected Coast population DPS is California, 2009, p. 6). Older estimates projected models which reflected conditions Oregon, Washington, and Mexico, and that sea level rise along the California across the range for the Pacific Coast coast would follow a similar rate and to update the ‘‘Vertebrate population WSP and those developed or accepted reach 0.7–2 feet (ft) (0.2–0.6 meters (m)) where endangered or threatened’’ by the Department of the Interior as a by 2100 (IPCC 2007). Recent column to indicate that the DPS is basis for determining the extent of the observations and models (including the threatened in California, Oregon, effects of climate change on coastal models we used to evaluate Pacific Washington, and Mexico (within 50 habitat used by the Pacific Coast WSP. Coast WSP habitat) indicate that those miles of Pacific coast). projections were conservative and Previous Federal Actions New Information on Species’ ignored some critical factors, such as The Pacific Coast WSP was listed as Description, Life History, Ecology, melting of the Greenland and Antarctica a threatened species on March 5, 1993 Habitat, and Range ice sheets (Heberger et al. 2009, p. 6). (58 FR 12864). Critical habitat was Heberger et al. (2009, p. 8) have updated designated in 1999 (64 FR 68508; We did not receive any new the sea level rise projections for December 7, 1999). That rule was information pertaining to the California to 3.3–4.6 ft (1.0–1.4 m) by remanded and partially vacated by the description, ecology, or habitat of the 2100, while Vermeer and Rahmstorf U. S. District Court for the District of Pacific Coast WSP following the 2011 (2009, p. 21530) calculate the sea level Oregon on July 2, 2003, in order to revised proposed critical habitat rule (76 rise globally at 2.4–6.2 ft (0.57–1.9 m); conduct a new analysis of economic FR 16046; March 22, 2011). in both cases, recent estimates were impacts (Coos County Board of County

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36730 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Commissioners et al. v. Department of comment periods, we requested that all additional information, clarifications, the Interior et al., CV 02–6128, M. interested parties submit comments or and suggestions that we have Hogan). We published a revised rule information related to the proposed incorporated, as appropriate, to improve designating critical habitat on revisions to critical habitat, including this revised final critical habitat rule. September 29, 2005 (70 FR 56970). (but not limited to) the following: Unit Other potential reviewers that were A 5-year status review of the boundaries; species occurrence contacted could not respond due to population under section 4(c)(2) of the information and distribution; land use prior commitments and timing of the Act was completed June 8, 2006, based designations that may affect critical requested review relative to the Pacific on the analysis conducted for the habitat; potential economic effects of the Coast WSP field season. Peer reviewer section 4(b)(3)(B) status review for a 12- revised proposed designation; benefits comments are addressed in the month finding on a petition to delist the associated with critical habitat following summary and incorporated Pacific Coast WSP (71 FR 20607; April designation; areas proposed for into the final rule as appropriate. 21, 2006). Because the Pacific Coast designation and associated rationale for Peer Review Comments WSP was listed prior to our 1996 policy the non-inclusion or considered published in the Federal Register on exclusion of these areas; and methods (1) Comment: The peer reviewer February 7, 1996 (61 FR 4721) regarding used to designate critical habitat. affirmed that the background recognition of distinct population During the first comment period, we information, essentially the biology of segments, in our 12-month finding, we received 149 comment letters directly the Pacific Coast WSP, was well reviewed and confirmed our addressing the proposed revision of represented. Additional information determination that the Pacific Coast critical habitat, as follows: 1 from a peer was provided for the distribution of WSP constituted a valid distinct reviewer, 5 from Federal agencies, 1 Pacific Coast WSP in Oregon. The population segment. from a Native American Tribe, and 142 reviewer suggested including sites in On October 2, 2008, the Center for from public organizations or northern Oregon not covered under the Biological Diversity challenged our 2005 individuals. During the second State’s habitat conservation plan (HCP), critical habitat designation (70 FR comment period, we received nine and that the sites should be considered 56970; September 29, 2005) (Center for additional comments addressing the collectively, as move between Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne, et revised proposed critical habitat them. al., No. C–08–4594 PJH (N.D. designation and the DEA. Of these latter Our Response: We appreciate the California)). This litigation was resolved comments, none were from Federal assessment of the revised proposed rule through settlement, in which the agencies, one was from a State agency, by the peer reviewer. We have identified Service agreed to conduct a rulemaking and the remaining eight were from all the areas we consider to have the to consider potential revisions to the public organizations or individuals. We physical or biological features essential designated critical habitat for the Pacific did not receive any additional to the conservation of the species or Coast WSP. On May 11, 2009, the U. S. comments from Native American Tribes other areas we have determined to be District Court for the Northern District during the second public comment essential for the conservation of the of California adopted the terms of the period. We reviewed all comments species as based on our criteria for settlement agreement and issued an received for substantive issues and new designating critical habitat. Not all order requiring the Service to submit a information regarding the revised occupied sites were proposed as critical final revised critical habitat designation designation of critical habitat for the habitat. Some areas meeting the to the Federal Register by June 5, 2012. Pacific Coast WSP. All substantive definition of critical habitat have been This rule complies with that court comments are addressed in the excluded from this revised final critical order. following summary and any changes habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) have been incorporated into this revised of the Act (see Exclusions section for a Summary of Comments and detailed discussion). Those sites that we Recommendations final rule as appropriate. The open period for requesting public consider to have spatial significance to We requested written comments from hearings on the revised proposed rule one another were grouped as subunits of the public on the 2011 proposed rule to ran from March 22, 2011, through May a larger unit. The northern Oregon sites revise critical habitat for the Pacific 6, 2011 (76 FR 16046). The second open referenced by the reviewer were not Coast WSP during two comment period for requesting public hearings included because of their relatively periods. The first comment period associated with the January 17, 2012 (77 limited use by Pacific Coast WSP at this requesting comments in association FR 2243), Federal Register publication time and they were determined not to be with the publication of the proposed ran from January 17, 2012, through essential. revised rule (76 FR 16046) opened on February 16, 2012. We did not receive The HCP with the Oregon Parks and March 22, 2011, and closed May 23, any requests for a public hearing during Recreation Department (OPRD) is a 2011. Upon the availability of the draft the two open periods. landscape-level conservation planning economic analysis (DEA) associated effort. It was developed with the with the revised proposed critical Peer Review assistance of a multi-partner steering habitat, a second comment period In accordance with our Policy for Peer committee that reviewed the recovery covering both the revised proposed rule Review in Endangered Species Act plan and objectives, historical plover and the DEA opened on January 17, Activities, published on July 1, 1994 (59 use, and existing habitat conditions, and 2012 (77 FR 2243) and closed on FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions selected the most appropriate locations February 16, 2012. During both public from three knowledgeable individuals for reestablishment of plover nesting comment periods, we contacted with scientific expertise that included habitat. In addition, the HCP went appropriate Federal, State, and local familiarity with the species, the through extensive public review at both agencies, scientific organizations, and geographic region in which it occurs, the State and Federal levels, and other interested parties and invited and conservation biology principles. incorporated appropriate input from them to comment on the proposal to One peer reviewer responded and those processes. revise critical habitat for this species generally supported the revised (2) Comment: The peer reviewer and the associated DEA. During the proposed designation, and provided agreed with the conservation benefit of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36731

designating additional habitat for the adequately represented across the range zone is essential to Pacific Coast WSP’s Pacific Coast WSP. Specifically, the of the species. conservation, thereby meeting the reviewer acknowledged that additional standard for designation as critical Federal Agency Comments habitat is needed for connectivity habitat when there is an association between sites, and noted that the Bureau of Land Management with other features and primary revised proposed rule leaves a 75-mile (4) Comment: The Bureau of Land constituent elements. (6) Comment: The USACE commented (mi) (121-kilometer (km)) gap between Management (BLM) in Arcata, that our approach to sea-level rise units on the north and south coasts of California, noted that, as proposed, Unit should be modified. The highest, high Oregon. 5 (Subunits A, B, and C) has expanded water boundary is recommended as a Our Response: We appreciate the peer to the west, encompassing the intertidal reviewer’s critical review. Connectivity starting reference point. In addition, the zone. Yet the eastern boundary remains USACE stated that the eastern boundary is not the only criterion used to select the same as in prior critical habitat sites. We refer readers to our Criteria should not be established in areas that designations. BLM commented that they do not currently contain suitable habitat Used To Identify Critical Habitat section understand the rationale for the in the revised proposed rule (76 FR as a means to address sea-level rise. westward expansion based on year-to- Our Response: The purpose of this 16046; March 22, 2011). Selected sites year changes to the beach environment must have regional importance, either revised critical habitat designation is to and improved mapping, because of conserve the Pacific Coast WSP. for breeding or wintering Pacific Coast expected inundation resulting from sea- WSPs. Establishing a western boundary is level rise. BLM noted that critical difficult, but the ‘‘water’s edge’’ is a There are few additional suitable habitat would be better served with an locations between Oregon’s north and boundary that is easily determined on expansion to the east. the ground. We agree with the USACE south coasts to designate as critical Our Response: Unit 5 primarily habitat. Sites were considered, but not that the water’s edge is difficult to map, depicts mapping changes with and will change with seasonal and daily proposed, due to habitat and improved information from the 2005 tides, storm events, beach configuration, development conditions that would designation. We did not extend the unit etc. Our maps and the inclusion of the adversely impact plovers were they to to the east, as there is a dune crest that intertidal zone are an attempt to address use the sites. Seventy-five miles is a would separate such an eastern the water’s edge issue and include the relatively small gap in the range given expansion from the ocean beach. Such full range of habitat available to the that current gap between occupied a barrier would likely discourage Pacific Pacific Coast WSP. habitat in Oregon and Washington is Coast WSP use of the area, combined We expanded critical habitat to the greater than 150 miles (241 km). with the paved road that reaches the east from past designations to help (3) Comment: The peer reviewer length of Humboldt Bay’s South Spit. ensure there will be adequate potential acknowledged the importance of Similarly, there is a dirt road to the east for habitat in the future as sea-level rise addressing sea-level rise, but noted side of the dune crest in subunit CA 5B occurs. Not all habitat to the east is uncertainty regarding our ability to that may also discourage Pacific Coast currently suitable, however, and we predict how Pacific Coast WSP will WSP use of any eastern expansion area include in this critical habitat respond. In addition, the reviewer noted there. designation only those areas that we that we cannot adequately predict the consider likely to be suitable with Department of the Army (U.S. Army response of Pacific Coast WSP prey restoration. Not addressing the eastern Corps of Engineers) sources to a rapidly changing beach expansion and only considering environment that is compromised by (5) Comment: The U.S. Army Corps of currently available habitat would limit years of beach stabilization and Engineers (USACE) challenged the need the conservation value of a critical invasive, nonnative plants. for critical habitat designation of the habitat designation as ‘‘coastal squeeze’’ Our Response: We agree that the intertidal zone, stating that Pacific Coast occurs with a rise in sea level. Using response of Pacific Coast WSPs and WSPs generally forage on wrack elevations on the beach and adjusting their prey is difficult to predict (refer to deposited at the maximum high water them as sea-level rise occurs, as Climate Change section above). Our mark, and roost well above this line and suggested by the USACE, makes it models for sea-level rise are general in are not found along the water’s edge. difficult for land and project managers nature as they must represent the entire Our Response: We agree that most to determine critical habitat boundaries. range of the Pacific Coast WSP in the foraging by Pacific Coast WSP on (7) Comment: The USACE questioned United States. Consequently, site- and southern California beaches is the validity of the Pacific Coast WSP regionally-specific models are relevant associated with wrack; however, Pacific listing as threatened. Specifically, the when assessing specific effects on Coast WSP will use the intertidal areas. agency provided an example of a snowy species and locations, but for the Use of intertidal areas may be greater plover banded in Utah appearing at a purposes of this evaluation, landscape- where there is no offshore kelp beds to coastal Orange County, California, site. scale models were used to assist us in form well-developed wrack, such as in Our Response: First, we note that the establishing unit boundaries. northern California, Oregon, and Service action at issue here does not There is inherent uncertainty Washington. However, Pacific Coast concern whether or not the Pacific Coast associated with the parameters in the WSPs have been documented foraging WSP should be listed under the Act, but model; however, assumptions were within the beach intertidal zone, and whether the Service should revise selected that were generally gathering food from both above and critical habitat for the species. Separate conservative to best protect the species. below the sand surface (Page et al. 2009; from this action, the Service is currently Our assessment of sea-level rise in the http://bna.birds.cornell.edu/bna/ reviewing the listing status of the Pacific revised proposed rule only addresses species/154/articles/foodhabits). Coast WSP (see 76 FR 30377; May 25, habitat, and does not attempt to address In areas that do not have well- 2011). For further discussion of listing prey response, plover use, and site- developed wrack, the intertidal zone issues, we direct the USACE to our 12- specific shoreline armoring, as these are may play a greater importance in plover month finding on a petition to delist the conditions or parameters that cannot be foraging. Consequently, the intertidal Pacific Coast WSP (71 FR 20607; April

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36732 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

21, 2006), where detailed information revised designation. The analysis of address management actions for western on the Pacific Coast WSP distinct effects of dredging and beach snowy plovers and therefore does not population segment listing is available. nourishment on Pacific Coast WSPs and meet the requirements for exemption The report cited by the USACE their habitat is part of the section 7 from critical habitat. On March 30, documents a Utah-banded snowy plover consultation process under the Act. 2012, we received an addendum to the at an Orange County beach during the Effects to designated critical habitat and 2001 INRMP; this addendum detailed nonbreeding season (project-related non-designated areas that are affected by additional conservation measures the observation period was from September the Federal action will be assessed Navy will implement for the Pacific 27, 2009, to October 29, 2009) (Ryan and under that process, as well as other Coast WSP at Naval Support Area Hamilton 2009, unpublished report). effects to Pacific Coast WSPs. Monterey. We have reviewed the Our understanding is that the snowy Disturbance by recreational users and addendum and have concluded that the plover banding in Utah was done during other sources will also be evaluated conservation measures identified in the the end of the breeding season, on July through the section 7 process where addendum would provide a benefit to 22, 2009 (F. Bidstrup, pers. comm. there is a Federal nexus. For areas the Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat. 2012). Few, if any, snowy plovers are lacking a Federal nexus, the Service will We approved and signed this addendum present in Utah during the nonbreeding work with beach and land managers to on May 24, 2012. As a result we have season (Paton 1995, p. 277). Interior- implement recovery actions that will exempted the approximately 8 ac (3 ha) nesting snowy plovers are migratory, avoid or offset adverse effects of from Unit CA 22 from the designation and are well documented overwintering disturbance. We consider disturbance to under section 4(a)(3) of the Act (see along the Pacific Coast (71 FR 20607; be relative, as Pacific Coast WSPs Exemptions section). April 21, 2006). Generally, interior- respond differently to disturbance The Navy also identified that nesting snowy plovers begin to appear between sites. approximately 0.08 ac (0.03 ha) at Naval along the Pacific Coast in mid- to late- (9) Comment: The USACE commented Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, July. In the 12-month finding, we cite that the maps were easier to follow in was included in the revised proposed instances of coastal-breeding snowy the 2005 designation than those in the rule. These lands were inadvertently plovers nesting at interior sites, but 2011 revised proposed rule because the included as part of Unit CA 39 in the acknowledge that this type of 2005 maps provided more detail relative revised proposed designation due to a occurrence is rare based on banding to land marks, such as roads. mapping error. The identified 0.08 ac records (71 FR 20607; April 21, 2006). Our Response: We appreciate this (0.03 ha) of Navy lands within Unit CA This interchange in breeders accounts comment, and have made changes to the 39, Ormond Beach, have been removed for the fact that there is little genetic maps in this final rule. Specifically, the in this revised final designation because difference between interior and coastal- maps in this revised final rule have they are unsuitable habitat and not breeding snowy plovers (71 FR 20607; more location detail, such as roads, than essential to the conservation of the April 21, 2006). Regardless, because the we provided in the 2011 revised species. Pacific Coast WSP is generally a non- proposed rule. In remote areas where migratory population, and because it is roads are scarce, we added ecologically separated from interior- watercourses. We acknowledge that (11) Comment: The National Park nesting snowy plovers, it meets criteria watercourses are dynamic, and they can Service noted that critical habitat units for listing under our distinct population change with time, but they do provide for the Pacific Coast WSP were segment policy (71 FR 20607, April 21, some ability to locate unit boundaries proposed within several units of the 2006; 61 FR 4721, February 7, 1996) and on the ground. National Park system, including: the Act. Department of the Navy Channel Islands National Park; Golden (8) Comment: The USACE stated that Gate National Recreation Area; Point some of the areas proposed for (10) Comment: The Department of the Reyes National Seashore; Redwood designation as critical habitat do not Navy (Navy) commented that portions National and State Parks; and Lewis and meet the definition of critical habitat. of two of their installations, Naval Clark National Historic Park. The Either the units are heavily used by Support Area Monterey and Navy at National Park Service supports the recreational users, or are adjacent to Naval Base Ventura County, Port proposed revised designation, and disturbed areas. The commenter Hueneme, were included in the revised provided general information regarding provided site-specific information proposed rule, and requested they be its management for Pacific Coast WSP at where they believe designation is exempted from critical habitat because its facilities. inappropriate due to beach nourishment both installations have an integrated Our Response: We appreciate the projects at some units. natural resources management plan National Park Service’s comments. No Our Response: We have determined (INRMP). response necessary. based on our criteria for designating Our Response: An INRMP integrates critical habitat that all the areas implementation of the military mission U.S. Forest Service designated in this rule are essential of the installation with stewardship of (12) Comment: The U.S. Forest either to or for the conservation of the the natural resources found on the base. Service (USFS), Siuslaw National Pacific Coast WSP and meet the A Service-approved INRMP is required Forest, Oregon, provided information definition of critical habitat. However, to exempt a facility from critical habitat regarding use and boundary within each critical habitat unit there designation (refer to section of this rule descriptions for Units OR 7, OR 8, and may be some areas that do not contain concerning military exemptions under OR 9. the physical or biological features and section 4(a)(3)). In 2001, the Navy Our Response: Lands covered under therefore would not be considered completed the INRMP for Naval Support the OPRD HCP are excluded in this critical habitat. Due to mapping Area Monterey, which includes revised final rule. We note the USFS’s constraints (e.g., the scale of the approximately 8 ac (3 ha) in Unit CA 22, comments; however, all units have unsuitable areas are too small to be Monterey to Moss Landing. Although changed with the exception of OR 8A, reflected on our maps), we did not the 2001 INRMP was approved by the as a result of the exclusions. Federal remove these areas from this final Service, we determined that it did not lands remain unaffected by the OPRD

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36733

HCP exclusions, and remain in this final Our Response: The general comments seasons. That said, a critical habitat unit designation. from CDPR on the unit description is not required to contain all PCEs to errors were noted and incorporated into qualify for designation. The State Agency Comments this revised final rule. implementing regulations for section 4 (13) Comment: The OPRD requested We agree with CDPR that a critical of the Act (50 CFR 424.12(d)) state that that all lands under its HCP be habitat designation should have little, if when several habitats, each satisfying ‘‘exempted’’ (meaning ‘‘excluded’’) any, effect on day-to-day operations at the requirements for designation as under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, because Oceano Dunes SVRA and should not critical habitat, are located in proximity the OPRD HCP provides adequate affect management activities for the to one another, an inclusive area may be management protections, making Pacific Coast WSP unless a future designated as critical habitat. Portions of designation of critical habitat on those project in Oceano Dunes SVRA would that inclusive area may not contain any lands covered by the HCP redundant. be authorized, funded, permitted, or or all PCEs. The Oceano Dunes SVRA is Our Response: Comment noted. In carried out by a Federal agency. located within unit CA–31, and contains developing this final revised We agree that portions of Oceano at least one PCE (open landscapes) year designation, we have considered Dunes SVRA are degraded by recreation round, and may seasonally contain two OPRD’s comments regarding exclusion activities; however, habitat degradation other PCEs (frequency of inundation of the HCP areas, and have conducted does not preclude us from designating and organic debris). We have the analysis required under section an area as critical habitat if the area determined that Oceano Dunes SVRA 4(b)(2) of the Act to consider such contains physical or biological features plays an important role in conservation exclusions (refer to the Exclusions essential to the conservation of the of the western snowy plover. That role section). As a result of our analysis, we species and otherwise meets the may increase due to climate-related have concluded that the benefits of definition of critical habitat. Also, changes, including sea-level rise. We excluding the lands covered under the annual surveys by CDPR and other maintain that Oceano Dunes SVRA is OPRD HCP outweigh the benefits of groups have documented the species (in essential to the conservation of the including those areas as critical habitat relatively large numbers) using Oceano Pacific Coast WSP. and as a result the Secretary has used Dunes SVRA in both breeding and Lastly, we recognize that the CDPR his discretion to exclude these areas wintering seasons. The use of areas for intensively manages habitat for the under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. recreational activities does not preclude Pacific Coast WSP at Oceano Dunes (14) Comment: The California the use of the area by the Pacific Coast SVRA. We also recognize the difficult Department of Parks and Recreation WSP. For example, the Silver Strand balance between the Oceano Dunes (CDPR) provided site information State Beach area identified as critical SVRA use-mandate and conservation of throughout California and pointed out habitat (Unit CA 55B), as well as other sensitive species. However, justification errors in the unit descriptions. CDPR high recreational use areas, plays an of exclusion from critical habitat is not believes some sites proposed for important role in Pacific Coast WSP solely based on conservation measures designation are inappropriate, due to conservation. We have determined that provided by a management plan but on disturbance, proximity to campgrounds, these areas are essential because they how the benefits of exclusion from recreational off-road vehicle use, and provide adequate space for high-tide critical habitat compare to the benefits presence of lifeguard facilities. roosting and foraging opportunities, of inclusion. We recognize that the Regarding Oceano Dunes State especially during low human-use CDPR at Oceano Dunes SVRA have been Vehicular Recreation Area (SVRA), periods and during the winter. These implementing measures to conserve the CDPR acknowledged that the critical areas may provide an even greater Pacific Coast WSP and conditions have habitat designation would have little conservation value as habitat conditions improved somewhat for the Pacific effect on day-to-day operations of shift and adaptive management Coast WSP in critical habitat unit CA– Oceano Dunes SVRA and would not strategies are implemented. 31. We value our current partnership affect management activities for the The DEA accompanying the proposed with the CDPR in conserving sensitive Pacific Coast WSP. However, CDPR also critical habitat rule determined that species and their habitats; however, stated that a critical habitat designation Oceano Dunes SVRA would incur some after considering the relevant impacts would increase administrative costs and increase in administrative cost as a being incurred by the Pacific Coast implied that a critical habitat result of being included in critical WSP, we did not conclude that the designation would require restoration of habitat. These costs would be associated benefits of excluding Oceano Dunes degraded habitat in Oceano Dunes with coordination with a Federal agency SVRA lands in unit CA–31 outweigh the SVRA. during consultation under section 7 of benefits of including those lands as CDPR stated that designation of the the Act, additional analysis under critical habitat. In addition, as ‘‘riding area’’ of Oceano Dunes SVRA as California Environmental Quality Act mentioned in the CDPR comment letter, critical habitat would be inappropriate (CEQA), or critical habitat analysis in the CDPR is experiencing severe because the riding area is degraded, the Oceano Dunes SVRA HCP. However, funding limitations. Consequently, the used for recreation, and unoccupied by the DEA did not identify any CDPR may not be able to guarantee that the western snowy plover. CDPR disproportionate costs to the Oceano the Oceano Dunes SVRA management requested that the riding and camping Dunes SVRA likely to result from a plan will be implemented in the future. areas be excluded from the critical critical habitat designation. For these reasons, the Secretary is habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) The recovery plan for the Pacific declining to exercise his discretion to of the Act, because those areas (1) do Coast WSP (Service 2007) states that, exclude Oceano Dunes SVRA lands not contain the physical or biological because of the dynamic nature of from unit CA–31. features essential for the western snowy western snowy plover habitat, the plover, and (2) are covered by a physical or biological features and Public Comments management plan that provides specific primary constituent elements The majority of the public comments conservation value greater than what (PCEs) for the species may be seasonally we received were form letters regarding would be provided by a critical habitat variable or lacking. Accordingly, one or Oceano Dunes SVRA. The 104 form designation. more PCEs may be absent during certain letters did not provide substantial

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36734 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

information, and were analogous to a 2011), as it is subject to debate in many of a single . Disturbance can come ‘‘vote’’ not to designate critical habitat at forums outside this critical habitat from both predators and human-caused Oceano Dunes SVRA. For information designation process. However, there are sources. on our determination on critical habitat ample data to support that sea-level rise (18) Comment: Comments regarding for the Oceano Dunes SVRA, please see is occurring, and it will continue into the primary constituent elements (PCEs) Comment 14 above. the future. The models we used provide were wide-ranging. Some commenters (15) Comment: Several commenters perspective on the extent and time at stated that the ‘‘minimal disturbance’’ proposed models other than the ones we which we can expect sea-level rise to element limited the Service’s selection used relative to sea-level rise. We also occur (refer to Climate Change section of potential units, while other received comments challenging the above). commenters asserted that several units likelihood of sea-level rise. Some (16) Comment: Two commenters should not be designated due to too commenters stated that sea-level rise questioned the need to list the Pacific much disturbance. One commenter could not be attributed to human-caused Coast WSP as threatened. suggested that ‘‘minimal disturbance’’ is actions and that we should not be Our Response: As noted above in better considered under Special managing for an impact (i.e., sea-level response to Comment 7, this finding Management Considerations. rise) that might not occur. Others does not address whether the Pacific Our Response: We generally consider commenters stated that there is no Coast WSP should be listed, but rather that there are three generalized threats, ‘‘global warming’’ occurring, and that concerns whether revisions should be or limiting factors, to conservation and the Service is not considering the best made to critical habitat for the Pacific recovery of the Pacific Coast WSP. science available. Coast WSP. See 71 FR 20607 (April 21, Specifically, we consider limiting Our Response: The Service considers 2006) for information on the listing of factors to conservation to be: (1) climate change the single greatest the Pacific Coast WSP. Predation; (2) habitat loss and conservation challenge of the 21st (17) Comment: Three commenters degradation; and (3) disturbance. These century, and as a result we have believe that we underestimate the three factors may vary in importance by developed a draft strategic plan to impacts of predation, and overstate the site, and their sequence here should not address climate change (Service 2009, effects of human-caused disturbance. indicate a priority or level of pp. 1–32). We acknowledge climate Our Response: Predation is a leading importance. change is a complex issue, and there cause of Pacific Coast WSP adult, chick, For the Pacific Coast WSP, there are may be some uncertainty over all the and egg mortality; however, the natural and human-caused disturbances causes and precise manifestations of significance of predation varies by site. that affect the species and its habitat. climate change (see Climate Change With the influx of common ravens to Pacific Coast WSPs respond differently section above). Given these Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, to disturbance depending on the type of uncertainties, one objective of this Monterey, and Santa Cruz Counties to disturbance, its frequency, and the revised final rule is to identify and coastal habitat since the late 1990s, timing of the disturbance. By way of protect those habitats that we determine predation pressure has increased in example, breeding Pacific Coast WSPs will provide resiliency for Pacific Coast some areas. Predator management, both appear to be more sensitive to WSP in the face of the effects of climate nonlethal and lethal, has been effective disturbance than wintering plovers. change on habitat. We will undoubtedly at many sites. Predator management is Pacific Coast WSPs are more likely to have to adapt management approaches generally considered a recovery action, flush from, or abandon, a nest during as we learn more. We agree that Pacific outside the process for designating the early incubation stages. They are Coast WPS management actions should critical habitat (Page et al. 2008, pp. 1– less likely to abandon a nest as eggs stem the impacts of climate change 11). approach hatching, presumably because where opportunities to do so exist. Regarding human disturbance and a significant time has been spent We evaluated the models proposed by effects to Pacific Coast WSP, there is a incubating and defending the nest. the commenters, and in some instances, relationship between human beach use Human presence at isolated beaches on we acknowledge that these models have and predation. Disturbance associated Vandenberg Air Force Base, for more detail, often resulting from site- with human beach use can result in example, can result in Pacific Coast specific information. However, that site Pacific Coast WSPs flushing from their WSPs flushing at a greater distance than specificity could not be incorporated nest. When this occurs, the leave plovers at Oceano Dunes SVRA, where into a model that would assess the tracks in the sand, and those foot tracks they are subject to greater disturbance species’ habitat rangewide because there can lead predators to the nest and result and have the ability to ‘‘habituate.’’ is insufficient corresponding data from in egg loss. Also, unmanaged or poorly Vandenberg and Oceano Dunes SVRA all sites across the entire range of the managed trash associated with a variety are only approximately 30 mi (48 km) Pacific Coast WSP (i.e., from of uses, including recreational use, can apart. Consequently, disturbance is Washington to the Mexican border in also attract potential predators to beach ‘‘relative’’ to site conditions. Minimal California). Other models proposed by habitats. Gulls, ravens, and crows are disturbance is a PCE because it is a commenters used different parameters known Pacific Coast WSP predators and component of a unit’s suitability and than the models we employed, and thus, are good examples of species that are should be considered in Pacific Coast could not be used consistently. The attracted to areas with improper trash WSP conservation, and therefore, in models we selected reflected conditions management practices. Outreach and critical habitat designation. The amount, across the range for the Pacific Coast education focusing on these human- timing, and extent of disturbance may WSP. Because we anticipated that use of associated concerns will assist in be best addressed as a special models would be controversial, we reducing predator interaction with the management consideration. We chose to use those developed or Pacific Coast WSP. considered sites with a range of accepted by the Department of the Pacific Coast WSPs can withstand disturbance, and each site designated is Interior. some disturbance. Their tolerance to regionally important. We intentionally did not address the disturbance will vary by site (see our (19) Comment: One commenter stated cause(s) for sea-level rise in our revised response to Comment 18 below), and that the Service is constraining critical proposed rule (76 FR 16046; March 22, may vary by the individual experience habitat protection by using criteria not

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36735

consistent with the Act. Specifically, designated units. As a consequence, the (23) Comment: Two commenters use of criteria other than the PCEs limits intertidal zone is included in our believed the Service violated the the Service’s ability to designate habitat. designation where appropriate. Having Administrative Procedure Act and the Our Response: Stating our selection the water’s edge as the westward, or Act by failing to provide adequate criteria and methods is necessary for ocean-side boundary, gives a clear notice of the extent of critical habitat. public disclosure (refer to Methods Used demarcation of the unit boundary when Specifically, commenters believe the to Designate Critical Habitat and actually visiting the site. maps provided in the revised proposed Physical and Biological Features Other expansions of unit boundaries rule were inadequate. sections). The selection criteria relate to beyond those in the 2005 designation Our Response: The critical habitat how we determine where the PCEs, or occurred as a result of using new maps are coarse, compared to detailed elements of physical and biological information that better identifies the land ownership. However, the features that are essential to the physical or biological features essential Geographical Information System (GIS) conservation of the Pacific coast WSP, to Pacific Coast WSP. Thus, the new layers for the unit polygons were posted are on the landscape. Therefore, our unit boundaries were drawn using the on the Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office selection criteria define how we best scientific information available to Web site, and were available for determined ‘‘essential areas’’ for the Service. downloading during the public designation of critical habitat. (22) Comment: Two commenters comment periods. The availability of the (20) Comment: One commenter believe the Service violated both the Act GIS data complies with both the suggested that we include habitat and Administrative Procedure Act by Administrative Procedure Act and the buffers in our designation. failing to adequately detail the Act. We notified landowners, informing Our Response: The Act does not difference in the revised proposed rule them that critical habitat was being provide for us to designate buffer over the 2005 designation. proposed for designation on lands in habitat. We are directed by section 4 of Our Response: In the revised coastal areas from Washington to the Act to designate only those specific proposed rule, we outlined our methods southern California. Because of the scale areas determined to be either essential and explained differences between the of the revised proposed designation, to or for the conservation of the species. prior September 2005 final rule and the some individual landowners may have The areas identified as critical habitat March 2011 revised proposed rule in the been missed, but we made a good faith within units that are not occupied, and Summary of Changes From Previously effort to reach all those that could be may be unsuitable at the present, still Designated Critical Habitat section (76 identified at the time of the proposal. meet the definition of critical habitat as FR 16054; March 22, 2011). We changed We also were available upon request to they will play a role in Pacific Coast the methods used to designate critical go over maps as needed and were WSP conservation as sea-level rise habitat because of the need to address directly contacted by several occurs. These areas are not considered sea-level rise and provide conservation landowners that sought clarification of buffers. of the species and its habitat based on ownership during the open public (21) Comment: One commenter raised the 2007 Recovery Plan for the species. comment periods. issues with the increase in unit size on These changes resulted in the proposed (24) Comment: Two commenters their lands from the 2005 designation. revision to designated critical habitat stated that the Service failed to Other landowners that are within and the proposed designation of adequately explain why retaining all proposed critical habitat units, but have additional areas as critical habitat, and previously designated critical habitat is property at some distance from the in some cases, a proposed expansion in essential. water’s edge, questioned the need to the size of areas designated in 2005. Our Response: By court settlement, designate their properties as critical We also reviewed the areas excluded the Service agreed to conduct a habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP. from the 2005 final critical habitat rulemaking to consider potential Our Response: In many instances, the designation based upon section 4(b)(2) revisions to the 2005 critical habitat units are wider in this rule than of the Act. Our March 22, 2011, revised designation. Our Methods and Criteria designated in 2005, because we proposal of critical habitat did not Used To Identify Critical Habitat anticipate sea-level rise and want to include any proposed exclusions, but sections in the 2011 revised proposed ensure there remains adequate critical we did request public comment as to rule explain how we selected areas habitat following inundation. It is whether any specific areas being essential to and for the conservation of difficult to determine where the effects proposed as revised critical habitat the species. The methods applied in of sea-level rise will be the most should be excluded under section 2011 were similar to those used in the significant, because we expect beach 4(b)(2) of the Act. Based on comments 2004 proposed rule and 2005 final rule. morphology or habitat characteristics to received on the 2011 revised proposed Each unit in this designation contains a change. Inland expansion of unit rule and our analysis conducted description explaining how it meets the boundaries (generally eastward) beyond pursuant to the Act, in this revised final Act’s definition and our criteria for those in the 2005 designation are designation we have excluded several designation as critical habitat. expected to offset potential adverse areas (see Application of Section 4(b)(2) Our revised final designation varies effects of sea-level rise. of the Act and Exclusions sections from the 2005 rule. There are exclusions Our maps and unit descriptions below). Because of these exclusions and and exemptions in this revised final rule indicate a westward increase in unit other modifications to various units, as that were not in the previous rule (refer boundaries for this rule in many cases. described elsewhere in this rule, the to our sections on Summary of Changes The inclusion of the intertidal zone is a areas included in this final revised from the Revised Proposed Rule). function of better mapping and the critical habitat designation differ from (25) Comment: Two commenters updated National Agriculture Imagery those proposed in March 2011. The suggested that the Service violated the (NAIP) used for this rule, as well as our methodology and process used to Act by proposing units that were not desire to use the ‘‘water’s edge’’ as a calculate acreage was discussed in the occupied at the time of listing. boundary. The intertidal zone plays an proposed revised rule (and herein), and Our Response: Critical habitat is important role in providing the physical there has been no deviation from that defined under section 3 of the Act as (1) and biological features of most of the process. the specific areas within the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36736 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

geographical area occupied by a species, public; however, because of their project’s effects on Pacific Coast WSP at the time it was listed in accordance experience with the species or similar and on designated critical habitat (refer with the Act, on which are found those species, they are asked to provide a to Effects of Critical Habitat physical or biological features (a) detailed review. Typically, their Designation—Section 7 Consultation). essential to the conservation of the response is provided by the closing date (30) Comment: Private landowners species, and (b) which may require of the public comment period; therefore, from all three States raised concerns special management considerations or there is no opportunity for the public to that designation of critical habitat on protection; and (2) the specific areas comment on peer-review input. Peer- their property would prevent use of outside the geographical area occupied reviewer input has been summarized in their land and adjacent land. Several by a species at the time it was listed, this rule, but the full text is available believe the designation would increase upon a determination that such areas upon request at the Arcata Fish and regulation and curtail development and are essential for the conservation of the Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES section). enjoyment. Some municipalities species. Some units are designated (28) Comment: Some commenters expressed similar concerns. based on this second prong; these units, provided Pacific Coast WSP use Our Response: A critical habitat such as WA 1, were not occupied at the information for sites that were not designation may result in limitations to time of listing but have been determined proposed for designation. Specifically, land use only in association with land to be essential for the conservation of sites in Oregon and the use or management practices that the species. region of California were referenced. require a Federal permit, Federal In addition, some units included in Commenters felt that the Service did not funding, or discretionary action by a this designation may not be occupied fully consider all sites, stating that the Federal agency (i.e., a Federal nexus). If year-round. However, they are essential omitted sites provide connectivity and a project requires such Federal for conservation because they constitute thus value to critical habitat. involvement, then the action and its important wintering sites where Our Response: We proposed sites that effects to the Pacific Coast WSP and its breeding does not occur, or important have regional and rangewide designated critical habitat would be breeding sites. Unit CA 9 is an example importance. Many sites in northern evaluated under section 7 of the Act of a unit designated for its importance California have comparatively little (refer to Effects of Critical Habitat as wintering site. Pacific Coast WSP use relative to sites Designation—Section 7 Consultation). Unit OR 12 is designated because, both to the north and to the south. Actions that do not have a Federal although it is unoccupied, it serves an However, we are designating those sites nexus may continue, provided there is essential role in conservation by because of the large gap in breeding and no take of Pacific Coast WSPs. If take of connecting other units and thus wintering Pacific Coast WSPs from Pacific Coast WSPs is anticipated, an facilitating Pacific Coast WSP southern Sonoma County, California, to individual may seek an incidental take movement from site to site depending New River in Oregon. The fluctuation in permit from the Service for the Pacific on habitat availability, allowing the breeding population and the Coast WSP on the lands where the additional foraging or wintering connectivity value of the sites within a action is to occur. The designation of opportunities. This site is expected to large gap in the Pacific Coast WSP’s critical habitat does not affect a non- play an important role as sea-level rise range justifies their inclusion in Federal action. inundates other sites. The site is designation. (31) Comment: Two commenters identified in the 2007 Recovery Plan as Habitat is dynamic, and species may reported on the importance of certain a recovery site. move from one area to another over sites in Sonoma County, California, (26) Comment: One commenter stated time. We recognize that critical habitat specifically Creek Beach and that the Service violated the Information designated at a particular point in time Doran Spit. (Data) Quality Act because the revised may not include all of the habitat areas Our Response: We agree that the proposed rule is not clear regarding the that we may later determine are Salmon Creek Beach and Doran Spit science used to develop the rule. necessary for the recovery of the sites are important to Pacific Coast WSP Our Response: The revised proposed species. For these reasons, a critical conservation. However, their overall rule, and this final revision to critical habitat designation does not signal that importance relative to other sites within habitat, are in fact clear in describing habitat outside the designated area is Recovery Unit 4 (refer to the Recovery the science used to develop the rule. In unimportant or may not be needed for Plan; Service 2007) is not as great. our Background and Critical Habitat— recovery of the species. Breeding is variable at both Salmon Methods Used to Designate Critical (29) Comment: A commenter in Creek Beach and Doran Spit, as well as Habitat sections, we discuss the types of Washington expressed concern that at more northern sites (e.g., CA 8, information used to develop the beach nourishment at Shoalwater Bay Manchester Beach). Monitoring of the designation, as well as the models, by the USACE would impact designated sites will continue, and the Service will mapping techniques, and other critical habitat. Additional, detailed work with beach managers to materials used to develop the revised information was provided by another implement appropriate recovery actions proposed rule. We selected models and commenter during the second comment that will further conservation of the data that could be consistently used period for the same unit, related to the Pacific Coast WSP at these sites. throughout the Pacific Coast WSP’s USACE’s beach nourishment project. (32) Comment: Four commenters range, and avoided site-specific models Our Response: These comments raise questioned why critical habitat was not and data that would be more difficult to issues related to section 7 of the Act, proposed for Ocean Beach, Pacifica obtain. which requires that Federal agencies State Beach, and Gazos Creek in San (27) Comment: One commenter stated ensure that their actions do not Francisco and San Mateo Counties. that the public should be able to review jeopardize species or adversely modify Commenters also expressed the input from peer reviewers. or destroy designated critical habitat. If importance of Laguna Creek State Beach Our Response: Peer review is the USACE engages in beach and Seabright State Beach, noting their conducted concurrently with the public nourishment projects at Shoalwater Bay, collective importance. comment period. Peer reviewers are such actions may require consultation Our Response: We agree that these provided the same information as the with the Service to determine the sites are important to Pacific Coast WSP

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36737

conservation. However, the potential of Our Response: Refer to our response further administrative burden related to these sites as breeding areas is lower to Comment 8 above. Our response to review by the CCC. The commenter than that of the sites we designated for Comment 17 also addresses disturbance. expressed concern that critical habitat breeding (see the Criteria Used To may be used by the CCC or other Comments on the Draft Economic Identify Critical Habitat section below) agencies as a further reason to deny a Analysis (Service 2007, pp. B9–B12; Service coastal development permit or other 2011, p. 16053). Similarly the numbers Comments on Development approval, resulting in increased of wintering birds supported by the (35) Comment: Several commenters litigation and associated costs. suggested sites is lower than that of the expressed concern that the designation Our Response: The DEA and FEA sites we designated for wintering alone, of critical habitat within the Sand City acknowledge the potential for increased and wintering needs are also met by coastal zone in Unit CA 22 will create indirect impacts to SNG due to the many of the sites designated for regulatory uncertainty with associated designation of critical habitat. The FEA breeding. The suggested areas also do costs for future development projects in notes that such indirect impacts are not strongly advance the goals of the area. Additionally, the California possible, and if they occur, may be an increasing diverse habitat, maintaining Coastal Commission (CCC) may view incremental result of critical habitat connectivity, or utilizing restored areas the designation of critical habitat as designation. However, as explained in for plover conservation. However, ‘‘overriding’’ the previously approved section 4.2.2 of the FEA, we do not monitoring of the suggested sites will Sand City local coastal plan (LCP), quantify these impacts due to continue, and we will work with beach which allows for the development of considerable uncertainty surrounding managers to implement appropriate two coastal resorts. If these projects do the probability that the development recovery actions that will further not move forward, jobs and tax revenue permits will be denied or that the conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP at that would have been generated by the development will face legal action due these sites. to the designation of critical habitat. To (33) Comment: One commenter developments would be lost. Our Response: As stated in section this point, the commenter provides ‘‘petitioned’’ for exclusions under documentation suggesting that denial of section 4(b)(2) of the Act for both 4.2.2 of the FEA, we acknowledge that incremental indirect impacts resulting a permit by CCC could be illegal in light Oceano Dunes SVRA, and a 4-ac (2-ha) of recent court decisions. An area near Sand City, California. from future litigation or increased scrutiny from State agencies may assumption that development will not Our Response: Although there is no proceed at the site as planned is thus 4(b)(2) petition process for exclusions of include denial of development permits highly speculative. areas from designation of critical for the Sterling-McDonald and Security (37) Comment: One commenter habitat, we have considered the National Guaranty (SNG) sites in Sand requested clarification of the meaning of comment in terms of whether Oceano City, Unit CA 22. Due to uncertainty the phrase ‘‘land’s option value for Dunes SVRA and Sand City sites should surrounding the likelihood and extent of development,’’ as used in section 4.2.2, be excluded from this designation. The such indirect impacts, we are unable to commenter cited economic quantify any potential impacts. paragraph 148, and in Exhibits ES–4 considerations in support of exclusion; Specifically, such a calculation requires and 4–4, of the DEA. these were addressed in the final information about both the probability Our Response: The FEA incorporates economic analysis (FEA) for the revised that current development plans will be clarifying language in section 4.2.2. proposed rule (refer to the Exclusions affected and the magnitude of impacts, ‘‘Option value’’ refers to the fact that section below). The FEA did not neither of which can be determined at land values incorporate an expectation identify any disproportionate costs this time, nor directly attributed to the of residential or commercial associated with designation of critical critical habitat designation. The development, in terms of likelihood and habitat at either Oceano Dunes SVRA or commenter provides estimates of total timing, and the associated returns to the the Sand City sites (refer to our response revenues anticipated to be generated by landowner. to Comment 14 above, and to these projects; however, assuming total (38) Comment: In the context of the ‘‘Exclusions based on Economic loss of these revenues implies that such indirect impacts to SNG development, a Impacts’’ below), and consequently, an impact will occur with 100 percent commenter stated that it is not helpful these sites were not considered for certainty. It is possible, based on recent or meaningful to characterize economic economic exclusions. Moreover, in litigation concerning the site and limits impacts as indirect because the term order for lands to be excluded under to the CCC’s authority to amend the may suggest that indirect impacts are of section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the benefits of previously approved local coastal lesser magnitude than direct impacts. excluding the area must outweigh the program, development will move Our Response: As described in section benefits of including those lands as forward as planned and not be affected 2.4.2 of the FEA, the designation of critical habitat. In this case, the benefits by the designation. Therefore, this critical habitat may, under certain of excluding the ‘‘petitioned’’ lands do analysis does not attempt to quantify circumstances, affect actions that do not not outweigh the benefits of including these impacts, but notes that such have a Federal nexus and thus are not those lands (for instance section 7 and impacts are possible and, if they occur, subject to the provisions of section 7 10 obligations under the Act; increased would be an incremental result of under the Act. Indirect incremental public awareness of Pacific Coast WSP critical habitat designation. impacts are those unintended changes habitat, and potential indirect oversite (36) Comment: One commenter in behavior that may occur outside of by State and local governments) in this expressed concern that the SNG the Act, through other Federal, State, or final revised designation. development site in Sand City, CA (Unit local actions, and that may be caused by (34) Comment: Three commenters CA 22), is vulnerable to indirect the designation of critical habitat. The requested exclusions or partial incremental impacts of the designation. FEA does not intend to diminish the exclusions to Units CA 38, CA 39, and The commenter stated that if critical magnitude of such impacts by calling CA 41 because they believe those areas habitat were designated in this them indirect. The FEA may not do not contain the PCEs due to previously excluded area, the quantify indirect impacts in some disturbance. development project would be subject to instances due to the considerable

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36738 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

uncertainty surrounding their likelihood burden and project modifications are not part of this designation as critical and magnitude. necessary under the Act for a USACE habitat, the FEA does not consider (39) Comment: One commenter beach nourishment project in subunit impacts to activities occurring at this requested that the Service utilize the WA 3B due to the Pacific Coast WSP’s beach. estimate of economic impacts for Unit recent colonization of subunit WA 3B. CA 22 contained in the 2005 economic Our Response: The FEA includes the Comments on Recreation analysis when making a decision to estimated administrative cost of section (42) Comment: A commenter stated exclude units from critical habitat 7 consultation related to this beach that if the open riding and camping area designation under section 4(b)(2) of the nourishment project in subunit WA 3B. of Oceano Dunes SVRA was to be Act. As described in section 4.2.5 of the FEA, restored to support the PCEs identified Our Response: The 2005 economic due to the designation of critical habitat, in the revised proposed critical habitat analysis was developed under a co- this project’s previous informal rule, there would be substantial adverse extensive framework, which considered consultation will need to be reinitiated economic impacts. The commenter and quantified both baseline costs, as in 2012, to consider the adverse asserted that restoration of PCEs in this well as incremental impacts of the modification standard. This project is area would require eliminating camping designation. As described in sections short-term and occurs in a critical and off-highway vehicle (OHV) riding 2.1 and 2.2 (as well as in Exhibit 2–1), habitat unit occupied by the Pacific opportunities in 563 ac (228 ha), or the 2011 DEA distinguishes the Coast WSP, but could have permanent approximately one third of the area incremental costs of designation from impacts on critical habitat. The analysis currently open to riding. baseline costs, whereas the 2005 assumes that no project modifications Our Response: Activities at Oceano economic analysis evaluated all Pacific would be necessary to avoid adverse Dunes SVRA are not currently subject to Coast WSP (baseline and incremental) modification of critical habitat in a Federal nexus. Because critical habitat conservation costs collectively. That is, addition to what has already been only applies to activities implemented the impacts estimated in the 2005 proposed to reduce impacts to the by a Federal agency or that require Economic Analysis captured costs of Pacific Coast WSP. However, until the Federal authorization or funding, we do Pacific Coast WSP conservation section 7 analysis is complete, it not expect the operations of the park to regardless of whether they resulted remains unknown if an adverse change due to critical habitat specifically from critical habitat modification determination will be the designation. As noted in section 4.2.1 of designation or from other Federal, State, resultant outcome. the FEA and Exhibits ES–4 and 4–4, or local regulations. The 2011 DEA (41) Comment: Although the revised indirect impacts to Oceano Dunes SVRA instead characterizes all potential future critical habitat does not overlap any are possible, but the analysis does not Pacific Coast WSP conservation as areas currently used for recreation in quantify the impacts due to either baseline (expected to occur even subunit CA 55B (Coronado Beach), a considerable uncertainty surrounding without the designation of critical commenter expressed concern that the the probability that the CCC will alter its habitat) or incremental (expected to designation of critical habitat could current permit or Oceano Dunes SVRA occur only if critical habitat is impact future recreation activities in the will face legal action due to the designated). The FEA qualitatively subunit. These activities included designation of critical habitat. The FEA discusses baseline Pacific Coast WSP lifeguarding activities, beach access, and notes, however, that such impacts are conservation and quantifies the construction of a bike path and possible, and if they were to occur, they incremental impacts. pedestrian trail. The commenter also would be considered incremental The identification and estimation of expressed concern that a popular dog results of the designation. incremental impacts is consistent with beach north of the critical habitat (43) Comment: One commenter direction provided by the Office of designation in subunit CA 55B could be asserted that the revised proposed Management and Budget (OMB) to affected by critical habitat. critical habitat rule fails to consider the Federal agencies for the estimation of Our Response: If there is a Federal economic impacts of this rule on the costs and benefits of Federal nexus, the future construction of a bike operations and recreational regulations (see OMB, Circular A–4, path and pedestrian trail could result in opportunities in Oceano Dunes SVRA. 2003). It is also consistent with several section 7 consultation with the Service The commenter expressed concerns that recent court decisions, including Cape if the project may affect Pacific Coast the revised critical habitat designation Hatteras Access Preservation Alliance v. WSPs or designated critical habitat. could result in significant delays to U.S. Department of the Interior, 344 F. Costs associated with this consultation crucial visitor-service efforts or resource Supp. 2d 108 (D.D.C.); Center for have been added to section 4.2.1 of the management efforts, including the Biological Diversity v. U.S. Bureau of FEA; however, these costs would be placement of new restrooms, restoration Land Management, 422 F. Supp. 2d incurred only if activities are subject to of sensitive vegetation islands, and 1115 (N.D. Cal. 2006); Home Builders a Federal nexus. Because subunit CA regular maintenance of perimeter fence Association of Northern California v. 55B is considered occupied by the to prevent trespass of vehicles into United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Pacific Coast WSP and these projects are closed areas or adjacent private 616 F.3d 983 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. considered long-term activities, the property. The commenter asserted that denied, 179 L. Ed 2d 301, 2011 U.S. incremental impacts associated with the additional time necessary to Lexis 1392, 79 U.S.L.W. 3475 (2011); these projects are limited to the undertake section 7 consultation could and Arizona Cattle Growers v. Salazar, administrative cost of addressing the jeopardize projects, jeopardize project 606 F. 3d 1160 (9th Cir. 2010), cert. adverse modification standard during funding, and result in significant loss of denied, 179 L. Ed. 2d 300, 2011 U.S. consultation. recreational opportunities in Oceano Lexis 1362, 79 U.S.L.W. 3475 (2011). The lifeguard facilities and activities Dunes SVRA. Loss of recreational These decisions found that estimation of are not part of a Federal action, and opportunities would, in turn, result in incremental impacts stemming solely therefore, would not involve an adverse significant loss of income for local from the designation is proper. modification analysis for critical habitat businesses and the local economy. Two (40) Comment: One commenter under section 7 of the Act. As the dog commenters submitted an economic asserted that additional administrative beach to the north of subunit CA 55B is analysis prepared for the California

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36739

Department of Parks and Recreation, Off projects in this unit are not likely to permanency of habitat impacts. Highway Motor Vehicle Recreation incur incremental project modifications, Following this methodology, the FEA Division, estimating the overall as they are short-term and temporary in forecasts costs in Units OR 1 and OR 3 economic contribution of Oceano Dunes nature. As Unit CA 35 is occupied by associated with future jetty repair as SVRA to be $171 million annually. the Pacific Coast WSP, any project incremental impacts of the designation. Our Response: Our analysis notes in modifications proposed in this unit For Units OR 2 and OR 5, we do not section 4.2.1 of the FEA and in Exhibits would be due to the presence of the foresee projects in these areas, and no ES–4 and 4–4 that reducing or Pacific Coast WSP and are considered specific planned or ongoing projects eliminating the area available for riding baseline impacts of the designation. were identified by the commenter. at Oceano Dunes SVRA would result in Therefore, the designation of critical Therefore, the FEA does not quantify welfare losses and regional economic habitat is not expected to impact beach additional impacts related to future impacts. Beach users would incur social access, tourism, or tax revenues in the OPRD habitat management projects. welfare losses due to forgone trips or a City of Santa Barbara. Note that most areas covered by diminished beach experience (for (45) Comment: One commenter OPRD’s HCP have been excluded from example, due to crowding). In addition, expressed concern that the designation the revised final critical habitat regional economic impacts arise due to of critical habitat on Los Angeles designation. Consequently, Federal reductions in beach recreation-related County beaches (CA 43, CA 44, CA grants obtained by the State and other expenditures caused by fewer 45A–D) could impact future recreational entities to conduct habitat restoration or recreation-related trips. The regional activities and daily maintenance other actions in the excluded areas will economic impacts that could result from operations, such as beach raking and not require a section 7 critical habitat reducing or eliminating the riding area sanitizing sandy beaches, collecting analysis, unless those activities are to would represent some portion of the trash, cleaning restroom facilities, and occur in areas not specifically excluded $171 million annual economic impact of maintaining volleyball courts. (i.e., within designated critical habitat). Oceano Dunes SVRA estimated by the Our Response: Unless such (47) Comment: One commenter stated commenter. recreational and maintenance activities that proposed units CA 55E and CA 55G However, activities on Oceano Dunes are subject to a Federal nexus, as are managed under the San Diego Bay SVRA are not currently subject to a defined under the section titled Effects INRMP, a joint INRMP between the U.S. Federal nexus. Therefore, the Service of Critical Habitat Designation, we do Navy Southwest Division and the San does not expect the operations of the not expect these activities to be affected Diego Unified Port District (Port of San park to change due to critical habitat by designation of critical habitat on Los Diego), prepared in the year 2000. The designation, nor does it expect Angeles County beaches. commenter requested that these lands administrative impacts (or delays) be exempted from critical habitat, Comments on Habitat Management associated with undertaking section 7 similar to the exemption of military consultation. As we note in section 4.2.1 (46) Comment: One commenter lands in the proposed rule. of the FEA and in Exhibits ES–4 and 4– asserted that inclusion of proposed Our Response: As described under the 4, indirect impacts to Oceano Dunes units OR 1, OR 2, OR 3, OR 5, and OR section titled Exemptions, the Sikes Act SVRA are possible, but the analysis does 11 generates additional stress on the Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) not quantify the impacts due to Oregon Parks and Recreation (16 U.S.C. 670a) required each military considerable uncertainty surrounding Department (OPRD) when applying for installation that includes land and water the probability that the CCC will alter its Federal grants to execute habitat suitable for the conservation and current permit or that Oceano Dunes management projects for the plover by management of natural resources to SVRA will face legal action due to the creating a Federal nexus where one did complete an integrated natural resources designation of critical habitat. In not previously exist. The commenter management plan (INRMP) by addition, the area within Oceano Dunes asserted that this Federal nexus November 17, 2001. As a result to a SVRA within Unit CA 31 is occupied by needlessly belabors efforts to improve 2004 amendment to the Act, section both breeding and wintering Pacific habitat for the plover and forces OPRD 4(a)(3)(B)(i) now provides: ‘‘The Coast WSP, and as a result any project and the Service to expend additional Secretary shall not designate as critical modifications that may take place staff time addressing items that have habitat any lands or other geographical would be a result of having to avoid take already been accounted for in the areas owned or controlled by the of the species and not because of the habitat conservation plan (HCP) process. Department of Defense, or designated designation of critical habitat and would Our Response: As stated in the for its use, that are subject to an be considered baseline impacts of the footnote to Exhibit 3–2 of the FEA, and integrated natural resources designation. as delineated in Table 3 below, Units management plan prepared under (44) Comment: A commenter OR 1, OR 2, OR 3, OR 4, OR 5, OR 6, section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. expressed concern that the designation OR 12, and OR 13 are considered 670a), if the Secretary determines in of critical habitat could impact beach unoccupied and consultation with the writing that such plan provides a benefit management activities, tourism, and, in Service would not occur absent critical to the species for which critical habitat turn, tax revenues in the City of Santa habitat designation. Unit OR 11 is is proposed for designation.’’ The Barbara. considered occupied by the Service and Department of Defense (DOD) lands we Our Response: Section 4.2.2 of the therefore, if a Federal nexus exists, identified as essential for the FEA describes expected economic consultation may be necessary to conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP impacts related to dredging and beach address project impacts to the species as within San Diego Bay have been nourishment projects in Unit CA 35, well as critical habitat. In the exempted under section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Santa Barbara Beaches. This section unoccupied units, costs of addressing Act. There are two INRMPs covering acknowledges the potential for critical habitat effects during Navy land in south San Diego County administrative impacts to semi-annual consultation and all administrative costs (2002 Naval Base Coronado INRMP and beach management activities caused by of consultation are considered 2000 San Diego Bay INRMP). All the designation of critical habitat for the incremental impacts of the designation, exemptions of Navy lands, including Pacific Coast WSP. Beach nourishment regardless of activity duration or the those within San Diego Bay, were based

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36740 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

on the 2002 Naval Base Coronado Pacific Coast WSP. We have determined Unit CA 46, INRMP (see Exemptions section). The that the actions being implemented (subunit CA 46A), and Bolsa Chica Port of San Diego owns non-DOD lands through the Vandenberg AFB INRMP Reserve (subunits 46E and 46F). The that are managed using the 2000 San provide a benefit to the Pacific Coast Unit was revised to include Diego Bay INRMP. Because we have a WSP, and therefore, we are exempting approximately 471 ac (191 ha), a net well-established partnership with the approximately 1,135 ac (459 ha) of DOD decrease of approximately 34 ac (14 ha) Port of San Diego for Pacific Coast WSP land in Units CA 32 and CA 33 under from the proposal. As described in our conservation, in this final rule we have section 4(a)(3) of the Act. For a complete January 17, 2012, Federal Register excluded, under section 4(b)(2) of the discussion of exemptions under section notice, the new areas identified better Act, the critical habitat within the plan 4(a)(3) of the Act, see Exemptions reflect lands essential to the Pacific area that is managed by the Port of San section below. Coast WSP (77 FR 2243). Diego (Subunits CA 55E and CA 55G) (2) During the public comment period (5) We received information from the (see Exclusions section). on the proposed rule, we received Willapa (NWR) information from the Navy that during development of this final rule Summary of the 2005 Rule approximately 8 ac (3 ha) of DOD lands regarding habitat suitability to the On September 29, 2005 (70 FR 56970), were included in the revised proposed Pacific Coast WSP at the refuge, and the we designated approximately 12,150 ac critical habitat within Unit CA 22 in extent of Federal jurisdiction. As a (4,922 ha) as critical habitat for the Monterey County, California. The Navy result, we modified the unit boundaries Pacific Coast WSP. We included 32 submitted an amended INRMP for these for WA 4A, Leadbetter Spit. In the units within Washington, Oregon, and lands. We have reviewed the amended March 2011 proposed rule, WA 4A was California. The unit breakdown by State INRMP and have determined that it identified as having 2,463 ac (997 ha) of is as follows: Washington, 3 units (2,526 provides conservation benefits for the habitat meeting criteria for designation ac (1,023 ha)); Oregon, 5 units (2,147 ac Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat. We as critical habitat (76 FR 16046). Federal (869 ha)); and California, 24 units (7,477 have exempted the 8 ac (3 ha) of DOD jurisdiction goes to ordinary high tide ac (3,026 ha)). During our comparison of lands from the designation under line. The acreage estimate under the the 2005 final critical habitat section 4(a)(3) of the Act, see proposed rule was incorrect, and the designation and this revised final Exemptions section below. revised unit is approximately 125 ac (50 designation, we discovered that the (3) We finalized our exclusion ha) smaller. In addition, the proposed acreage totals for some units or areas analysis under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. rule did not account for acreage that was were in error. The totals for areas for the Approximately 3,797 ac (1,537 ha) of unlabeled in the parcel data, similar to 2005 rule identified within this rule are habitat are excluded from the revised the situation described in point (6) the correct totals. final critical habitat designation based below (see Table 1). Within Subunit WA on this analysis. This represents Summary of Changes From the Revised 4A, approximately 1,713 ac (693 ha) are approximately 16 percent of the habitat Proposed Rule managed by Washington State and 987 that was proposed. See the Exclusions ac (399 ha) are on Willapa National On March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046), we section, below, for more information. Wildlife Refuge (Federal). proposed to designate 28,261 ac (11,436 Approximately 425 ac (172 ha) of tribal Similarly, Shoalwater Bay Tribe ha) of critical habitat for the Pacific lands are excluded from subunit WA Reservation lands included in Unit WA Coast WSP in 68 units. On January 17, 3B, including all land under the 3B, Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit, were 2012 (77 FR 2243), we reopened the jurisdiction of the Shoalwater Bay Tribe. miscalculated in the revised proposed comment period and made changes to Another 3,309 ac (1,339 ha) of critical rule (76 FR 16046). Tribal lands have our March 22, 2011, revised proposed habitat is being excluded under the been recalculated to be 425 ac (172 ha) rule. Specifically, we announced the Oregon Parks and Recreation in this revised final rule, all of which availability of the draft economic Department Habitat Conservation Plan, are excluded from designation under analysis on our March 22, 2011, revised City of San Diego Subarea Plan (under 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions proposed critical habitat rule (76 FR the Multi-Species Conservation Plan) section). 16046); identified the taxonomic and and the Carlsbad Habitat Management (6) During finalization of our critical nomenclature change for the Pacific Plan (under the Multi-species Habitat habitat designation, we discovered Coast WSP; proposed to exempt Conservation Plan). An additional 63 ac inconsistencies in the calculation of Vandenberg Air Force Base under (25 ha) of Port of San Diego managed some of the acreages for proposed units. provisions in section 4(a)(3) of the Act lands within subunits CA 55E and CA The inconsistencies resulted from due to their newly approved INRMP; 55G are being excluded based on a calculations based on parcel data (i.e. and proposed changes to Unit CA 46: management plan for the Pacific Coast ownership data), which do not contain Bolsa Chica State Beach and Bolsa Chica WSP and our partnership with the Port. the intertidal zone and other lands Reserve. The most significant changes We determined that excluding these managed by the California State Lands between the March 22, 2011, and lands would not result in extinction of Commission (and the similar agency for January 17, 2012, revised proposed rule the Pacific Coast WSP, and that the Washington). Consequently, those acres and this revised final rule are outlined benefits of excluding these lands were not included in the unit acreage in Table 2 below and include: outweigh the benefits of including them. totals in the proposed revised rule. (1) In the document announcing the Consequently, the Secretary is Table 1 lists the affected units. availability of the DEA (77 FR 2243; exercising his discretion to exclude Maps in the proposed revised rule for January 17, 2012), we stated we were approximately 3,797 ac (1,537 ha) of the affected units in Table 1 accurately considering exempting the Department land in Washington, Oregon, and depict the intended unit boundaries, of Defense (DOD) lands at Vandenberg California under section 4(b)(2) of the including the unlabeled lands managed Air Force Base (AFB) within Units CA Act. For a complete discussion of by the California State Lands 32 and CA 33 from the designation of exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Commission and the State of critical habitat based on the April 14, Act, see Exclusions section below. Washington (76 FR 16046). In addition, 2011, approved INRMP, which contains (4) Based on comments received by our methods discussion in this final conservation measures that protect the the USACE and the public, we revised revision reflects our decision to use the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36741

water’s edge as the westward or ocean- habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP to the this revised final designation and side unit boundary (refer to our Methods water’s edge. previous rules. However, these Used to Designate Critical Habitat (7) There were several discrepancies differences in acreages are small, and section, and our response to Comment between text and tables in the 2005 final the data provided within this rule 4 in the Summary of Comments and critical habitat rule for the Pacific Coast remain representative of our Recommendations section). This revised WSP (70 FR 56970). The information designation. Legal descriptions and GIS final designation includes the intertidal provided in this revised final rule is data layers are available at http:// zone and other lands managed by state compared to the tables in the 2005 www.fws.gov/arcata/es/birds/WSP/ land commission agencies. Therefore, revised rule (see Table 2 below in this plover.html, or upon request to the rule for comparison). Rounding error adequate notice has been provided Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR remains an issue, and may result in a regarding our intent to designate critical FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above). difference in acreages between tables in

TABLE 1—UNITS WITH DISCREPANCIES FROM PARCEL DATA AND UNIT BOUNDARY. THE DIFFERENCE IN ACREAGE (HECTARES) IS REFLECTED IN LANDS UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION

Total unit area Unit name Proposed acres recalculated ac (ha) ac (ha)

WA 4A Leadbetter Spit ...... 2,463 (997) 2,700 (1,093) CA 2 Gold Bluffs Beach ...... 144 (58) 233 (94) CA 3A Stone Lagoon ...... 52 (21) 55 (22) CA 3B Big Lagoon ...... 212 (86) 268 (108) CA 4A Clam Beach/Little River ...... 194 (79) 337 (136) CA 5A Humboldt Bay South Spit ...... 419 (170) 572 (231) CA 5B Eel River North Spit and Beach ...... 259 (105) 464 (188) CA 6 Eel River Gravel Bars ...... 1,139 (461) 1,349 (546) CA 7 MacKerricher Beach ...... 1,176 (476) 1,218 (493) CA 8 Manchester Beach ...... 482 (195) 505 (204) * Values in table may not sum due to rounding.

TABLE 2—CHANGES BETWEEN THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005, PACIFIC COAST WSP REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNA- TION; THE MARCH 22, 2011, AND THE JANUARY 17, 2012, REVISED PROPOSED DESIGNATION; AND THIS REVISED FINAL DESIGNATION [Acreage values are approximate and may not total due to rounding]

2005 Designation of 2011 and 2012 Revised 2012 Revised final critical revised critical habitat in proposed revisions to the habitat designation in AC/HA critical habitat designation AC/HA Critical habitat unit in this revised final rule in AC/HA AC HA AC HA AC HA

Washington: WA 1Copalis Spit...... 407 165 407 165 WA 2Damon Point...... 908 368 673 272 673 272 WA 3AMidway Beach...... 786 318 697 282 697 282 WA 3B Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit ...... 1121 454 696 282 WA 4A Leadbetter Spit ...... 832 337 2463 997 2700 1093 WA 4B Gunpowder Sands Island ...... 904 366 904 366

Washington Totals...... 2526 1022 6265 2535 6077 2459

Oregon: OR 1 Columbia River Spit ...... 169 68 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

OR 2 Necanicum River Spit ...... 211 85 11 4

OR 3 Nehalem River Spit ...... 299 121 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

OR 4 Bayocean Spit ...... 207 84 367 149 201 82

OR 5 Netarts Spit ...... 541 219 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

OR 6 Sand Lake South ...... 200 81 5 2 OR 7Sutton/Baker Beaches...... 260 105 372 151 276 112 OR 8A Siltcoos Breach ...... 8 3 15 6 15 6 OR 8B Siltcoos River Spit ...... 527 213 241 97 116 47 OR 8C Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch Creek Spit ...... 716 290 383 155 OR 8D North Umpqua River Spit ...... 236 95 59 24 OR 9 Tenmile Creek Spit ...... 235 95 244 99 223 90 OR 10 Coos Bay North Spit ...... 278 113 308 125 273 111

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36742 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 2—CHANGES BETWEEN THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005, PACIFIC COAST WSP REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNA- TION; THE MARCH 22, 2011, AND THE JANUARY 17, 2012, REVISED PROPOSED DESIGNATION; AND THIS REVISED FINAL DESIGNATION—Continued [Acreage values are approximate and may not total due to rounding]

2005 Designation of 2011 and 2012 Revised 2012 Revised final critical revised critical habitat in proposed revisions to the habitat designation in AC/HA critical habitat designation AC/HA Critical habitat unit in this revised final rule in AC/HA AC HA AC HA AC HA

OR 11 Bandon to New River ...... 632 256 1016 411 541 219

OR 12 Elk River Spit ...... 167 68 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

OR 13 Euchre Creek Spit ...... 116 47 9 4

Oregon Totals...... 2147 869 5218 2112 2112 855 California: CA 1 Lake Earl ...... 57 24 74 30 74 30 CA 2 Gold Bluffs Beach ...... 144 58 233 94 CA 3A Stone Lagoon ...... 52 21 55 22 CA 3B Big Lagoon ...... 280 113 212 86 268 108 CA 4A Clam Beach/Little River ...... 155 63 194 79 337 136 CA 4B Mad River Beach ...... 377 153 456 185 452 183 CA 5A Humboldt Bay South Spit ...... 375 152 419 170 572 231 CA 5B Eel River North Spit and Beach ...... 283 114 259 105 464 188 CA 5C Eel River South Spit and Beach ...... 402 163 339 137 336 136 CA 6 Eel River Gravel Bars ...... 1193 483 1139 461 1349 546 CA 7 MacKerricher Beach ...... 1048 424 1176 476 1218 493 CA 8Manchester Beach...... 341 138 482 195 505 204 CA 9 Dillon Beach ...... 39 16 39 16 CA 10APoint Reyes...... 462 187 460 186 460 186 CA 10B Limantour ...... 124 50 156 63 156 63 CA 11 Napa-Sonoma ...... 618 250 618 250 CA 12 Hayward ...... 1 0 1 0 CA 13A Eden Landing ...... 237 96 237 96 CA 13B Eden Landing ...... 171 69 171 69 CA 13C Eden Landing ...... 609 246 609 246 CA 14 Ravenswood ...... 89 36 89 36 CA 15 Warm Springs ...... 168 68 168 68 CA 16 Half Moon Bay ...... 37 15 36 15 36 15 CA 17 Waddell Creek Beach ...... 9 4 25 10 25 10 CA 18 Scott Creek Beach ...... 19 8 23 9 23 9 CA 19 Wilder Creek Beach ...... 10 4 15 6 15 6 CA 20 Jetty Road to Aptos ...... 399 161 399 161 CA 21 Mudflats ...... 281 114 281 114 281 114 CA 22 Monterey to Moss Landing ...... 967 391 959 388

...... 8 ac (3 ha) exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 23 Point Sur Beach ...... 61 25 72 29 72 29 CA 24 San Carpoforo Creek ...... 24 10 24 10 CA 25 Arroyo Laguna Creek ...... 28 11 28 11 CA 26 San Simeon State Beach ...... 28 11 24 10 24 10 CA 27 Villa Creek Beach ...... 17 7 20 8 20 8 CA 28 Toro Creek ...... 34 14 34 14 CA 29 Atascadero Beach/ ...... 213 86 213 86 CA 30 Morro Bay Beach ...... 1076 435 1076 435 CA 31 Pismo Beach/Nipomo Dunes ...... 1652 669 1652 669

CA 32 Vandenberg North ...... 711 288 Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 33 Vandenberg South ...... 424 172 Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 34 Devereaux Beach ...... 36 15 52 21 52 21 CA 35 Santa Barbara Beaches ...... 65 26 65 26 CA 36 Santa Rosa Island Beaches ...... 586 237 586 237 CA 37 San Buenaventura Beach ...... 70 28 70 28 CA 38 Mandalay Beach to Santa Clara River ...... 350 142 672 272 672 272 CA 39 Ormond Beach ...... 175 71 320 130 320 130

CA 40, CA 41 Mugu Lagoon ...... 87 35 Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36743

TABLE 2—CHANGES BETWEEN THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005, PACIFIC COAST WSP REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNA- TION; THE MARCH 22, 2011, AND THE JANUARY 17, 2012, REVISED PROPOSED DESIGNATION; AND THIS REVISED FINAL DESIGNATION—Continued [Acreage values are approximate and may not total due to rounding]

2005 Designation of 2011 and 2012 Revised 2012 Revised final critical revised critical habitat in proposed revisions to the habitat designation in AC/HA critical habitat designation AC/HA Critical habitat unit in this revised final rule in AC/HA AC HA AC HA AC HA

CA 42 San Nicolas Island ...... Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 43 Zuma Beach ...... 68 28 73 30 73 30 CA 44 Malibu Beach ...... 13 5 13 5 CA 45A Santa Monica Beach ...... 25 10 48 19 48 19 CA 45B Dockweiler North ...... 43 17 34 14 34 14 CA 45C Dockweiler South ...... 24 10 65 26 65 26 CA 45D Hermosa State Beach ...... 10 4 27 11 27 11 CA 46A Bolsa Chica State Beach ...... 4 2 93 38 93 38 CA 46B Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 2 1 CA 46C Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 591 239 222 90 222 90 CA 46D Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 2 1 CA 46E Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 247 100 247 100 CA 46F Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 2 1 CA 47 Santa Ana River Mouth ...... 13 5 19 8 19 8 CA 48 Balboa Beach ...... 25 10 25 10

CA 49 San Onofre Beach-Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton ...... 49 20 Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 50A–C ...... 65 26 66 27 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 51A–C San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve ...... 15 6 15 6

CA 52A San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 4 2 4 2

CA 52B San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 3 1 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 52C San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 4 2 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 53 Los Penasquitos Lagoon ...... 24 10 32 13 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 54A Fiesta Island ...... 2 1 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 54B Mariner’s Point ...... 7 3 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 54C South Mission Beach ...... 38 15 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 54D San Diego River Channel ...... 51 21 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 55A orth Island ...... 44 18 Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 55B Coronado Beach ...... 74 30 74 30

CA 55C ...... Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 55D Delta Beach ...... Exempt under 4(a)(3) Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 55E Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Ref- uge and D Street Fill ...... 128 52 132 54 79 32 CA 55F Silver Strand State Beach ...... 82 33 82 33

CA 55G Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve ...... 10 4 Excluded under 4(b)(2).

CA 55H Naval Radio Receiving Facility ...... 66 27 Exempt under 4(a)(3).

CA 55I San Diego National Wildlife Refuge South Bay Unit ...... 5 2 5 2 CA 55J Tijuana and ...... 182 74 150 61 150 61

California Totals...... 7,477 3,026 16,896 6,838 16,337 6,612

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36744 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 2—CHANGES BETWEEN THE SEPTEMBER 29, 2005, PACIFIC COAST WSP REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNA- TION; THE MARCH 22, 2011, AND THE JANUARY 17, 2012, REVISED PROPOSED DESIGNATION; AND THIS REVISED FINAL DESIGNATION—Continued [Acreage values are approximate and may not total due to rounding]

2005 Designation of 2011 and 2012 Revised 2012 Revised final critical revised critical habitat in proposed revisions to the habitat designation in AC/HA critical habitat designation AC/HA Critical habitat unit in this revised final rule in AC/HA AC HA AC HA AC HA

Total * ...... 12,150 4,917 28,379 11,485 24,527 9,926 * Values in table may not sum due to rounding.

In summary, this revised final critical (1) The specific areas within the authorization for an action that may habitat designation includes geographical area occupied by a species, affect a listed species or critical habitat, approximately 24,527 ac (9,926 ha) in at the time it is listed in accordance the consultation requirements of section 60 units, after excluding portions of with the Act, on which are found those 7(a)(2) would apply, but even in the Units/subunits WA 3B, OR 1–7, OR 8A– physical or biological features: event of a destruction or adverse D, OR 9–13, CA 50A–C, CA 52B–C, CA (a) Essential to the conservation of the modification finding, the obligation of 53, CA 54A–D, CA 55E, CA 55G, and CA species and the Federal action agency and the 55I (approximately 3,797 ac (1,537 ha)) (b) Which may require special landowner is not to restore or recover based on consideration of economic, management considerations or the species, but to implement national security, and other relevant protection; and reasonable and prudent alternatives to impacts (see Exclusions). The areas (2) Specific areas outside the avoid destruction or adverse identified in this revised final rule geographical area occupied by a species modification of critical habitat. constitute revisions of areas excluded at the time it is listed, upon a Under the first prong of the Act’s and designated as critical habitat for the determination that such areas are definition of critical habitat, areas Pacific Coast WSP on September 29, essential for the conservation of the within the geographical area occupied 2005 (70 FR 56970), and proposed species. by the species at the time it was listed revisions to that rule published on Conservation, as defined under are included in a critical habitat March 22, 2011 (76 FR 16046) and section 3 of the Act, means to use and designation if they contain physical or January 17, 2012 (77 FR 2243). This the use of all methods and procedures biological features (1) which are revised final critical habitat designation that are necessary to bring any essential to the conservation of the includes approximately 6,077 ac (2,460 endangered or threatened species to the species and (2) which may require ha) in 4 units within Washington, point at which the measures provided special management considerations or approximately 2,112 ac (856 ha) in 9 under the Act are no longer necessary. protection. In this final rule, we also units within Oregon, and 16,337 ac Such methods and procedures include, designate areas within the Pacific Coast (6,612 ha) in 47 units within California. but are not limited to, all activities WSP’s historical range that may not Table 2 above outlines the differences associated with scientific resources have been occupied at listing. We between the 2005 final critical habitat management such as research, census, designate those areas because we have rule (70 FR 56970; September 29, 2005), law enforcement, habitat acquisition determined that those areas are essential the 2011 and 2012 proposed revisions to and maintenance, propagation, live for the conservation of the species. For the critical habitat designation (76 FR trapping, and transplantation, and, in both the occupied and unoccupied areas 16046, March 22, 2011; 77 FR 2243, the extraordinary case where population (at the time of listing), critical habitat January 17, 2012, respectively), and this pressures within a given ecosystem designation identifies, to the extent revised final critical habitat designation cannot otherwise be relieved, may known using the best scientific and for the Pacific Coast WSP. For more include regulated taking. commercial data available, those information on the differences between Critical habitat receives protection physical or biological features that are the 2005 critical habitat rule and the under section 7 of the Act through the essential to the conservation of the 2011 revised proposed critical habitat requirement that Federal agencies species (such as space, food, cover, and rule and 2012 amendment, please see ensure, in consultation with the Service, protected habitat). In identifying those the Summary of Changes From that any action they authorize, fund, or physical and biological features within Previously Designated Critical Habitat carry out is not likely to result in the an area, we focus on the principal section of the revised proposed critical destruction or adverse modification of biological or physical constituent habitat rule published in the Federal critical habitat. The designation of elements (primary constituent elements Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR critical habitat does not affect land such as roost sites, nesting grounds, 16046), and the Changes to Proposed ownership or establish a refuge, seasonal , water quality, tide, Revised Critical Habitat section of the wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other soil type) that are essential to the document published in the Federal conservation area. Such designation conservation of the species. Primary Register on January 17, 2012 (77 FR does not allow the government or public constituent elements are the elements of 2243). to access private lands. Such physical or biological features that, Critical Habitat designation does not require when laid out in the appropriate implementation of restoration, recovery, quantity and spatial arrangement to Background or enhancement measures by non- provide for a species’ life-history Critical habitat is defined in section 3 Federal landowners. Where a landowner processes, are essential to the of the Act as: requests Federal agency funding or conservation of the species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36745

Under the second prong of the Act’s species, both inside and outside the although critical habitat designation can definition of critical habitat, we can critical habitat designation, will contribute to the overall recovery designate critical habitat in areas continue to be subject to: (1) strategy for a species, it does not, by outside the geographical area occupied Conservation actions implemented itself, achieve recovery plan goals. by the species at the time it is listed, under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) In Appendix C of the Recovery Plan upon a determination that such areas regulatory protections afforded by the (Service 2007), the Service recommends are essential for the conservation of the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act management actions that can be taken species. For example, an area currently for Federal agencies to insure their by land managers to benefit the occupied by the species but that was not actions are not likely to jeopardize the conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. occupied at the time of listing may be continued existence of any endangered Some actions should be implemented essential to the conservation of the or threatened species, and (3) the with other measures to maximize the species and may be included in the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act if recovery potential. Other recovery critical habitat designation. We actions occurring in these areas may actions need to be instituted when designate critical habitat in areas affect the species. Federally funded or conditions change; for example, when outside the geographical area occupied permitted projects affecting listed there is increased predation, or the type by a species only when a designation species outside their designated critical of predator changes. Monitoring and limited to its range would be inadequate habitat areas may still result in jeopardy intensive management may be required to ensure the conservation of the findings in some cases. These at some sites. species. protections and conservation tools will We expect that there will be an Section 4 of the Act requires that we continue to contribute to recovery of increased need for management (i.e., designate critical habitat on the basis of this species. Similarly, critical habitat implementation of recovery actions) as the best scientific and commercial data designations made on the basis of the ‘‘coastal squeeze’’ occurs with a rising available. Further, our Policy on best available information at the time of shift in sea level. A land manager’s Information Standards Under the designation will not control the response will likely vary by site, Endangered Species Act (published in direction and substance of future depending on the site needs at that time. the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 recovery plans, habitat conservation Additional planning may be required to FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act plans (HCPs), or other species set priorities to the expected change in (section 515 of the Treasury and General conservation planning efforts if new habitat condition. Government Appropriations Act for information available at the time of Much information has been collected Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. these planning efforts calls for a since the Pacific Coast WSP’s listing as 5658)), and our associated Information different outcome. threatened in 1993. Those data that Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, define life history parameters need to be establish procedures, and provide Relationship of Critical Habitat to regularly assessed to gain a better guidance to ensure that our decisions Recovery Planning understanding of Pacific Coast WSP are based on the best scientific data Areas that are important to the survivorship, response to predation and available. They require our biologists, to conservation of the species, but are disturbance, and response to changing the extent consistent with the Act and outside the critical habitat designation, habitats. A revised population viability with the use of the best scientific data will continue to be subject to analysis (Service 2007, Appendix D) available, to use primary and original conservation actions we implement will assist biologists and land managers sources of information as the basis for under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. Areas to understand population movements, recommendations to designate critical that support populations are also subject and perhaps prioritize areas suitable for habitat. to the regulatory protections afforded by intensive management. Cost-effective When we are determining which areas the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as management at a few, well-distributed should be designated as critical habitat, determined on the basis of the best sites may assist with long-term Pacific our primary source of information is available scientific information at the Coast WSP conservation, and allow for generally the information developed time of the agency action. Federally the sharing of resources. during the listing process for the funded or permitted projects affecting species. Additional information sources listed species outside their designated Methods may include the recovery plan for the critical habitat areas may still result in As required by section 4(b)(2) of the species, articles in peer-reviewed jeopardy findings in some cases. Act, we used the best scientific data journals, conservation plans developed Similarly, critical habitat designations available in determining areas that by States and counties, scientific status made on the basis of the best available contain the features essential to the surveys and studies, biological information at the time of designation conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. assessments, other unpublished will not control the direction and Data sources included research materials, or experts’ opinions or substance of future recovery plans, published in peer-reviewed articles and personal knowledge. HCPs, or other species conservation previous Service documents on the Habitat is dynamic, and species may planning efforts if new information species. Additionally, we utilized move from one area to another over available at the time of these planning regional Geographic Information System time. We recognize that critical habitat efforts calls for a different outcome. (GIS) shape files for area calculations designated at a particular point in time In developing this revised final rule, and mapping (also refer to Methods may not include all of the habitat areas we considered the conservation section in the 2011 revised proposed that we may later determine are relationship between critical habitat and rule published at 76 FR 16046). necessary for the recovery of the recovery planning. Although recovery species. For these reasons, a critical plans formulate the recovery strategy for Physical or Biological Features habitat designation does not signal that a species, they are not regulatory In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) habitat outside the designated area is documents, and there are no specific and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations unimportant or may not be needed for protections, prohibitions, or at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which recovery of the species. Areas that are requirements afforded a species based areas within the historical range and important to the conservation of the solely on a recovery plan. Furthermore, geographical area occupied by the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36746 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

species at the time of listing to designate characteristics of typically being flat, physical or biological feature needed by as critical habitat, we consider the open areas with sandy or saline this species. physical or biological features essential substrates, with usually sparse or absent Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or to the conservation of the species and vegetation or driftwood (Stenzel et al. Other Nutritional or Physiological which may require special management 1981, p. 18; Service 2007). Requirements considerations or protection. These In addition to the varying habitat include, but are not limited to: types identified above, individual Pacific Coast WSPs typically forage in (1) Space for individual and habitat characteristics also vary across open areas by locating prey visually and population growth and for normal the Pacific Coast WSP’s range. For then running to seize it with their beaks behavior; example, beach habitats in the southern (Page et al. 1995, p. 12). They may also (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or part of its range are generally probe in the sand for burrowing other nutritional or physiological characterized by large, flat, open spaces, invertebrates, or charge flying insects requirements; whereas beach habitats within the that are resting on the ground, snapping (3) Cover or shelter; northern part of the range (north of at them as they flush. Accordingly they (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or , CA) are smaller, more need open areas in which to forage, to rearing (or development) of offspring; widely distributed, and often associated facilitate both prey location and capture. and with stream mouths, bays, or . Deposits of tide-cast wrack such as kelp (5) Habitats that are protected from These varying habitat types and or driftwood tend to attract certain disturbance or are representative of the availability contribute to the Pacific invertebrates, and so provide important historical, geographical, and ecological Coast WSP’s ability to maintain its use foraging sites for plovers (Page et al. distributions of a species. of coastal areas for breeding and 1995, p. 12). Pacific Coast WSPs forage We derive the specific physical or wintering across its range and are both above and below high tide, but not biological features essential for the considered an essential physical or while those areas are underwater. Pacific Coast WSP from studies of this biological feature for the species. Foraging areas will therefore typically species’ habitat, ecology, and life history be limited by water on their shoreward as described in the Critical Habitat Space for Individual and Population side, and by dense vegetation or section of the revised proposed rule to Growth and for Normal Behavior development on their landward sides. designate critical habitat published in Pacific Coast WSPs require space for Therefore, we have identified open, the Federal Register on March 22, 2011 foraging and establishment of nesting sandy areas which may contain tide-cast (76 FR 16046), and in the information territories. These areas vary widely in wrack or other vegetative debris to presented below. Additional size depending on habitat type, habitat attract prey as a physical or biological information can be found in the final availability, life-history stage, and feature needed by this species. listing rule published in the Federal activity. As stated in the Background Pacific Coast WSPs use sites of Register on March 5, 1993 (58 FR section of the revised proposed freshwater for drinking where available, 12864), and the Recovery Plan for the designation (76 FR 16046; March 22, but some historical nesting sites, Pacific Coast Population of the Western 2011), males establish nesting territories particularly in southern California, have Snowy Plover (Charadrius alexandrinus that vary from about 0.25 to 2.5 ac (0.1 no obvious nearby freshwater sources. nivosus) finalized on August 13, 2007 to 1.0 ha) at interior sites (Page et al. Adults and chicks in those areas must (Service 2007). We have determined that 1995, p. 10) and 1.2 ac (0.5 ha) in be assumed to obtain their necessary the Pacific Coast WSP requires the coastal salt pan habitat, with beach water from the food they eat. following physical or biological territories perhaps larger (Warriner et al. Accordingly we have not included features. 1986, p. 18). Foraging activities also freshwater sites as a physical or occur in non-territorial areas up to 5 mi biological feature for the species. Habitats That Are Representative of the (8 kilometers (km)) from the nesting Historical Geographical and Ecological sites when not incubating. Essential Cover or Shelter Distribution of the Species areas must therefore extend beyond Pacific Coast WSPs occupy open The historical range of the Pacific nesting territories to include space for beach or similar areas for the majority Coast WSP extends from Copalis Spit, foraging during the nesting season and of their life functions. Such open areas Washington, south along the Pacific space for overwintering, and to provide provide little cover or shelter from Coast of Oregon and California to Bahia for connectivity with other portions of predators, human disturbance, winds, Magdelena, Baja California, Mexico. The the Pacific Coast WSP’s range. Pacific storms, and the extreme high tides Pacific Coast WSP breeds primarily Coast WSPs may overwinter at locations associated with weather events, and above the high tide line on coastal where there is no current breeding, but these conditions cause many nest losses. beaches, sand spits, dune-backed where breeding may have occurred in Pacific Coast WSPs and their eggs are beaches, sparsely vegetated dunes, the past (e.g. Dillon Beach, CA–9). well camouflaged against light colored, beaches at creek and river mouths, and These wintering areas provide sandy or pebbly backgrounds (Page et salt pans at lagoons and estuaries. Less important areas for overwinter survival, al. 1995, p. 12), so open areas with such common nesting habitats include bluff- provide protections for historical substrates actually constitute shelter for backed beaches, dredged material nesting areas, and allow for connectivity purposes of nesting. Chicks may also disposal sites, salt pond levees, dry salt between sites. These open areas also crouch near driftwood, dune plants and ponds, and river bars. In winter, Pacific allow plovers to fully utilize their piles of kelp to hide from predators Coast WSPs are found on many of the camouflage and running speed to avoid (Page and Stenzel 1981, p. 7). Plovers beaches used for nesting as well as on predators and to catch prey. Based on readily scrape blown sand out of their beaches where they do not nest, the information above, we identify areas nests, but there is little they can do to including manmade salt ponds and on surrounding known breeding and protect their nests against serious storms estuarine sand and mud flats. Despite wintering areas containing space for or flooding other than to attempt to lay the variation in the types of habitat nesting territories, foraging activities, a new clutch if the old one is lost (Page where the Pacific Coast WSP is found, and connectivity for dispersal and et al. 1995, p. 8). No studies have these habitats all share the same general nonbreeding or nesting use to be a quantified the amount of vegetation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36747

cover that would make an area consistently higher than on northern considerations or protection. We are unsuitable for nesting or foraging, but beaches, where recreational use was also designating areas outside the coastal nesting and foraging locations much lower (Persons and Applegate geographical area occupied by the typically have relatively well-defined 1997, p. 8). Ruhlen et al. (2003, p. 303) species at the time of listing, but are boundaries between open sandy found that increased human activities essential for the conservation of the substrate favorable to Pacific Coast on Point Reyes beaches resulted in a species. These sites are within the WSPs and unfavorably dense vegetation lower chick survival rate. historical range of the Pacific Coast inland. Such bounds show up well in Pacific Coast WSP require relatively WSP, and were used by the species aerial and satellite photographs, which undisturbed areas. However, prior to listing. See Criteria Used To we used to map essential habitat disturbance appears to be a relative Identify Critical Habitat section below features. Therefore, based on the feature that varies between sites and for a discussion of the species’ historical information above, we have identified Pacific Coast WSPs seem to respond and current geographic range. areas with sandy or pebbly backgrounds differently to disturbance by site. We believe conservation of the Pacific or other substrate which provide Consequently, one level of disturbance Coast WSP is dependent upon multiple camouflage for eggs, young, and nesting at a particular site may not be factors, including the conservation and adults and areas that contain driftwood, detrimental at another site. ‘‘Relatively management of areas to maintain dune plants, piles of kelp or other undisturbed’’ is therefore a site-specific ‘‘normal’’ ecological functions, where materials which provide cover and consideration. For example, incubating existing populations survive and shelter to be physical or biological Pacific Coast WSPs at Vandenberg Air reproduce. We are designating areas of features needed by this species. Force Base are easily disturbed because critical habitat that provide some or all there is little human-related activity and of the elements of physical or biological Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, and noise due to the military mission of the features essential for the conservation of Rearing (or Development) of Offspring Air Force. At Oceano Dunes SVRA this species. Based on the best available Pacific Coast WSPs nest in about 30 miles to the south, Pacific information, the primary constituent depressions in open, relatively flat Coast WSPs appear to tolerate more elements (PCEs) essential to the areas, near to tidal waters but far enough noise and activity. With intensive conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP away to avoid being inundated by daily management, the reproductive success are the following: tides. Typical substrate is sandy or for Pacific Coast WSPs at Oceano Dunes Sandy beaches, dune systems pebbly beaches, but plovers may also SVRA is fairly high, although it varies immediately inland of an active beach lay their eggs in existing depressions on from year to year. face, salt flats, mud flats, seasonally harder ground such as salt pan, Recent efforts in various areas along exposed gravel bars, artificial salt ponds cobblestones, or dredge tailings. As the Pacific coast that have been and adjoining levees, and dredge spoil stated earlier, Pacific Coast WSPs and implemented to isolate nesting plovers sites, with: their eggs are well camouflaged against from recreational beach users through (1) Areas that are below heavily light-colored, sandy or pebbly the use of docents, symbolic fencing, vegetated areas or developed areas and backgrounds (Page et al. 1995, p. 12), and public outreach have correlated above the daily high tides; Where available, dune systems with with higher nesting success in those (2) Shoreline habitat areas for feeding, numerous flat areas and easy access to areas (Page, et al. 2003, p. 3). Therefore with no or very sparse vegetation, that the shore are particularly favored for we have identified undisturbed areas are between the annual low tide or low- nesting. Plover nesting areas must that allow the species to conduct their water flow and annual high tide or high- provide shelter from predators and ‘‘normal activities’’ to be a physical or water flow, subject to inundation but human disturbance, as discussed above. biological feature essential for the not constantly under water, that support Unfledged chicks forage with one or species. small invertebrates, such as crabs, both parents, using the same foraging worms, flies, beetles, spiders, sand Primary Constituent Elements for the areas and behaviors as adults. hoppers, clams, and ostracods, that are Pacific Coast Western Snowy Plover Undisturbed Areas essential food sources; Pursuant to the Act and its (3) Surf- or water-deposited organic Disturbance of nesting or brooding implementing regulations under 50 CFR debris, such as seaweed (including kelp plovers by humans and domestic 424.12, we are required to identify the and eelgrass) or driftwood located on can be a major factor affecting physical or biological features essential open substrates that supports and nesting success. Pacific Coast WSPs to the conservation of the Pacific Coast attracts small invertebrates described in leave their nests when humans or pets WSP in areas occupied at the time of PCE 2 for food, and provides cover or approach too closely. Dogs may also listing, focusing on the features’ primary shelter from predators and weather, and deliberately chase plovers and constituent elements. We consider assists in avoidance of detection inadvertently trample nests, while primary constituent elements to be the (crypsis) for nests, chicks, and vehicles may directly crush adults, elements of physical or biological incubating adults; and chicks, or nests, separate chicks from features that provide for a species’ life- (4) Minimal disturbance from the brooding adults, and interfere with history processes and are essential to presence of humans, pets, vehicles, or foraging and mating activities (Warriner the conservation of the species. We are human-attracted predators, which et al. 1986, p. 25; Service 1993, p. designating critical habitat in areas provide relatively undisturbed areas for 12871; Ruhlen et al. 2003, p. 303). within the geographical areas that were individual and population growth and Repeated flushing of incubating plovers occupied by the species at the time of for normal behavior. exposes the eggs to the weather and listing that continue to be occupied The critical habitat identified in this depletes energy reserves needed by the today, that contain the primary revised rule contains the primary adult, which may result in reductions to constituent elements in the quantity and constituent elements in the appropriate nesting success. Surveys at Vandenberg spatial arrangement to support life- quantity and spatial arrangement Air Force Base, California, from 1994 to history functions essential for the essential to the conservation of the 1997, found the rate of nest loss on conservation of the species, and that Pacific Coast WSP, and supports southern beaches at the Base to be may require special management multiple life processes for the species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36748 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Portions of some critical habitat units plovers. Fishing can disturb Pacific designation of critical habitat for the may be currently degraded; however, Coast WSPs and can attract predators by Pacific Coast WSP, we used the best these areas could be restored with the presence of fish offal and bait available information on occupancy and special management, thereby providing (Lafferty 2001, p. 2222; Dugan 2003, p. habitat conditions of areas that were suitable habitat to offset habitat loss 134; Schlacher et al. 2007, p. 557; analyzed in 2005 to determine whether from anticipated sea-level rise resulting Service 2007, p. 33; Dugan and Hubbard to add or remove areas from this from climate change. Additional areas 2010, p. 67). revision of critical habitat. are proposed as critical habitat to allow For discussion of the threats to the The amount and distribution of a recovering Pacific Coast WSP Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat, please critical habitat being designated will population to occupy its former range, see the 12-month finding on the petition allow populations of Pacific Coast WSP and allow adjustment to changing to delist the Pacific Coast WPS (71 FR to: conditions (e.g. shifting sand dunes), 20607, April 21, 2006), the final listing (1) Maintain their existing expected sea-level rise, and human rule (58 FR 12864, March 5, 1993) and distribution; encroachment. the final critical habitat rule (70 FR (2) Increase their distribution into 56970, September 29, 2005). Please also previously occupied areas (needed to Special Management Considerations or see the Revised Final Critical Habitat offset habitat loss and fragmentation); Protection Designation section below for a (3) Move between areas depending on When designating critical habitat, we discussion of the threats in each of the resource and habitat availability assess whether the specific areas within proposed revised critical habitat units. (response to changing nature of coastal the geographical area occupied by the beach habitat) and support genetic species at the time of listing contain Criteria Used To Identify Critical interchange; features that are essential to the Habitat (4) Increase the size of each conservation of the species and which As required by section 4(b)(2) of the population to a level where the threats may require special management Act, we use the best scientific data of genetic, demographic, and normal considerations or protection. available to designate critical habitat. environmental uncertainties are All areas included in our revision of We review available information diminished; and critical habitat will require some level of pertaining to the habitat requirements of (5) Maintain their ability to withstand management to address the current and the species. In accordance with the Act local or unit level environmental future threats to the physical and and its implementing regulation at 50 fluctuations or catastrophes. biological features essential to the CFR 424.12(e), we consider whether We considered the following criteria conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. designating additional areas—outside to select appropriate units for this Special management considerations or those currently occupied as well as revised rule: protection may be required to minimize those occupied at the time of listing— (1) Areas throughout the range of the habitat destruction, degradation, and are necessary to ensure the conservation Pacific Coast WSP located to allow the fragmentation associated with the of the species. We are designating species to move and expand. The following threats, among others: water critical habitat in areas within the dynamic nature of beach, dune, and diversions, stabilized dunes and geographical area occupied by the similar habitats necessitates that Pacific watercourses associated with urban species at the time of listing in 1993. We Coast WSPs move to adjust for changes development, human recreational also are designating specific areas in habitat availability, food sources, and activities, off-highway vehicle (OHV) outside the geographical area occupied pressures on survivorship or use, beach raking, pets, nonnative by the species at the time of listing reproductive success (Colwell et al. vegetation, resource extraction, and because such areas are essential for the 2009, p. 5). Designating units in fishing. conservation of the species, and are appropriate areas throughout the range Water diversions reduce the transport within the Pacific Coast WSP’s of the Pacific Coast WSP allows for of sediments, which contribute to historical range. We have determined seasonal migration, year-to-year suitable nesting and foraging substrates. that limiting the designation of critical movements, and expansion of the Stabilized dunes and watercourses habitat to those areas that were Pacific Coast WSP to its historical associated with urban development alter considered occupied at the time of boundaries. We consider this necessary the dynamic processes of beach and listing is no longer sufficient to conserve to conserve the species because it assists river systems, thereby reducing the open the species because: in counterbalancing catastrophes, such nature of suitable habitat needed for (1) There has been considerable loss as extreme climatic events, oil spills, or predator detection. Human recreational and degradation of habitat throughout disease that might depress regional activities disturb foraging or nesting the species’ range since the time of survival or productivity. Having units activities or may attract and provide listing; across the species’ range helps maintain cover for approaching predators. The (2) We anticipate a further loss of a robust, well-distributed population use of OHVs has been documented to habitat in the future due to sea-level rise and enhances survival and productivity crush plover nests and strike plover resulting from climate change; and; of the Pacific Coast WSP as a whole, adults. Beach raking or grooming can (3) The species needs habitat areas facilitates interchange of genetic remove wrack, reducing food resources that are arranged spatially in a way that material between units, and promotes and cover, and contributing to beach will maintain connectivity and allow recolonization of any sites that erosion. Pets (leashed and unleashed) dispersal within and between units. experience declines or local extirpations can cause incubating adults to leave the All areas designated as critical habitat due to low productivity or temporary nest and establish trails in the sand that are within the historical range of the habitat loss. Within this designation we can lead predators to the nest. species, which differs from the species’ focused on areas within the six recovery Nonnative vegetation reduces visibility geographic distribution (i.e., occupancy) units identified in the Recovery Plan that plovers need to detect predators, at the time of listing. We have identified (Service 2007, Appendix A). and occupies otherwise suitable habitat. areas to include in this designation by (2) Breeding areas. Areas identified in Resource extraction can disturb applying Criteria 1 through 6 below. In the Recovery Plan (Service 2007) known incubating, brooding, or foraging an effort to update our 2005 final to support breeding Pacific Coast WSP

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36749

were selected. Selected sites include to support the Pacific Coast WSP. These lack physical or biological features for historical breeding areas and areas areas generally are upland habitats the Pacific Coast WSP. The scale of currently being used by breeding adjacent to beach and other areas used maps we prepared under the parameters plovers. These areas are essential to the by the species containing introduced for publication within the Code of conservation of the species because they vegetation, such as European beach Federal Regulations may not reflect the contain the physical and biological grass (Ammophila arenaria), that exclusion of such developed lands. Any features necessary for Pacific Coast currently limits use of the area by the such lands inadvertently left inside WSPs to breed and produce offspring species. These areas would provide critical habitat boundaries shown on the and ensure that population increases are habitat to off-set the anticipated loss and maps of this revised critical habitat are distributed throughout the Pacific Coast degradation of habitat due to sea-level considered excluded in this revised WSP’s range. By selecting breeding rise expected from the effects of climate rule. Therefore, a Federal action areas across the Pacific Coast WSP’s change or due to development. These involving these lands would not trigger range we can assist in conserving the areas previously contained and would section 7 consultation with respect to species’ genetic and demographic still contain the features essential to the critical habitat unless the specific action robustness and important life-history conservation of the species once would affect the physical and biological stages for long-term sustainability of the removal of the beachgrass and features in adjacent critical habitat. entire listed species. Some breeding restoration of the area has occurred. We are designating critical habitat areas are occupied year-round and also units that we have determined were Methods Used To Designate Critical are used as wintering areas by a portion occupied at the time of listing and Habitat of the population. contain sufficient elements of physical (3) Wintering areas. Major wintering In order to translate the criteria above and biological features to support life- sites not already selected under to the areas on the ground we used the history processes essential for the criterion 2 above were added. A ‘‘major’’ following methodology to identify the conservation of the species, and lands wintering site is defined as one that boundaries of critical habitat for the outside of the geographical area supports more wintering birds than Pacific Coast WSP: occupied at the time of listing that we average for the geographical region (1) We digitally mapped occurrence have determined are essential for the based on current or historical numbers. data within the range of the Pacific conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. These areas are necessary to provide Coast WSP at the time and subsequent Units in this revised designation have sufficient habitat for the survival of to the time of listing in the form of sufficient elements of physical or Pacific Coast WSPs during the polygons and points using ArcMap 9.3.1 biological features to support Pacific nonbreeding season as these areas allow (ESRI 2009). An attempt was made to Coast WSP life-history processes. Some for dispersal of adults or juveniles to consider site-specific survey data that units contain all of the identified nonbreeding sites and provide roosting was both current and historical. Survey elements of physical and biological and foraging opportunities and shelter information used in this designation features and support multiple life- during inclement weather. was compiled from several sources history processes. Some units contain (4) Unique habitat. Additional sites during various timeframes as identified only some elements of the physical and were added that provide unique habitat, in the Recovery Plan (Service 2007, biological features necessary to support or that are situated to facilitate Appendix B). the Pacific Coast WSP particular use of interchange between otherwise widely (2) We utilized National Agriculture that habitat. separated units. This criterion is based Imagery Program (NAIP 2009) aerial (3) In determining the boundaries of on standard conservation biology imagery with a 3.3-ft (1-m) resolution to the OPRD HCP-covered lands that are principles. By protecting a variety of determine the lateral extent (width) being excluded under section 4(b)(2) of habitats and facilitating interchange between the water and upland areas of the Act from this revised final critical between them, we increase the ability of habitat. The western (seaward) habitat designation, we relied on Oregon the species to adjust to various limiting boundary of the coastal units is the State statute for the definition of beach factors that affect the population, such water’s edge based on NAIP imagery. and shoreline boundaries. HCP-covered as predators, disease, major storms, This boundary varies daily with each lands consist of the ‘‘Ocean Shore,’’ an habitat loss and degradation, and rise in changing tide, and will vary seasonally area defined by Oregon State statute as sea level. with storm surges, and sand erosion and the sandy areas of the Oregon coast (5) Areas to maintain connectivity of deposition. Given the dynamic nature of between the extreme low tide and the habitat. Some areas that may be coastal beaches, riparian areas, and salt actual or statutory vegetation line, seasonally lacking in certain elements of pond management, we also delineated whichever is farther landward. HCP- essential physical or biological features the lateral extent to encompass the covered lands do not include the and that contain marginal habitat were entire area up to the lower edge of Federal lands within the ‘‘Ocean Shore’’ included if they were contiguous with permanent upland vegetation or to the boundary. For these Federal lands that areas containing one or more of those edge of a permanent barrier, such as a are not excluded from this designation, elements and if they contribute to the bluff, levee, sea wall, human the designated lands extend landward hydrologic and geologic processes development, etc. Using aerial imagery from the mean high tide. OPRD either essential to the ecological function of (NAIP 2009), we also delineated the owns and leases lands on the ‘‘Ocean the system. These areas are essential to northern and southern extents of the Shore’’ as a State Park or State Natural the conservation of the species because units to include the beach areas Area or manages the ‘‘Ocean Shore’’ they maintain connectivity within associated with the occurrence under a statutory recreation easement populations, allow for species information identified above. (Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 390.635 movement throughout the course of a When determining revised critical and 390.620; Oregon Administrative given year, and allow for population habitat boundaries, we made every Rule 736–020–0040(3)). expansion. effort to avoid including developed GIS data layers for the statute (6) Restoration areas. We have areas, such as lands covered by vegetation line and mean high water selected some areas within occupied buildings, sea walls, pavement, and line were provided to the Service by the units that, once restored, would be able other structures, because these areas State of Oregon. The statutory

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36750 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

vegetation line (ORS 390.770) was Florence were collected in the summer Revised Final Critical Habitat established in 1969. This is a of 2009. Designation jurisdictional line that determines the Using the 2009 National Agriculture We are designating approximately regulatory authority of OPRD to regulate Imagery Program data (NAIP) for 6,077 ac (2,460 ha) in 4 units within development and recreation on the proposed revised western snowy plover Washington, approximately 2,112 ac beach. The statutory vegetation line critical habitat, we incorporated the (855 ha) in 9 units within Oregon, and applies to all the land located along the MHWL into the critical habitat layer to 16,337 ac (6,612 ha) in 47 units within Pacific Ocean between the Columbia create separate polygons. These California. The area identified as critical River and the Oregon-California polygons represent HCP-covered lands habitat Units CA32, Vandenberg Air boundary between extreme low tide and Force Base North and CA33, the lines of vegetation as established adjacent to Federal lands and were excluded from critical habitat. Vandenberg Air Force Base South and described according to the Oregon (combined total of approximately 1,134 Coordinate System (ORS) 93.330. Where the ‘‘Ocean Shore’’ overlaps ac (459 ha)), have been exempted from Adjacent to Federal lands, the ‘‘Ocean non-Federal lands, we incorporated the this revised final designation in their Shore’’ only extends to the mean high statutory vegetation line into the critical entirety under section 4(a)(3)(B) of the water line (MHWL). MHWL is a tidal habitat layer to determine HCP-covered Act (refer to the Exemptions section datum, which is the computed average lands. Based on aerial imagery, if the below). These units had been previously of all the high water heights observed actual vegetation line was farther proposed for designation as they did not over the National Tidal Datum Epoch. landward of the statutory vegetation have clear management protections for For purposes of OPRD jurisdiction line, all land seaward of the actual Pacific Coast WSP until the April 14, where adjacent to Federal lands, ‘‘mean vegetation line was excluded from 2011, approval of the base’s INRMP. high water’’ corresponds generally with critical habitat, as defined by Oregon Additional areas have been excluded the ‘‘line of ordinary high water’’ as statute. All areas that were not under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see defined in ORS 274.005(3). For mapping identified for exclusion remain as Exclusions section below). Table 3 critical habitat in Oregon, MHWL data designated critical habitat. identifies the areas known to be from south of Florence were collected in occupied at the time of listing as well the summer of 2008; data from north of as current occupancy status.

TABLE 3—OCCUPANCY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP BY DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS

Occupied Unit at time of Currently listing? occupied?

WA 1 Copalis Spit ...... No ...... No. WA 2 Damon Point ...... Yes ...... Yes. WA 3A Midway Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. WA 3B Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. WA 4A Leadbetter Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. WA 4B Gunpowder Sands Island ...... Unknown .. No. OR 2 Necanicum River Spit ...... No ...... No. OR 4 Bayocean Spit ...... Yes ...... No. OR 6 Sand Lake South ...... No ...... No. OR 7 Sutton/Baker Beaches ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 8A Siltcoos Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 8B Siltcoos River Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 8C Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch Creek Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 8D North Umpqua River Spit ...... No ...... No. OR 9 Tenmile Creek Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 10 Coos Bay North Spit ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 11 Bandon to New River ...... Yes ...... Yes. OR 13 Euchre Creek Spit ...... No ...... No. CA 1 Lake Earl ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 2 Gold Bluffs Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 3A Stone Lagoon ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 3B Big Lagoon ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 4A Clam Beach/Little River ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 4B Mad River Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 5A Humboldt Bay South Spit Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 5B Eel River North Spit and Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 5C Eel River South Spit and Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 6 Eel River Gravel Bars ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 7 MacKerricher Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 8 Manchester Beach ...... No ...... Yes. CA 9 Dillon Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 10A Point Reyes ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 10B Limantour ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 11 Napa-Sonoma Marshes ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 12 Hayward ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 13A Eden Landing ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 13B Eden Landing ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 13C Eden Landing ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 14 Ravenswood ...... Yes ...... Yes.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36751

TABLE 3—OCCUPANCY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP BY DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS—Continued

Occupied Unit at time of Currently listing? occupied?

CA 15 Warm Springs ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 16 Half Moon Bay ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 17 Waddell Creek Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 18 Scott Creek Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 19 Wilder Creek Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 20 Jetty Road to Aptos ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 21 Elkhorn Slough Mudflats ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 22 Monterey to Moss Landing ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 23 Point Sur Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 24 San Carpoforo Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 25 Arroyo Laguna Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 26 San Simeon State Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 27 Villa Creek Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 28 Toro Creek ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 29 Atascadero Beach/Morro Stand State Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 30 Morro Bay Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 31 Pismo Beach/Nipomo Dunes ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 34 Devereaux Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 35 Santa Barbara Beaches ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 36 Santa Rosa Island Beaches ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 37 San Buenaventura Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 38 Mandalay Beach to Santa Clara River ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 39 Ormond Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 43 Zuma Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 44 Malibu Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 45A Santa Monica Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 45B Dockweiler North ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 45C Dockweiler South ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 45D Hermosa State Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46A Bolsa Chica State Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46B Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46C Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46D Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46E Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 46F Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 47 Santa Ana River Mouth ...... No ...... No. CA 48 Balboa Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 50(A–C) Batiquitos Lagoon ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 51(A–C) San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 52(A–C) San Dieguito Lagoon ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 53 Los Penasquitos Lagoon ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 54A Fiesta Island ...... Yes ...... No. CA 54B Mariner’s Point ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 54C South Mission Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 54D San Diego River Channel ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55B Coronado Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55C Silver Strand Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55D Delta Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55E Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and D Street Fill ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55F Silver Strand State Beach ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55H Naval Radio Receiving Facility ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55I San Diego National Wildlife Refuge, South Bay Unit ...... Yes ...... Yes. CA 55J Tijuana Estuary and Border Field State Park ...... Yes ...... Yes

Table 4 outlines the areas included in designated as critical habitat are best assessment of areas that meet the this revised final critical habitat discussed in detail below. The areas we definition of critical habitat for the designation by land ownership. Units describe below constitute our current Pacific Coast WSP.

TABLE 4—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP BY LAND OWNERSHIP

Proposed Proposed Land Designated Designated Critical habitat units acres hectares ownership acres hectares

WA 1 Copalis Spit ...... 407 165 State ...... 407 165 WA 2 Damon Point ...... 673 272 State ...... 648 262 Other ...... 25 10 WA 3A Midway Beach ...... 697 282 State ...... 697 282 WA 3B Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit ** ...... 1,121 454 State ...... 505 204

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36752 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 4—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP BY LAND OWNERSHIP—Continued

Proposed Proposed Land Designated Designated Critical habitat units acres hectares ownership acres hectares

Other ...... 192 78 WA 4A Leadbetter Spit ...... 2,700 1,093 Federal ...... 997 403 State ...... 1,703 689 WA 4B Gunpowder Sands Island ...... 904 366 Federal ...... 904 366

Washington State Totals Federal ...... 1,901 769

State ...... 3,960 1,602

Other ...... 217 88

OR 2 Necanicum River Spit ...... 211 85 Other ...... 11 4 OR 4 Bayocean Spit ...... 367 149 Federal ...... 199 81 Other ...... 2 1 OR 6 Sand Lake South ...... 200 81 Other ...... 5 2 OR 7 Sutton/Baker Beaches ...... 372 151 Federal ...... 276 112 OR 8A Siltcoos Breach ...... 15 6 Federal ...... 7 3 State ...... 8 3 OR 8B Siltcoos River Spit ...... 241 97 Federal ...... 116 47 OR 8C Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch Creek Spit ...... 716 290 Federal ...... 383 155 OR 8D North Umpqua River Spit ...... 236 96 Federal ...... 59 24 OR 9 Tenmile Creek Spit ...... 244 99 Federal ...... 223 90 OR 10 Coos Bay North Spit ...... 308 125 Federal ...... 273 110 OR 11 Bandon to New River ...... 1,016 411 Federal ...... 459 186 Other ...... 82 33 OR 13 Euchre Creek Spit ...... 116 47 Other ...... 9 4

Oregon State Totals Federal ...... 1,995 807

State ...... 8 3

Other ...... 109 44

CA 1 Lake Earl ...... 74 30 State ...... 73 30 CA 2 Gold Bluffs Beach * ...... 144 58 State ...... 233 94 CA 3A Stone Lagoon * ...... 52 21 State ...... 55 22 CA 3B Big Lagoon * ...... 212 86 State ...... 268 108 CA 4A Clam Beach/Little River * ...... 194 79 State ...... 222 90 Other ...... 115 47 CA 4B Mad River Beach ...... 456 185 State ...... 148 60 Other ...... 304 123 CA 5A Humboldt Bay South Spit * ...... 419 170 Federal ...... 20 8 State ...... 542 219 Other ...... 10 4 CA 5B Eel River North Spit and Beach * ...... 259 105 State ...... 457 185 Other ...... 7 3 CA 5C Eel River South Spit and Beach ...... 339 137 State ...... 172 70 Other ...... 164 66 CA 6 Eel River Gravel Bars * ...... 1,139 461 State ...... 304 123 Other ...... 1,045 463 CA 7 MacKerricher Beach * ...... 1,176 476 State ...... 1,144 463 Other ...... 74 30 CA 8 Manchester Beach * ...... 482 195 Federal ...... 68 28 State ...... 425 172 Other ...... 12 5 CA 9 Dillon Beach ...... 39 16 Other ...... 39 16 CA 10A Point Reyes ...... 460 186 Federal ...... 460 186 CA 10B Limantour ...... 156 63 Federal...... 156 63 CA 11 Napa-Sonoma ...... 618 250 State ...... 618 250 CA 12 Hayward ...... 1 0 Other ...... 1 0 CA 13A Eden Landing ...... 237 96 State ...... 228 92 Other ...... 8 3 CA 13B Eden Landing ...... 171 69 State ...... 171 69 CA 13C Eden Landing ...... 609 246 State ...... 602 244 Other ...... 7 3 CA 14 Ravenswood ...... 89 36 Other...... 89 36 CA 15 Warm Springs ...... 168 68 Federal ...... 168 68 CA 16 Half Moon Bay ...... 36 15 State ...... 36 15 CA 17 Waddell Creek Beach ...... 25 10 State ...... 19 8 Other ...... 6 2 CA 18 Scott Creek Beach ...... 23 9 State ...... 15 6 Other ...... 8 3

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36753

TABLE 4—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP BY LAND OWNERSHIP—Continued

Proposed Proposed Land Designated Designated Critical habitat units acres hectares ownership acres hectares

CA 19 Wilder Creek Beach ...... 15 6 State ...... 14 6 Other ...... 1 0 CA 20 Jetty Road Aptos ...... 399 161 State ...... 369 149 Other ...... 30 12 CA 21 Elkhorn Slough Mudflats ...... 281 114 State ...... 281 114 CA 22 Monterey to Moss Landing ...... 967 391 Federal ...... 415 168 State ...... 285 115 Other ...... 259 105 CA 23 Point Sur Beach ...... 72 29 State ...... 38 15 Other ...... 34 14 CA 24 San Carpoforo Creek ...... 24 10 Federal ...... 4 2 State ...... 18 7 Other ...... 2 1 CA 25 Arroyo Laguna Creek ...... 28 11 State ...... 18 7 Other ...... 10 4 CA 26 San Simeon State Beach ...... 24 10 State ...... 24 10 CA 27 Villa Creek Beach ...... 20 8 State ...... 20 8 CA 28 Toro Creek ...... 34 14 State ...... 11 4 Other ...... 23 9 CA 29 Atascadero Beach/Morro Strand State Beach ...... 213 86 State ...... 64 26 Other ...... 149 60 CA 30 Morro Bay Beach ...... 1,076 435 State ...... 948 383 Other ...... 129 52 CA 31 Pismo Beach/Nipomo Dunes ...... 1,652 669 Federal ...... 242 98 State ...... 552 223 Other ...... 858 347 CA 34 Devereaux Beach ...... 52 21 State ...... 43 17 Other ...... 9 4 CA 35 Santa Barbara Beaches ...... 65 26 State ...... 30 12 Other ...... 35 14 CA 36 Santa Rosa Island Beaches ...... 586 237 Federal ...... 586 237 CA 37 San Buenaventura Beach ...... 70 28 State ...... 70 28 CA 38 Mandalay Beach to Santa Clara River ...... 672 272 State ...... 459 186 Other ...... 213 86 CA 39 Ormond Beach ...... 320 130 State ...... 159 65 Other ...... 161 65 CA 43 Zuma Beach ...... 73 30 State ...... 1 0 Other ...... 72 29 CA 44 Malibu Beach ...... 13 5 State ...... 13 5 CA 45A Santa Monica Beach ...... 48 19 State ...... 29 12 Other ...... 19 8 CA 45B Dockweiler North ...... 34 14 State ...... 34 14 CA 45C Dockweiler South ...... 65 26 State ...... 54 22 Other ...... 11 5 CA 45D Hermosa State Beach ...... 27 11 State ...... 8 3 Other ...... 19 8 CA 46A Bolsa Chica Beach ...... 93 38 State ...... 93 38 CA 46B Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 State ...... 2 1 CA 46C Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 222 90 State ...... 222 90 CA 46D Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 State ...... 2 1 CA 46E Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 247 100 State ...... 247 100 CA 46F Bolsa Chica Reserve ...... 2 1 State ...... 2 1 CA 47 Santa Ana River Mouth ...... 19 8 State ...... 18 7 Other ...... 1 0 CA 48 Balboa Beach ...... 25 10 Other ...... 25 10 CA 51A–C San Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve ...... 15 6 State ...... 11 4 Other ...... 4 2 CA 52A San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 4 2 Other ...... 4 2 CA 55B Coronado Beach ...... 74 30 State ...... 74 30 CA 55E Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and D Street 132 54 Federal...... 79 32 Fill. CA 55F Silver Strand State Beach ...... 82 33 Federal ...... 78 31 State ...... 4 1 CA 55I San Diego National Wildlife Refuge, South Bay Unit ...... 5 2 Federal ...... 5 2 CA 55J Tijuana Estuary and Border Field State Park ...... 150 61 Federal ...... 71 29 Other ...... 79 32

California State Totals Federal ...... 2,352 952

State ...... 9,857 3,989

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36754 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 4—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE PACIFIC COAST WSP BY LAND OWNERSHIP—Continued

Proposed Proposed Land Designated Designated Critical habitat units acres hectares ownership acres hectares

Other ...... 4,128 1,671

Totals Designated By Ownership Federal ...... 6,248 2,529

State ...... 13,825 5,595

Other ...... 4,454 1,802

Totals Designated By State Washington .. 6,078 2,460

Oregon ...... 2,112 855

California ...... 16,337 6,612

Grand Total ...... 24,527 9,926 * Land ownership values differ from the revised proposed rule due to updated ownership data. ** Off-reservation lands (fee-owned) were not excluded and are included within the Other land ownership total. Values in table may not sum due to rounding.

Brief descriptions of all units and therefore relatively undisturbed. plover nesting has been documented at reasons why they meet the definition of Although currently unoccupied, the Damon Point since 2006, we still critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP unit is considered essential for the consider this unit occupied by the are described below. The units are conservation of the species as it allows species based on previous use of the grouped by State and listed in order for population expansion into the area, on the fluctuating use of areas in geographically north to south. For more northern extent of the Pacific Coast general by the species as a response to information about the areas excluded WSP’s historical range from adjacent habitat and resource availability, and from critical habitat designation, please occupied areas and has high-quality because breeding surveys are not see the Exclusions section of this habitat, including a long sandy beach extensive presence-absence surveys and revised final rule. with limited disturbance with sparsely only provide information during the vegetated dunes that extend to the river, breeding season. We have determined Washington providing nesting and foraging that the unit contains the physical and WA 1, Copalis Spit, 407 ac (165 ha) opportunities for the species. biological features essential to the conservation of the species which may Copalis Spit is located along the WA 2, Damon Point, 673 ac (272 ha) require special management central Washington coast, This unit is located at the southern considerations or protection. The unit approximately 20 mi (32 km) northwest end of the City of Ocean Shores in Grays includes sandy beaches that are of the Community of Hoquiam in Grays Harbor County and is a sandy spit that relatively undisturbed by human or Harbor County. Copalis Spit is a 2-mi (3- extends into Grays Harbor. The unit tidal activity (nesting habitat), large km) long sand spit bounded by the boundary begins at the Damon Point expanses of sparsely vegetated barren Copalis River on the northern and parking area off Marine View Drive. The terrain, and mudflats and sheltered bays landward sides. The Copalis Beach western boundary generally follows the that provide ample foraging areas. access road off State Route 109 and property line for the Oyhut Wildlife The majority (648 ac (262 ha)) of the State Park property line demark the Area. unit is administered by the State of southern boundary. The unit is entirely This unit was occupied at the time of Washington (Department of Fish and within Griffiths-Priday Ocean State Park listing, and we consider this unit to be Wildlife and Department of Natural (Washington State Parks and Recreation currently occupied. Research in the Resources). There are over 7 mi (11 km) Commission). mid-1980s indicated that up to 20 of sandy beaches and shoreline at This unit is the northernmost unit in Pacific Coast WSPs have used Damon Damon Point, and the shape of the spit the range of the species and historically Point for nesting. However, use has changes constantly with winter storms supported 6 to 12 nesting pairs of declined significantly at this site, with and nearshore sand drift. In recent Pacific Coast WSPs, but no nesting has only six adult birds documented using years, some of the lower elevation areas been documented since 1984 (Service the area during the breeding season in have been overwashed, and coastal 2007, p. 21). This unit was not occupied 2005. A historic shipwreck (S.S. Catala) erosion may result in separation of the at the time of listing and is not currently was exposed during winter storms in spit from the mainland in the near occupied. The unit consists of a long 2006, and the vessel was removed from future. The western edge of the unit lies sandy beach with sparsely vegetated the spit due to oil spill and other adjacent to a municipal wastewater dunes that extend to the river, providing hazardous materials concerns over a treatment facility that is managed by the nesting and foraging opportunities, as period of 17 months (State of City of Ocean Shores, with a few well as protection from the weather. The Washington, Department of Ecology undevelopable private parcels in the northward shift of Connor Creek washed 2007). The opportunity to view the tidelands near the parking area. Similar out the beach access road at the shipwreck and removal operation drew to Copalis Spit, the access road has southern end, effectively closing the media attention, and hundreds of washed out, and the area is currently area to motorized vehicles. Because of visitors visited the site on weekends. inaccessible to motorized vehicles. its relatively remote location, the area Visitation of the area has dropped off The primary threats to Pacific Coast receives little human use and is since the clean-up. Even though no WSPs that may require special

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36755

management at this time are recreational physical and biological features disturbance to breeding Pacific Coast use, including pedestrians and identified above. WSPs, and maintenance of the physical unleashed pets; habitat loss from or biological features within the WA 3B, Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit, 696 European beach grass; and potential subunit. ac (282 ha) reopening of the vehicle access road. Based on interpretation of aerial Special management in the form of The subunit is located in Pacific imagery, the Cape Shoalwater area has developing and enforcing regulations to County at Shoalwater Bay (also known experienced extensive erosion over the address the recreation issues may be as Graveyard Spit). This beach is an past 15 years. A nearly 0.3 mi-wide (0.5 needed. Management to remove and extension of Midway Beach, and km-wide) by 1.5 mi-long (2.4 km-long) control beach grass will prevent further extends south into the entrance of section of the coastline, including roads spread of nonnative vegetation, thereby Willapa Bay. The western portion of this and residences, has been reclaimed by maintaining and expanding the subunit starts at a narrow strip of beach the ocean, resulting in the accretion of elements of essential physical or adjacent to State Route 105 and extends Midway Beach. The accretion of beach biological features identified above. to the western edge of the Shoalwater improves elements of essential physical Bay Indian reservation. This portion of or biological features. Because the WA 3A, Midway Beach, 697 ac (282 ha) the subunit is approximately 148 ac (60 county ownership layer for this subunit Located adjacent to the Community of ha) in size. The eastern portion of the is ambiguous and all private property Grayland, this subunit extends from the subunit starts at the eastern edge of the parcels are under water, the layer could northern boundary of Grayland Beach Shoalwater Bay Indian reservation not be used for precise acreage State Park, through South Beach State boundary and continues in a calculations. However, the vast majority Park to Cape Shoalwater at the southern southwesterly direction to the of the unit is managed by the State of end in Pacific County. Midway Beach is Community of Tokeland. This portion of Washington. an expansive beach and is nearly 0.5 mi the subunit is approximately 548 ac (222 ha) in size. The landward extent of WA 4A, Leadbetter Spit, 2,700 ac (1,093 (0.8 km) wide at the widest point. This ha) subunit was occupied at the time of the unit is the edge of the bay, and the The Leadbetter Spit subunit is located listing and is currently occupied. This seaward extent of the unit is the Pacific in Pacific County at the northern tip of subunit includes the following physical Ocean’s water’s edge. In our March 2011 the Long Beach Peninsula, and consists and biological features essential to the revised proposal, we proposed 1,121 ac (454 ha) for this subunit; approximately of a 26 mi-long (42 km-long) spit that conservation of the species: large areas 425 ac (172 ha) of the proposed subunit defines the west side of Willapa Bay and of sand dune habitat that is relatively that is part of the Shoalwater Bay Tribal extends down to the mouth of the undisturbed, areas of sandy beach above lands have been excluded from Columbia River. The subunit is located and below the high-tide line with designation under section 4(b)(2) of the just north of the community of Ocean occasional surf-cast wrack supporting Act (refer to the Exclusions section Park and includes Leadbetter Point State small invertebrates, and close proximity below). Park (SP) and the Willapa NWR at the to tidally influenced estuarine mud flats This subunit was occupied at the time northern end of the spit. The main that provide cover or shelter from of listing and is currently occupied. The portion of this subunit is on the ocean predators, and are important for State Recovery Plan for the western side, and includes the coastal beaches foraging. snowy plover (WDFW 1995) defines the from the tip of the peninsula, and the Beach accretion since 1998 has greatly geographic area from Grayland Beach habitat restoration area down to improved habitat conditions, resulting State Park south to Toke Point as ‘‘South Oysterville Road, approximately 1.8 mi in this beach becoming a primary Beach.’’ Based on documented sightings (3 km) south of Leadbetter Point SP. The nesting area in the State. From 1998 to and records of western snowy plover boundaries for this subunit have 2005, an average of 18 plovers nested use for the south beach geographic area changed from that proposed in our annually at Midway Beach, and from (WDFW 1995, Appendix C), March 2011 rule as a result of 2003 to 2006, between 23 and 28 Pacific Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit was information provided to us by Willapa Coast WSPs nested at Midway Beach. occupied at the time of listing and is a NWR staff and an acreage Primary threats at this subunit that known or presumed historical nesting miscalculation in the March 2011 may require special management area (WDFW 1995, Figure 2, p. 3). proposed rule (76 FR 16046) (refer to the include motorized vehicle use on the Pacific Coast WSPs nested on the Summary of Changes from the Revised beaches and human activity. The recent Shoalwater Bay Indian reservation in Proposed section above). closure of the Midway Beach Access 2006, 2007 and 2008, but no nesting has This subunit contains some areas that Road due to safety concerns, e.g., been documented on the spit since are currently not suitable habitat (water vehicles getting stuck in deep sand, has 2008. Although fledging success is and vegetated areas) but may become reduced impacts in the nesting area, but relatively high at this location, plover suitable with management actions, sea- may not be permanent. Therefore, the use of the Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit level rise, and ongoing natural changes physical or biological features essential area is sporadic. and beach accretion on the spit. to the conservation of the species in this The subunit includes the following Although the refuge manages areas subunit may require special features essential to the conservation of above the high tide line on the northern management considerations or the species: large areas of sand dune portion of the spit, the ownership data protection to address threats associated habitat that are relatively undisturbed; do not reflect where the State and with human-related recreation and other areas of sandy beach above and below Federal jurisdictions lie. Thus, all activities. Developing and enforcing the high-tide line with occasional surf- ownership acreages are approximate for regulations to address the recreation cast wrack supporting small this unit. The subunit includes issues may be needed. Management to invertebrates; and close proximity to approximately 8 mi (13 km) of coastal remove and control beach grass will tidally influenced estuarine mud flats. beaches and sheltered bays. prevent further spread of nonnative Special management that may be Approximately 987 ac (399 ha) are on vegetation, thereby maintaining and required includes management of lands that are managed by the Willapa expanding the elements of essential human-related activities to reduce NWR, and the remaining 1,713 ac (693

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36756 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

ha) are managed by the Washington Because the island is only accessible included in this revised designated State Park and Recreation Department by boat, breeding surveys for Pacific critical habitat because they are and Department of Natural Resources. Coast WSP at this location are sporadic. essential to the conservation of the Leadbetter Spit was occupied at the It is unknown if this Gunpowder Sands Pacific Coast WSP to address habitat time of listing, is currently occupied, Island was occupied at the time the needs arising from anticipated sea-level and is the largest subunit in Pacific Coast WSP was listed in 1993, rise. Washington. Approximately 25 to 30 but two successful nests and one failed Necanicum River Spit was not Pacific Coast WSPs nest and overwinter nest were documented on the island in considered occupied at the time the on the spit annually, with most of the 1995 (WDFW heritage data). Although Pacific Coast WSP was listed in 1993. nesting occurring in the snowy plover nesting has not been recently confirmed Two breeding Pacific Coast WSPs were habitat restoration area within the for this area, we consider this unit documented in 2002 (Service Willapa NWR. Between 10 and more essential for the conservation of the unpublished data). We consider the unit than 40 breeding adults were recorded species because it provides a safe is essential for the conservation of the between 2005 and 2009 (WDFW 2009, nesting, resting, and foraging area free of species as it is needed for use in p. 12). A few pairs nest along the ocean human disturbance and connectivity response to fluctuating habitat and beaches and on State Park lands just between two currently occupied areas. resource availability. It has the south of the Willapa NWR. The 2007 We consider that it is important for the capability of providing future Recovery Plan lists a management goal species’ use, based on the proximity of connectivity between occupied areas, of 30 breeding adults for this subunit the site to the occupied nesting area on dispersal habitat between units, and (Service 2007, Appendix B). Leadbetter Spit, and on fluctuating habitat for resting and foraging. This The subunit includes the following habitat and resource availability. unit may provide habitat to support features essential to the conservation of Gunpowder Sands Island also has breeding plovers and facilitate the species: Relatively undisturbed, physical or biological features essential interchange between otherwise widely sandy beaches above and below the to the conservation of the species: separated units within Recovery Unit 1 high-tide line and sparsely vegetated Relatively undisturbed, sandy beaches (identified in the Recovery Plan, Service dunes for nesting; miles of coastal wrack above and below the high-tide line; 2007) in Oregon and Washington. Necanicum River Spit is a line supporting small invertebrates; and sparsely vegetated dunes for nesting; characteristic dune-backed beach with close proximity to tidally influenced and coastal wrackline supporting small wide sand spits in close proximity to estuarine mud flats and sheltered bays invertebrates. The island is periodically tidally influenced estuarine mud flats. for foraging. The combined dynamics of overwashed during winter storms, The unit contains sparsely vegetated, weather and surf cause large quantities resulting in dry sand and beach habitat low-lying areas of sandy dune; open, of wood and shell material to with little or no vegetation. sandy areas that are relatively accumulate on the spit, providing prime Oregon undisturbed by humans; and close nesting habitat, hiding areas from proximity to tidally influenced predators, foraging opportunities, and OR 1, Columbia River Spit estuarine mud flats, which are shelter from inclement weather. Unit OR 1 has been excluded from considered essential for the European beach grass threatens the critical habitat designation under conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. habitat quality of the subunit. Special section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions management that may be needed section below). OR 3, Nehalem River Spit includes restoration and maintenance of Unit OR 3 has been excluded from degraded habitat to ensure the OR 2, Necanicum River Spit, 11 ac (4 ha) critical habitat designation under reinfestation of nonnative vegetation section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions does not occur. Doing so will ensure We proposed 211 (85 ha) for section below). that elements of essential physical or designation in this unit in our revised biological features within this subunit proposed designation of critical habitat. OR 4, Bayocean Spit, 201 ac (82 ha) remain intact. Primary threats that may In this final revision, 200 ac (81 ha) has We proposed 367 ac (149 ha) for require special management include the been excluded from critical habitat designation in this unit in our revised State’s management of the spring razor designation under section 4(b)(2) of the proposed designation of critical habitat. clam season, which opens beaches to Act (see Exclusions section below). In this final revision, 80 ac (32 ha) were motorized vehicle and provides access This unit is on the western coast of removed from proposed critical habitat into Pacific Coast WSP nesting areas Clatsop County, adjacent to the City of at the shoreline due to inundation, and that normally receive limited human Gearhart, and less than 1 mi (2 km) 86 ac (35 ha) of proposed critical habitat use. The State Parks and Recreation north of the City of Seaside. It is has been excluded under section 4(b)(2) Commission has posted areas where bounded by the Necanicum River of the Act (see Exclusions section plovers nest, increased enforcement of estuary on the south, City of Gearhart to below). the wet sand driving regulations, and the north and east, and Oregon Parks This unit is on the western coast of conducted habitat restoration on State and Recreation Department’s HCP- Tillamook County, and about 9 mi (15 Park lands. covered lands to the west. The mouth of km) northwest of the City of Tillamook. the river changes periodically. The It is bounded by Tillamook Bay on the WA 4B, Gunpowder Sands Island, 904 northern inland portion of the unit is east, the Tillamook Bay South Jetty to ac (366 ha) overgrown with European beach grass; the north, the northern boundary of The subunit includes Gunpowder sea-level rise and overwashing of this Bayocean Peninsula County Park 2.0 mi Sands Island just off the northern tip of area during the winter months is (3.2 km) to the south, and HCP-covered the Long Beach Peninsula. The island anticipated to result in vegetation lands to the west. The unit is located shifts location annually and only a removal and the creation of additional behind a relatively low foredune. Sea- portion of the mapped area may be dry Pacific Coast WSP breeding habitat. level rise and overwashing of this area sand at any given time. The island is Eleven ac (4 ha) of privately owned land during the winter months is anticipated managed by the State of Washington. landward of HCP-covered lands are to result in vegetation removal and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36757

creation of additional Pacific Coast WSP by Sand Lake estuary to the north and managed by the U.S. Forest Service’s breeding habitat. Two ac (1 ha) of east, the northern limit of development (USFS) Siuslaw National Forest. privately owned land and 199 ac (81 ha) in the town of Tierra Del Mar to the This unit was occupied at the time of of federally owned land landward of the south, and HCP-covered lands to the listing and is currently occupied. The HCP-covered lands are designated due west. The mouth of the lake changes most recently documented Pacific Coast to anticipated sea-level rise. periodically. The unit is a small upland WSPs for this unit includes four Bayocean Spit was occupied at the portion of the spit. Sea-level rise and breeding plovers in 2007 (Lauten et al. time of listing. Two Pacific Coast WSPs overwashing of this area during the 2007, p. 5). We have determined that the were documented in 1993, and six winter months is anticipated to result in unit contains the physical and plovers in 1995, in this unit during the vegetation removal and the creation of biological features essential to the breeding season (ODFW in litt. 1994, additional Pacific Coast WSP breeding conservation of the species which may Appendix, Table 2; ODFW unpublished habitat. Five ac (2 ha) of privately require special management data). Prior to 2001, winter use of the owned land landward of HCP-covered considerations or protection. This unit area by plovers was documented lands are included in this revised provides habitat to support breeding consistently. Recent records indicate designated critical habitat because they plovers and facilitates interchange use by wintering plovers in 2007 and are essential to the conservation of the between otherwise widely separated 2008 (Service unpublished data). We Pacific Coast WSP to address habitat units under intensive management. It consider the unit to be needed by the needs arising from anticipated sea-level extends behind a relatively low species for future use in response to rise. foredune in several places into areas fluctuating habitat and resource Sand Lake South was not considered overgrown with beach grass. Sea-level availability. It has the capability of occupied at the time the Pacific Coast rise and overwashing of these areas providing future connectivity between WSP was listed in 1993. However, four during the winter months is anticipated occupied areas, dispersal habitat snowy plovers were observed during the to result in vegetation removal and the between units, and habitat for resting breeding season at Sand Lake in 1986 creation of additional plover breeding and foraging. This unit may provide (ODFW, in litt. 1994, Appendix, Table habitat. habitat to support breeding plovers and 2). Although nesting has not been The unit is characteristic of a dune- facilitate interchange between otherwise recently confirmed for this area, Sand backed beach and wide sand spits with widely separated units within Recovery Lake South is an historical breeding site overwash areas and contains an Unit 1 (identified in the Recovery Plan, within the species’ range. The unit has interdune flat created through habitat Service 2007) in Oregon and the capability of providing connectivity restoration. It includes the following Washington. between occupied areas, dispersal features essential to the conservation of Bayocean Spit is a characteristic habitat between units, and habitat for the species: Sparsely vegetated, low- dune-backed beach in close proximity to resting and foraging. This unit is needed lying areas of sandy dune; open, sandy tidally influenced estuarine mud flats. to provide habitat to support breeding areas that are relatively undisturbed by The unit contains the following features plovers and facilitate interchange humans; and sandy beach above the essential to the conservation of the between otherwise widely separated mean high water line that supports species: Sparsely vegetated, low-lying units within Recovery Unit 1 (identified small invertebrates. areas of sandy dune; open, sandy areas in the Recovery Plan, Service 2007) in Primary threats to essential physical that are relatively undisturbed by Oregon and Washington. and biological features that may require humans; sandy beach above the mean Sand Lake South is a characteristic special management in this unit are high water line that supports small dune-backed beach with wide sand spits degradation of the sand dune system invertebrates; and close proximity to in close proximity to tidally influenced due to encroachment of European beach tidally influenced estuarine mud flats. estuarine mud flats. The unit contains grass; disturbance from humans, pets, Primary threats to essential physical sparsely vegetated, low-lying areas of and horses in important foraging and and biological features that may require sandy dune; open, sandy areas that are nesting areas; and predators. relatively undisturbed by humans; and special management in this unit are OR 8A, Siltcoos Breach, 15 ac (6 ha) degradation of the sand dune system close proximity to tidally influenced due to encroachment of European beach estuarine mud flats, which are This subunit is on the southwestern grass; disturbance from humans and considered essential for the coast of Lane County, about 7 mi (11 pets in important foraging and nesting conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. km) southwest of the City of Florence. areas; and predators. It is an important wintering area that OR 7, Sutton/Baker Beaches, 276 ac (112 includes a large opening in the foredune OR 5, Netarts Spit ha) 1.2 mi (2 km) north of the Siltcoos Unit OR 5 has been excluded from We proposed 372 (151 ha) for River. The southern boundary is located critical habitat designation under designation in this unit in our revised 0.6 mi (1 km) north of the Siltcoos section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions proposed designation of critical habitat. River, with the Oregon Dunes National section below). In this final revision, 96 ac (39 ha) of Recreation Area (NRA) to the east and proposed critical habitat has been the Pacific Ocean to the west. The OR 6, Sand Lake South, 5 ac (2 ha) excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the subunit consists of 7 federally owned ac We proposed 200 ac (81 ha) for Act (see Exclusions section below). (3 ha) managed by the USFS as the designation in this unit in our revised This unit is on the western coast of Oregon Dunes NRA in the Siuslaw proposed designation of critical habitat. Lane County, about 5 mi (8 km) north National Forest and 8 ac (3 ha) on the In this final revision, 195 ac (79 ha) has of the City of Florence. It is located 2.25 ‘‘Ocean Shore,’’ managed by OPRD. been excluded from critical habitat mi south of Heceta Head and bounded This subunit was occupied at the time designation under section 4(b)(2) of the by Sutton Creek to the south, lands of listing and is currently occupied with Act (see Exclusions section below). administered by the Siuslaw National recently documented wintering Pacific This unit is on the southwestern coast Forest to the east, and HCP-covered Coast WSPs in 2005, 2006, 2007, and of Tillamook County, about 4.5 mi (7 lands to the west The unit consists of 2010 (Service unpublished data). As km) north of Pacific City. It is bounded 276 ac (112 ha) of Federal lands, many as 59 Pacific Coast WSP were

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36758 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

documented during the winter of 2005 areas; vehicle trespass into closed areas; land to the north and east, and HCP- (C. Burns, pers. comm. 2006), and 26, and predators. covered lands to the west. Subunit 8D 36, and 24 Pacific Coast WSP in 2006, consists of 59 ac (24 ha) of Federal land OR 8C, Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch 2007 and 2010, respectively (Service managed by the USFS for the Oregon Creek Spit, 383 ac (155 ha) unpublished data). Dunes NRA in the Siuslaw National The subunit is characteristic of a We proposed 716 (290 ha) for Forest. dune-backed beach. It includes the designation in this unit in our revised This subunit was not occupied at the following features essential to the proposed designation of critical habitat. time of listing. Nesting Pacific Coast conservation of the species: Sparsely In this final revision, 333 ac (135 ha) of WSPs were last documented at North vegetated, low-lying areas of sandy dune proposed critical habitat has been Umpqua River Spit in the 1980s (ODFW and sandy beach above the mean high excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the unpublished data). The subunit is water line that supports small Act (see Exclusions section below). located between currently occupied invertebrates. This subunit is in Douglas County, areas and provides habitat for adult Primary threats to essential physical about 9 mi (15 km) southwest of the City dispersal between units. Although and biological features that may require of Florence. The southern boundary of nesting and wintering has not been special management in this subunit are the unit is about 5.3 mi (9 km) recently confirmed for this area, we degradation of the sand dune system northwest of the City of Reedsport. It is consider the unit is needed by the due to encroachment of European beach bounded by the subunit 8B to the north, species for use in response to grass on the available wintering habitat a street legal vehicle area to the south, fluctuating habitat and resource and disturbance from humans, pets, and Oregon Dunes NRA to the east, and availability. vehicles in important roosting and HCP-covered lands to the west. It The subunit is characteristic of a foraging areas. consists of 383 federally owned ac (155 dune-backed beach in close proximity to ha) managed by the USFS as the Oregon tidally influenced freshwater areas. The OR 8B, Siltcoos River Spit, 116 ac (47 Dunes NRA in the Siuslaw National subunit includes sparsely vegetated, ha) Forest. low-lying areas of sandy dune; open, We proposed 241 (97 ha) for Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch Creek sandy areas that are relatively designation in this unit in our revised Spit was occupied at the time of listing undisturbed by humans; sandy beach proposed designation of critical habitat. and is currently occupied. Documented above the mean high water line that In this final revision, 125 ac (51 ha) of Pacific Coast WSPs for this subunit supports small invertebrates; and close proposed critical habitat has been include 71 breeding plovers in 2011 proximity to tidally influenced excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the (Lauten et al. 2011, p. 25). freshwater areas, which are considered Act (see Exclusions section below). The subunit is characteristic of a essential for the conservation of the This subunit is located in Lane and dune-backed beach and sand spit in Pacific Coast WSP. Douglas Counties, about 7 mi (11 km) close proximity to a tidally influenced southwest of the City of Florence. It river mouth and contains interdune flats OR 9, Tenmile Creek Spit, 223 ac (90 ha) includes the sand spits to the north and created through habitat restoration. The We proposed 244 ac (99 ha) for south of the Siltcoos River and is subunit contains the following features designation in this unit in our revised bounded by the Waxmyrtle Trail and essential to the conservation of the proposed designation of critical habitat. campground to the east, and HCP- species: Wide sand spits or overwashes In this final revision, 21 ac (8 ha) of covered lands to the west. It consists of and sparsely vegetated, low-lying areas proposed critical habitat has been 116 federally owned ac (47 ha) managed of sandy dune; open, sandy areas that excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the by the USFS as the Oregon Dunes NRA are relatively undisturbed by humans; Act (see Exclusions section below). in the Siuslaw National Forest. sandy beach above the mean high water This unit is on the northwestern coast Siltcoos River Spit was occupied at line that supports small invertebrates; of Coos County, about 11 mi (18 km) the time of listing and is currently and close proximity to tidally southwest of the City of Reedsport. It occupied. Most recently documented influenced freshwater areas. includes the sand spits and beaches to Pacific Coast WSPs for this subunit Primary threats to essential physical the north and south of the Tenmile include 26 breeding adults in 2011 and biological features that may require River. This unit is on the northwestern (Lauten et al. 2011, p. 25). special management in this subunit are coast of Coos County, about 11 mi (18 The subunit is characteristic of a degradation of the sand dune system km) southwest of the City of Reedsport, dune-backed beach and sand spit in due to encroachment of European beach with Winchester Bay 6.5 mi (10.5 km) close proximity to a tidally influenced grass; disturbance from humans in to the north, Coos Bay North Jetty 15.5 river mouth. The subunit contains the important foraging and nesting areas; mi (25 km) to the south, the City of following features essential to the and predators. Lakeside 2.5 mi (4 km) to the east, and conservation of the species: sparsely HCP-covered lands to the west. vegetated, low-lying areas of sandy OR 8D, North Umpqua River Spit, 59 ac Tenmile Creek Spit was occupied at dune; open, sandy areas that are (24 ha) the time of listing and is currently relatively undisturbed by humans; We proposed 236 (95 ha) for occupied. Documented Pacific Coast sandy beach above the mean high water designation in this unit in our revised WSPs for this unit include 25 breeding line that supports small invertebrates; proposed designation of critical habitat. adults in 2011 (Lauten et al. 2011, p. and close proximity to tidally In this final revision, 177 ac (71 ha) of 25). Unit OR 9 consists of 223 ac (90 ha) influenced freshwater areas. proposed critical habitat has been of Federal land managed as the Oregon Primary threats to essential physical excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Dunes NRA by the USFS. and biological features that may require Act (see Exclusions section below). The unit is characteristic of a dune- special management in this subunit are This subunit is on the western coast backed beach and sand spit in close degradation of the sand dune system of Douglas County, about 4 mi (5 km) proximity to a tidally influenced river due to encroachment of European beach west of the City of Reedsport. It is mouth. It includes the following grass; disturbance from humans and bounded by the Umpqua River North features essential to the conservation of pets in important foraging and nesting Jetty to the south, Oregon Dunes NRA the species: Sparsely vegetated, low-

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36759

lying areas of sandy dune; open, sandy OR 11, Bandon to New River, 541 ac OR 13, Euchre Creek Spit, 9 ac (4 ha) areas that are relatively undisturbed by (219 ha) We proposed 116 (47 ha) for humans; sandy beach above the mean We proposed 1,016 ac (411 ha) for designation in this unit in our revised high water line that supports small designation in this unit in our revised proposed designation of critical habitat. invertebrates; and close proximity to proposed designation of critical habitat. In this final revision, 107 ac (43 ha) of tidally influenced freshwater areas. In this final revision, Bandon State proposed critical habitat has been Primary threats to essential physical Natural Area (227 ac, 92 ha), which is excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the and biological features that may require owned and managed by OPRD, and 249 Act (see Exclusions section below). special management in this unit ac (101 ha) of private land have been This unit is on the western coast of degradation of the sand dune system excluded from critical habitat Curry County, approximately 10 mi (6 due to encroachment of European beach designation for this unit under section km) north of the City of Gold Beach. It grass; disturbance from humans in 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions section located to the north and south of the important foraging and nesting areas; below). Euchre Creek and is bounded by HCP- vehicle trespass into closed areas; and The remaining lands of this unit are covered lands to the west. The unit predators. on the southwestern coast of Coos consists of 9 ac (4 ha) of private land. County, about 3 mi (5 km) south of the The unit extends into low-elevation OR 10, Coos Bay North Spit, 273 ac (111 City of Bandon. The unit consists of areas on the north and south side of ha) multiple land ownerships bounded by Euchre Creek. Sea-level rise and We proposed 308 (125 ha) for the southern boundary of Bandon State overwashing of these areas during the designation in this unit in our revised Natural Area to the north, the New River winter months is anticipated to result in proposed designation of critical habitat. to the east, north of the Floras Creek vegetation removal and the creation of In this final revision, 35 ac (14 ha) of outlet to the south, and HCP-covered additional Pacific Coast WSP breeding proposed critical habitat has been lands to the west. The unit encompasses habitat. excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the all of New River Spit and extends Although Euchre Creek Spit was not Act (see Exclusions section below). behind a relatively low foredune north considered occupied at the time the of Floras Creek. Sea-level rise and Pacific Coast WSP was listed in 1993, This unit is on the western coast of overwashing of these areas during the this beach is a historical nesting site. Coos County, about 3 mi (5 km) west of winter months is anticipated to result in The most recently documented Pacific the City of Coos Bay. It is bounded vegetation removal and the creation of Coast WSP in the area was one Oregon Dunes NRA 3 mi (4.8 km) to the additional Pacific Coast WSP breeding wintering plover in 1989 (ODFW in litt. north, Coos Bay North Jetty to the south, habitat. 1994, Appendix, Table 3). Although Coos Bay to the east, and HCP-covered New River was occupied at the time nesting and wintering have not been lands to the west. of listing and is currently occupied. recently confirmed for this area, we Coos Bay North Spit was occupied at Documented Pacific Coast WSPs for this consider the unit is needed by the the time of listing and is currently unit include 20 breeding plovers in species for use in response to occupied. Documented Pacific Coast 2011 (Lauten et al. 2011, p. 25; Lauten fluctuating habitat and resource WSPs for this unit include 59 breeding 2012 pers. comm.). The BLM is the availability. We consider the unit to be plovers in 2011 (Lauten et al. 2011, p. unit’s primary land manager. Unit OR essential for the conservation of the 25). The unit consists of 273 ac (111 ha) 11 consists of 459 ac (186 ha) of Federal Pacific Coast WSP as it has the of Federal land under the jurisdiction of land with 82 ac (33 ha) of private land. capability of providing connectivity the USACE, but primarily managed by The unit is characteristic of a dune- between occupied areas, dispersal the U.S. Bureau of Land Management backed beach and barrier spit, and habitat between units, and habitat for (BLM). contains interdune flats created through resting and foraging. This unit may The unit is characteristic of a dune- habitat restoration. It includes the provide habitat to support breeding backed beach in close proximity to following features essential to the Pacific Coast WSP and would facilitate tidally influenced estuarine mud flats conservation of the species: Wide sand interchange between otherwise widely and containing interior interdune flats spits or overwashes and sparsely separated units within Recovery Unit 1 created through dredge material vegetated, low-lying areas of sandy (identified in the Recovery Plan, Service disposal or through habitat restoration. dune; open, sandy areas that are 2007) in Oregon and Washington. It includes the following features relatively undisturbed by humans; areas Euchre Creek Spit is characteristic of essential to the conservation of the of sandy beach above the mean high a dune-backed beach and sand spit in species: Expansive, sparsely vegetated water line with occasional surf-cast close proximity to a tidally influenced interdune flats; open, sandy areas that wrack supporting small invertebrates; river mouth. The unit includes sparsely are relatively undisturbed by humans; and close proximity to tidally vegetated, low-lying areas of sandy areas of sandy beach above the mean influenced freshwater areas. dune; open, sandy areas that are Primary threats that may require high water line with occasional surf-cast relatively undisturbed by humans; and special management in this unit are wrack supporting small invertebrates; close proximity to tidally influenced degradation of the sand dune system and close proximity to tidally freshwater areas, which are essential for due to encroachment of European beach influenced estuarine mud flats. the conservation of the Pacific Coast grass; disturbance from humans and WSP. Primary threats to essential physical pets in important foraging and nesting and biological features that may require areas; vehicle trespass into closed areas; California special management in this unit are and predators. degradation of the sand dune system CA 1, Lake Earl, 74 ac (30 ha) due to encroachment of European beach OR 12, Elk River Spit This unit is located directly west of grass; disturbance from humans, pets, Unit OR 12 has been excluded from the Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa lagoon and horses in important foraging and critical habitat designation under system in Del Norte County about 4 mi nesting areas; vehicle trespass into section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions (7 km) north of Crescent City. The Lake closed areas; and predators. section below). Earl Lagoon spit is approximately 3 mi

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36760 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(5 km) in length, encompasses 2004. Up to five Pacific Coast WSPs management potential for subunit CA approximately 74 ac (30 ha), and lies were observed within the unit in March 3A is underestimated by the Recovery approximately 2 mi (3 km) north of 2007. The unit’s primary value is as a Plan (Service 2007, Appendix B), as it Point Saint George and the McNamara wintering site (Service 2007, Appendix does contribute towards the species’ Airfield. B). The site is often used as wintering reproductive success in northern This unit was occupied at the time of habitat on an irregular basis (Service California (Colwell et al. 2009, p. 9; listing and is currently occupied. This unpublished data). RNSP are actively Service unpublished data). unit is a historical breeding site (Yocom managing the area for Pacific Coast The subunit contains the following and Harris 1975, p. 30), and has WSP. physical or biological features essential harbored a small population of The northeast portion of the unit is to the conservation of the Pacific Coast wintering Pacific Coast WSP in recent currently vegetated with European WSP: Low-lying sandy dunes; open, years (Service unpublished data). This beach grass and is, therefore, currently sandy areas that are relatively unit is capable of supporting 10 unsuitable for nesting. However, with undisturbed by humans; and sandy breeding adults with adaptive restoration, that portion of the unit beach above and below the high-tide management (Service 2007, Appendix would be considered suitable nesting line that supports small invertebrates. B). All 74 ac (24 ha) are managed by the habitat. We include that portion of the Special management may be needed to State under the jurisdiction of the unit to help offset the anticipated effects control nonnative vegetation and California Department of Fish and Game of sea-level rise over time. RNSP have enforce existing regulations to ensure (CDFG), and California Department of restored beach habitat by removing the suitability of the subunit. With time, Parks and Recreation (CDPR). nonnative vegetation on other portions we anticipate that the entire subunit Essential physical or biological of Gold Bluffs Beach. We anticipate will be inundated with sea-level rise features of the unit for Pacific Coast similar restoration within the unit to associated with climate change. WSP conservation include sandy occur sometime in the future. beaches above and below the mean The unit contains the following CA 3B, Big Lagoon, 268 ac (108 ha) high-tide line, wind-blown sand in dune features essential to the conservation of This subunit consists of a large sand systems immediately inland of the the Pacific Coast WSP: Low lying sandy spit that divides the Pacific Ocean from active beach face, and the wash over dunes; open, sandy areas that are Big Lagoon. The northern extent of Big area at the lagoon mouth. relatively undisturbed by humans; and Lagoon Spit is located in Humboldt The physical or biological features sandy beach above and below the high- County and is approximately 6 mi (10 essential to the conservation of the tide line that supports small km) south of the Town of Orick. This species may require special invertebrates. Most visitor use in the subunit was occupied at the time of management considerations or area is in Fern Canyon, which is to the listing and is currently occupied. Big protection to address the main threats east of the unit and outside of suitable Lagoon Spit is historical nesting habitat from: Degradation of the sand dune Pacific Coast WSP habitat. Visitation is (Page and Stenzel 1981, p. 9), and system due to encroachment of light relative to other State and National currently maintains a winter population European beach grass; destruction of Parks within the Pacific Coast WSP’s of fewer than 10 Pacific Coast WSPs habitat and loss of wintering and range. Limited vehicle use of the beach (Service unpublished data). Recent nesting Pacific Coast WSPs from OHV is allowed for commercial and tribal nesting occurred within the subunit use; and destruction of habitat from fishing, and park administrative use. during 2005, in which a single nest annual mechanical breaching (as The physical or biological features hatched and fledged three chicks. We authorized by the USACE) of the spit essential to the conservation of the estimate the subunit can support 16 between the Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa species may require special breeding adults (Service 2007, Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. management considerations or Appendix B). The subunit is located on protection to address the main threats the Big Lagoon Spit, which is CA 2, Gold Bluffs Beach, 233 ac (94 ha) from human-related use from recreation approximately 4 mi (7 km) in length. This unit is located in Humboldt and OHV use associated with Most of the subunit is managed by the County about 5 mi (6 km) north of the commercial fishing, and European CDPR. Approximately 0.6 ac (0.3 ha) are Town of Orick within Prairie Creek beach grass. managed by Humboldt County. State Park (north of Gold Bluffs Beach Essential physical or biological campground), and is managed CA 3A, Stone Lagoon, 55 ac (22 ha) features of the subunit that contribute cooperatively with Redwood National This subunit is approximately 0.9 mi towards the conservation of the Pacific Park, collectively known as Redwood (1.5 km) in length, and is located on the Coast WSP include: Low-lying sandy National and State Parks (RNSP). This Stone Lagoon spit. Stone Lagoon dunes and open, sandy areas that are unit was occupied at the time of listing, borders the subunit on the east, and the relatively undisturbed by humans; and is currently occupied, and incorporates Pacific Ocean makes up the subunit’s sandy beach above and below the high- the primary use area of a pair of Pacific western edge. Subunit CA 3A is located tide line that supports small Coast WSPs that nested in Prairie Creek in Humboldt County, approximately 3 invertebrates. State Park during the summer of 2005, mi (5 km) south of the Town of Orick. CDPR has conducted habitat and is commonly used by wintering The subunit was occupied at the time restoration at this unit through the Pacific Coast WSPs. of listing and is currently occupied. hand-removal of nonnative vegetation. Although not considered a main Nesting has recently occurred within The primary threat to wintering and breeding location, unit CA 2 provides a the subunit. In 2009, a single nest breeding Pacific Coast WSPs that may fairly undisturbed location for breeding hatched three chicks, all of which require special management is Pacific Coast WSP that lose nests to fledged (Colwell, et al. 2009, p. 9). The disturbance from humans and pets from predation or other causes at various nest Recovery Plan (Service 2007) estimates walking through winter flocks and sites, and could offset habitat loss as that up to 16 Pacific Coast WSPs can be potential nesting areas. sea-level rise prevents nesting at sites supported within Unit CA 3; however, Other threats requiring management currently being used by plovers. One all are attributed to subunit CA 3B. include control of nonnative vegetation chick was fledged from the unit during Recent data indicate that the population and enforcement of existing human-use

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36761

regulations are needed to ensure the the overall subunit area is habitat restoration within the subunit, suitability of the subunit. With time, we approximately 4 ac (2 ha) smaller than in consultation with us. anticipate that the entire subunit will be proposed. The following physical or biological inundated with sea-level rise associated This subunit was occupied at the time features essential to the conservation of with climate change. of listing and is currently occupied. We the Pacific Coast WSP can be found expect it to eventually support 12 within the unit: Large areas of sandy CA 4A, Clam Beach/Little River, 337 ac dunes, areas of sandy beach above and (136 ha) breeding Pacific Coast WSPs with proper management (Service 2007, below the high-tide line, and generally The subunit is located in Humboldt Appendix B). The current breeding barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. County immediately west and north of population is believed to be less than Control of nonnative vegetation and the Town of McKinleyville. The Clam five Pacific Coast WSPs, although enforcement of existing human-use Beach/Little River subunit’s northern plovers from this subunit readily regulations are needed to ensure the boundary is directly across from the intermix with plovers in CA 4A and suitability of the unit. With time, we south abutment of the U.S. Highway 101 elsewhere (Colwell et al. 2009, p. 9; anticipate that the lower portions of this Bridge that crosses the Little River. The Service unpublished data). Occasional unit will be inundated with sea-level southern subunit boundary is aligned winter use by Pacific Coast WSPs has rise associated with climate change. with the north end of the southernmost, been intermittently documented, with The physical or biological features paved Clam Beach parking area. The most wintering within the adjacent essential to the conservation of the length of the subunit is approximately 2 critical habitat subunit to the north species may require special mi (3 km). Approximately 222 ac (90 ha) (Service unpublished data). management considerations or are State owned. protection to address the main threats Essential physical or biological This subunit was occupied at the time from nonnative vegetation, OHV use, features of the subunit that contribute of listing and is currently occupied. and disturbance from equestrians and towards the conservation of the Pacific During 2003, the subunit supported a humans with pets. breeding population of approximately Coast WSP include large areas of sandy 12 Pacific Coast WSPs, and a winter dunes, areas of sandy beach above and CA 5B, Eel River North Spit and Beach, population of up to 55 plovers (Service below the high-tide line, and generally 464 ac (188 ha) unpublished data). This subunit is one barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. This subunit is located in Humboldt of four primary nesting locations within Control of nonnative vegetation and County about 4 mi (7 km) east of the northern California. Based on the enforcement of existing human-use Town of Loleta and stretches from Table Recovery Plan (Service 2007, Appendix regulations are needed to ensure the Bluff on the north to the mouth of the B), we expect the subunit to be capable suitability of the subunit. With time, we Eel River in the south. The subunit is of supporting six pairs of breeding anticipate that the lower portions of this estimated to be 3.9 mi (7 km) long, and Pacific Coast WSPs. subunit will be inundated with sea-level is managed by the State, except for 7 ac Essential physical or biological rise associated with climate change. (3 ha) of private land. features of the subunit that contribute Potential threats to nests, chicks, and This subunit was occupied at the time towards the conservation of the Pacific both wintering and breeding adult of listing and is currently occupied with Coast WSP include large areas of sandy Pacific Coast WSPs that may require a wintering population of Pacific Coast dunes, areas of sandy beach above and special management are: nonnative WSPs estimated at fewer than 20 below the high-tide line, and generally vegetation, OHV use, and disturbance (Service unpublished data). As many as barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. caused by equestrians (i.e., people 11 breeders have been observed during Special management is needed to riding horses) and humans with breeding season window surveys, with control nonnative vegetation and accompanying pets. a breeding population estimated at less enforcement of existing human-use CA 5A, Humboldt Bay South Spit than 15 (Colwell et al. 2009, p. 9). We regulations. With time, we anticipate Beach, 572 ac (231 ha) expect this subunit to eventually that the lower portions of this subunit support 20 breeding Pacific Coast WSPs will be inundated with sea-level rise This subunit is located in Humboldt with proper management (Service 2007, associated with climate change. County adjacent to Humboldt Bay, less Appendix B). than 1 mi west of the City of Eureka, Essential physical or biological CA 4B, Mad River Beach, 452 ac (183 with the southern boundary being Table features of the subunit include: Large ha) Bluff. Approximately 542 ac (219 ha) of areas of sandy, sparsely vegetated dunes The subunit is located in Humboldt the unit are owned by the CDFG and for reproduction and normal behavior, County immediately west of the Town State Lands Commission, but are and areas of sandy beach above and of McKinleyville. This subunit was managed by BLM; 10 ac (4 ha) are below the high-tide line supporting largely swept clean of European beach owned and managed by Humboldt small invertebrates for foraging. Surf- grass when the Mad River temporarily County; and 20 ac (8 ha) are owned by cast organic debris is an important shifted north in the 1980s and 1990s. the USACE. The subunit is 5 mi (8 km) component of the habitat in this The Mad River Beach subunit is in total length. subunit, providing shelter from the approximately 3 mi (5 km) long, and This subunit was occupied at the time wind both for nesting Pacific Coast ranges from the U.S. Highway 101 Vista of listing and is currently occupied. The WSPs and for invertebrate prey species. Point below the Arcata-Eureka Airport Pacific Coast WSP wintering population Control of nonnative vegetation and in the north, to School Road in the within the subunit is estimated at fewer enforcement of existing human-use south. Approximately 161 ac (65 ha) are than 15 individuals. Three nests, from regulations are needed to ensure the owned and managed by Humboldt four breeders, were attempted within suitability of the subunit. With time, we County, and 143 ac (58 ha) are privately the subunit in 2003 (Service anticipate that the lower portions of this owned. The remaining 148 ac (60 ha) unpublished data). This subunit is subunit will be inundated with sea-level are managed by the State, and consist of capable of supporting 30 breeding rise associated with climate change. the intertidal zone. Upon recalculation Pacific Coast WSPs (Service 2007, The physical or biological features of ownership data, we discovered that Appendix B). The BLM has conducted essential to the conservation of the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36762 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

species may require special This unit was occupied at the time of protection to address the main threats management considerations or listing, is currently occupied, and from nonnative vegetation, predators, protection to address the main threats capable of supporting 40 breeding and disturbance from equestrians and from nonnative vegetation, predators, Pacific Coast WSPs. Surveys have humans with pets. documented 22 breeding birds in this OHVs, and disturbance from equestrians CA 8, Manchester Beach, 505 ac (204 unit; however, those numbers have and humans with pets. ha) dropped off in recent years (Colwell et CA 5C, Eel River South Spit and Beach, al. 2009, p. 9; Service unpublished The Manchester Beach unit is 336 ac (136 ha) data). approximately 3.5 mi (6 km) long and This subunit, located in Humboldt Essential physical or biological located in Mendocino County about 1 County, encompasses the beach segment features of this unit include bare, open mi (2 km) west of the Town of from the mouth of the Eel River, south gravel bars comprised of both sand and Manchester. The State manages 425 ac to Centerville Road, approximately 4 mi cobble, which support reproduction and (172 ha) of the unit, 68 ac (28 ha) are (7 km) west of the City of Ferndale. The foraging. This unit harbors the most federally managed, and the remaining subunit is 5 mi (8 km) long; 160 ac (65 important breeding habitat in California 12 ac (5 ha) are privately owned. This ha) are private, with 4 ac (2 ha) managed north of San Francisco Bay, and has the unit is occupied and provides an by Humboldt County. Approximately highest fledging success rate of any area important wintering site for Pacific 172 ac (70 ha) are managed by the State. from Mendocino County to the Oregon Coast WSPs in the region (Service 2007, This subunit was occupied at the time border. Appendix B). In 2003, a pair of Pacific of listing, is currently occupied, and The physical or biological features Coast WSPs nested within the unit, and capable of supporting 20 breeding essential to the conservation of the successfully hatched two chicks. Pacific Coast WSPs. A single nest was species may require special However, those chicks did not survive (Colwell et al. 2004, p. 7). The current found during the 2004 breeding season management considerations or wintering population is estimated at (Colwell et al. 2004, p. 7). The winter protection to address the main threats fewer than 20 (Service unpublished population is estimated at fewer than 80 from predators, OHVs, disturbance from data). plovers, many of which breed on the Eel gravel mining, and humans with pets. Gravel mining is managed through a Although occupancy at the time of River gravel bars (CA 5) (Service listing has not been confirmed, we unpublished data). Clean Water Act permit issued by the USACE. consider this unit essential for the Essential physical or biological conservation of the species based on the features of the subunit include: Large CA 7, MacKerricher Beach, 1,218 ac fluctuating use of areas by the species as areas of sandy dunes, areas of sandy (493 ha) a response to habitat and resource beach above and below the high-tide This unit is approximately 3.5 mi (5.6 availability. The unit is located adjacent line, and generally barren to sparsely km) long. The unit is just south of the to currently occupied areas and vegetated terrain for foraging. Control of Ten Mile River, and approximately 4 mi provides dispersal habitat between nonnative vegetation and enforcement (6 km) north of the City of Fort Bragg units. This unit provides habitat to of existing human-use regulations are located in Mendocino County. The State support breeding Pacific Coast WSPs, needed to ensure the suitability of the manages approximately 1,144 ac (463 will facilitate interchange between subunit. With time, we anticipate that ha), and 74 ac (30 ha) are privately otherwise widely separated units, and the lower portions of this subunit will owned. CDPR has been conducting helps provide habitat within a Recovery be inundated with sea-level rise removal of European beach grass to Unit identified in the Recovery Plan associated with climate change. improve habitat for the Pacific Coast (Service 2007). The physical or biological features WSP and other sensitive dune species The unit contains large areas of sandy essential to the conservation of the within the unit. dunes, areas of sandy beach above and species may require special This unit was occupied at the time of below the high-tide line, and generally management considerations or listing, is currently occupied, and is barren to sparsely vegetated terrain, protection to address the main threats capable of supporting 20 breeding which are essential for the conservation from nonnative vegetation, predators, Pacific Coast WSPs (Service 2007, of the Pacific Coast WSP. OHVs, and disturbance from equestrians Appendix B). The current breeding CA 9, Dillon Beach, 39 ac (16 ha) and humans with pets. population is estimated at fewer than 10 This unit is located at the mouth of CA 6, Eel River Gravel Bars; 1,349 ac (Colwell et al. 2009, p. 9). The winter Tomales Bay, in Marin County, just (546 ha) population of plovers is fewer than 45 (Service unpublished data). south of the Town of Dillon Beach. It This unit, located in Humboldt Essential physical or biological stretches for about 0.7 mi (1 km) north County, is largely inundated during features of the unit include: large areas from Sand Point. The unit was occupied winter months due to high flows in the of sandy dunes, areas of sandy beach at the time of listing, is currently Eel River. The unit is 6.4 mi (8 km) from above and below the high-tide line, and occupied, and is an important wintering the City of Fernbridge, and includes generally barren to sparsely vegetated area for the species. Seventy-five gravel bars between Fernbridge and the terrain. Control of nonnative vegetation wintering Pacific Coast WSPs were confluence of the Van Duzen River. The and enforcement of existing human-use counted at this location during the Eel River is contained by levees in this regulations are needed to ensure the January 2007 winter window survey section, and consists of gravel bars and suitability of the unit. With time, we (Service 2007, p. 4). The unit does not wooded islands. The unit contains a anticipate that the lower portions of this extend as far north as did the unit total of 1,349 ac (546 ha), of which 176 unit will be inundated with sea-level proposed for Dillon Beach in 2004 (69 ac (71 ha) are owned and managed by rise associated with climate change. FR 75607, December 17, 2004), because Humboldt County, 304 ac (123 ha) are The physical or biological features subsequent site visits and discussions under the jurisdiction of the California essential to the conservation of the with local Pacific Coast WSP surveyors State Lands Commission, and 869 ac species may require special have established that Pacific Coast (352 ha) are privately-owned. management considerations or WSPs only rarely used the area north of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36763

the unit we are designating in this rule. located in Marin County to the west of management considerations or The unit is entirely on private land. the unincorporated Community of protection to address the main threats Essential physical or biological Olema. The subunit includes the end of from nonnative vegetation, flooding, features provided by the unit include the spit, and narrows to include only and nest predators such as great egrets surf cast debris supporting small the south-facing beach towards the base (Casmerodius albus) and common invertebrates for foraging, and large of the spit. It is completely within the ravens (Corvus corax) (Robinson-Nilsen stretches of relatively undisturbed, Point Reyes National Seashore. This et al. 2009, p. 14). Control of nonnative sparsely vegetated, sandy beach, both unit was occupied at the time of listing, vegetation and enforcement of existing above and below high-tide line, for is currently occupied, and can support human-use regulations are needed to foraging and potentially for nesting. both nesting and wintering Pacific Coast ensure the suitability of the unit. With The physical or biological features WSPs, although nesting has not been time, we anticipate that the lower essential to the conservation of the documented since 2000 (Stenzel in litt. portions of this unit will be inundated species may require special 2004, p. 3; Service 2009, p. 3). Ninety- with sea-level rise associated with management considerations or eight wintering plovers were counted at climate change. protection to address the main threats the site during the January 2007 CA 12, Hayward, 1 ac (0 ha) from nonnative vegetation, predators, window survey (Service 2007, p. 4). The and disturbance by humans and their subunit is expected to contribute This unit comprises Island 5 at the pets. Control of nonnative vegetation significantly to plover conservation in Hayward Regional Shoreline Park, and enforcement of existing human-use the region by providing habitat capable located to the west of the City of regulations are needed to ensure the of supporting 10 nesting birds (Service Hayward in Alameda County. The area suitability of the unit. With time, we 2007, Appendix B). is managed by the East Bay Regional anticipate that the lower portions of this PCEs at the subunit include sparsely Park District (EBRPD) as a nesting area unit will be inundated with sea-level vegetated beach sand, above and below for shorebirds—primarily least terns rise associated with climate change. high-tide for nesting and foraging, and (Sterna antillarum browni), but also tide-cast debris supporting small Pacific Coast WSPs (Riensche 2007, p. CA 10A, Point Reyes, 460 ac (186 ha) invertebrates. Control of nonnative 1). The unit was occupied at the time of This subunit is located in Marin vegetation and enforcement of existing listing and is currently occupied. Three County to the west of the human-use regulations are needed to Pacific Coast WSPs chicks from one nest unincorporated Community of Inverness ensure the suitability of the subunit. successfully fledged from the unit in and occupies most of the west-facing With time, we anticipate that the lower 2008 (Riensche 2008, p. 2; Robinson et beach between Point Reyes and Tomales portions of this subunit will be al. 2008, pp. 19, 34), but since then Point. It is located entirely within the inundated with sea-level rise associated seven plover nesting attempts in the Point Reyes National Seashore, and with climate change. area have failed, primarily due to consists primarily of dune-backed The physical or biological features predation (Robinson-Nilsen et al. 2009, beaches. This unit was occupied at the essential to the conservation of the pp. 16, 32; Robinson-Nilsen 2010, pers. time of listing, is currently occupied, species may require special comm.). The most commonly observed supports both nesting and wintering management considerations or avian predators at the site have been Pacific Coast WSPs, and has the protection to address the main threats California gulls (Larus californicus), potential to support 50 breeding birds from nonnative vegetation, disturbance although the only actual depredation with proper management (Service 2007, by humans and pets, and nest predators observed was by a killdeer (Charadrius Appendix B). such as crows and ravens. vociferus) (Robinson-Nilsen et al. 2009, The Point Reyes unit includes the pp. 14, 16). Essential physical or following PCEs essential to Pacific Coast CA 11, Napa-Sonoma Marshes, 618 ac biological features provided by the unit WSP conservation: sparsely vegetated (250 ha) include sparsely vegetated areas above sandy beach above and below high-tide This unit encompasses salt daily high-tides, such as salt pans, for nesting and foraging, wind-blown evaporation ponds 7 and 7A, in the artificial salt ponds, and adjoining sand dunes for nesting and predator Napa-Sonoma Marshes Wildlife Area, levees, for nesting and foraging. avoidance, and tide-cast debris owned by the CDFG. It is situated in The physical or biological features attracting small invertebrates for Napa County, about 2.3 mi (4 km) west essential to the conservation of the foraging. Control of nonnative of the Napa County Airport, and about species may require special vegetation and enforcement of existing 1.5 mi (2.4 km) south of Las Amigas management considerations or human-use regulations are needed to Road. The unit was occupied at the time protection to address the main threats ensure the suitability of the subunit. of listing and is currently occupied. from predation, salt pond management, With time, we anticipate that the lower Twelve Pacific Coast WSPs were and non-native vegetation. The EBRPD portions of this subunit will be identified at the location in the summer is implementing a predator management inundated with sea-level rise associated 2009, during window surveys (Service program utilizing numerous volunteers with climate change. 2009, p. 2). This is the only location in as well as staff from the U.S. The physical or biological features the northern portion of the San Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) essential to the conservation of the Francisco Bay known to support nesting Wildlife Services program (Riensche species may require special Pacific Coast WSPs. 2008, p. 2) to reduce predation at this management considerations or Essential physical or biological site. protection to address the main threats features provided by the unit include CA 13A, Eden Landing: 237 ac (96 ha) from nonnative vegetation, disturbance sparsely vegetated areas above daily by humans and pets, and predators high-tides, such as salt pans, artificial This subunit encompasses salt ponds (particularly corvids). salt ponds, and adjoining levees, for E11, E15B, and E16B, just south of nesting and foraging. highway 92 and the San Mateo Bridge CA 10B, Limantour, 156 ac (63 ha) The physical or biological features and west of Union City in Alameda Limantour is a roughly 2.25-mi (4-km) essential to the conservation of the County. This unit was occupied at the sand spit at the north end of Drake’s Bay species may require special time of listing, is currently occupied,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36764 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

and supported a total of 30 Pacific Coast Essential physical or biological features Plan (Service 2009, p. 266). The entire WSP nests in 2009, 15 of which hatched provided by the subunit include unit is federally owned. (Robinson-Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 32). sparsely vegetated areas above daily Essential physical or biological Approximately 228 ac (92 ha) are State high-tides, such as salt pans, artificial features provided by the unit include owned. Approximately 8 ac (3 ha) are salt ponds, and adjoining levees, for sparsely vegetated areas above daily privately owned. Essential features nesting and foraging. high-tides, such as salt pans, artificial provided by the subunit include The physical or biological features salt ponds, and adjoining levees, for sparsely vegetated areas above daily essential to the conservation of the nesting and foraging. high tides, such as salt pans, artificial species may require special The physical or biological features salt ponds, and adjoining levees, for management considerations or essential to the conservation of the nesting and foraging. protection to address the main threats species may require special The physical or biological features from flooding and avian nest predators management considerations or essential to the conservation of the such as California gulls (Robinson- protection to address the main threats species may require special Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 13). from flooding and avian nest predators management considerations or such as California gulls (Robinson- CA 14, Ravenswood, 89 ac (36 ha) protection to address the main threats Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 13). This unit consists of the southwestern from flooding and avian nest predators CA 16, Half Moon Bay, 36 ac (15 ha) such as California gulls (Robinson- portion of salt pond SF2 located east of Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 13). the City of East Palo Alto in San Mateo This unit is located next to the City County near the western approach to the of Half Moon Bay in San Mateo County CA 13B, Eden Landing, 171 ac (69 ha) Dumbarton Bridge. Pond SF2 is and stretches for about 1.25 mi (2 km) This subunit is located west of Union undergoing renovations intended to along Half Moon Bay State Beach, and City in Alameda County and provide ponded areas, islands, and salt is entirely within CDPR land. The encompasses salt pond E14, just south pan for several species of shorebirds, essential features of this unit include of Eden Creek. This subunit was including Pacific Coast WSPs (South sandy beach above and below the high- occupied at the time of listing, is Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project 2010, tide line for nesting and foraging, and currently occupied, supported nine p. 3). The Ravenswood unit is drawn to surf-cast debris to attract small Pacific Coast WSP nests in 2009, three encompass the salt pan area (Strong invertebrates. This unit was occupied at of which hatched young (Robinson- 2010b, pp. 3, 4). This unit was occupied the time of listing and is currently Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 32). The subunit at the time of listing and is currently occupied. Small numbers of breeding does not include salt ponds E12 and E13 occupied. In 2009, pond SF2 supported Pacific Coast WSPs have been found at (just north of E14), because those are 23 Pacific Coast WSPs nests, 17 of the location in the past five surveys being converted to high salinity ponds which hatched young (Robinson-Nilsen (Service 2009, p. 3). The unit also for birds such as eared grebes (Podiceps et al. 2009, p. 32). The entire unit is supports a sizeable winter flock, nigricollis) and phalaropes (Phalaropus privately owned. Essential physical or consisting of 50 Pacific Coast WSPs in spp.) that forage well on such habitat biological features provided by the unit 2007 (Service 2007, p. 4). We expect the (Strong 2010a, p. 1). The entire subunit include sparsely vegetated areas above unit to eventually support 10 breeding is State owned. Essential features daily high-tides, such as salt pans, Pacific Coast WSPs in the unit under provided by the subunit include artificial salt ponds and adjoining proper management (Service 2007). sparsely vegetated areas above daily levees, for nesting and foraging. The physical or biological features high-tides, such as salt pans, artificial The physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the salt ponds and adjoining levees, for essential to the conservation of the species may require special nesting and foraging. species may require special management considerations or The physical or biological features management considerations or protection to address the main threats essential to the conservation of the protection to address the main threats from nonnative vegetation, disturbance species may require special from flooding and avian nest predators by humans and pets, and nest predators. management considerations or such as California gulls (Robinson- Control of nonnative vegetation and protection to address the main threats Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 13). enforcement of existing human-use from flooding and avian nest predators regulations are needed to ensure the CA 15, Warm Springs, 168 ac (68 ha) such as California gulls (Robinson- suitability of the unit. With time, we Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 13). This unit encompasses the anticipate that the lower portions of this northeastern portion of salt evaporation unit will be inundated with sea-level CA 13C, Eden Landing, 609 ac (246 ha) ponds A22 and A23 in the Warm rise associated with climate change. This subunit encompasses salt ponds Springs area of the South San Francisco E6A and E6B, and is located just north Bay near Foster City in San Mateo CA 17, Waddell Creek Beach, 25 ac (10 of Old Alameda Creek and west of County. This unit was occupied at the ha) Union City in Alameda County. This time of listing and is currently This unit includes the mouth of unit was occupied at the time of listing, occupied. Fourteen breeding Pacific Waddell Creek and is located about 20 is currently occupied, and supported a Coast WSPs were identified at these mi (32 km) north of the City of Santa total of two Pacific Coast WSP nests in ponds during the 2009 summer window Cruz in Santa Cruz County. It extends 2009, both of which hatched young surveys (Service unpublished data). about 0.6 mi (1 km) north along the (Robinson-Nilsen et al. 2009, p. 32). The Additionally, Robinson-Nilsen et al. coast from a point about 0.4 mi (0.6 km) subunit does not include a panhandle- (2009, p. 32) found a total of 21 Pacific south of the creek mouth to a point shaped area of potential habitat just Coast WSPs nests at the ponds in 2009, about 0.2 mi (1 km) north of the creek north of pond E6A because it is being 11 of which successfully hatched young. mouth. Unit CA 17 encompasses converted to tidal marsh as part of a The southwestern portions of the ponds approximately 19 ac (8 ha) of State land restoration project started before the are excluded in keeping with tidal and 6 ac (2 ha) of private land. This unit South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project marsh restoration plans envisioned was occupied at the time of listing, and (Strong 2010b, p. 7; Strong 2010c, p. 1). under the draft Tidal Marsh Recovery the unit has historically (prior to 2004)

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36765

been an important breeding and with proper management, and in wrack supporting small invertebrates wintering site, supporting up to 11 conjunction with the other two (for nesting and foraging) and generally breeding and up to 50 wintering Pacific relatively small units designated in barren to sparsely vegetated terrain (for Coast WSPs (Service unpublished data). Santa Cruz County (CA 17 and 19), it foraging and predator avoidance). Although Pacific Coast WSPs have not can attract additional breeding Pacific The physical or biological features been documented in recent years, we Coast WSPs and thereby facilitate essential to the conservation of the consider this unit presently occupied interchange between the larger units at species may require special based on the fluctuating use of areas by Half Moon Bay (CA 16). management considerations or the species as a response to habitat and The unit includes the following protection to address the main threats resource availability. The unit is located habitat physical or biological features from nonnative vegetation, human between currently occupied areas and essential to the species: Areas of sandy disturbance, development, OHV use, provides dispersal habitat between beach above and below the high-tide pets, and predators. Control of units. This unit provides habitat to line with occasional surf-cast wrack nonnative vegetation and enforcement support breeding plovers, will facilitate supporting small invertebrates and of existing human-use regulations are interchange between otherwise widely generally barren to sparsely vegetated needed to ensure the suitability of the separated units, and helps provide terrain. unit. With time, we anticipate that the habitat within Recovery Unit 4 The physical or biological features lower portions of this unit will be (identified in the Recovery Plan, Service essential to the conservation of the inundated with sea-level rise associated 2007) along the central California Coast. species may require special with climate change. This unit includes the following management considerations or CA 20, Jetty Road to Aptos, 399 ac (161 physical or biological features essential protection to address the main threats ha) to the conservation of the species: from nonnative vegetation, human Wind-blown sand dunes, areas of sandy disturbance, and predators. Control of This unit is located about 5 mi (8 km) beach above and below the high-tide nonnative vegetation and enforcement west of the City of Watsonville and line with occasional surf-cast wrack of existing human-use regulations are includes located in supporting small invertebrates, and needed to ensure the suitability of the Santa Cruz County and Zmudowski generally barren to sparsely vegetated unit. With time, we anticipate that the State Beach and Moss Landing State terrain. lower portions of this unit will be Beach, both located in Monterey The physical or biological features inundated with sea-level rise associated County. The mouth of the essential to the conservation of the with climate change. is located near the center of the subunit, species may require special and is designated as a Natural Preserve CA 19, Wilder Creek Beach, 15 ac (6 ha) management considerations or within Zmudowski State Beach. Elkhorn protection to address the main threats This unit is located at the mouth of Slough is at the south end of the from nonnative vegetation and human Wilder Creek and is about 1 mi (1.6 km) subunit. It extends about 8 mi (13 km) disturbance. Control of nonnative west of the city of Santa Cruz, in Santa along the coast from Elkhorn Slough to vegetation and enforcement of existing Cruz County. It extends about 0.25 mi Zils Road. Approximately 369 ac (149 human-use regulations are needed to (0.40 km) along the coast encompassing ha) are State owned. The remaining 30 ensure the suitability of the unit. With the sandy beach at the mouth of Wilder ac (12 ha) are privately owned. This unit time, we anticipate that the lower Creek. The unit is situated on State- was occupied at the time of listing; is portions of this unit will be inundated owned (14 ac (6 ha)) and private (1 ac currently occupied; is an important with sea-level rise associated with (0.4 ha)) land. This unit was occupied breeding area, with as many as 105 climate change. at the time of listing and is currently breeding Pacific Coast WSPs each year; occupied. Although nesting in this area and is also an important wintering area, CA 18, Scott Creek Beach, 23 ac (9 ha) has been uncommon in recent years, it with up to 250 plovers each winter This unit includes the mouths of Scott has historically been an important (Service unpublished data). and Molino Creeks and is located about snowy plover nesting area, with up to The unit includes the following 13 mi (21 km) north of the City of Santa 16 birds nesting each year (Service habitat physical or biological features Cruz in Santa Cruz County. It extends 2007, Appendix B) and is also an essential to the species: Areas of sandy about 0.7 mi (1 km) north along the important Pacific Coast WSP wintering beach above and below the high-tide coast from the southern end of the area, with up to 52 birds each winter line with occasional surf-cast wrack sandy beach, 0.3 mi (0.5 km) south of (Service 2007, Appendix B). Unit CA 19 supporting small invertebrates, and Molino Creek, to a point about 0.1 mi is capable of supporting 16 breeding generally barren to sparsely vegetated (0.2 km) north of Scott Creek. Unit CA Pacific Coast WSPs under proper terrain. 18 encompasses approximately 15 ac (6 management (Service 2007, Appendix The physical or biological features ha) of State land and 8 ac (3 ha) of local B). essential to the conservation of the jurisdictional land. This unit was This unit is essential to the species may require special occupied at the time of listing and is conservation of the species because, management considerations or currently occupied, and recent surveys with proper management, and in protection to address the main threats have found up to 4 breeding Pacific conjunction with the other two from nonnative vegetation, human Coast WSPs, while historical surveys relatively small units in Santa Cruz disturbance, development, horses, OHV (prior to 2004) have found up to 12 County (CA 17 and 18), it can attract use, pets, predators, and habitat changes breeding plovers occupying the area additional breeding Pacific Coast WSPs resulting from exotic vegetation. Control (Service unpublished data). Unit CA 18 and thereby facilitate interchange of nonnative vegetation and is an important wintering area, with up between the larger units at Half Moon enforcement of existing human-use to 129 Pacific Coast WSPs recorded in Bay (CA 16) and Jetty Road to Aptos (CA regulations are needed to ensure the a single season (Service unpublished 20). The unit includes the following suitability of the unit. With time, we data). features essential to the species: Areas anticipate that the lower portions of this This unit is essential to the of sandy beach above and below the unit will be inundated with sea-level conservation of the species because, high tide line with occasional surf-cast rise associated with climate change.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36766 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

CA 21, Elkhorn Slough Mudflats, 281 ac remainder is privately owned. This unit vegetation. Control of nonnative (114 ha) was occupied at the time of listing, is vegetation and enforcement of existing This unit is located about 3.5 mi (6 currently occupied, and is an important human-use regulations are needed to km) north of the City of Castroville breeding area, with as many as 162 ensure the suitability of the unit. With along the north side of Elkhorn Slough breeding Pacific Coast WSPs each year, time, we anticipate that the lower east of Highway 1 located in Monterey and is also an important wintering area, portions of this unit will be inundated County. This unit is 1.5 mi (2 km) long, with up to 363 plovers each winter with sea-level rise associated with climate change. extending about 1 mi (2 km) along the (Service unpublished data). The unit includes the following north shore of Elkhorn Slough east of physical or biological features essential CA 24, San Carpoforo Creek, 24 ac (10 Highway 1 and about 0.5 mi (1 km) to the species: Areas of sandy beach ha) north from Elkhorn Slough to Bennett above and below the high-tide line with This unit is located approximately 20 Slough. The unit is situated entirely on occasional surf-cast wrack supporting mi (32 km) north of the Town of State-owned land. This unit was small invertebrates and generally barren Cambria and 2.5 mi (4 km) south of the occupied at the time of listing, is to sparsely vegetated terrain. San Luis Obispo/Monterey County currently occupied, and is an important The physical or biological features boundary in San Luis Obispo County. It breeding area, with as many as 41 essential to the conservation of the extends approximately 0.57 mi (1 km) breeding Pacific Coast WSPs each year, species may require special along the coast. This unit contains and is also an important wintering area, management considerations or approximately 4 ac (2 ha) of land owned with up to 137 plovers each winter protection to address the main threats by the USFS, 18 ac (7 ha) owned by the (Service unpublished data). This unit is from human disturbance, development, CDPR, and 2 ac (1 ha) of private land. capable of supporting 80 breeding horses, OHV use, pets, predators, and The unit was occupied at the time of Pacific Coast WSPs under proper habitat changes resulting from exotic listing, is currently occupied, and has management (Service 2007, Appendix vegetation. Control of nonnative supported as many as nine breeding B). vegetation and enforcement of existing Pacific Coast WSPs; however, breeding The unit includes the following human-use regulations are needed to does not occur here every year (Service habitat physical or biological features ensure the suitability of the unit. With unpublished data). This unit is capable essential to the species: Areas of sandy time, we anticipate that the lower of supporting 10 breeding Pacific Coast beach above and below the high-tide portions of this unit will be inundated WSPs under proper management line with occasional surf-cast wrack with sea-level rise associated with (Service 2007, Appendix B). This unit supporting small invertebrates, and mud climate change. consistently supports 40 to 50 wintering flat and salt pan habitat with generally plovers (Service unpublished data). San CA 23, Point Sur Beach, 72 ac (29 ha) barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. Carpoforo Creek is approximately 53 mi The physical or biological features This unit is about 17 mi (27 km) south (84 km) south of the closest unit to the essential to the conservation of the of the City of Monterey and immediately north (CA 23, Point Sur), and species may require special north of Point Sur State Historic Park approximately 11 mi (18 km) north of management considerations or (SHP) in Monterey County. It extends the closest unit to the south (CA 25, protection to address the main threats about 0.7 mi (1 km) north along the Arroyo Laguna Creek). Therefore, this from human disturbance, development, coast from Point Sur SHP, and includes unit may facilitate interchange between horses, OHV use, pets, predators, and the Point Sur Dunes Natural Preserve. widely separated habitats. habitat changes resulting from exotic This unit encompasses approximately This unit includes the following vegetation. Control of nonnative 38 ac (15 ha) of State land and 34 ac (14 physical or biological features essential vegetation and enforcement of existing ha) of private land. This unit was to the conservation of the species: Areas human-use regulations are needed to occupied at the time of listing, is of sandy beach above and below the ensure the suitability of the unit. With currently occupied, and has supported high-tide line with occasional surf-cast time, we anticipate that the lower up to 13 breeding Pacific Coast WSPs wrack supporting small invertebrates portions of this unit will be inundated each year (Service unpublished data). and generally barren to sparsely with sea-level rise associated with This unit is capable of supporting 20 vegetated terrain. climate change. breeding Pacific Coast WSPs under The physical or biological features proper management (Service 2007, CA 22, Monterey to Moss Landing, 959 essential to the conservation of the Appendix B). Unit CA 23 is an ac (388 ha) species may require special important wintering area, historically management considerations or This unit includes the beaches along supporting up to 65 plovers each winter protection to address the main threats the southern half of Monterey Bay from (Service unpublished data). from human disturbance, pets, and the City of Monterey at the south end of The unit includes the following dune-stabilizing vegetation. Control of the unit to Moss Landing and the mouth habitat physical or biological features nonnative vegetation and enforcement of Elkhorn Slough at the north end of essential to the species: Wind-blown of existing human-use regulations are the unit in Monterey County. The sand dunes, areas of sandy beach above needed to ensure the suitability of the mouth of the Salinas River is a Natural and below the high-tide line with unit. With time, we anticipate that the Preserve under State Parks, and is occasional surf-cast wrack supporting lower portions of this unit will be located near the center of the unit. Both small invertebrates, and generally inundated with sea-level rise associated the Salinas River and Marina Dunes barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. with climate change. Natural Preserves are within the unit. The physical or biological features The unit extends about 15 mi (24 km) essential to the conservation of the CA 25, Arroyo Laguna Creek, 28 ac (11 north along the coast from Monterey to species may require special ha) Moss Landing. Unit CA 22 includes management considerations or This unit is located 11 mi (8 km) approximately 285 ac (115 ha) of State protection to address the main threats south of San Carpoforo Creek and 10 mi lands, 36 ac (14 ha) of local lands, and from human disturbance and habitat (16 km) north of the Town of Cambria 415 ac (168 ha) of Federal land. The changes resulting from exotic in San Luis Obispo County. It extends

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36767

approximately 0.9 mi (2 km) along the This unit includes the following 0.5 mi (1 km) south of Toro Creek Road coast from a rocky headland 0.2 mi (0.3 physical or biological features essential (total length: 0.9 mi (1 km)). This unit km) south of Adobe Creek to 0.2 mi (0.3 to the conservation of the species: Areas was occupied at the time of listing, is km) north of Oak Knoll Creek. This unit of sandy beach above and below the currently occupied, and was historically encompasses approximately 18 ac (7 ha) high-tide line with occasional surf-cast (prior to 2000) an important breeding of land owned by the CDPR and 10 ac wrack supporting small invertebrates area, having supported as many as 16 (4 ha) of private land. This unit was and generally barren to sparsely breeding Pacific Coast WSPs (Service occupied at the time of listing and is vegetated terrain. unpublished data). Breeding has not currently occupied. Arroyo Laguna The physical or biological features occurred at this unit in the last 5 Creek has historically (prior to 2000) essential to the conservation of the seasons; however, the unit is capable of been an important site, supporting as species may require special supporting 25 breeding plovers under many as 6 breeding and 91 wintering management considerations or proper management (Service 2007, Pacific Coast WSPs; however, neither protection to address the main threats Appendix B). This unit is an important breeding nor wintering occurs here from human disturbance, pets, and wintering area with up to 121 Pacific every year (Service unpublished data). dune-stabilizing vegetation. Control of Coast WSPs recorded in a single season This unit is capable of supporting six nonnative vegetation and enforcement (Service unpublished data). The unit breeding Pacific Coast WSPs under of existing human-use regulations are encompasses approximately 11 ac (4 ha) proper management (Service 2007, needed to ensure the suitability of the of State land and 23 ac (9 ha) of private Appendix B). This unit is roughly unit. With time, we anticipate that the land. equidistant between CA 24 (San lower portions of this unit will be This unit includes the following Carpoforo Creek) and CA 26 (San inundated with sea-level rise associated physical or biological features essential Simeon State Beach) and may facilitate with climate change. to the species: Areas of sandy beach above and below the high-tide line with interchange between widely separated CA 27, Villa Creek Beach, 20 ac (8 ha) habitats. occasional surf-cast wrack supporting This unit is located about 3.5 mi (6 This unit includes the following small invertebrates and generally barren km) northwest of the Community of physical or biological features essential to sparsely vegetated terrain. Cayucos in San Luis Obispo County. It The physical or biological features to the conservation of the species: Areas extends 0.3 mi (0.5 km) northwest along essential to the conservation of the of sandy beach above and below the the beach from an unnamed headland species may require special high-tide line with occasional surf-cast 1.4 mi (2 km) north of Point Cayucos to management considerations or wrack supporting small invertebrates an unnamed headland northwest of protection to address the main threats (for nesting and foraging) and generally Villa Creek. This unit is owned by the from nonnative vegetation, human barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. CDPR. This unit was occupied at the disturbance, pets, and predators. The physical or biological features time of listing, is currently occupied, Control of nonnative vegetation and essential to the conservation of the and is an important breeding and enforcement of existing human-use species may require special wintering site. This unit has supported regulations are needed to ensure the management considerations or as many as 33 breeding Pacific Coast suitability of the unit. With time, we protection to address the main threats WSPs in a single season (Service anticipate that the lower portions of this from human disturbance, pets, and unpublished data). Wintering numbers unit will be inundated with sea-level dune-stabilizing vegetation. Control of vary widely from year to year, with 10 rise associated with climate change. nonnative vegetation and enforcement to 112 plovers recorded over the last 7 of existing human-use regulations are CA 29, Atascadero Beach/Morro Strand seasons (Service unpublished data). State Beach, 213 ac (86 ha) needed to ensure the suitability of the This unit includes the following unit. With time, we anticipate that the physical or biological features essential This unit is located at Morro Strand lower portions of this unit will be to the species: Areas of sandy beach State Beach just north of the City of inundated with sea-level rise associated above and below the high-tide line with Morro Bay in San Luis Obispo County. with climate change. occasional surf-cast wrack supporting It extends about 2.25 mi (4 km) north along the beach from the parking area CA 26, San Simeon State Beach, 24 ac small invertebrates and generally barren northeast of Morro Rock to an unnamed (10 ha) to sparsely vegetated terrain. The physical or biological features rocky outcrop opposite the end of Yerba This unit is located about 2 mi (3 km) essential to the conservation of the Buena Street at the north end of the City north of the Town of Cambria in San species may require special of Morro Bay. This unit encompasses Luis Obispo County. It extends about management considerations or approximately 64 ac (26 ha) of State 0.9 mi (2 km) along the coast from a protection to address the main threats land, 51 ac (21 ha) of local jurisdictional point opposite the intersection of from nonnative vegetation, human land, and 98 ac (40 ha) of private land. Highway 1 and Moonstone Beach Drive disturbance, pets, horses, and predators. This unit was occupied at the time of to the northwestern corner of San Control of nonnative vegetation and listing, is currently occupied, and is an Simeon State Beach. Unit CA 26 is enforcement of existing human-use important breeding area, having owned by the CDPR. The unit was regulations are needed to ensure the supported as many as 24 breeding occupied at the time of listing and is suitability of the unit. With time, we Pacific Coast WSPs in a single season currently occupied. San Simeon State anticipate that the lower portions of this (Service unpublished data). The unit is Beach has supported as many as seven unit will be inundated with sea-level capable of supporting 40 breeding breeding Pacific Coast WSPs; however, rise associated with climate change. Pacific Coast WSPs under proper breeding does not occur here every year management (Service 2007, Appendix (Service unpublished data). This unit is CA 28, Toro Creek, 34 ac (14 ha) B). This unit is also an important an important wintering area with up to This unit is located about 3 mi (5 km) wintering area, with up to 249 plovers 143 plovers recorded in a single season north of the City of Morro Bay in San being recorded during a single season over the last 7 years (Service Luis Obispo County, extending from 0.4 over the last 7 years (Service unpublished data). mi (1 km) north of Toro Creek Road to unpublished data).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36768 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

This unit includes the following CA 31, Pismo Beach/Nipomo Dunes, CA 32, Vandenberg North, CA 33, physical or biological features essential 1,652 ac (669 ha) Vandenberg South to the species: areas of sandy beach This unit is located south of the City Pursuant to section 4(a)(3) of the Act, above and below the high-tide line with we have exempted units CA 32 (711 ac occasional surf-cast wrack supporting of Grover Beach and west of the Town of Oceano and extends from San Luis (288 ha)), and CA33 (424 ac (172ha)), small invertebrates and generally barren from critical habitat designation (see Obispo County into northern Santa to sparsely vegetated terrain. Exemptions section below). The physical or biological features Barbara County west of the City of essential to the conservation of the Guadalupe. The unit has approximately CA 34, Devereaux Beach, 52 ac (21 ha) species may require special 242 ac (98 ha) of Federal land, 552 ac This unit is located on the University management considerations or (223 ha) of State land, 377 ac (152 ha) of California’s Coal Oil Point Natural protection to address the main threats of local jurisdictional land, and 481 ac Reserve, about 7 mi (11 km) west along from nonnative vegetation, human (195 ha) of private land. This unit the coast from the City of Santa Barbara disturbance, pets, and predators. extends about 12 mi (19 km) along the in Santa Barbara County. The unit Control of nonnative vegetation and beach from a point about 0.4 mi (1 km) extends about 1.8 mi (3 km) north along enforcement of existing human-use north of Mussel Point to a point on the the coast from the western boundary of regulations are needed to ensure the north side of Arroyo Grande Creek at the Isla Vista County Park to a point along suitability of the unit. With time, we south end of Strand Way in the Town the beach opposite the end of Santa anticipate that the lower portions of this of Oceano. This unit was occupied at Barbara Shores Drive. This unit consists unit will be inundated with sea-level the time of listing, is currently of 43 ac (17 ha) of State land and 9 ac rise associated with climate change. occupied, and is an important breeding (4 ha) of local jurisdictional land. This CA 30, Morro Bay Beach, 1,076 ac (435 area, having supported as many as 162 unit was occupied at the time of listing, ha) breeding Pacific Coast WSPs in a single is currently occupied, and is an season (Service unpublished data). This important breeding area with as many as This unit is located at Montana de unit is capable of supporting 350 39 breeding Pacific Coast WSPs Oro State Park south of Morro Rock and breeding Pacific Coast WSPs under recorded in a single season (Service adjacent to the City of Morro Bay in San proper management (Service 2007, unpublished data). This unit is also an Luis Obispo County. It extends 5.5 mi Appendix B). Pismo Beach/Nipomo important wintering area with up to 360 (9 km) north along the beach from a Dunes is an important wintering area, Pacific Coast WSPs recorded during a rocky outcrop about 350 ft (105 m) north having supported up to 287 Pacific single season over the last 7 years of Hazard Canyon to the northern tip of Coast WSPs during a single season over (Service unpublished data). the sand spit. This unit encompasses the last 7 years (Service unpublished This unit includes the following approximately 948 ac (383 ha) of State physical or biological features essential land, 69 ac (28 ha) of local jurisdictional data). The unit includes portions of and Oceano Dunes to the conservation of the species: Areas land, and 60 ac (24 ha) of private land. of sandy beach above and below the This unit was occupied at the time of SVRA, owned and managed by the CDPR; the Guadalupe-Nipomo Dunes high-tide line with occasional surf-cast listing, is currently occupied, and is an wrack supporting small invertebrates National Wildlife Refuge, owned and important breeding area, supporting as and generally barren to sparsely managed by the Service; the Guadalupe many as 205 breeding Pacific Coast vegetated terrain. Oil Field, owned and managed by the WSPs in a single season (Service The physical or biological features unpublished data). Morro Bay Beach is Chevron Corporation; and Rancho essential to the conservation of the also an important wintering area, Guadalupe County Park, owned and species may require special supporting up to 104 plovers during a managed by the County of Santa management considerations or single over the last seven seasons Barbara. protection to address the main threats (Service unpublished data). This unit includes the following from nonnative vegetation, human This unit includes the following physical or biological features essential disturbance, pets, and predators. physical or biological features essential to the species: Wind-blown sand dunes, Control of nonnative vegetation and to the species: Wind-blown sand dunes, areas of sandy beach above and below enforcement of existing human-use areas of sandy beach above and below the high-tide line with occasional surf- regulations are needed to ensure the the high-tide line with occasional surf- cast wrack supporting small suitability of the unit. With time, we cast wrack supporting small invertebrates, and generally barren to anticipate that the lower portions of this invertebrates, and generally barren to sparsely vegetated terrain. unit will be inundated with sea-level sparsely vegetated terrain. rise associated with climate change. The physical or biological features The physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the essential to the conservation of the CA 35, Santa Barbara Beaches, 65 ac (26 species may require special species may require special ha) management considerations or management considerations or This unit is located within the City of protection to address the main threats protection to address the main threats Santa Barbara in Santa Barbara County. from human disturbance, horses, pets, from nonnative vegetation, human It extends about 1.8 mi (3 km) along the predators, and dune-stabilizing disturbance, OHVs, horses, pets, and coast from the Andree Clark Bird Refuge vegetation. Control of nonnative predators. Control of nonnative intersection with the Pacific Ocean to vegetation and enforcement of existing vegetation and enforcement of existing the Santa Barbara Harbor. This unit human-use regulations are needed to human-use regulations are needed to encompasses approximately 30 ac (12 ensure the suitability of the unit. With ensure the suitability of the unit. With ha) of State land, 35 ac (14 ha) of City time, we anticipate that the lower time, we anticipate that the lower of Santa Barbara lands, and 0.3 ac (0.1 portions of this unit will be inundated portions of this unit will be inundated ha) of private land. The unit was with sea-level rise associated with with sea-level rise associated with occupied at the time of listing and is climate change. climate change. currently occupied. The unit is an

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36769

important wintering area with up to 111 unit. With time, we anticipate that the line with occasional surf-cast wrack Pacific Coast WSPs recorded during a lower portions of this unit will be supporting small invertebrates, and single season over the last 7 years inundated by sea-level rise associated generally barren to sparsely vegetated (Service unpublished data). with climate change. terrain. This unit includes the following The physical or biological features physical or biological features essential CA 37, San Buenaventura Beach, 70 ac essential to the conservation of the to the conservation of the species: areas (28 ha) species may require special of sandy beach above and below the This unit is located within the City of high-tide line with occasional surf-cast Ventura in Ventura County. It extends management considerations or wrack supporting small invertebrates about 2 mi (3 km) north along the coast protection to address the main threats and generally barren to sparsely from rock groin, immediately north of from human disturbance, development, vegetated terrain. Marina Park to the Ventura Pier. San pets, and dune-stabilizing vegetation. The physical or biological features Buenaventura State Beach is a unit that Control of nonnative vegetation and essential to the conservation of the is owned by the CDPR. This unit was enforcement of existing human-use species may require special occupied at the time of listing and is regulations are needed to ensure the management considerations or currently occupied. It is an important suitability of the unit. With time, we protection to address the main threats wintering area with up to 72 Pacific anticipate that the lower portions of this from nonnative vegetation, human Coast WSPs recorded during a single unit will be inundated by sea-level rise disturbance, development, and pets. season over the last 7 years (Service associated with climate change. Control of nonnative vegetation and unpublished data). CA 39, Ormond Beach, 320 ac (130 ha) enforcement of existing human-use This unit includes the following regulations are needed to ensure the physical or biological features essential This unit is located near the cities of suitability of the unit. With time, we to the conservation of the species: Areas Port Hueneme and Oxnard in Ventura anticipate that the lower portions of this of sandy beach above and below the County. It extends about 3 mi (5 km) unit will be inundated by sea-level rise high-tide line with occasional surf-cast northwest along the coast from Arnold associated with climate change. wrack supporting small invertebrates Road and the boundary of Naval Base and generally barren to sparsely CA 36, Santa Rosa Island Beaches, 586 Ventura County, Point Mugu (NBVC, vegetated terrain. ac (237 ha) The physical or biological features Point Mugu) to the south jetty of Port This unit is located on Santa Rosa essential to the conservation of the Hueneme. This unit encompasses Island about 31 mi (50 km) southwest of species may require special approximately 161 ac (65 ha) of private the City of Santa Barbara in Santa management considerations or land and 159 ac (65 ha) of State land. Barbara County. This unit is comprised protection to address the main threats This unit was occupied at the time of of 11 different beaches (subunits CA from nonnative vegetation, human listing, is currently occupied, and is an 36A through CA 36K) around the island. disturbance, and pets. Control of important breeding area with as many as This unit encompasses approximately nonnative vegetation and enforcement 33 breeding Pacific Coast WSPs 586 ac (237 ha) of Channel Islands of existing human-use regulations are recorded in a single season (Service National Park land. This unit was needed to ensure the suitability of the unpublished data). This unit is capable occupied at the time of listing, is unit. With time, we anticipate that the of supporting 50 breeding plovers under currently occupied, and is an important lower portions of this unit will be proper management (Service 2007, breeding area with as many as 37 inundated by sea-level rise associated Appendix B). This unit is also an breeding Pacific Coast WSPs recorded in with climate change. important wintering area with up to 117 a single season (Service unpublished plovers recorded during a single season data). This unit is capable of supporting CA 38, Mandalay Beach to Santa Clara over the last 7 years (Service 130 breeding plovers under proper River, 672 ac (272 ha) unpublished data). management (Service 2007, Appendix This unit is located near the City of This unit includes the following B). This is also an important wintering Oxnard in Ventura County. It extends physical or biological features essential area with up to 242 plovers recorded about 6 mi (10 km) north along the coast to the conservation of the species: during a single season over the last 7 from the north jetty of Channel Islands Wind-blown sand dunes, areas of sandy years (Service unpublished data). Harbor to a point about 0.5 mi (1 km) beach above and below the high-tide This unit includes the following north of the Santa Clara River mouth. line with occasional surf-cast wrack physical or biological features essential This unit encompasses approximately supporting small invertebrates, and to the conservation of the species: Areas 213 ac (86 ha) of private land and 459 generally barren to sparsely vegetated of sandy beach above and below the ac (186 ha) of State land within McGrath terrain. high-tide line with surf-cast wrack and Mandalay State Beaches. This unit supporting small invertebrates and was occupied at the time of listing and The physical or biological features generally barren to sparsely vegetated is currently occupied. It is an important essential to the conservation of the terrain. breeding area with as many as 70 species may require special The physical or biological features breeding Pacific Coast WSPs recorded in management considerations or essential to the conservation of the a single season (Service unpublished protection to address the main threats species may require special data). This unit is also an important from nonnative vegetation, human management considerations or wintering area with up to 129 plovers disturbance, and pets. Control of protection to address the main threats recorded during a single season over the nonnative vegetation and enforcement from nonnative vegetation, and direct last 7 years (Service unpublished data). of existing human-use regulations are disturbance from expanding marine This unit includes the following needed to ensure the suitability of the mammal populations. Control of physical or biological features essential unit. With time, we anticipate that the nonnative vegetation and enforcement to the conservation of the species: lower portions of this unit will be of existing human-use regulations are Wind-blown sand dunes, areas of sandy inundated by sea-level rise associated needed to ensure the suitability of the beach above and below the high-tide with climate change.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36770 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

CA 40, Mugu Lagoon North; CA 41, sandy beach above and below the high- a location with high quality breeding Mugu Lagoon South; CA 42, San Nicolas tide line with occasional surf-cast wrack habitat (Page in litt. 2004) and facilitates Island supporting small invertebrates and interchange between wintering Pursuant to section 4(a)(3) of the Act, generally barren to sparsely vegetated locations. This location contains the physical or we have exempted units CA 40, CA 41, terrain. The physical or biological features biological features essential to the and CA42 from critical habitat essential to the conservation of the conservation of the species, including a designation (see Exemptions section species may require special wide sandy beach with occasional surf- below). management considerations or cast wrack supporting small CA 43, Zuma Beach, 73 ac (30 ha) protection to address the main threats invertebrates. from nonnative vegetation, human The physical or biological features This unit is located about 8 mi (13 disturbance, and pets. Control of essential to the conservation of the km) west of the City of Malibu in Los nonnative vegetation and enforcement species may require special Angeles County. It extends about 3 mi of existing human-use regulations are management considerations or (5 km) north along the coast from the needed to ensure the suitability of the protection to address the main threats north side of to the base of unit. With time, we anticipate that the from human recreational disturbance, Trancas Canyon. This unit encompasses lower portions of this unit will be pets, and beach raking. approximately 72 ac (29 ha) of Los inundated by sea-level rise associated Angeles County lands, and 1 ac (0.5 ha) CA 45C, Dockweiler South, 65 ac (26 ha) with climate change. of State land. This unit was occupied at This subunit is located immediately the time of listing and is currently CA 45A, Santa Monica Beach, 48 ac (19 west of the Hyperion Wastewater occupied. It is an important wintering ha) Treatment Plant between the cities of area with up to 213 Pacific Coast WSPs This subunit is located between the Los Angeles and El Segundo in Los recorded during a single season over the cities of Santa Monica and Los Angeles Angeles County. It stretches last 7 years (Service unpublished data; in Los Angeles County. It stretches approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) along Vista Ryan et al. 2010, p. 19). roughly 1 mi (2 km) from Montana del Mar from West Imperial Highway This unit includes the following Avenue to the mouth of Santa Monica extending past East Grand Avenue. This physical or biological features essential Canyon. This subunit consists of 29 ac subunit consists of 54 ac (22 ha) of State to the conservation of the species: Areas (12 ha) of State owned land, and 19 ac land and 11 ac (5 ha) of privately owned of sandy beach above and below the (8 ha) are owned by the City of Santa land. This subunit was occupied at the high-tide line with occasional surf-cast Monica. This subunit was occupied at time of listing and is currently wrack supporting small invertebrates the time of listing, is currently occupied. In conjunction with Subunits and generally barren to sparsely occupied, and annually supports a CA 45B and CA 45D, it annually vegetated terrain. significant wintering flock of Pacific supports a significant wintering flock of The physical or biological features Coast WSPs (an average wintering flock Pacific Coast WSPs in a location with essential to the conservation of the of 36 from 2003 to 2010 (Service high-quality breeding habitat (Page in species may require special unpublished data)) in a location with litt. 2004) and facilitates interchange management considerations or high-quality breeding habitat. This between wintering locations. protection to address the main threats location also facilitates interchange This location contains the physical or from nonnative vegetation, human between wintering locations. biological features essential to the disturbance, development, horses, and This location contains the physical or conservation of the species, including a pets. Control of nonnative vegetation biological features essential to the wide sandy beach with occasional surf- and enforcement of existing human-use conservation of the species, including a cast wrack supporting small regulations are needed to ensure the wide sandy beach with occasional surf- invertebrates. suitability of the unit. With time, we cast wrack supporting small The physical or biological features anticipate that the lower portions of this invertebrates. essential to the conservation of the unit will be inundated by sea-level rise The physical or biological features species may require special associated with climate change. essential to the conservation of the management considerations or CA 44, Malibu Beach, 13 ac (5 ha) species may require special protection to address the main threats management considerations or from human recreational disturbance, This unit is located within the City of protection to address the main threats pets, and beach raking. Malibu in Los Angeles County. It from human recreational disturbance, CA 45D, Hermosa State Beach, 27 ac (11 extends about 0.5 mi (1 km) north along pets, and beach raking. the coast from approximately 300 ft (94 ha) m) north of the Malibu Pier to Malibu CA 45B, Dockweiler North, 34 ac (14 ha) This subunit is located immediately Point. Approximately 9 ac (4 ha) are This subunit is located south of west of the City of Hermosa Beach in within Malibu Lagoon State Beach. The Ballona Creek and west of the El Los Angeles County. This subunit ownership of the remaining 4 ac (1 ha) Segundo Dunes, and immediately west stretches roughly 0.5 mi (1 km) from are not known; however, the State likely of the Los Angeles International Airport, Eleventh Street to First Street. This has jurisdiction over these lands. This in the City of Los Angeles, Los Angeles subunit consists of 8 ac (3 ha) State land unit was occupied at the time of listing County. It stretches roughly 0.5 mi (0.8 and 19 ac (8 ha) are privately owned. and is currently occupied. It is an km) centered at Sandpiper Street. This This subunit was occupied at the time important wintering area with up to 67 subunit is owned by the State of of listing and is currently occupied. The Pacific Coast WSPs recorded during a California. This subunit was occupied at unit supported an average wintering single season over the last 7 years the time of listing and is currently flock of 25 Pacific Coast WSPs from (Service unpublished data). occupied. In conjunction with Subunits 2003 to 2010 (Service unpublished This unit includes the following CA 45C and CA 45D, the subunit data). In conjunction with subunits CA physical or biological features for the annually supports a significant 45B and CA 45C, this subunit annually conservation of the species: Areas of wintering flock of Pacific Coast WSPs in supports a large and significant

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36771

wintering flock of Pacific Coast WSP location contributes to the conservation CA 48, Balboa Beach, 25 ac (10 ha) and facilitates interchange between goal for the region by providing a This unit is located on the Balboa wintering locations. management potential of 70 breeding Peninsula, immediately west of the City This location contains the physical or birds (Service 2007, Appendix B). This of Newport Beach in Orange County. biological features essential to the location also supported an average This unit stretches roughly 0.3 mi (0.5 conservation of the species, including a wintering flock of 14 Pacific Coast WSP km) from A Street south to G Street, wide sandy beach with occasional surf- from 2003 through 2010 (Service including a total of 25 ac (10 ha), all of cast wrack supporting small unpublished data). This reserve is an which are owned by the City of Newport invertebrates. active oil field that underwent Beach. This unit was occupied at the The physical or biological features significant reconstruction and time of listing, is currently occupied, essential to the conservation of the restoration between 2004 and 2006, and supported two breeding adult species may require special including the addition of three new nest Pacific Coast WSPs in 2009 (P. Knapp, management considerations or sites and a new ocean inlet that allows pers. comm. 2010) and three breeding protection to address the main threats the water level to rise and fall adult Pacific Coast WSPs in 2010 (T. from human recreational disturbance, resembling the irregular semi-diurnal Ryan, in litt. 2010). It also supported an pets, and beach raking. tidal range of southern California’s average wintering flock of 35 Pacific CA 46A, Bolsa Chica State Beach, 93 ac ocean waters (Knapp and Peterson 2009, Coast WSPs from 2003 through 2010 (38 ha) p. 1). (Service unpublished data). This subunit is located west of the This location contains the physical or This location contains the physical or Pacific Coast Highway, in the City of biological features essential to the biological features essential to the conservation of the species, including a Huntington Beach, Orange County. It conservation of the species, including wide sandy beach with occasional surf- stretches roughly 2.4 mi (3.9 km) from tidally influenced estuarine mud flats cast wrack supporting small north of the lagoon mouth channel (into supporting small invertebrates, and invertebrates. Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve) to just seasonally dry ponds that provide The physical or biological features south of the Sunset Beach area near nesting and foraging habitat for Pacific essential to the conservation of the Warner Avenue. This subunit consists Coast WSP. The physical or biological species may require special of 93 ac (38 ha) owned by the State of features essential to the conservation of management considerations or California. This subunit was occupied at the species in these subunits may protection to address the main threats the time of listing, is currently require special management from human recreational disturbance, occupied, and supported an average considerations or protection to address predation of chicks and eggs, and beach wintering flock of 27 Pacific Coast WSPs threats from vegetation encroachment in raking. from 2003 through 2010 (Service nesting and foraging areas and predation unpublished data). The subunit of chicks and eggs. CA 49, San Onofre Beach-Marine Corps annually supports a significant Base Camp Pendleton CA 47, Santa Ana River Mouth, 19 ac wintering flock of Pacific Coast WSPs in Unit CA 49 has been exempted from (8 ha) a location with high-quality breeding critical habitat designation under habitat. This unit is located north of the Santa section 4(a)(3) of the Act (see This location contains the physical or Ana River mouth, immediately west of Exemptions section below). biological features essential to the the City of Huntington Beach in Orange conservation of the species, including a CA 50 (Subunits A–C), Batiquitos County. This unit consists of 19 ac (8 wide sandy beach with occasional surf- Lagoon ha), of which 18 ac (7 ha) are owned by cast wrack supporting small Unit CA 50 (66 ac (27 ha)) has been the State of California, and 1 ac (0.4 ha) invertebrates. The physical or biological excluded from critical habitat is privately owned. This unit was not features essential to the conservation of designation under section 4(b)(2) of the occupied at the time of listing. However, the species in this subunit may require Act (see Exclusions section below). we consider this unit essential for the special management considerations or conservation of the species based on the CA 51 (Subunits A–C), San Elijo Lagoon protection to address threats from fluctuating use of areas by the species as Ecological Reserve, 15 ac (6 ha) recreational disturbance and beach a response to habitat and resource raking. These subunits are located between availability. The unit is located adjacent the cities of Solana Beach and Encinitas CA 46 (Subunits B–F), Bolsa Chica to currently occupied areas and in San Diego County. These subunits Reserve, 475 ac (192 ha) provides dispersal habitat between were occupied at the time of listing and These subunits are located east of the units. This unit provides habitat to are currently occupied. They consist of Pacific Coast Highway, in Orange support breeding plovers, and will 15 ac (6 ha), of which 11 ac (4 ha) are County. They consist of 475 ac (192 ha), facilitate interchange between otherwise owned by the State of California, and 4 all of which are owned by the State of widely separated units, and helps ac (2 ha) are privately owned. San Elijo California. Bolsa Chica Reserve contains provide habitat within the Recovery Lagoon includes three nest sites (which significant nesting areas (which we are Unit identified in the Recovery Plan we are labeling as individual Subunits labeling as individual subunits B, C, D, (Service 2007). CA 51A, CA 51B, and CA 51C). The San E, and F). This location supported 47 This location contains habitat such as Elijo Lagoon Restoration Working Group breeding adult Pacific Coast WSP in a wide sandy beach with surf-cast wrack is planning to restore habitat at the San 2009 (Knapp and Peterson 2009, p. 8). supporting small invertebrates, and Elijo Lagoon Ecological Reserve, which These subunits were occupied at the tidally influenced estuarine mud flats may include nest sites for nesting sea time of listing, are currently occupied, that provide nesting and foraging habitat birds and shorebirds, including Pacific and annually support one of the largest for Pacific Coast WSPs. Primary threats Coast WSP and California least tern. breeding populations of Pacific Coast in this unit are those associated with Restoration and enhancement of coastal WSP in the region. The Recovery Plan recreational disturbance and beach dune habitat at this site is ongoing, and for the Pacific Coast WSP states that this raking. the Service is currently participating in

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36772 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

a cooperative agreement with the San The physical or biological features flock of 69 Pacific Coast WSPs from Elijo Lagoon Conservancy to create essential to the conservation of the 2003 to 2010 (Service unpublished suitable nesting areas for Pacific Coast species in this subunit may require data). Additionally, biologists recorded WSPs, California least terns, and other special management considerations or 17 breeding adults at NASNI during shorebirds in the southwest corner of protection to address threats from 2009 surveys (Service unpublished the West Basin of the lagoon. The human recreational disturbance, data). The Recovery Plan for the Pacific Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast WSP vegetation encroachment in the Coast WSP states that this location (in states that this location contributes intertidal zone, and predation of chicks conjunction with adjacent military significantly to the conservation goal for and eggs. lands) contributes significantly to the the region by providing a management conservation goal for the region by potential of 20 breeding birds (Service CA 52 (Subunits B–C), San Dieguito providing a management potential of 20 2007, Appendix B). This unit may Lagoon breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix facilitate interchange between wintering Subunits CA 52B (3 ac (1 ha)) and CA B). This unit also facilitates interchange locations (see Criteria Used to Identify 52C (4 ac (2 ha)) have been excluded between wintering locations. Critical Habitat section above). from critical habitat designation under This subunit contains the physical or These subunits contain the physical section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions biological features essential to the or biological features essential to the section below). conservation of the species, including a conservation of the species, including wide sandy beach with occasional surf- sandy beaches and tidally influenced CA 53, Los Penasquitos Lagoon cast wrack supporting small estuarine mud flats with tide-cast Unit CA 53 (32 ac (13 ha)) has been invertebrates, as well as wind-blown organic debris supporting small excluded from critical habitat sand in dune systems immediately invertebrates. Restoration of degraded designation under section 4(b)(2) of the inland of the active beach face. habitat within these subunits will Act (see Exclusions section below). The physical or biological features improve the habitat. essential to the conservation of the The physical or biological features CA 54A, Fiesta Island species may require special essential to the conservation of the Subunit CA 54A (2 ac (1 ha)) has been management considerations or species may require special excluded from critical habitat protection to address the main threats management considerations or designation under section 4(b)(2) of the from human recreational disturbance protection to address the main threats Act (see Exclusions section below). and beach raking. from human recreational disturbance, vegetation encroachment in the CA 54B, Mariner’s Point CA 55C, Silver Strand Beach and CA intertidal zone, and predation of chicks Subunit CA 54B (7 ac (3 ha)) has been 55D, Delta Beach and eggs. excluded from critical habitat Subunits CA 55C and CA 55D have been exempted from critical habitat CA 52A, San Dieguito Lagoon, 4 ac designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions section below). designation under section 4(a)(3) of the (2 ha) Act (see Exemptions below). Subunit CA 52A is located at the west CA 54C, South Mission Beach CA 55E, Sweetwater Marsh National end of San Dieguito River Park within Subunit CA 54C (38 ac (15 ha)) has Wildlife Refuge and D Street Fill, 79 ac the city of Del Mar in San Diego County. been excluded from critical habitat (32 ha) This subunit was occupied at the time designation under section 4(b)(2) of the of listing, is currently occupied, and Act (see Exclusions section below). Lands owned and managed by the consists of 4 ac (1 ha), all of which are Port of San Diego under the San Diego privately owned. CA 54D, San Diego River Channel Bay Natural Resources Plan within This subunit is a nest site that was Subunit CA 54D (51 ac (21 ha)) has subunit CA 55E (53 ac (21 ha)) have created for nesting seabirds and been excluded from critical habitat been excluded from critical habitat shorebirds including Pacific Coast WSP designation under section 4(b)(2) of the designation under section 4(b)(2) of the and California least tern. This subunit Act (see Exclusions section below). Act (see Exclusions section below). also facilitates interchange between Federal lands (79 ac (32 ha)) within the wintering locations. The Recovery Plan CA 55A, Naval Air Station North Island subunit that are owned and managed by for the Pacific Coast WSP states that San Subunit CA 55A has been exempted the Service (Sweetwater Marsh National Dieguito Lagoon contributes from critical habitat designation under Wildlife Refuge) are not excluded from significantly to the conservation goal for section 4(a)(3) of the Act (see critical habitat. the region by providing a management Exemptions section below). This subunit is located on the east potential of 20 breeding birds (Service side of San Diego Bay in the City of CA 55B, Coronado Beach, 74 ac (30 ha) 2007, Appendix B). Additionally, Chula Vista in San Diego County. This restoration of this site occurred in 2009, This subunit is located immediately subunit consists of approximately 79 ac improving areas used by breeding and west of the City of Coronado in San (32 ha) of which all are owned by the wintering shorebirds. Use of one nesting Diego County. This subunit stretches Service. This subunit was occupied at site by a pair of plovers was reported in roughly 0.6 mi (0.96 km) from the the time of listing, is currently 2010 (Foster, pers. comm. 2010b). boundary with Naval Air Station North occupied, and supported nesting Pacific Additional improvements to the nest Island (NASNI) to the south end of the Coast WSPs in 2000 (R. Patton, pers. sites are expected in the future. natural sand dunes at Coronado City comm. 2010), and two adult Pacific This subunit contains the physical or Beach. This subunit includes a total of Coast WSPs in 2009 (Service biological features essential to the 74 ac (30 ha) owned by the State of unpublished data). The Recovery Plan conservation of the species, including California. This subunit was occupied at for the Pacific Coast WSP states that this wide sandy beaches and tidally the time of listing, is currently location contributes significantly to the influenced estuarine mud flats with occupied, and is adjacent to the sizable conservation goal for the region by tide-cast organic debris supporting Pacific Coast WSP population at NASNI, providing a management potential of 25 small invertebrates. which contained an average wintering breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36773

B). Additionally, this subunit annually from human recreational disturbance adult breeding Pacific Coast WSPs in supports a large and significant and predation of chicks and eggs. 2009 (B. Collins, in litt. 2010), and 19 wintering flock of Pacific Coast WSPs breeding adults in 2010 (Ryan, in litt. CA 55G, Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve and facilitates interchange between 2010). This location also supported an wintering locations. Subunit CA 55G (10 ac (4 ha)) has average wintering flock of 54 Pacific This subunit contains the physical or been excluded from critical habitat Coast WSPs from 2003 to 2010 (Service biological features essential to the designation under section 4(b)(2) of the unpublished data). The Recovery Plan conservation of the species, including Act (see Exclusions section below). for the Pacific Coast WSP states that this sandy beaches above and below mean CA 55H, Naval Radio Receiving Facility location contributes significantly to the high-tide line and tidally influenced conservation goal for the region by estuarine mud flats that provide nesting Subunit CA 55H has been exempted providing a management potential of 40 and foraging habitat for Pacific Coast from critical habitat designation under breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix WSPs. section 4(a)(3) of the Act (see B). Exemptions section below). The physical or biological features This subunit contains the physical or essential to the conservation of the CA 55I, San Diego National Wildlife biological features essential to the species in this subunit may require Refuge, South Bay Unit, 5 ac (2 ha) conservation of the species, including a special management considerations or This subunit is located at the wide sandy beach with occasional protection to address threats from southernmost end of San Diego Bay in surfcast wrack supporting small vegetation encroachment in the a location that is operated by Western invertebrates, as well as tidally intertidal zone, and predation of chicks Salt Works as salt evaporation ponds. influenced estuarine mud flats with and eggs. This subunit is immediately north of the tide-cast organic debris supporting CA 55F, Silver Strand State Beach, 82 ac City of Imperial Beach, in the City of small invertebrates for foraging. (33 ha) San Diego in San Diego County. This The physical or biological features subunit consists of 5 ac (2 ha), all of essential to the conservation of the This subunit is located immediately which are owned by the Service. This species in this subunit may require north of the City of Imperial Beach, in subunit was occupied at the time of special management considerations or the City of Coronado in San Diego listing, is currently occupied, and protection to address threats from County. This subunit consists of 82 ac supported at least three breeding adults human recreational disturbance and (33 ha), of which approximately 78 ac in 2009 (Collins, in litt. 2010), and seven predation of chicks and eggs. (31 ha) are owned by the State of breeding adults in 2010 (Ryan, in litt. Effects of Critical Habitat Designation California, and the ownership of 4 ac (1 2010). The Recovery Plan for the Pacific ha) are unknown, but may also be under Coast WSP states that this location Section 7 Consultation the State’s jurisdiction. This subunit contributes significantly to the Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires was occupied at the time of listing and conservation goal for the region by Federal agencies, including the Service, is currently occupied. The subunit providing a management potential of 30 to ensure that any action they fund, stretches roughly 1.5 mi (2.4 km) west breeding birds (Service 2007, Appendix authorize, or carry out is not likely to of Silver Strand Boulevard, and is B). centered roughly at Coronado Cays Park. The subunit contains the physical or jeopardize the continued existence of This subunit, in conjunction with biological features essential to the any endangered species or threatened adjacent lands at Naval Amphibious conservation of the species, including species or result in the destruction or Base Coronado, supported at least 10 sparsely vegetated areas on artificial salt adverse modification of designated breeding adults in 2009 (Service flats and adjoining dikes, as well as critical habitat of such species. In unpublished data) and 8 breeding adults tidally influenced estuarine mud flats addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act in 2010 (Ryan, in litt. 2010). The with tide-cast organic debris supporting requires Federal agencies to confer with Recovery Plan for the Pacific Coast WSP small invertebrates for foraging. the Service on any agency action which states that this location contributes The physical or biological features is likely to jeopardize the continued significantly to the conservation goal for essential to the conservation of the existence of any species proposed to be the region by providing a management species in this subunit may require listed under the Act or result in the potential of 65 breeding birds (Service special management considerations or destruction or adverse modification of 2007, Appendix B). This subunit protection to address threats from egg proposed critical habitat. contained an average wintering flock of and chick predation. Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit 13 Pacific Coast WSPs from 2003 to Courts of Appeal have invalidated our 2010 (Service unpublished data). This CA 55J, Tijuana Estuary and Border regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or subunit also facilitates interchange Field State Park, 150 ac (61 ha) adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) between wintering locations. This subunit is located in the City of (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. This subunit contains the physical or Imperial Beach in San Diego County. Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 biological features essential to the This subunit stretches roughly 2 mi (3.2 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. conservation of the species, including a km) from the end of Seacoast Drive to Fish and Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d wide sandy beach with occasional surf- the United States/Mexico border, 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do not cast wrack supporting small extending across both the Tijuana rely on this regulatory definition when invertebrates, as well as wind-blown Slough National Wildlife Refuge and analyzing whether an action is likely to sand in dune systems immediately Border Field State Park. This subunit destroy or adversely modify critical inland of the active beach face. consists of 150 ac (61 ha), of which 71 habitat. Under the statutory provisions The physical or biological features ac (29 ha) are owned by the Service and of the Act, we determine destruction or essential to the conservation of the 79 ac (32 ha) are owned by the State of adverse modification on the basis of species may require special California. This subunit was occupied at whether, with implementation of the management considerations or the time of listing, is currently proposed Federal action, the affected protection to address the main threats occupied, and supported at least 10 critical habitat would continue to serve

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36774 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

its intended conservation role for the relocation of the project. Costs utility corridors that require species. associated with implementing a maintenance, which can lead to If a Federal action may affect a listed reasonable and prudent alternative are disturbance of Pacific Coast WSPs; species or its critical habitat, the similarly variable. (2) Dredging and dredge spoil responsible Federal agency (action Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require placement that permanently removes agency) must enter into consultation Federal agencies to reinitiate the physical or biological features to the with us. Examples of actions that are consultation on previously reviewed extent that Pacific Coast WSPs are subject to the section 7 consultation actions in instances where we have affected for the foreseeable future; process are actions on State, tribal, listed a new species or subsequently (3) Construction and maintenance of local, or private lands that require a designated critical habitat that may be roads, walkways, marinas, access Federal permit (such as a permit from affected, and the Federal agency has points, bridges, culverts, and other the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under retained discretionary involvement or structures that interfere with Pacific section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 control over the action (or the agency’s Coast WSP nesting, breeding, or foraging U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the discretionary involvement or control is or that result in increases in predation; Service under section 10 of the Act) or authorized by law). Consequently, (4) Storm water and wastewater that involve some other Federal action Federal agencies sometimes may need to discharge from communities, which (such as funding from the Federal request reinitiation of consultation with could impact invertebrate abundance, Highway Administration, Federal us on actions for which formal on which Pacific Coast WSPs rely for Aviation Administration, or the Federal consultation has been completed, if food; and Emergency Management Agency). those actions with discretionary (5) Flood control actions that change Federal actions not affecting listed involvement or control may affect the physical or biological features to the species or critical habitat, and actions subsequently listed species or extent that the habitat no longer on State, tribal, local, or private lands designated critical habitat. contributes to the conservation of the that are not federally funded or Application of the ‘‘Adverse species. authorized, do not require section 7 Modification’’ Standard Note that the scale of these activities consultation. is a crucial factor in determining As a result of section 7 consultation, The key factor related to the adverse whether, in any instance, they would we document compliance with the modification determination is whether, directly or indirectly alter critical requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the with implementation of the proposed habitat to the extent that the value of the Act through our issuance of: Federal action, the affected critical critical habitat would be appreciably (1) A concurrence letter for Federal habitat would continue to serve its diminished in providing for the actions that may affect, but are not intended conservation role for the physical or biological features essential likely to adversely affect, listed species species. Activities that may destroy or to the conservation of the Pacific Coast or critical habitat; or adversely modify critical habitat are WSP. (2) A biological opinion for Federal those that alter the physical and We consider all of the revised final actions that may affect, and are likely to biological features to an extent that critical habitat units and subunits to adversely affect, listed species or critical appreciably reduces the conservation contain features essential to or for the habitat. value of critical habitat for the Pacific conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP. When we issue a biological opinion Coast WSP. As discussed above, the role To ensure that their actions do not concluding that a project is likely to of critical habitat is to support life- jeopardize the continued existence of jeopardize the continued existence of a history needs of the species and to the Pacific Coast WSP, Federal agencies listed species and/or destroy or provide for the conservation of the already consult with us on activities in adversely modify critical habitat, we species. areas currently occupied by the Pacific Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us provide reasonable and prudent Coast WSP, or in unoccupied areas if to briefly evaluate and describe in any alternatives to the project, if any are the species may be affected by their proposed or final regulation that identifiable, that would avoid the actions. likelihood of jeopardy and/or designates critical habitat, activities destruction or adverse modification of involving a Federal action that may Exemptions destroy or adversely modify such critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR habitat, or that may be affected by such 402.02) as alternative actions identified designation. The Sikes Act Improvement Act of during consultation that: Activities that may affect critical 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) (1) Can be implemented in a manner habitat, when carried out, funded, or required each military installation that consistent with the intended purpose of authorized by a Federal agency, should includes land and water suitable for the the action, result consultation for the Pacific Coast conservation and management of (2) Can be implemented consistent WSP. These activities include, but are natural resources to complete an with the scope of the Federal agency’s not limited to: integrated natural resources legal authority and jurisdiction, (1) Actions and management efforts management plan (INRMP) by (3) Are economically and affecting Pacific Coast WSP on Federal November 17, 2001. An INRMP technologically feasible, and lands, such as refuges, national integrates implementation of the (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, seashores, parks, and wildlife reserves. military mission of the installation with avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the Such activities may include clearing stewardship of the natural resources continued existence of the listed species and raking of tidal debris (seaweed, found on the base. Each INRMP and/or avoid the likelihood of driftwood) from beaches, causing a loss includes: destroying or adversely modifying in cover and forage; high levels of (1) An assessment of the ecological critical habitat. visitor use, which can disturb and needs on the installation, including the Reasonable and prudent alternatives disrupt normal behavior; restoration need to provide for the conservation of can vary from slight project efforts, which can temporarily affect listed species; modifications to extensive redesign or Pacific Coast WSP’s use of an area; and (2) A statement of goals and priorities;

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36775

(3) A detailed description of Oceanography Center provides the (8) Actively communicate management actions to be implemented highest quality, most relevant, and management strategies to local to provide for these ecological needs; timely worldwide Meteorology and community; and Oceanography support to U.S. and (9) Enhance remnant dune areas as (4) A monitoring and adaptive coalition forces from their Operations potential nest sites; management plan. Center in Monterey, California. The (10) Identify opportunities to use Among other things, each INRMP Navy Research Lab conducts scientific suitable dredge or other materials for must, to the extent appropriate and and weather modeling as well as expansion of beachareas to create applicable, provide for fish and wildlife atmospheric and aerosol studies. improved nesting substrate; management; fish and wildlife habitat The NSA Monterey INRMP is a (11) Maintain native plant coverage enhancement or modification; planning document that guides the on dunes and control invasive weeds on protection, enhancement, and management and conservation of dunes and beach; restoration where necessary to support natural resources under the (12) Conduct monitoring in support of fish and wildlife; and enforcement of installation’s control. The INRMP was management objective; applicable natural resource laws. prepared to ensure that natural (13) Meet with stakeholders annually The National Defense Authorization resources are managed in support of the to oversee implementation and Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– NSA Monterey’s military command prioritize projects; 136) amended the Act to limit areas mission and that all activities are (14) Monitor Pacific Coast WSP eligible for designation as critical consistent with Federal stewardship population at least annually; and (15) Regularly monitor dune and habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) requirements. The NSA Monterey beach area and identify conflicts for of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) INRMP was completed in 2001. An immediate actions and long-term now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not addendum to the 2001 INRMP, projects. designate as critical habitat any lands or addressing conservation of the Pacific Based on the above considerations, other geographical areas owned or Coast WSP, was submitted to the and in accordance with section controlled by the Department of Service in March 2012 and was 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have Defense, or designated for its use, that approved and signed by the Service in determined that the identified lands are are subject to an integrated natural May 2012. The INRMP is NSA subject to the 2001 INRMP and the 2012 resources management plan prepared Monterey’s adaptive plan for managing Addendum to the INRMP for NSA under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 natural resources to support and be Monterey and that the conservation U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines consistent with the military mission, efforts identified in the INRMP have and in writing that such plan provides a while protecting and enhancing the will provide a benefit to the Pacific benefit to the species for which critical biological integrity of lands under its Coast WSP and features essential to its habitat is proposed for designation.’’ use. Naval Support Activity Monterey is conservation, and will benefit Pacific We consult with the military on the committed to an ecosystem management Coast WSPs occurring in habitats within development and implementation of approach for its natural resources or adjacent to NSA Monterey. Therefore, INRMPs for installations with federally program by integrating all components lands within this installation listed species. We analyzed INRMPs of natural resource management into a (approximately 8 ac (3 ha) of of Unit CA developed by military installations comprehensive and coordinated effort. 22) are exempt from critical habitat located within the range of the critical An integrated approach to ecosystem designation under section 4(a)(3) of the habitat designation for the Pacific Coast management will help protect the Act. We are not including WSP to determine if units covered by biological diversity found at NSA approximately 8 ac (3 ha) of habitat for these INRMPs are exempt under section Monterey. the Pacific Coast WSP in this revised 4(a)(3) of the Act. The following areas The INRMP identifies the goal of final critical habitat designation because are Department of Defense lands with contributing to the recovery of the of this exemption. completed, Service-approved INRMPs Pacific Coast WSP through development within the revised critical habitat of cooperative, ecosystem management- Vandenberg Air Force Base, CA 32 and designation. based strategies. The INRMP identifies CA 33, 1,135 ac (460 ha) the following management and Approved Integrated Natural Resources VAFB is headquarters for the 30th protective measures to achieve this goal: Space Wing, the Air Force’s Space Management Plans (1) Protect and maintain natural Command unit that operates VAFB and coastal processes that perpetuate high- Naval Support Activity Monterey, CA the Western Test Range/Pacific Missile quality breeding habitat including 22, 8 ac (3 ha) Range. VAFB operates as an aerospace measures such as: The Department of the Navy, Naval (2) Ensure beach areas are clean of center supporting west coast launch Support Activity (NSA) Monterey litter and contaminants; activities for the Air Force, Department provides primary support to the Naval (3) Improve signage mandating dogs of Defense, National Aeronautics and Postgraduate School, Fleet Numerical be leashed at all times; Space Administration, and commercial Meteorology and Oceanography Center, (4) Develop and maintain a feral contractors. The three primary Navy Research Lab and more than 15 predator management program; operational missions of VAFB are to additional tenant commands. Naval (5) Minimize activities which can launch, place, and track satellites in Support Activity Monterey supports affect invertebrate populations that near-polar orbit; to test and evaluate the over 160 buildings which are located on shorebirds forage on,such as routine intercontinental ballistic missile more than 626 ac (253 ha) of DOD lands. removal of tidal wrack; systems; and to support aircraft The Naval Postgraduate School is the (6) Discourage human foot traffic from operations in the western range. VAFB largest producer of advanced graduate suitable nesting areas with fencing and lies on the south-central California degrees for DOD and graduates educational signage; coast, approximately 275 mi (442 km) thousands every year from all services (7) Eliminate incompatible military south of San Francisco, 140 mi (225 km) and from over 50 countries. The Fleet operations on beach during nesting northwest of Los Angeles, and 55 mi (88 Numerical Meteorology and season; km) northwest of Santa Barbara. The

VerDate Mar<15>2010 19:36 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36776 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

99,100-ac (40,104-ha) base extends resources, including the western snowy command mission and that all activities along approximately 42 mi (67 km) of plover and its habitat. are consistent with Federal stewardship Santa Barbara County coast, and varies Habitat features essential to the requirements. The NBVC, Point Mugu in width from 5 to 15 mi (8 to 24 km). conservation of the western snowy INRMP was completed in 2002, and The VAFB INRMP was prepared to plover exist on VAFB, and activities renewed and approved by the Service in provide strategic direction to ecosystem occurring on VAFB are currently being 2008. The INRMP is Naval Base Ventura and natural resources management on conducted in a manner that minimizes County’s adaptive plan for managing VAFB. The long-term goal of the INRMP impacts to western snowy plover natural resources to support and be is to integrate all management activities habitat. This military installation has a consistent with the military mission, in a manner that sustains, promotes, and Secretarial-approved INRMP that while protecting and enhancing the restores the health and integrity of provides a benefit to the western snowy biological integrity of lands under its VAFB ecosystems using an adaptive plover, and VAFB has committed to use (U.S. Navy 2002, p. ES–3). Naval management approach. The INRMP was work closely with the Service and the Base Ventura County is committed to an designed to: (1) Summarize existing CDFG to continually refine their ecosystem management approach for its management plans and natural existing INRMP as part of the Sikes natural resources program by integrating resources literature pertaining to VAFB; Act’s INRMP review process. Based on all components of natural resource (2) identify and analyze management the above considerations, and in management into a comprehensive and goals in existing plans; (3) integrate the accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of coordinated effort. An integrated management goals and objectives of the Act, we have determined that approach to ecosystem management will individual plans; (4) support base conservation efforts identified in the help protect the biological diversity compliance with applicable regulatory 2011 INRMP for VAFB provide a benefit found at NBVC, Point Mugu. requirements; (5) support the integration to the western snowy plover and its The INRMP identifies the following of natural resource stewardship with the habitat. This includes habitat located on management and protective measure Air Force mission; and (6) provide Vandenberg North (CA 32) and South goals for the Pacific Coast WSP: direction for monitoring strategies. (CA 33) beaches. Therefore, lands (1) Monitor and manage breeding subject to the INRMP for VAFB, which VAFB completed an INRMP in 2011, habitat of Pacific Coast WSPs; includes the lands leased from the which benefits western snowy plover (2) Monitor and manage wintering Department of Defense by other parties, and migration areas to maximize Pacific by: (1) Implementing restrictions on are exempt from critical habitat recreational beach access during the Coast WSP population survival; designation under section 4(a)(3)(B) of (3) Develop mechanisms for long-term nesting season, which are evaluated the Act, and we are not including management and protection of Pacific each year for their effectiveness in approximately 1,135 ac (460 ha) of Coast WSPs and their breeding and protecting snowy plovers; (2) habitat in this revised critical habitat wintering habitat; prohibiting recreational off-road vehicle designation because of this exemption. (4) Undertake scientific investigations activity on western snowy plover that facilitate recovery efforts; beaches at any time except when Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, CA 40 and CA 41, 208 ac (84 ha) (5) Undertake public information and essential to support the VAFB mission education programs for Pacific Coast or in an emergency; (3) training VAFB The Department of the Navy, Naval WSPs; personnel to operate ATVs to avoid Base Ventura County, manages two (6) Continue measures in place for impacts to western snowy plovers and facilities in Ventura County, California: Pacific Coast WSP protection, including their habitat; (4) using horse and foot Point Mugu and San Nicolas Island. beach closures; patrols when possible on base beaches; Naval Base Ventura County, Point Mugu (7) Protect and maintain natural (5) enforcing leash laws throughout (NBVC, Point Mugu) was established in coastal processes that perpetuate high- VAFB year-round; (6) prohibiting all 1949 as the Naval Air Weapons Station quality breeding habitat; pets on western snowy plover nesting to support a new U.S. Naval Air Missile (8) Keep Pacific Coast WSP beaches between March 1 and Test Center, which provided material management areas closed to all pets, September 30 each year; (7) and service support, including military leashed or not, with the exception of implementing a predator management personnel administration, air traffic NBVC security dogs on official duty plan that includes ecologically sound control, and flight line functions. The (e.g., apprehending a suspect); approaches to reducing predation of NBVC, Point Mugu occupies (9) Monitor habitat to maintain the western snowy plover nests and chicks; approximately 4,490 ac (1,817 ha) of nesting substrates necessary for Pacific (8) cleaning base beaches between land on the coast of southern California, Coast WSP breeding success; October 1 and February 28 each year Ventura County. Currently, the (10) Identify factors that limit the under the ‘‘Adopt-a-Beach Program’’ installation is used for target drone quality of wintering and breeding and implementing program-specific launches, aircraft operations, and beach habitat; monitoring of western snowy plovers, to missile launch operations, and is (11) Clean and restore the eastern arm determine impacts from launches and responsible for maintenance of the roads of Mugu Lagoon to sandy beach; other Air Force activities; (9) restricting and perimeter fence, utilities (12) Improve methods of monitoring aircraft overflight to a minimum of 500- maintenance, pest management, Pacific Coast WSPs, such as color foot altitude above western snowy recreation, and natural resource banding; and plover nesting beaches; and (10) management. (13) Develop and implement public establishing flight patterns to minimize The NBVC, Point Mugu INRMP is a information and education programs on aircraft presence over these beaches planning document that guides the Pacific Coast WSPs and recovery efforts (VAFB 2011, Tab D, p. 18–20). management and conservation of at the proposed Mugu Lagoon Visitor Furthermore, VAFB’s environmental natural resources under the Education Center. staff reviews projects and enforces installation’s control. The INRMP was Based on the above considerations, existing regulations and orders that, prepared to ensure that natural and in accordance with section through their implementation, avoid resources are managed in support of the 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have and minimize impacts to natural Naval Base Ventura County’s military determined that the identified lands are

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36777

subject to the 2008 INRMP for NBVC, comprehensive and coordinated effort. section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. We are not Point Mugu and that the conservation An integrated approach to ecosystem including approximately 321 ac (130 ha) efforts identified in the INRMP have and management will help protect the of habitat in this revised final critical will provide a benefit to the Pacific biological diversity found at San Nicolas habitat designation because of this Coast WSP and features essential to its Island. exemption. conservation, and will benefit Pacific The San Nicolas Island INRMP Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Coast WSPs occurring in habitats within identifies the following management Pendleton (CA 49), 441 ac (179 ha) or adjacent to NBVC, Point Mugu. and protective measure goals for the Therefore, lands within this installation Pacific Coast WSP: Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp (Units CA 40 and CA 41) are exempt (1) Monitor Pacific Coast WSPs’ nests Pendleton is the Marine Corps’ premier from critical habitat designation under during missile launches, barge landings, amphibious training installation and it section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not and other activities that may disturb is the only west coast amphibious including approximately 208 ac (84 ha) nesting behaviors; assault training center. The installation of habitat in this revised final critical (2) Close Pacific Coast WSP nesting has been conducting air, sea, and habitat designation because of this areas to recreational activity during the ground assault training since World War exemption. breeding season (March through II. MCB Camp Pendleton occupies over September); 125,000 ac (50,586 ha) of coastal Department of the Navy, Naval Base (3) Monitor the effects of Navy southern California in the northwest Ventura County, San Nicolas Island (CA activities on Pacific Coast WSPs by corner of San Diego County. Aside from 42), 321 ac (130 ha) conducting island-wide Pacific Coast nearly 10,000 ac (4,047 ha) that is San Nicolas Island is under the WSP censuses twice annually, once developed, most of the installation is jurisdiction of Department of the Navy, during the breeding season and once largely undeveloped land that is used Naval Base Ventura County. The 14,230- during the winter season; for training. MCB Camp Pendleton is ac (5,759-ha) San Nicolas Island is (4) Educate island personnel situated between two major located approximately 65 mi (105 km) regarding protected species regulations metropolitan areas: The City of Los south of NBVC, Point Mugu. Naval and responsibilities; Angeles that is 82 mi (132 km) to the facilities on San Nicolas Island include (5) Maintain signs around breeding north, and the City of San Diego that is a 10,000-ft (3,048-m) concrete and sites to alert personnel of closures; 38 mi (61 km) to the south. MCB Camp asphalt runway, radar tracking (6) Conduct site-specific Pacific Coast Pendleton is located north of the City of instrumentation, electro-optical devices, WSP surveys in potential or known Oceanside, southeast of the City of San telemetry, communications equipment, breeding habitat prior to disturbance Clemente, and adjacent to the western and missile and target launch areas, as activities; side of the unincorporated community well as personnel support. Currently, (7) Remove unnecessary structures in of Fallbrook, San Diego County, the island is used as the management Pacific Coast WSP nesting areas and California. Aside from a portion of the launch platform for short- and medium- attach avian excluders to essential installation’s border that is shared with range missile testing, and an observation structures, if feasible; the Cleveland National Forest’s San facility for missile testing. Primarily, (8) Conduct amphibious training Mateo Wilderness Area and Fallbrook San Nicolas Island’s mission is to exercises on beaches not harboring Naval Weapons Station, surrounding support the primary research, design, nesting Pacific Coast WSPs; land use includes urban development, development, testing, and evaluation of (9) Continue to implement a feral cat rural residential development, and air weapons and associated aircraft control/removal program; farming and ranching. The largest single systems into anti-surface and anti-air (10) Develop and maintain a computer leaseholder on the installation is CDPR, warfare aircraft. database for storing information on which possesses a 50-year real estate The San Nicolas Island INRMP (U.S. locations of nesting sites, incidental lease granted on September 1, 1971, for Navy 2005, pp. 1–129) is a planning sightings and size and results of surveys 2,000 ac (809 ha) that encompasses San document that guides the management for resource management purposes; Onofre State Beach. and conservation of natural resources (11) Continue to participate with The MCB Camp Pendleton INRMP is under the Navy Base Ventura County’s recovery planning and other efforts to a planning document that guides the control. The INRMP was prepared to help establish stable Pacific Coast WSP management and conservation of ensure that natural resources are populations; and natural resources under the managed in support of the Naval Base (12) Support research to explore the installation’s control. The INRMP was Ventura County’s military command effects of increasing pinniped (seal, sea prepared to assist installation staff and mission and that all activities are lion) populations on nesting success of users in their efforts to conserve and consistent with Federal stewardship Pacific Coast WSPs. rehabilitate natural resources consistent requirements. The San Nicolas Island Based on the above considerations, with the use of MCB Camp Pendleton to INRMP was completed and approved by and in accordance with section train Marines and set the agenda for the Service in 2003, and renewed in 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have managing natural resources on MCB 2005. The San Nicolas Island INRMP is determined that the identified lands are Camp Pendleton. Marine Corps Base Naval Base Ventura County’s adaptive subject to the 2005 INRMP for San Camp Pendleton completed its INRMP plan for managing natural resources to Nicolas Island and that the conservation in 2001, followed by a revised and support and be consistent with the efforts identified in the INRMP have and updated version in 2007, to address military mission, while protecting and will provide a benefit to the Pacific conservation and management enhancing the biological integrity of Coast WSP and features essential to its recommendations within the scope of lands under its use (U.S. Navy 2005, p. conservation, and will benefit Pacific the installation’s military mission, 5). Naval Base Ventura County is Coast WSPs occurring in habitats within including conservation measures for committed to an ecosystem management or adjacent to NBVC, San Nicolas Pacific Coast WSP (MCB Camp approach for its natural resources Island. Therefore, lands within this Pendleton 2007, Appendix F, Section program by integrating all components installation (Unit CA 42) are exempt F.23, pp. F85–F89). The Service of natural resource management into a from critical habitat designation under provided concurrence in 2001 and 2007

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36778 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

for the respective INRMPs. including Pacific Coast WSP and its Conservation Plan, biennial monitoring Additionally, CDPR is required to habitat. Specific conservation measures, is conducted to determine number of conduct its natural resources outlined in the Instructions for Military pairs, hatching success, and management consistent with the Training Activities section of the reproductive success (MCB Camp philosophies and supportive of the Estuarine and Beach Conservation Plan, Pendleton 2007, Appendix B, p. B12). objectives in the revised 2007 INRMP are applied to Pacific Coast WSP and its Annual monitoring of nests is (MCB Camp Pendleton 2007, Chapter 2, habitat (MCB Camp Pendleton 2007, p. conducted to track Pacific Coast WSP p. 31). B–13). These include: population trends (MCB Camp The Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat (1) Military activities are kept to a Pendleton 2007, Appendix F, p. F89). are provided protection and minimum within the Santa Margarita Data are provided to all necessary management by the Estuarine and Beach Management Zone (i.e., the area on the personnel through MCB Camp Conservation Plan (MCB Camp base where the majority of nesting sites Pendleton’s GIS database on sensitive Pendleton 2007, Appendix B, pp. B–1— occur) and any nesting site outside the resources and MCB Camp Pendleton’s B–20), which was addressed through the traditionally fenced nesting areas during published resource atlas. Moreover, section 7 consultation process with a the breeding/nesting season (1 March– CDPR is required to conduct its natural biological opinion issued by the Service 31 August) for the Pacific Coast WSP. A resources management consistent with on October 30, 1995 (Service 1995, buffer distance of 984 ft (300 m) away the philosophies and supportive of the Biological Opinion 1–6–95–F02), and is from fenced or posted nesting areas objectives of the INRMP (MCB Camp now implemented under the 2007 must be adhered to for all activities Pendleton 2007, p. 2–30). INRMP. Base-wide protection measures involving smoke, pyrotechnics, loud Based on the above considerations, for avoidance and minimization of noises, blowing sand, and large and in accordance with section impacts to Pacific Coast WSP and its groupings of personnel (14 or more). 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have habitat, especially during the breeding Aircraft are not authorized to land determined that the identified lands are season, are provided in both the within 984 ft (300 m) of fenced nesting subject to the MCB Camp Pendleton conservation plan and Base Order areas on Blue Beach or White Beach and INRMP and that conservation efforts P3500.1M. The base-wide protection are required to maintain an altitude of identified in the 2007 INRMP do and measures for Pacific Coast WSP include, 300 ft (91 m) Above Ground Level (AGL) will continue to provide a benefit to but are not limited to: or more above nesting areas. Pacific Coast WSP and features essential (2) Recreational activities within the (1) Minimize reduction or loss of to its conservation, and will benefit Santa Margarita Management Zone and upland buffers surrounding coastal Pacific Coast WSPs occurring in habitats posted nest locations during the wetlands; within or adjacent to MCB Camp breeding season are to be kept to a (2) Restore the dune system in the Pendleton. This includes habitat located minimum, and camping at Cocklebur vicinity of the Santa Margarita Estuary in the following areas: San Onofre following the guidance developed by Canyon Beach is prohibited. (3) Foot traffic within the Santa Beach, Aliso/French Creek Mouth, and The Nature Conservancy; Santa Margarita River Estuary (names of (3) Maintain integrity of listed Margarita Management Zone is prohibited within 150 ft (46 m) of areas follow those used in the draft species’ habitat; and recovery plan (Service 2001, Appendix (4) Promote growth of current posted nesting areas during the breeding season. B, p. B–16)). Therefore, lands within population of Pacific Coast WSPs (MCB this installation are exempt from critical Camp Pendleton 2007, Appendix B, pp. (4) A 300-ft (91-m) buffer from posted nesting areas is required for surf habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) B5–B7). of the Act. We are not including Annual management and protection fishermen, and no live baitfish or approximately 441 ac (179 ha) of habitat measures for Pacific Coast WSPs amphibians are allowed for fishing in this revised final critical habitat identified in Appendix F of the INRMP activities. designation because of this exemption. include, but are not limited to: Additionally, MCB Camp Pendleton (1) Installation of sign postings Environmental Security staff review Naval Base Coronado, Naval Air Station describing the sensitive nature of the projects and enforce existing regulations (CA 55A, CA 55C, CA 55D, and CA breeding area/season; and orders that, through their 55H), 734 ac (297 ha) (2) Installation of permanent/ implementation under National temporary fencing that directs military Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 Naval Base Coronado includes eight training away from sensitive nesting and U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) requirements, avoid military facilities in San Diego County, foraging areas; and minimize impacts to natural California. Three of these facilities (3) Beach habitat enhancement resources, including the Pacific Coast (Naval Air Station North Island (CA (nonnative vegetation control and sand WSP and its habitat. MCB Camp 55A); Naval Amphibious Base Coronado mobilization); Pendleton also provides training to (CA 55C, and CA 55D); and Naval Radio (4) Ant control (ants can cause personnel on environmental awareness Receiving Facility (CA 55H)) include incubating adults to abandon a nest, and for sensitive resources on the base, beach habitat that supports Pacific Coast can contribute towards chick mortality); including the Pacific Coast WSP and its WSPs. For planning and description and habitat. As a result of these regulations purposes regarding these beaches and (5) Focused predator control (MCB and restrictions, activities occurring on the military training that occurs here, Camp Pendleton 2007, Appendix F, p. MCB Camp Pendleton are currently the U.S. Navy describes these areas as: F89). conducted in a manner that minimizes (1) Naval Air Station North Island Current environmental training impacts to Pacific Coast WSPs and their (NAS North Island), regulations and restrictions are provided habitat. (2) Naval Amphibious Base Coronado to all military personnel to maintain MCB Camp Pendleton’s INRMP also or Silver Strand Training Complex— compliance with the terms of the benefits Pacific Coast WSP through North (SSTC–North), and INRMP. Training regulations guide ongoing monitoring and research efforts. (3) Naval Radio Receiving Facility or activities to protect endangered and To assess the effectiveness of MCB Silver Strand Training Complex—South threatened species on the installation, Camp Pendleton’s Estuarine and Beach (SSTC–South).

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36779

NAS North Island is located north of Operations, Naval Base, Coronado, in (16) Public outreach to military the City of Coronado and encompasses accordance with the 2002 INRMP as residents of adjacent housing; 2,803 ac (1134 ha), of which modified by the 2010 SSTC BO (17) Post signs to eliminate human approximately 95 ac (39 ha) is southern (08B0503–09F0517) include: trespassers during nesting season and foredune/beach habitat. SSTC–North is (1) Minimize the potential for take of possibly for nest avoidance as well; and located south of the City of Coronado nests and chicks at SSTC–N and SSTC– (18) Work with the Service and others and encompasses roughly 1,000 ac (405 S Beaches during the breeding season; to develop a regional approach to ha), of which approximately 257 ac (104 (2) Monitor training activities to managing and conserving the habitat ha) are beach-front habitat leased from ascertain the impact on Pacific Coast needed to sustain Pacific Coast WSP. CDPR for amphibious military training WSP distribution and report any The 2010 SSTC BO (08B0503– activities. SSTC–North, including the observed incidental take to the Service 09F0517, p. 128) also specifies that if San Diego Bay-front beach referred to as annually; new information reveals that the Delta Beach, supports approximately (3) Modify the beach to create increased training is affecting Pacific 278 ac (113 ha) of southern foredune/ hummocks to deter plovers from nesting Coast WSP in a manner inconsistent beach habitat. SSTC–South is located in intensively used beach lanes; with the conclusion of the Biological north of the City of Imperial Beach, and (4) Schedule efforts to avoid beach Opinion, then reinitiation of encompasses 450 ac (182 ha), of which lanes with higher nest numbers; consultation may be warranted. If approximately 78 ac (32 ha) is southern (5) Study the effects of military monitoring indicates that the western foredune/beach habitat. working dogs on plovers to develop snowy plover numbers within the area The U.S. Navy completed an INRMP additional conservation measures, if of increased military training decline in 2002 to provide a viable framework necessary; below the 5-year average, as determined for the management of natural resources (6) Require that dogs be on leashes; by maximum active nest numbers— on lands controlled by for Naval Base (7) Annual nest site preparation; average of 18 plover pairs at SSTC Coronado. This INRMP was approved (8) Mark and avoid up to 22 nests at (range of 11 to 22); 10 plover pairs at by the Service. The U.S. Navy continues SSTC–S, SSTC–N Beaches, plus any NASNI (range of 7 to 14); and 8 plover to implement the completed 2002 additional nests that exceed 22 that are pairs at SSSB (range of 5 to 9)— INRMP as a revision is being drafted. initiated in beach lanes Orange 1 and reinitiation of consultation may be The INRMP identifies conservation and Orange 2; warranted. If snowy plover use of SSTC management recommendations within (9) Protect nesting and foraging areas beaches declines, Service and U.S. Navy the scope of the installation’s military at NAS North Island, SSTC–North, biologists will evaluate alternative mission, including conservation SSTC–South, and Delta Beach from explanations for any observed decline measures for Pacific Coast WSP and its predation by supporting consistent and (such as, continuation of low habitat (Naval Base Coronado 2002, effective predator management; productivity associated with predation) Section 3, pp. 81–83). The management (10) Enhance and disallow mowing of and the need for additional conservation strategy outlines actions that would remnant dune areas as potential nest measures. This cooperative relationship contribute to the recovery of Pacific sites in areas that can be protected from allows the Service to work closely with Coast WSP through development of human disturbance and predators the U.S. Navy for the continued cooperative, ecosystem management- during nesting season; implementation of beneficial measures based strategies (Naval Base Coronado (11) Conduct monitoring throughout to Pacific Coast WSP, while minimizing 2002, Section 4, pp. 56–58). Naval Base Coronado and establish a impacts associated with the increased The INRMP revision will reflect the consistent approach to monitoring training activities that are required for management changes driven by the U.S. nesting attempts and hatching success military readiness. Navy’s need for additional beach to determine the success of predator Based on the above considerations, training. The U.S. Navy will continue to management activities, and limit and in accordance with section implement the 2002 INRMP, subject to predator-prey interactions by fencing 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have modified management strategies unless it conflicts with U.S. Navy determined that the identified lands are identified in the 2010 Silver Strand training; subject to the Naval Base Coronado Training Area Biological Opinion (BO), (12) Identify opportunities to use INRMP and that the conservation efforts until completion of a revised INRMP. dredge material that has high sand identified in the existing Service- The revised INRMP will include the content for expansion and rehabilitation approved INRMP will provide a benefit management strategy identified in the of beach areas at NAS North Island and to Pacific Coast WSP features essential 2010 Silver Strand Training BO. The Delta Beach to create improved nesting to its conservation and will benefit 2002 INRMP identifies conservation and substrate; Pacific Coast WSPs occurring in habitats management recommendations within (13) Minimize activities that can affect within and adjacent to NAS North the scope of the installation’s military invertebrate populations necessary for Island, SSTC–North, and SSTC–South. mission, including conservation Pacific Coast WSP foraging by We also anticipate that the draft revised measures for Pacific Coast WSP and its prohibiting beach raking on Naval Base INRMP will provide a similar if not habitat (Naval Base Coronado 2002, Coronado beaches, with the exception of greater benefits to Pacific Coast WSPs, Section 3, pp. 81–83). The management the area immediately in front of the but will reopen this designation as strategy outlines actions that would Navy Lodge at NAS North Island and necessary to evaluate the conservation contribute to the recovery of Pacific Camp Surf at SSTC–South; efforts in Naval Base Coronado’s final Coast WSP through development of (14) If any relocation of nest/eggs is revised INRMP. Therefore, lands within cooperative, ecosystem management- necessary as a protective measure, each this installation (Units CA 55A, CA 55C, based strategies (Naval Base Coronado nest/egg will be relocated the shortest CA 55D, and CA 55H) are exempt under 2002, Section 4, pp. 56–58). distance possible into suitable habitat section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not Management actions that will benefit by Service-approved monitors to including approximately 734 ac (297 ha) the Pacific Coast WSP to be increase the chance of nest success; of habitat in this revised final critical implemented by the Navy on the U.S. (15) Identify conflicts for immediate habitat designation because of this Navy’s Silver Strand Training Complex action and response; exemption.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36780 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Table 5 below provides approximate exempt from designation under section land areas (ac, ha) that meet the 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. definition of critical habitat but are

TABLE 5—EXEMPTIONS FROM DESIGNATION BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT

Areas meeting the Basis for definition of critical Areas Unit Specific area exemption habitat in ac exempted in (ha) ac (ha)

CA 22 ...... Naval Support Area Monterey ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 8 ac (3 ha) ...... 8 ac (3 ha). CA 32 ...... Vandenberg Air Force Base North ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 711 ac (288 ha) ...... 711 ac (288 ha). CA 33 ...... Vandenberg Air Force Base South ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 423 ac (171 ha) ...... 423 ac (171 ha). CA 40 ...... Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, Mugu 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 136 ac (55 ha) ...... 136 ac (55 ha). Lagoon North. CA 41 ...... Naval Base Ventura County Point Mugu, Mugu 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 72 ac (29 ha) ...... 72 ac (29 ha). Lagoon South. CA 42 ...... Naval Base Ventura County, San Nicolas Island 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 321 ac (130 ha) ...... 321 ac (130 ha). CA 49 ...... Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 441 ac (179 ha) ...... 441 ac (179 ha). CA 55A ...... Naval Base Coronado, Naval Air Station North 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 142 ac (57 ha) ...... 142 ac (57 ha). Island. CA 55C ...... Naval Base Coronado Silver Strand Beach ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 436 ac (176 ha) ...... 436 ac (176 ha). CA 55D ...... Naval Base Coronado Delta Beach ...... 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 90 ac (36 ha) ...... 90 ac (36 ha). CA 55H ...... Naval Base Coronado Naval Radio Receiving 4(a)(3)(B) ...... 66 ac (27 ha) ...... 66 ac (27 ha). Facility.

Total ...... 2,846 ac (1,151 ha).

Exclusions When identifying the benefits of the conservation management strategies inclusion for an area, we consider the and actions contained in a management Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act additional regulatory benefits that area plan will be implemented into the Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that would receive from the protection from future; whether the conservation the Secretary shall designate and make adverse modification or destruction as a strategies in the plan are likely to be revisions to critical habitat on the basis result of actions with a Federal nexus, effective; and whether the plan contains of the best available scientific data after the educational benefits of mapping a monitoring program or adaptive taking into consideration the economic essential habitat for recovery of the management to ensure that the impact, national security impact, and listed species, and any benefits that may conservation measures are effective and any other relevant impact of specifying result from a designation due to State or can be adapted in the future in response any particular area as critical habitat. Federal laws that may apply to critical to new information. After evaluating the benefits of The Secretary may exclude an area from habitat. When considering the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, critical habitat if he determines the exclusion, we consider, among other we carefully weigh the two sides to benefits of such exclusion outweigh the things, whether exclusion of a specific evaluate whether the benefits of benefits of specifying such area as part area is likely to result in conservation; exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. of the critical habitat, unless he the continuation, strengthening, or If our analysis indicates that the benefits determines, based on the best scientific encouragement of partnerships; or of exclusion outweigh the benefits of data available, that the decision not to implementation of a management plan inclusion, we then determine whether designate such area as critical habitat that provides equal to or more exclusion would result in extinction. If will result in the extinction of the conservation that a critical habitat exclusion of an area from critical habitat species. In making that determination, designation would provide. will result in extinction, we will not the statute on its face, as well as the In the case of the Pacific Coast WSP, exclude it from the designation. legislative history are clear that the the benefits of critical habitat include Based on the information provided by Secretary has broad discretion regarding public awareness of the Pacific Coast entities seeking exclusion, as well as which factor(s) to use and how much WSP’s presence and the importance of any additional public comments weight to give to any factor. habitat protection, and in cases where a received and information in our files, In considering whether to exclude a Federal nexus exists, increased habitat we evaluated whether certain lands in particular area from the designation, we protection for the Pacific Coast WSP due the revised proposed critical habitat identify the benefits of including the to the protection from adverse were appropriate for exclusion from this area in the designation, identify the modification or destruction of critical revised final designation pursuant to benefits of excluding the area from the habitat. section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We designation, and evaluate whether the When we evaluate the existence of a considered the areas discussed below benefits of exclusion outweigh the conservation or management plan when for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of benefits of inclusion. If the analysis considering the benefits of exclusion, the Act, and present our detailed indicates that the benefits of exclusion we consider a variety of factors, analysis below. For those areas in which outweigh the benefits of inclusion, the including but not limited to, whether the Secretary has exercised his Secretary may exercise his discretion to the plan is finalized; how it provides for discretion to exclude, we conclude that: exclude the area only if such exclusion the conservation of the essential (1) Their value for conservation will would not result in the extinction of the physical or biological features; whether be preserved in the near future by species. there is a reasonable expectation that existing protective actions, or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36781

(2) The benefits of excluding the land from critical habitat for the Pacific rule. Maps showing excluded areas are particular area outweigh the benefits of Coast WSP. Table 6 below provides available upon request by contacting the their inclusion, based on the ‘‘other approximate areas (ac, ha) of lands in Arcata Fish and Wildlife Office (see the relevant factor’’ provisions of section each State by unit that meet the ADDRESSES section). 4(b)(2) of the Act. definition of critical habitat but are We are excluding a total of being excluded under section 4(b)(2) of approximately 3,797 ac (1,537 ha) of the Act from the final critical habitat

TABLE 6—AREAS EXCLUDED FROM CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION BY CRITICAL HABITAT UNIT

Area excluded Unit/subunit under section 4(b)(2) of the act

HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS

Oregon Parks and Recreation Department HCP

UNIT ...... ac (ha). OR 1 Columbia River Spit ...... 169 (68). OR 2 Necanicum River Spit ...... 200 (81). OR 3 Nehalem River Spit ...... 299 (121). OR 4 Bayocean Spit ...... 166 (67). OR 5 Netarts Spit ...... 541 (219). OR 6 Sand Lake South ...... 195 (79). OR 7 Sutton/Baker Beaches ...... 96 (39). OR 8B Siltcoos River Spit ...... 125 (51). OR 8C Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch Creek Spit ...... 333 (135). OR 8D North Umpqua River Spit ...... 177 (71). OR 9 Tenmile Creek Spit ...... 21 (8). OR 10 Coos Bay North Spit ...... 35 (14). OR 11 Bandon to New River ...... 475 (192). OR 12 Elk River Spit ...... 167 (68). OR 13 Euchre Creek Spit ...... 107 (43).

Subtotal for OPRD HCP Lands ...... 3,106 (1,257).

Southern California Multi-Species HCPs and Other Management Plans

UNIT ...... ac (ha). CA 50A Batiquitos Lagoon ...... 24 (10). CA 50B Batiquitos Lagoon ...... 23 (9). CA 50C Batiquitos Lagoon ...... 19 (8). CA 52B San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 3 (1). CA 52C San Dieguito Lagoon ...... 4 (2). CA 53 Los Penasquitos Lagoon ...... 32 (13). CA 54A Fiesta Island ...... 2 (1). CA 54B Mariner’s Point ...... 7 (3). CA 54C South Mission Beach ...... 38 (15). CA 54D San Diego River Channel ...... 51 (21). CA 55E Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife Refuge and D Street Fill ...... 53 (21). CA G55 Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve ...... 10 (4).

Subtotal for all Southern CA Plans ...... 266 (108). Subtotal for all HCP Lands in OR and CA ...... 3,372 (1,365).

Tribal Lands

Shoalwater Bay Tribe

UNIT ...... ac (ha). Shoalwater Bay tribal lands within WA3B Shoalwater/Graveyard Spit ...... 425 (172).

Subtotal for Tribal Lands ...... 425 ac (172 ha).

Total Area Excluded Under 4(b)(2) ...... 3,797 (1,537). * Values in this table may not sum due to rounding.

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts impacts, we prepared a draft economic dated September 15, 2011, was made analysis of the proposed critical habitat available for public review and Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we designation and related factors comment from January 17, 2012, consider the economic impacts of (Industrial Economics Incorporated (IEc) through February 16, 2012 (77 FR 2243). specifying any particular area as critical 2011, pp. 1–130). The draft analysis, Following the close of the comment habitat. In order to consider economic

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36782 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

period, a final analysis (dated March 23, designation of critical habitat, which WSP. The total incremental impacts 2012) of the potential economic effects was determined to be the appropriate within Unit CA 22 are estimated to be of the designation was developed taking period for analysis because limited $17,100 ($1,610 annualized) at a 7 into consideration the public comments planning information was available for percent discount rate and include the and any new information (IEc 2012, pp. most activities to forecast activity levels administrative cost of addressing 1–131). for projects beyond a 20-year timeframe. adverse modification during The intent of the final economic The FEA quantifies economic impacts of consultation as well as any additional analysis (FEA) is to quantify the the Pacific Coast WSP conservation conservation efforts necessary to avoid economic impacts of all potential efforts associated with the following adverse modification (IEc 2012, pp. 4– conservation efforts for the Pacific Coast categories of activity: (1) Recreation; 4, 4–12—4–14). These costs are WSP; some of these costs will likely be (2) commercial and residential assuming that a Federal nexus would be incurred regardless of whether we development; (3) gravel mining; (4) identified for the proposed project; designate critical habitat (baseline). The military activities; and (5) habitat and currently, however, there is no federal economic impact of the final critical species management. nexus and thus consultation under habitat designation is analyzed by Nearly 86 percent of the critical section 7 is not required. Indirect costs comparing scenarios both ‘‘with critical habitat is not expected to experience (i.e., lost potential income to local habitat’’ and ‘‘without critical habitat.’’ any incremental impacts. In some of business and construction jobs) may The ‘‘without critical habitat’’ scenario these units, the critical habitat area is also be associated with this unit and the represents the baseline for the analysis, subject to existing HCPs or land project proponents have estimated these considering protections already in place management plans that incorporate impacts to be approximately $30 million for the species (e.g., under the Federal plover conservation. For other units, no annually to the local economy if the listing and other Federal, State, and future land use threats (e.g., projects are not allowed to proceed due local regulations). The baseline, development or transportation projects) to litigation or other permit proceedings therefore, represents the costs incurred are forecast to occur (IEc 2012, p. 4–1). not connected with this critical habitat regardless of whether critical habitat is In the DEA, the major cost was designation (IEc 2012, p. 4–14). These designated. The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ associated with military operations at estimates could not be verified by our scenario describes the incremental Vandenberg Air Force Base, which was economic analysis. Both development impacts associated specifically with the proposed for designation as Units CA 32 sites are located at the southerly end of designation of critical habitat for the and 33 in our March 2011 proposed Unit CA 22 in Sand City, California. The species. The incremental conservation revised designation. Vandenberg Air first development site, commonly efforts and associated impacts are those Force Base subsequently completed a known as the ‘‘Sterling/McDonald’’ site, not expected to occur absent the Secretarial-approved INRMP and has is jointly owned by a private developer been exempted from this final revised designation of critical habitat for the and the Sand City Redevelopment designation under section 4(a)(3) of the species. In other words, the incremental Agency. The project proponents are Act (see Exemptions section). costs are those attributable solely to the presently in the process of developing designation of critical habitat above and The FEA estimates total potential incremental economic impacts in areas an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) beyond the baseline costs; these are the under CEQA. Project proponents expect costs we consider in the final proposed as revised critical habitat over the next 20 years (2012 to 2032) to be the EIR to be completed in 6 months. designation of critical habitat. The The second site on the Sand City analysis looks retrospectively at $266,000, annualized at $25,100 using a coastline is the Security National baseline impacts incurred since the 7 percent discount rate. These totals Guaranty (SNG) development site species was listed, and forecasts both include the potential incremental (formerly known as the Lonestar site). baseline and incremental impacts likely impacts associated with inclusion of Similar to the Sterling McDonald site, to occur with the designation of critical Vandenberg Air Force Base and, as a the SNG site is planned for a mixed-use habitat. result of its exemption from this final The FEA also addresses how potential designation, the total potential visitor-serving resort. The hotel-condo economic impacts are likely to be incremental impacts may be less. These resort will include up to 341 units. distributed, including an assessment of costs represent additional Pursuant to CEQA, the resort has any local or regional impacts of habitat administrative effort as part of future undergone a full EIR along with an conservation and the potential effects of consultations under section 7 of the Act. addendum update and peer review. conservation activities on government We do not expect that the designation These development projects do not agencies, private businesses, and will result in additional conservation have a Federal nexus and thus individuals. The FEA measures lost efforts for the plover due to the nature consultation with the Service under economic efficiency associated with of the known projects. Exhibit 4–2 section 7 of the Act is not required. Due residential and commercial provides the estimated incremental to the lack of a Federal nexus, no direct development and public projects and impacts by activity (IEc 2012, p. 4–6). impacts of critical habitat designation activities, such as economic impacts on Development activities have the highest are expected; however, indirect impacts water management and transportation incremental impact at $50,000, followed (i.e. lost potential income to local projects, Federal lands, small entities, by habitat and species management at business and construction jobs) are and the energy industry. Decision $16,700, and mining at $10,500. possible in the event that other makers use this information to assess permitting processes or litigation whether the effects of the designation Development unrelated to this designation affect might unduly burden a particular group The FEA estimates the largest impacts project approvals (IEc 2012, pp. 4–12– or economic sector. Finally, the FEA of the proposed revised critical habitat 4–13). SNG has prepared a detailed looks retrospectively at costs that have rule would result from real estate habitat protection plan (HPP) that been incurred since 1993 (year of the development. The FEA has identified evaluates and mitigates potential species’ listing) (58 FR 12864; March 5, two commercial resort developments impacts to any presence of sensitive 1993), and considers those costs that that may be affected by the designation biological resources, including the may occur in the 20 years following the of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast Pacific Coast WSP. Conservation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36783

measures contained within the HPP the USACE. Currently, six gravel owned or managed by the Department of related to the plover include: Fencing extractors operate in Unit CA 6 under a Defense, and, therefore, we anticipate and signage around construction; Pacific countywide permit issued by the no impact on national security. Coast WSP surveys prior to, during, and USACE. A biological opinion has been In comments received from the Navy after construction; erection of exclosures issued for the gravel mining operations, on our 2011 revised proposed rule, we and signage if any nesting Pacific Coast and the USACE is required to re-initiate were notified that approximately 8 ac (3 WSPs are discovered; predator consultation to renew the Letter of ha) associated with a Navy school management; permanent conservation Permission during the life of the permit. (Naval Support Area Monterey) along easement for Pacific Coast WSP habitat The USACE must consult with the the Monterey Bay coast was identified on the property; and quarterly and Service again in 2014, 2019, 2024, and within the revised proposed critical annual reporting to the Service (IEc 2029. The direct incremental impacts habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP. These 2012, p. 4–13). identified are a result of section 7 DOD lands have been exempted from One additional development project administrative costs and are estimated the revised final designation under was identified in subunit CA 55B by the to be approximately $10,500 ($995 section 4(a)(3) of the Act (see City of Coronado. The City of Coronado annualized, at a 7 percent discount rate) Exemptions). has developed a conceptual plan for a (IEc 2012, pp. 4–3, 4–18—4–19). The Navy also identified that Class 1 bike path and pedestrian trail for approximately 0.08 ac (0.03 ha) at Naval the Central Beach area in subunit CA Habitat and Species Management Base Ventura County, Port Hueneme, 55B. If this plan moves forward, We have consulted on many habitat was included in the revised proposed consultation with the Service would and species management projects rule. These lands were inadvertently occur if there is a Federal nexus. The throughout the range of the Pacific Coast included as part of Unit CA 39 in the total incremental impacts within this WSP. The FEA has identified four revised proposed designation due to a unit are estimated to be $4,670 ($441 habitat and species management mapping error. The identified 0.08 ac annualized) at a 7 percent discount rate activities that would require (0.03 ha) of Navy lands within Unit CA and include the administrative cost of consultation under section 7 of the Act. 39, Ormond Beach, have been removed addressing adverse modification during The projects include: (1) A habitat in this revised final designation because consultation as well as any additional restoration project in subunit WA 3B; they are unsuitable habitat and not conservation efforts necessary to avoid (2) the draft Dunes HCP; (3) the essential to the conservation of the adverse modification (IEc 2012, pp. 4– Santa Barbara County Parks Department species. 5, 4–14). draft HCP for Rancho Guadalupe Dunes No other DOD lands have been County Park in Unit CA 31; and (4) the Recreation identified within the revised final draft HCP for Oceano Dunes SVRA for designation. Consequently, the The majority of incremental costs the CDPR. Individual costs for each unit Secretary is not exercising his discretion associated with recreation are at the are summarized in Exhibit 4–1 (IEc to exclude any areas from this revised Oceano Dunes State Vehicular 2012, pp. 4–3—4–6). The total estimated final designation based on impacts on Recreation Area (SVRA). Oceano Dunes costs associated with these projects are national security. SVRA is one of several Off-Highway $16,700 ($1,580 annualized, at a 7 Vehicle (OHV) areas administered by percent discount rate) (IEc 2012, pp. 4– Exclusions Based on Other Relevant the CDPR and encompasses roughly 21—4–23). Impacts 3,590 ac (1,453 ha) in San Luis Obispo Because the FEA did not identify any Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we County; approximately 1,500 ac (607 ha) disproportionate, or unreasonable costs consider any other relevant impacts, in are designated for camping and OHV that are likely to result from the addition to economic impacts and use. Portions of Oceano Dunes SVRA designation of revised final critical impacts to national security. We are located within Unit CA 31. While habitat, the Secretary did not consider consider a number of factors including there is no federal nexus for activities at exercising his discretion to exclude any whether the landowners have developed Oceano Dunes SVRA, CDPR is working areas from this designation of critical any HCPs or other management plans with the Service to develop a habitat habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP based for the area, or whether there are conservation plan in connection with on economic impacts. A copy of the conservation partnerships that would be obtaining an incidental take permit. An FEA with supporting documents may be encouraged by designation of, or intra-Service consultation under section obtained by contacting the Arcata Fish exclusion from, critical habitat. In 7 would be required for issuance of the and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES) or addition, we look at any tribal issues, permit. Consequently, the direct by downloading from the Internet at and consider the government-to incremental impacts identified are a http://www.regulations.gov. government relationship of the United result of section 7 administrative costs Exclusions Based on National Security States with tribal entities. We also and are estimated to be approximately Impacts consider any social impacts that might $9,580 ($904 annualized, at a 7 percent occur because of the designation. discount rate); however, additional Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we indirect costs may also be associated consider whether there are lands owned Land and Resource Management Plans, with this unit (IEc 2012, pp. 4–4, 4–10— or managed by the Department of Conservation Plans, or Agreements 4–12). Defense (DOD) where a national security Based on Conservation Partnerships impact might exist. In preparing this We consider a current land Mining proposal, we have exempted from the management or conservation plan Gravel mining has occurred within designation of critical habitat those DOD (HCPs, as well as other types) to provide Unit CA 6 and within the Eel River lands with completed INRMPs adequate management or protection for basin for decades and has been determined to provide a benefit to the Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat if it regulated under a variety of programs, Pacific Coast WSP. We have also meets the following criteria: including under section 404 of the determined that the remaining lands (1) The plan is complete and provides Clean Water Act and the Rivers and within the proposed designation of the same or better level of protection Harbors Act, which are administered by critical habitat for the species are not from adverse modification or

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36784 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

destruction than that provided through nexus for future activities is uncertain, Oregon Parks and Recreation a consultation under section 7 of the the benefits of preserving existing Department Habitat Conservation Plan Act; partnerships by excluding the covered The OPRD HCP was permitted under (2) There is a reasonable expectation lands from critical habitat are most section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act in 2011, that the conservation management significant. Excluding lands owned by and covers about 230 mi (370 km) of strategies and actions will be or under the jurisdiction of the sandy shore within the range of the implemented for the foreseeable future permittees of an HCP, under these Pacific Coast WSP in Oregon. The and effective, based on past practices, circumstances, promotes positive associated incidental take permit (ITP) written guidance, or regulations; and working relationships and eliminates (3) The plan provides adaptive authorizes incidental take of the Pacific impacts to existing and future Coast WSP caused by public use and management and conservation strategies partnerships while encouraging and measures consistent with currently recreation management activities, development of additional HCPs for natural resources management accepted principles of conservation other species. biology. activities, and beach management Large-scale HCPs take many years to activities along the coast of Oregon for Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) develop and foster an ecosystem-based a period of 25 years (Service 2011). Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act approach to habitat conservation The HCP-covered lands consist of the authorizes us to issue to non-Federal planning, by addressing conservation ‘‘Ocean Shore,’’ an area defined by entities a permit for the incidental take issues through a coordinated approach. Oregon State statute as the sandy areas of endangered and threatened species. If local jurisdictions were to require of the Oregon coast between the extreme This permit allows a non-Federal landowners to obtain incidental take low tide and the actual of statutory landowner to proceed with an activity permits (ITP) individually prior to the vegetation line, whichever is farther that is legal in all other respects, but issuance of a building permit under landward. HCP-covered lands do not that results in the incidental taking of a section 10 of the Act, this would result include the Federal lands within the listed species (i.e., take that is incidental in uncoordinated, patchy conservation ‘‘Ocean Shore’’ boundary. In the areas to, and not the purpose of, the carrying that would be less likely to achieve adjacent to Federal lands, the covered out of an otherwise lawful activity). The listed species recovery. We actively lands extend from the extreme low tide Act specifies that an application for an work to foster partnerships with local to the mean high tide. Covered lands are incidental take permit must be jurisdictions and encourage either owned and leased by OPRD as a accompanied by a habitat conservation development of regional HCPs that State Park or Natural Area or managed plan, and specifies the content of such afford proactive, landscape-level under a statutory recreation easement a plan. The purpose of HCPs is to conservation for multiple species, within the Ocean Shore (Oregon describe and ensure that the effects of including voluntary protections for Revised Statute 390.635 and 390.620; the permitted action on covered species covered species. Oregon Administrative Rule 736–020– are adequately minimized and The proposed rule to revise 0040(3)). Federal lands are not covered mitigated, and that the action does not designated habitat for the Pacific Coast by the HCP and were, therefore, not appreciably reduce the survival and WSP (76 FR 16046; March 22, 2011) did considered for exclusion. recovery of the species. In our not specifically identify any HCP, Conservation measures to be assessment of HCPs associated with this management plan, or conservation implemented on the covered lands will final rulemaking, the analysis required partnership that the Service was be focused on 16 management areas that for these types of exclusions involves proposing at that time for exclusion were identified to have the greatest careful consideration of the benefits of under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. The potential to provide Pacific Coast WSP designation versus the benefits of Service did indicate that it was seeking habitat when considered in the context exclusion. The benefits of designation input from the public as to whether the of recreational use of the Ocean Shore, typically arise from additional section 7 Secretary should exclude HCP areas or historical Pacific Coast WSP use, and protections, as well as enhanced public other such areas under management that the biological requirements of the awareness once specific areas are benefits the Pacific Coast WSP from the species. identified as critical habitat. The final revised designation, and The OPRD either owns or leases five benefits of exclusion generally relate to mentioned that there were areas in the of these management areas, which are relieving regulatory burdens on existing revised proposed designation that were identified as ‘‘Snowy Plover conservation partners, maintaining good included in management plans or other Management Areas’’ (SPMAs): (1) working relationships with them, and large-scale HCPs, such as the Oregon Columbia River South Jetty; (2) encouraging the development of new Parks and Recreation Department Necanicum Spit; (3) Nehalem Spit; (4) partnerships. (OPRD) Habitat Conservation Plan. The Bandon; and (5) Netarts Spit. The Some HCP permittees have expressed Service also sought input on exclusions remaining 11 potential management the view that critical habitat designation of Tribal Lands from the final revised areas are identified as ‘‘Recreation on lands covered by an HCP devalues designation. In developing the revised Management Areas’’ (RMAs) and are the conservation efforts of the plan’s final critical habitat and weighing the adjacent to upland areas owned by other proponents, and could undermine the benefits of exclusion versus inclusion, landowners but are located within the partnerships fostered through the we have analyzed these areas that are area defined as Ocean Shore. Together, development and implementation of the managed under a HCP, similar the 16 management areas span plans. They believe critical habitat management plan, or conservation approximately 48 mi (77 km) of the 230 designation on HCP lands would partnership and have determined that mi (370 km) of sandy Ocean Shore in discourage development of additional several units or portions of units that Oregon. HCPs and other conservation plans in were included in the revised proposed The conservation measures (Table 7) the future. Where an existing HCP designation are managed consistent include: (1) Implementation of Pacific provides for protection for a species and with the intent of the exclusion Coast WSP management activities on its essential habitat within the plan area, language. We discuss each of these areas OPRD-owned or -leased SPMAs; (2) or where the existence of a Federal below. implementation of recreational use

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36785

restrictions at SPMAs and RMAs owned implementation of beach management by other landowners; and (3) activities on the Ocean Shore.

TABLE 7—SUMMARY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE OREGON PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT HCP

Conservation benefit to Pacific Coast Area specific management objectives WSP

Restrict activities near nesting habitat during the breeding season (March 15 through September 15) Protect nesting and foraging areas. Restore and maintain plover nesting habitat ...... Protect, restore, or enhance breeding and foraging areas. Restore, maintain, and manage currently unoccupied sites for plover nesting ...... Protect, restore, or enhance breeding and foraging areas. Manage predators within plover nesting areas ...... Protect individuals, eggs, and young. Monitor breeding and nonbreeding population ...... Ensure effectiveness of plover conserva- tion measures in HCP. Conduct public outreach and education about plovers and their habitat ...... Protect nesting and foraging areas. Provide law enforcement of HCP rules and regulations ...... Protect nesting and foraging areas. If wintering plovers are impacted by covered activities or climate change is impacting plovers within Protect wintering, nesting, and foraging the covered lands, modify the HCP to respond to changed circumstances. plovers. Ensure site-specific management actions are prioritized and completed through individual site man- Protect, restore, or enhance breeding, agement plans. wintering, and foraging areas.

Under the OPRD HCP, site nesting populations of the Pacific Coast North Spit, New River, Elk River, and management plans are required by the WSP over the term of the 25-year ITP. Euchre Creek. HCP for each area managed for Pacific Three SPMAs will initially be managed If a RMA or the area immediately Coast WSPs. Site management plans by OPRD for nesting populations of inland of a RMA becomes occupied by include management prescriptions Pacific Coast WSP: (1) Columbia River the Pacific Coast WSP, but a site specific to individual management areas South Jetty; (2) Necanicum Spit; and (3) management plan does not exist, the and describe how the conservation Nehalem Spit. OPRD will automatically implement measures required by the HCP (i.e., By 2013, OPRD will prepare site recreational use restrictions on HCP- covered lands between March 15 and recreation management, habitat management plans that describe how September 15 of each year. These restoration and maintenance, predator restoration and management measures restrictions will remain in place until an management, monitoring, enforcement, required by the HCP are implemented at agreement is reached between the and public outreach and education) will these three unoccupied SPMAs. Active Service and the landowner on be completed at each managed area. Site management will begin the nesting conservation, any recommended management plans also outline the season after site plans have been conservation actions or a site extent of seasonal recreational use approved by the Service, starting in restrictions for each area and are management plan is developed by 2014. One additional SPMA, Netarts approved by the Service, and are OPRD. The OPRD will also be notified Spit, could also be managed if (1) the reviewed every 5 years to ensure the of any changes that may modify the Columbia River South Jetty, Necanicum provisions are providing conservation application of recreational use Spit, or the Nehalem Spit SPMA benefits and meeting the intent of the restrictions to a more focused area, becomes occupied; and (2) one of the HCP. based on the conservation needs of the The Bandon State Natural Area (SNA) RMAs is not already under active, plovers at the site, as outlined in the is managed as the Bandon SPMA. OPRD Service-approved management for the HCP. The provisions to implement has completed a draft site management Pacific Coast WSP. Under these restrictions on the covered lands allow plan, which has been submitted to the circumstances, OPRD will commit to OPRD to protect plovers within covered Service for review and approval. This managing Netarts Spit for nesting lands regardless of the management on site management plan further describes populations of the Pacific Coast WSP to the adjacent areas. In addition, a how the conservation measures, ensure that a minimum of three memorandum of understanding has required in the HCP, will be completed unoccupied SPMAs are being actively been completed and signed by all at Bandon SPMA. Active management managed at any given time over the term involved State and Federal agencies, of the Bandon SPMA, per this site of the 25-year ITP. ensuring consistent management of management plan, will begin in 2013. In As discussed above, RMAs extend plovers across jurisdictional boundaries the interim, OPRD continues to manage from the extreme low tide line to the according to the provisions of the HCP. plovers at the site by restricting mean high tide line on Federal lands, In the event that a Service-approved recreational access, providing public and from the mean low tide line to the site management plan has been education, law enforcement, and habitat statutory or actual vegetation line, developed, the OPRD will implement restoration and management. The site whichever is most landward, on all recreational use restrictions in management plan will specify the long- other lands. Under the HCP, the OPRD cooperation with the landowner as term implementation of the OPRD HCP will implement recreational use directed by the site management plan. If provisions at Bandon SPMA. restrictions at up to 11 RMAs, which an RMA and the areas immediately In addition to the occupied Bandon include; Bayocean Spit, South Sand inland of the RMA are unoccupied by SPMA, as many as four areas currently Lake Spit, Sutton/Baker Beach, Siltcoos the Pacific Coast WSP, the OPRD will unoccupied by the Pacific Coast WSP Estuary/Dunes Overlook/Tahkenitch only implement recreational use have been identified as SPMAs and Estuary, Tahkenitch South, Umpqua restrictions at the request of the targeted for management of potential River North Jetty, Tenmile, Coos Bay landowner and after consultation with

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36786 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

the Service and collaboration with the nesting habitat over the term of the HCP, located within critical habitat or are OPRD. The OPRD will also work with OPRD and the Service will determine likely to affect critical habitat would county and private landowners adjacent appropriate conservation measures create a Federal nexus and trigger to RMAs to provide supervision, necessary to respond to the changed section 7 consultation under the Act. enforcement, and signage on their lands, circumstance. Examples of potential projects that may because such restrictions (ropes, signs, trigger consultation as a result of CWA, Benefits of Inclusion—Oregon Parks and enforcement) cannot be implemented by CZMA, and RHA include beach Recreation Department HCP a private landowner on the Ocean Shore restoration (such as, beach without OPRD approval. The primary effect of designating any replenishment or removal of nonnative If a Pacific Coast WSP should nest on particular area as critical habitat is the plants) and channel dredging. HCP-covered lands outside an occupied requirement for Federal agencies to Another important benefit of or unoccupied SPMA or RMA, the consult with us under section 7 of the including lands in a critical habitat OPRD will install fencing around the Act to ensure actions they carry out, designation is that the designation can individual nest in coordination with the authorize, or fund do not destroy or serve to educate landowners and the landowner, and will consider installing adversely modify designated critical public regarding the potential a nest enclosure after consultation with habitat. This would provide an conservation value of an area, and may the Service. Specifically, the OPRD will additional benefit beyond that provided help focus conservation efforts on areas install a 164-foot (50-m radius) roped under the jeopardy standard which of high conservation value for certain buffer around the nest that allows access obligates Federal agencies to consult species. Any information about the along the wet sand, and will determine, under section 7 of the Act with us on Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat that through coordination with the Service, actions that may affect a federally listed reaches a wide audience, including if use of an exclosure to protect the nest species to ensure such actions do not parties engaged in conservation from predation is appropriate. The jeopardize the species’ continued activities, is valuable. OPRD will also work with the Service existence. If a federally listed species Benefits of Exclusion—Oregon Parks and the landowner to install signage, as does not occupy an area where a and Recreation Department HCP appropriate, to indicate the presence of proposed action may occur, Federal nesting Pacific Coast WSPs. agencies are not obligated to consult The benefits of excluding from The terms of the OPRD HCP and with us to ensure actions do not designated critical habitat the associated ITP only addressed impacts jeopardize the species’ existence. approximately 3,106 ac (1,257 ha) of to Pacific Coast WSPs during the However, the designation of critical lands owned and managed by the breeding season. The HCP concluded habitat in such unoccupied areas Oregon Parks and Recreation that the impacts of covered activities provides an additional layer of Department are significant and include did not rise to the level of take for regulatory review that would require the measures summarized in Table 7 wintering Pacific Coast WSPs. Federal agencies to consult with us to above. Therefore, OPRD did not request ensure that critical habitat is not We have created close partnerships coverage by the ITP for activities that adversely modified. Therefore, there with the OPRD and several other occur outside the breeding season, nor may be an additional regulatory benefit stakeholders through the development did the OPRD HCP include provisions to designating critical habitat in of the OPRD HCP, which incorporates for wintering habitat management or unoccupied areas that we have protections and management objectives protection. However, the provisions for determined to be essential. for the Pacific Coast WSP and the habitat management of nesting areas In evaluating project effects on critical habitat upon which it depends for within the covered lands should habitat, the Service must be satisfied breeding, sheltering, and foraging provide conservation value for that the PCEs and, therefore, the activities. The conservation strategy wintering habitat within the essential features of the critical habitat identified in the OPRD HCP, along with conservation area by providing likely will not be altered or destroyed by our close coordination with OPRD, protections during the nonbreeding proposed activities to the extent that the addresses the identified threats to season to foraging, roosting, and winter conservation of the affected species Pacific Coast WSP and the geographical use areas. In addition, OPRD included a would be appreciably reduced. If critical areas that contain the physical or provision that would require habitat were designated in areas of biological features essential to the amendment of the HCP, if covered unoccupied habitat or currently conservation of the species in the areas activities were determined to adversely occupied areas subsequently become identified in Table 6. The management impact wintering Pacific Coast WSPs, unoccupied, different outcomes or objectives identified within this based on annual monitoring. requirements are also likely because conservation strategy seek to achieve The OPRD HCP has provisions for effects to unoccupied areas of critical conservation goals for Pacific Coast adaptive management to address habitat are not likely to trigger the need WSPs and their habitat, and thus can be uncertainties in achieving conservation for a jeopardy analysis. of greater conservation benefit than the objectives for Pacific Coast WSP habitat, Critical habitat designation can also designation of critical habitat, which including uncertainties that may be result in ancillary conservation benefits does not require specific actions. Thus, associated with climate change. The to the Pacific Coast WSP by triggering the OPRD HCP provides a greater adaptive management strategy helps to additional review and conservation benefit to the Pacific Coast WSP than ensure management will continue to be through other Federal laws. The Federal would designating critical habitat. consistent with agreed-upon Pacific laws most likely to afford protection to Therefore, the relative benefits of Coast WSP conservation objectives. designated Pacific Coast WSP habitat designation of critical habitat on these Climate change and associated sea-level are the Clean Water Act (CWA), Coastal lands are diminished and limited. rise were considered ‘‘changed Zone Management Act (CZMA; 16 Conservation measures that provide a circumstances’’ that may require U.S.C. 1451 et seq.), and the Rivers and benefit to Pacific Coast WSP and its additional conservation measures of Harbors Act (RHA; 33 U.S.C. 401 et habitat have been implemented in the OPRD. In the event that sea-level rise seq.). Projects requiring a review under areas owned and managed by the OPRD. results in loss of Pacific Coast WSP the CWA, CZMA, and RHA that are These measures will continue to be

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36787

implemented as the OPRD and the partnerships for the benefit of listed because of limited Federal nexus and Service finalize site-specific species. conservation measures which management plans on covered lands. We also conclude that the educational specifically benefit Pacific Coast WSP Such measures include protection of benefits of designating critical habitat and its habitat are in place to address nesting and foraging areas, predator on lands owned and managed by the unoccupied areas. We also conclude management at nest sites, and trash OPRD would be negligible because there that the educational and ancillary clean-up at occupied sites. have been numerous opportunities for benefits of designating the geographical Excluding the approximately 3,106 ac public education and outreach related to areas containing the physical or (1,257 ha) owned and managed by the Pacific Coast WSP over the 10-year biological features essential to the OPRD from the critical habitat development of the HCP. In addition, conservation of the Pacific WSP would designation will sustain and enhance the HCP includes public education and be minimal, because the HCP process the working relationship between the related tasks to conserve plovers on the has already provided considerable Service and the OPRD. The willingness entire Oregon coast. Western snowy public education and ancillary benefits. of the OPRD to work with the Service plovers are State-listed throughout Therefore, in consideration of the on innovative ways to manage federally Oregon, and as a result, they receive a factors discussed above in the Benefits listed species will continue to reinforce high degree of conservation oversight of Exclusion section, including the those conservation efforts and our and management within the State. The relevant impact to current and future partnership, which contribute OPRD HCP has gone through the State’s partnerships, we have determined that significantly toward achieving recovery public review and input process, and the significant benefits of exclusion of of Pacific Coast WSP. We consider this again through the Federal public review lands covered by the OPRD HCP voluntary partnership in conservation and input process under NEPA. These outweigh the benefits of critical habitat vital to our understanding of the status processes have provided extensive designation. of species on non-Federal lands and opportunities to educate the public and necessary for us to implement recovery landowners about the location of Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction actions such as habitat protection and plovers and plover habitat, and efforts to of the Species—Oregon Parks and restoration, and beneficial management conserve the physical or biological Recreation Department HCP actions for species. features essential to the conservation of We have determined that the Pacific Coast WSP. exclusion of 3,106 ac (1,257 ha) from the The Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Pacific Coast WSP currently occupies designation of critical habitat for the Benefits of Inclusion—Oregon Parks and areas that are owned and managed by Pacific Coast WSP of lands owned and Recreation Department HCP the OPRD and covered by its HCP (refer managed by the OPRD, as identified in We reviewed and evaluated the to Table 3). Because one of the primary the OPRD HCP will not result in exclusion of approximately 3,106 ac threats to the Pacific Coast WSP is extinction of the species because current (1,257 ha) of land owned and managed habitat loss and degradation, the conservation efforts under the plan by the OPRD from our designation of consultation process under section 7 of adequately protect the geographical critical habitat. The benefits of the Act for projects with a Federal nexus areas containing the physical or including these lands in the designation will, in evaluating effects to the plovers, biological features essential to the are small because the regulatory, evaluate the effects of the action on the conservation of the species. For projects educational, and ancillary benefits that conservation or functionality of the affecting plovers in occupied areas, the would result from critical habitat habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP jeopardy standard of section 7 of the designation are almost entirely regardless of whether critical habitat is Act, coupled with protection provided redundant with the regulatory, designated for these lands; a similar by OPRD HCP, would provide educational, and ancillary benefits analysis would be performed to conduct assurances that this species will not go already afforded through the OPRD HCP the adverse modification analysis (IEc extinct as a result of excluding these and under State and Federal law. 2011, p. D–3). Consultation will lands from the critical habitat The OPRD HCP provides for continue to occur in areas outside the designation. Based on the above significant conservation and covered lands that remain critical discussion, the Secretary is exercising management of the geographical areas habitat, but not on the excluded areas. his discretion under section 4(b)(2) of that contain the physical or biological However, the HCP has provisions for the Act to exclude from this final features essential to the conservation of protecting and restoring plover habitat critical habitat designation portions of the Pacific Coast WSP and help achieve on occupied and unoccupied lands that the units or subunits that are within the recovery of this species through the far exceed the conservation afforded by OPRD HCP boundary (refer to Table 6), objectives as described in Table 7. section 7 consultation. These measures totaling 3,106 ac (1,257 ha) of land. Exclusion of these lands from critical will not only prevent the degradation of habitat will help preserve the essential features of plover habitat, but Multiple Species Conservation Program partnerships we have developed with they will improve and maintain these (MSCP)—City of San Diego Subarea the OPRD, other stakeholders, and features over time. Plan project proponents through the We have determined that the The MSCP is a comprehensive habitat development and ongoing management actions provided through conservation planning program that implementation of the OPRD HCP. implementation of the OPRD HCP, in encompasses 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) These partnerships are focused on conjunction with our partnership with within 12 jurisdictions of southwestern conservation of multiple species, the OPRD, provide a greater benefit to San Diego County, California (County of including Pacific Coast WSP, and secure Pacific Coast WSP than would critical San Diego 1998). The MSCP identifies conservation benefits for the species habitat designation. Furthermore, we the conservation needs of 85 federally that will lead to recovery, as described have determined that the additional listed and sensitive species, including above, beyond those that could be regulatory benefits of designating the Pacific Coast WSP, and serves as the required under a critical habitat critical habitat in the occupied areas basis for development of subarea plans designation. Furthermore, these afforded through the section 7(a)(2) by each jurisdiction in support of partnerships aid in fostering future consultation process, are minimal section 10(a)(1)(B) permits. The MSCP

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36788 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

identifies where mitigation activities exclude from critical habitat, all effects to unoccupied areas of critical should be focused, such that upon full proposed subunits within the City of habitat are not likely to trigger the need implementation of the subarea plans San Diego Subarea Plan boundaries, for a jeopardy analysis. approximately 171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of including a portion of proposed Critical habitat designation can also the MSCP plan area will be preserved subunits within San Dieguito Lagoon result in ancillary conservation benefits and managed for covered species (CA 52B–C), all of the proposed unit at to the Pacific Coast WSP by triggering (County of San Diego 1998, pp. 2–1, Los Penasquitos Lagoon (CA 53), and all additional review and conservation 4–2—4–4). proposed subunits within Mission Bay through other Federal laws. The Federal Conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP (CA 54A–D). This area encompasses laws most likely to afford protection to is addressed in the MSCP and in the approximately 137 ac (55 ha) of land. designated Pacific Coast WSP habitat City of San Diego Subarea Plan. The We did not exclude one subunit within are the Clean Water Act (CWA), Coastal section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the City of the San Dieguito Lagoon (CA 52A) as Zone Management Act (CZMA), and the San Diego Subarea Plan was issued on this area is not within the boundaries of Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA). Projects July 18, 1997 (Service 1997). The City of the City of San Diego Subarea Plan. All requiring a review under the CWA, San Diego Subarea Plan identifies areas areas containing the physical or CZMA, and RHA that are located within where mitigation activities should be biological features essential to the critical habitat or are likely to affect focused to assemble preserve areas in conservation of the species that occur critical habitat would create a Federal the Multi-Habitat Planning Area on non-Federal lands covered by the nexus and trigger section 7 consultation (MHPA); additional preserve areas City of San Diego Subarea Plan under under the Act. Examples of potential within the MSCP (i.e., outside the City the MSCP are excluded from the final projects that may trigger consultation as of San Diego Subarea Plan jurisdiction) critical habitat designation. a result of CWA, CZMA, and RHA include Pre-Approved Mitigation Areas include beach restoration (such as, (PAMA). Benefits of Inclusion—City of San Diego beach replenishment or removal of When completed at the end of the 50- Subarea Plan under the MSCP nonnative plants) and channel dredging. year permit term, the public sector The primary effect of designating any Thus, review of Federal actions affecting (Federal, State, and local government, particular area as critical habitat is the designated critical habitat units would and the general public) will have requirement for Federal agencies to consider the importance of this habitat contributed 108,750 ac (44,010 ha) (63 consult with us under section 7 of the to the species and the protections percent) to the preserve areas, of which Act to ensure actions they carry out, required for the species and its habitat. 81,750 ac (33,083 ha) (48 percent) was authorize, or fund do not destroy or Another important benefit of existing public land when the MSCP adversely modify designated critical including lands in a critical habitat was established, and 27,000 ac (10,927 habitat. Absent critical habitat designation is that the designation can ha) (16 percent) will have been designation in occupied areas, Federal serve to educate landowners and the acquired. At completion, the private agencies remain obligated under section public regarding the potential sector will have contributed 63,170 ac 7 of the Act to consult with us on conservation value of an area, and may (25,564 ha) (37 percent) to the preserve actions that may affect a federally listed help focus conservation efforts on areas areas as part of the development species to ensure such actions do not of high conservation value for certain process, either through avoidance of jeopardize the species’ continued species. Any information about the impacts or as compensatory mitigation existence. If a federally listed species Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat that for impacts to biological resources does not occupy an area where a reaches a wide audience, including outside the preserve. Currently, and in proposed action may occur, Federal parties engaged in conservation the future, Federal and State agencies are not obligated to consult activities, is valuable. governments, local jurisdictions and with us to ensure actions do not Benefits of Exclusion—City of San Diego special districts, and managers of jeopardize the species’ existence. Subarea Plan Under the MSCP privately owned land will manage and However, the designation of critical monitor their land in the preserve habitat in such unoccupied areas The benefits of excluding from within the MHPA for species and provides an additional layer of designated critical habitat the habitat protection (County of San Diego regulatory review that would require approximately 137 ac (55 ha) of land 1998, pp. 2–1, 4–2—4–4). Federal agencies to consult with us to within the boundaries of the City of San The MSCP requires the City of San ensure that critical habitat is not Diego Subarea Plan are significant and Diego to develop framework and site- adversely modified. Therefore, there include: (1) That the conservation specific management plans, subject to may be an additional regulatory benefit management objectives for Pacific Coast the review and approval of the Service to designating critical habitat in WSP and its habitat identified in the and CDFG, to guide the management of unoccupied areas that we have City of San Diego Subarea Plan, all preserve land under City control. determined to be essential, such as described in Table 8 below, would Currently, the framework plan for the Fiesta Island (CA 54A). continue to be implemented into the City of San Diego is in place. The City In evaluating project effects on critical future; (2) continued and strengthened of San Diego has not yet completed site- habitat, the Service must be satisfied effective working relationships with all specific management plans for some that the PCEs and, therefore, the MSCP jurisdictions and stakeholders to lands containing Pacific Coast WSP, essential features of the critical habitat promote the conservation of the Pacific including some lands we are excluding likely will not be altered or destroyed by Coast WSP and its habitat; (3) continued from critical habitat designation (CA proposed activities to the extent that the meaningful collaboration and 52B–C and CA 53). However, the City of conservation of the affected species cooperation in working toward San Diego has completed the Mission would be appreciably reduced. If critical recovering this species, including Bay Natural Resources Management habitat were designated in areas of conservation benefits that might not Plan, which addresses Pacific Coast unoccupied habitat or currently otherwise occur; (4) encouragement of WSP within Mission Bay (CA 54A–D). occupied areas subsequently become other jurisdictions with completed Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the unoccupied, different outcomes or subarea plans under the MSCP to amend Secretary is exercising his discretion to requirements are also likely because their plans to cover and benefit the

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36789

Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat; (5) adjacent to Pacific Coast WSP habitat future on other private lands that encouragement of other coastal (including the cities of Coronado and include the Pacific Coast WSP and other jurisdictions within the range of Pacific Imperial Beach); and (6) encouragement federally listed species. Coast WSP to complete HCPs or subarea of additional HCP and other plans under the MSCP that cover or are conservation plan development in the

TABLE 8—SUMMARY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE CITY OF SAN DIEGO SUBAREA PLAN UNDER THE MSCP

Conservation benefit to Pacific Coast Area specific management objectives WSP

Protect nesting sites from human disturbance during the reproductive season ...... Protect breeding areas. Implement specific measures to protect against detrimental edge effects ...... Protect, restore, or enhance breeding and foraging areas. Ensure that incidental take (during the breeding season) associated with maintenance or removal of Protect individuals and nests. levees or dikes is not authorized except as specifically approved by wildlife agencies. Ensure the conservation of: 99 percent of saltpan habitat; 90–95 percent of remaining beach habitat Protect nesting, wintering, and foraging outside of intensively used beaches; and 93 percent of potential habitat. areas.

We have created close partnerships By excluding the approximately 137 Exclusion of these lands from critical with the City of San Diego and several ac (55 ha) of land within the boundaries habitat will help preserve the other stakeholders through the of the City of San Diego Subarea Plan partnerships we have developed with development of the City of San Diego from critical habitat designation, we are local jurisdictions and project Subarea Plan, which incorporate encouraging new partnerships with proponents through the development protections and management objectives other landowners and jurisdictions to and ongoing implementation of the (described in Table 8 above) for the protect the Pacific Coast WSP and other MSCP and the City of San Diego Pacific Coast WSP and the habitat upon listed species. Our ongoing partnerships Subarea Plan. These partnerships are which it depends for breeding, with the City of San Diego, the larger focused on conservation of multiple sheltering, and foraging activities. The regional MSCP participants, and the species, including Pacific Coast WSP, conservation strategy identified in the landscape-level multiple species and secure conservation benefits for the subarea plan, along with our close conservation planning efforts they species that will lead to recovery, as coordination with the city and other promote, are essential to achieve long- described above, beyond those that stakeholders, addresses the identified term conservation of the Pacific Coast could be required under a critical threats to Pacific Coast WSP and the WSP. We consider this voluntary habitat designation. Furthermore, these geographical areas that contain the partnership in conservation vital to our partnerships aid in fostering future physical or biological features essential understanding of the status of species partnerships for the benefit of listed to its conservation. The conservation on non-Federal lands and necessary for species, the majority of which do not gains to the Pacific Coast WSP us to implement recovery actions such occur on Federal lands and thus are less identified within the City of San Diego as habitat protection and restoration, likely to result in a section 7 Subarea Plan are more beneficial than and beneficial management actions for consultation. designation of critical habitat because species. We also conclude that the educational inclusion in critical habitat does not The Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the benefits of designating critical habitat require beneficial management actions. Benefits of Inclusion—City of San Diego within the City of San Diego Subarea Thus, the City of San Diego Subarea Subarea Plan Under the MSCP Plan boundaries would be negligible Plan provides a greater benefit to the because there have been several Pacific Coast WSP than would We have reviewed and evaluated the opportunities for public education and designation of critical habitat. Our exclusion of approximately 137 ac (55 outreach related to Pacific Coast WSP. partnership with the City of San Diego ha) of land within the boundaries of the The framework for the regional MSCP helps ensure implementation of the City of San Diego Subarea Plan. The was developed over a 7-year period; the protections and management actions benefits of including these lands in the City of San Diego Subarea plan has been identified within the City of San Diego designation are small because the in place since 1997. Implementation of Subarea Plan. Therefore, the relative regulatory, educational, and ancillary the subarea plan is formally reviewed benefits of designation of critical habitat benefits that would result from critical yearly through publicly available annual on these lands are diminished and habitat designation are almost entirely reports and a public meeting, providing limited. redundant with the regulatory, extensive opportunity to educate the Excluding lands within the MSCP educational, and ancillary benefits public and landowners about the from the critical habitat designation will already afforded through the City of San location of, and efforts to conserve, the sustain and enhance the working Diego Subarea Plan and under State and physical or biological features essential relationship between the Service and Federal laws. The City of San Diego to the conservation of Pacific Coast the City of San Diego. The willingness Subarea Plan provides for significant WSP. of the City to work with the Service on conservation and management of the Within the City of San Diego Subarea innovative ways to manage federally geographical areas that contain the Plan boundaries, Pacific Coast WSP listed species will continue to reinforce physical or biological features essential currently occupies all but one subunit those conservation efforts and our to the conservation of the Pacific Coast (CA 54A). Any project with a Federal partnership, which contribute WSP and help achieve recovery of this nexus will require consultation under significantly toward achieving recovery species through the objectives as section 7 of the Act in those subunits of Pacific Coast WSP. described in Table 8. occupied by Pacific Coast WSPs.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36790 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Furthermore, because one of the the plan that benefit the plover and its northwestern San Diego County, primary threats to the Pacific Coast WSP habitat will be implemented regardless California, including the cities of is habitat loss and degradation, the of the species presence. We also Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, consultation process required under conclude that the educational and Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, section 7 of the Act for a project with ancillary benefits of designating critical and Vista. The MHCP was designed to a Federal nexus will, in evaluating habitat for Pacific WSP within the City create, manage, and monitor an effects to the plovers, most likely of San Diego Subareas Plan boundaries ecosystem preserve. The MHCP is a evaluate the effects of the action on the would be negligible because of the subregional plan that identifies the conservation or functionality of partnership established between the conservation needs of 77 federally listed occupied habitat for the Pacific Coast Service and the City of San Diego, the and sensitive species, including Pacific WSP and thus the jeopardy analysis management objectives identified in the Coast WSP, and serves as the basis for would be similar to that performed to City of San Diego Subarea Plan, the development of subarea plans by each conduct the adverse modification educational outreach that has occurred jurisdiction in support of section analysis (IEc 2011, p. D–3). Therefore, as part of the subarea planning process, 10(a)(1)(B) permits. The subregional there would be minimal additional and the independent regulatory MHCP identifies where mitigation benefit of designating critical habitat protection already provided under the activities should be focused, such that within the boundaries of the City of San subarea plan. Therefore, in upon full implementation of the subarea Diego Subarea Plan. The management consideration of the relevant impact to plans over 20,000 ac (8,094 ha) of the objectives identified within this current and future partnerships, as MHCP plan area will be preserved and conservation strategy seek to achieve summarized in the Benefits of Exclusion managed for covered species (AMEC conservation goals for Pacific Coast section above, we determined the Earth and Environmental, Inc. (AMEC) WSPs and their habitat, and thus can be significant benefits of exclusion and Conservation Biology Institute (CBI) of greater conservation benefit than the outweigh the benefits of critical habitat 2003, p. E–16). The MHCP is also a designation of critical habitat, which designation. subregional plan under the State of California’s Natural Communities does not require specific actions, Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction Conservation Plan (NCCP) program and particularly in the unoccupied subunit of the Species—City of San Diego was developed in cooperation with CA 54A. The City of San Diego Subarea Subarea Plan Under the MSCP Plan would ensure the conservation of CDFG. The MHCP preserve system is We determine that the exclusion of 99 percent of saltpan habitat; 90–95 intended to protect viable occurrences 137 ac (55 ha) of land from the percent of remaining beach habitat of native plant and animal species and designation of critical habitat for the outside of intensively used beaches; and their habitats in perpetuity, while Pacific Coast WSP within the 93 percent of potential habitat. We have accommodating continued economic boundaries of the City of San Diego determined that the additional development and quality of life for Subarea Plan will not result in regulatory benefits of designating residents of northern San Diego County. extinction of the species because current critical habitat in the occupied areas Conservation of Pacific Coast WSP is conservation efforts under the subarea afforded through the section 7(a)(2) addressed in the subregional plan and plan adequately protect the geographical consultation process are minimal in the Carlsbad HMP. The section areas containing the physical or because of limited Federal nexus, and 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the City of biological features essential to the Carlsbad HMP was issued on November because of conservation measures in conservation of the species. In our 1997 9, 2004 (Service 2004a). The Carlsbad place which specifically benefit Pacific Biological Opinion, the Service HMP identifies areas where mitigation Coast WSP and its habitat. These determined that implementation of the activities should be focused to assemble conservation measures also provide for City of San Diego Subarea Plan is not preserve areas within the Focused conservation of Pacific Coast WSP likely to result in jeopardy to Pacific Planning Areas (FPAs). The FPAs are habitat in unoccupied areas. The City of Coast WSP (Service 1997, p. 111). comprised of ‘‘hard line’’ preserves, San Diego Subarea Plan will also Therefore, based on the benefits indicating that lands will be conserved manage saltpan habitat within the described above, we have determined and managed for biological resources, MSCP used by Pacific Coast WSP for that this exclusion would not result in and ‘‘soft line’’ planning areas, within breeding and the City will implement the extinction of the Pacific Coast WSP. which preserve areas will ultimately be measures to protect nesting sites from Based on the above discussion, the delineated and managed based on human disturbance during the Secretary is exercising his discretion further data and planning (AMEC and reproductive season, control predators, under section 4(b)(2) of the Act to CBI 2003, p. ES–6). Those areas of the and protect against detrimental edge exclude from this final critical habitat MHCP preserve that are already effects (Service 1997, p. 110–111). designation a portion of proposed conserved, as well as those designated We have determined that the subunits within San Dieguito Lagoon for inclusion in the preserve under the additional regulatory benefits of (CA 52B–C), all of the proposed unit at plan, are referred to as the ‘‘preserve designating occupied areas as Pacific Los Penasquitos Lagoon (CA 53), and all area’’ in this revised final critical habitat Coast WSP critical habitat, such as proposed subunits within Mission Bay designation. Conservation within the protection afforded through the section (CA 54A–D) addressed by the City of FPAs will be achieved by the 7(a)(2) consultation process, are San Diego Subarea Plan under the implementing measures documented in minimal. Furthermore, the conservation MSCP, totaling 137 ac (55 ha) of land. each city’s subarea plan, including land objectives identified by the City of San use regulation, minimization of impacts, Diego Subarea Plan, in conjunction with Multiple Habitat Conservation Program mitigation, and acquisition of parcels our partnership with the City of San (MHCP)—Carlsbad Habitat Management from willing sellers (AMEC and CBI Diego will provide a greater benefit to Plan (Carlsbad HMP) 2003, p. ES–6). the species than critical habitat The MHCP is a comprehensive habitat The Carlsbad HMP was approved by designation, especially in areas that are conservation planning program that the Service on October 15, 2004. not currently occupied because the encompasses 111,908 ac (45,279 ha) Approximately 24,570 ac (9,943 ha) of specific measures identified above in within seven jurisdictions in land are within the Carlsbad HMP

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36791

planning area, with about 8,800 ac the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP are critical habitat would create a Federal (3,561 ha) remaining as natural habitat excluded from the final critical habitat nexus and trigger section 7 consultation for species covered under the plan. Of designation. under the Act. Examples of potential this remaining habitat, the Carlsbad projects that may trigger consultation as Benefits of Inclusion—Carlsbad HMP a result of CWA, CZMA, and RHA HMP proposes to establish a preserve Under the MHCP system covering approximately 6,786 ac include beach restoration (such as (2,746 ha). The MHCP requires the City The primary effect of designating any replenishment or removal of nonnative of Carlsbad to develop area-specific particular area as critical habitat is the plants) and channel dredging. Thus, management directives to address requirement for Federal agencies to review of Federal actions affecting species and habitat needs for the consult with us under section 7 of the designated critical habitat units would preserve areas, including lands that Act to ensure actions they carry out, consider the importance of this habitat support Pacific Coast WSP, and its authorize or fund do not destroy or to the species and the protections habitat, and requires the City of adversely modify designated critical required for the species and its habitat. Carlsbad to describe specific policies habitat. Absent critical habitat Another important benefit of that will be implemented for the MHCP, designation in occupied areas, Federal including lands in a critical habitat subject to the review and approval of agencies remain obligated under section designation is that the designation can the Service and CDFG, to guide the 7 of the Act to consult with us on serve to educate landowners and the City’s preserve system. The City of actions that may affect a federally listed public regarding the potential Carlsbad has not yet completed area- species to ensure such actions do not conservation value of an area, and may jeopardize the species’ continued specific management directives for some help focus conservation efforts on areas existence. If a federally listed species lands that support Pacific Coast WSP of high conservation value for certain does not occupy an area where a and its habitat. However, the MSCP, species. Any information about the proposed action may occur, Federal which has been approved and permitted Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat that agencies are not obligated to consult by the Service and CDFG. provides an reaches a wide audience, including with us to ensure actions do not overarching conservation benefit for the parties engaged in conservation jeopardize the species’ existence. Pacific Coast WSP, and the Carlsbad activities, is valuable. HMP includes numerous conservation However, the designation of critical measures to benefit the Pacific Coast habitat in such unoccupied areas Benefits of Exclusion—Carlsbad HMP provides an additional layer of WSP and its habitat and will be Under the MHCP regulatory review that would require implemented regardless of any area Federal agencies to consult with us to The benefits of excluding from specific plan (see Table 9). Furthermore, ensure that critical habitat is not designated critical habitat the the City has demonstrated their adversely modified. Therefore, there approximately 66 ac (27 ha) of land commitment to implementation of the may be an additional regulatory benefit within the boundaries of the Carlsbad HMP since its approval in 2004, and we to designating critical habitat in HMP are significant and include: (1) An are confident their commitment will unoccupied areas that we have assurance that the conservation continue into the future as they determined to be essential. management objectives for Pacific Coast establish the preserve system and the In evaluating project effects on critical WSP and its habitat contained in the directives that will govern management habitat, the Service must be satisfied Carlsbad HMP, as described in Table 9 of the preserve lands. Therefore, the that the PCEs and, therefore, the below, will be implemented into the lands identified as critical habitat essential features of the critical habitat future; (2) continued and strengthened subunit CA 50A–C which are addressed likely will not be altered or destroyed by effective working relationships with all within the Carlsbad HMP are being proposed activities to the extent that the MHCP jurisdictions and stakeholders to excluded from this revised critical conservation of the affected species promote the conservation of the Pacific habitat designation. Currently, and in would be appreciably reduced. If critical Coast WSP and its habitat; (3) continued the future, Federal and State habitat were designated in areas of meaningful collaboration and governments, local jurisdictions and unoccupied habitat or currently cooperation in working toward special districts, and managers of occupied areas subsequently become recovering this species, including privately owned land will manage and unoccupied, different outcomes or conservation benefits that might not monitor their land in the preserve requirements are also likely because otherwise occur; (4) encouragement of within the FPA for species and habitat effects to unoccupied areas of critical other jurisdictions with completed protection (AMEC and CBI 2003, habitat are not likely to trigger the need subarea plans under the MHCP to p. E–24). for a jeopardy analysis. amend their plans to cover and benefit Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Critical habitat designation can also the Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat; Secretary is exercising his discretion to result in ancillary conservation benefits (5) encouragement of other coastal exclude from critical habitat, all to the Pacific Coast WSP by triggering jurisdictions within the range of Pacific proposed subunits within Batiquitos additional review and conservation Coast WSP to complete HCPs or subarea Lagoon (CA 50A–C) that are addressed through other Federal laws. The Federal plans under the MHCP that cover or are by the Carlsbad HMP under the laws most likely to afford protection to adjacent to Pacific Coast WSP habitat Multiple Habitat Conservation Program designated Pacific Coast WSP habitat (including the cities of Encinitas, (MHCP). This area encompasses are the Clean Water Act (CWA), Coastal Oceanside, and Solana Beach); and (6) approximately 66 ac (27 ha) of land. All Zone Management Act (CZMA), and the encouragement of additional HCP and geographical areas containing the Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA). Projects other conservation plan development in physical or biological features essential requiring a review under the CWA, the future on other private lands that to the conservation of the species that CZMA, and RHA that are located within include the Pacific Coast WSP and other occur on non-Federal lands covered by critical habitat or are likely to affect federally listed species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36792 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

TABLE 9—SUMMARY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE CARLSBAD HMP

Conservation benefit to Pacific Coast Area specific management objectives WSP

Conserve saltmarsh and estuarine habitats at Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos Lagoons Protect nesting, wintering, and foraging consistent with the City of Carlsbad’s wetland policy. areas. Assure no net loss of saltmarsh and estuarine habitats within the City of Carlsbad ...... Protect, restore, or enhance foraging areas. Conserve all major populations within the City of Carlsbad, i.e., at Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos La- Protect individuals. goons. Assure no direct impacts to nesting areas ...... Protect nests. Manage preserve areas to minimize edge effects; control nonnative plants; maintain hydrology and Protect, restore, or enhance breeding, water quality; protect habitats from physical disturbances; and control predators. wintering, and foraging areas. Restore and enhance habitat in preserved areas, where possible ...... Protect, restore, or enhance breeding, wintering, and foraging areas. Restrict activities near nesting habitat during the breeding season (April 1 through August 31) ...... Protect individuals and nests. Implement access control measures for areas where populations are present during the nonbreeding Protect individuals. season, if warranted.

We have created close partnerships of species on non-Federal lands and within the boundaries of the Carlsbad with the City of Carlsbad and several necessary for us to implement recovery HMP would be negligible because there other stakeholders through the actions, such as habitat protection and have been several opportunities for development of the Carlsbad HMP, restoration, and beneficial management public education and outreach related to which incorporates protections and actions for species. Pacific Coast WSP. The framework for management objectives (described in the regional MHCP was developed over Table 9 above) for the Pacific Coast WSP The Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the a 12-year period; the Carlsbad HMP has and the habitat upon which it depends Benefits of Inclusion—Carlsbad HMP been in place since 2004. for breeding, sheltering, and foraging Under the MHCP Implementation of the subarea plan is activities. The conservation strategy The benefits of including these lands formally reviewed yearly through identified in the Carlsbad HMP, along in the designation are small because the publicly available annual reports and a with our close coordination with each regulatory, educational, and ancillary public meeting, providing extensive city and other stakeholders, addresses benefits that would result from critical opportunity to educate the public and the identified threats to Pacific Coast habitat designation are almost entirely landowners about the location of, and WSP and the geographical areas that redundant with the regulatory, efforts to conserve, the physical or contain the physical or biological educational, and ancillary benefits biological features essential to the features essential to its conservation. already afforded through the Carlsbad conservation of Pacific Coast WSP. The conservation gains to the Pacific HMP and under State and Federal law. Within the Carlsbad HMP boundaries, Coast WSP identified within the The Carlsbad HMP provides for any project with a Federal nexus will Carlsbad HMP are more beneficial than significant conservation and require consultation under section 7 of designation of critical habitat because management of the geographical areas the Act because Pacific Coast WSP critical habitat designation does not that contain the physical or biological currently occupies all proposed require beneficial management actions. features essential to the conservation of subunits within the plan boundaries. Thus, the Carlsbad HMP provides a the Pacific Coast WSP and help achieve Furthermore, because one of the greater benefit to the Pacific Coast WSP recovery of this species through the primary threats to the Pacific Coast WSP than would designating critical habitat. objectives as described in Table 9. is habitat loss and degradation, the Our partnership with the City of Exclusion of these lands from critical consultation process required under Carlsbad helps ensure implementation habitat will help preserve the section 7 of the Act for a project with of the protections and management partnerships we have developed with a Federal nexus will, when analyzing actions identified within the Carlsbad local jurisdictions and project effects to plovers, most likely evaluate HMP. Therefore, the relative benefits of proponents through the development the effects of the action on the designation of these lands are and ongoing implementation of the conservation or functionality of diminished and limited. MHCP and Carlsbad HMP. These occupied habitat for the Pacific Coast By excluding the approximately 66 ac partnerships are focused on WSP and thus the jeopardy analysis (27 ha) of land within the boundaries of conservation of multiple species, would be similar to that performed to the Carlsbad HMP from critical habitat including Pacific Coast WSP, and secure conduct the adverse modification designation, we are encouraging new conservation benefits for the species analysis (IEc 2011, p. D–3). Therefore, partnerships with other landowners and that will lead to recovery, as described there would be minimal additional jurisdictions to protect the Pacific Coast above, beyond those that could be benefit of designating critical habitat WSP and other listed species. Our required under a critical habitat within the boundaries of the Carlsbad ongoing partnerships with the City of designation. Furthermore, these HMP. Carlsbad, the larger regional MHCP partnerships aid in fostering future We have determined that the participants, and the landscape-level partnerships for the benefit of listed additional regulatory benefits of multiple species conservation planning species, the majority of which do not designating critical habitat for Pacific efforts they promote, are essential to occur on federal lands and thus are less Coast WSP within the boundaries of the achieve long-term conservation of the likely to result in a section 7 Carlsbad HMP, such as protection Pacific Coast WSP. We consider this consultation. afforded through the section 7(a)(2) voluntary partnership in conservation We also conclude that the educational consultation process, are minimal. We vital to our understanding of the status benefits of designating critical habitat also conclude that the educational and

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36793

ancillary benefits of designating critical revised critical habitat include which includes the Port of San Diego’s habitat for Pacific WSP within the Sweetwater Marsh National Wildlife lands. boundaries of the Carlsbad HMP would Refuge and D Street Fill (CA 55E) and The footprint of the San Diego Bay be negligible because of the partnership Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve (CA 55G). Natural Resources Plan encompasses established between the Service and the These lands are owned and managed by both uplands adjacent to the bay and all City of Carlsbad, the management the Port of San Diego. As described tidelands bayward of the historical objectives identified in the Carlsbad above under the section titled mean high tide. Historical tideland areas HMP, and the independent regulatory Exemptions, all lands in the San Diego owned or controlled by the Port of San protection already provided under the Bay that are owned or managed by the Diego include 5,483 ac (2,219 ha) of Carlsbad HMP. Therefore, in U.S. Department of the Navy are nearly 15,000 ac (6,070 ha) of land and consideration of the relevant impact to exempted from critical habitat as a water within San Diego Bay, which current and future partnerships, as result of benefits provided to Pacific collectively supports over 1,100 summarized in the Benefits of Exclusion Coast WSP based on a separate and documented marine and terrestrial section above, we determine that the distinct INRMP (Naval Base Coronado species (U.S. Navy and Port of San significant benefits of exclusion INRMP). Diego 2011, p. 1–12), including Pacific outweigh the benefits of critical habitat Because subunits CA 55E and CA 55G Coast WSP. designation. are not owned or controlled by the In conjunction with the San Diego Bay INRMP, the San Diego Bay Natural Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction Department of Defense, but rather are owned and managed by the Port of San Resources Plan is currently being of the Species—Carlsbad HMP Under revised (U.S. Navy, Southwest Division the MHCP Diego, it is inappropriate to exempt the Port of San Diego lands from the critical and Port of San Diego 2011). The Service is providing input during the We determine that the exclusion of 66 habitat designation under section development of this revision. The ac (27 ha) of land from the designation 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act. However, after revised version includes many of the of critical habitat for the Pacific Coast reviewing comments from the Port of same objectives and strategies as the WSP within the boundaries of the San Diego concerning these subunits current version, although it expands Carlsbad HMP will not result in during both comment periods, coverage on water quality, sediment extinction of the species because current conducting an analysis of the benefits of quality, sustainable development, and conservation efforts under the Carlsbad inclusion compared with the benefits of other topics. The revision also outlines HMP adequately protect the exclusion, and determining that additional benefits for Pacific Coast geographical areas containing the exclusion will not result in the physical or biological features essential WSP. In February of 2012, a draft was extinction of the species, we are released for public comment, and the to the conservation of the species. In our excluding these Port of San Diego lands 2004 Biological Opinion, the Service Port of San Diego had a public meeting (CA 55E and CA 55G) under section to allow members of the public to determined that the MHCP subregional 4(b)(2) of the Act. We, hereafter, refer to and the City’s subarea plans are not provide input. Both the San Diego Bay the Port of San Diego management plan INRMP and the San Diego Bay Natural likely to jeopardize the continued for the Port lands incorporated into the existence or recovery of the Pacific Resources Plan continue to be San Diego Bay INRMP as the San Diego implemented while being updated and Coast WSP (Service 2004, pp. 148–149). Bay Natural Resources Plan. No direct impacts are expected from the revised. The intent of the San Diego Bay Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the MHCP subregional plan or the City’s Natural Resources Plan is to provide for Secretary is exercising his discretion to subarea plan due to 100 percent stewardship of natural resources while exclude from critical habitat a portion of conservation of the coastal lagoons and supporting the ability of the Port of San proposed subunits within San Diego because the MHCP will not allow any Diego to achieve their mission within Bay, which includes the non-Federal take of individuals or nests of Pacific San Diego Bay. The plan is part of a lands portion of the Sweetwater Marsh Coast WSP. Therefore, we have larger strategy to assist the users of the National Wildlife Refuge and D Street determined that this exclusion will not San Diego Bay to make better, more Fill subunit (CA 55E) and the Chula result in the extinction of the Pacific cost-effective decisions about the Vista Wildlife Reserve subunit (CA 55G) Coast WSP. Based on the above development, conservation, restoration, addressed by the San Diego Bay Natural discussion, the Secretary is exercising and management of San Diego Bay. This Resources Plan. This area encompasses his discretion under section 4(b)(2) of strategy takes an ecosystem approach to approximately 63 ac (25 ha) of non- the Act to exclude from this final management, whereby San Diego Bay is Federal land. A 79-ac (32-ha) portion of critical habitat designation all proposed viewed as an ecosystem as opposed to subunit CA 55E (Sweetwater Marsh subunits within Batiquitos Lagoon (CA a collection of individual species, sites, National Wildlife Refuge and D Street 50A–C) that are addressed by the or projects, and management is Fill) is Federal land that is a part of the Carlsbad HMP under the MHCP, totaling addressed across ownership and greater San Diego Bay National Wildlife 66 ac (27 ha) of land. jurisdictional boundaries. In Refuge Complex and is not excluded Other Management Plans conjunction with the San Diego Bay from critical habitat designation. INRMP, the San Diego Bay Natural San Diego Bay Natural Resources Plan Resources Plan was developed through Benefits of Inclusion—San Diego Bay In a collaborative strategy, the Port of the cooperative effort of 13 Natural Resources Plan San Diego and the U.S. Department of governmental and nongovernmental The primary effect of designating any the Navy, Southwest Division prepared organizations representing the primary particular area as critical habitat is the an INRMP for the San Diego Bay in working group known as the Technical requirement for Federal agencies to September of 2000 (San Diego Bay Oversight Committee (TOC). The consult with us under section 7 of the INRMP) (U.S. Navy and San Diego Service, a member of the TOC, Act to ensure actions they carry out, Unified Port District 2000, p. xxi). The participated in the development of the authorize, or fund do not destroy or lands within the boundaries of the San plan and is a signatory to the adversely modify designated critical Diego Bay INRMP that were proposed as overarching San Diego Bay INRMP, habitat. Absent critical habitat

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36794 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

designation in occupied areas, Federal habitat were designated in areas of of high conservation value for certain agencies remain obligated under section unoccupied habitat or currently species. Any information about the 7 of the Act to consult with us on occupied areas subsequently become Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat that actions that may affect a federally listed unoccupied, different outcomes or reaches a wide audience, including species to ensure such actions do not requirements are also likely because parties engaged in conservation jeopardize the species’ continued effects to unoccupied areas of critical activities, is valuable. existence. If a federally listed species habitat are not likely to trigger the need does not occupy an area where a for a jeopardy analysis. Benefits of Exclusion—San Diego Bay proposed action may occur, Federal Critical habitat designation can also Natural Resources Plan result in ancillary conservation benefits agencies are not obligated to consult The benefits of excluding from with us to ensure actions do not to the Pacific Coast WSP by triggering designated critical habitat the jeopardize the species’ existence. additional review and conservation approximately 63 ac (25 ha) of lands However, the designation of critical through other Federal laws. The Federal owned and managed by the Port of San habitat in such unoccupied areas laws most likely to afford protection to Diego within the San Diego Bay Natural provides an additional layer of designated Pacific Coast WSP habitat regulatory review that would require are the Clean Water Act (CWA), Coastal Resources Plan are significant and Federal agencies to consult with us to Zone Management Act (CZMA), and the include: (1) An expectation that the ensure that critical habitat is not Rivers and Harbors Act (RHA). Projects management objectives contained adversely modified. Therefore, there requiring a review under the CWA, within the San Diego Bay Natural may be an additional regulatory benefit CZMA, and RHA that are located within Resources Plan, as described in Table 10 to designating critical habitat in critical habitat or are likely to affect below, will be implemented into the unoccupied areas that we have critical habitat would create a Federal future; (2) continued and strengthened determined to be essential, such as nexus and trigger section 7 consultation effective working relationships with the Chula Vista Wildlife Reserve (CA 55G). under the Act. Examples of potential Port of San Diego and other jurisdictions As stated above, the principal benefit projects that may trigger consultation as and stakeholders in the San Diego Bay of any designated critical habitat is that a result of CWA, CZMA, and RHA to promote the conservation of the Federal activities will require section 7 include beach restoration (such as, Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat; (3) consultations to ensure that adequate beach replenishment or removal of continued meaningful collaboration and protection is provided to avoid adverse nonnative plants) and channel dredging. cooperation in working toward modification or destruction of critical Thus, review of Federal actions affecting recovering this species, including habitat. This would provide an designated critical habitat units would conservation benefits that might not additional benefit beyond that provided consider the importance of this habitat otherwise occur; (4) encouragement of under the jeopardy standard. In to the species and the protections other coastal jurisdictions within the evaluating project effects on critical required for the species and its habitat. range of Pacific Coast WSP to complete habitat, the Service must be satisfied Another important benefit of management plans that provide a that the PCEs and, therefore, the including lands in a critical habitat benefit to Pacific Coast WSP or its essential features of the critical habitat designation is that the designation can habitat; and (5) encouragement of future likely will not be altered or destroyed by serve to educate landowners and the management plan development on proposed activities to the extent that the public regarding the potential private lands that include the Pacific conservation of the affected species conservation value of an area, and may Coast WSP and other federally listed would be appreciably reduced. If critical help focus conservation efforts on areas species.

TABLE 10—SUMMARY OF PACIFIC COAST WSP CONSERVATION OBJECTIVES WITHIN THE SAN DIEGO BAY NATURAL RESOURCES PLAN.

Conservation Benefit to Pacific Coast Area specific management objectives WSP

Support consistent and effective predator management at nest sites ...... Protect nesting and foraging areas. Protect unvegetated areas or remnant dune sites above the high tide line which are potential nesting Protect nesting and foraging areas. sites. Reduce human use during nesting season, particularly in the upper dunes; enforce dog leashing; Protect nesting and foraging areas. and post signs. Clean up trash, which attracts predators...... Protect nesting and foraging areas. Prohibit beach raking which can affect invertebrate populations upon which the plover depends ...... Protect foraging areas. Enhance remnant dune areas as potential nest sites in areas that can be protected from human dis- Restore habitat for nesting adults. turbance and predators during nesting season. Remove ice plant (e.g., Carpobrotus sp.) and other nonnatives from remnant dunes ...... Restore habitat for nesting adults. Support broader beaches with gentler slopes to support plover nesting ...... Restore habitat for nesting adults. Conduct research and monitoring in support of the management objective (i.e., study the plover’s Restore habitat for nesting adults. preference for higher mudflat, so that function may be protected or enhanced).

We have created close partnerships in Table 10) for the Pacific Coast WSP addresses the identified threats to with the Port of San Diego and several and the habitat upon which it depends Pacific Coast WSP and the geographical other stakeholders through the for breeding, sheltering, and foraging areas that contain the physical or development of the San Diego Bay activities. The conservation strategy biological features essential to its Natural Resources Plan, which identified in the San Diego Bay Natural conservation on subunits CA 55E and incorporates protections and Resources Plan, along with our close CA 55G. The management objectives management objectives (described above coordination with Port of San Diego, identified within this conservation

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36795

strategy are more beneficial than physical or biological features essential conduct the adverse modification designation of critical habitat on lands to the conservation of the Pacific Coast analysis (IEc 2011, p. D–3). owned and managed by the Port of San WSP and help achieve recovery of this We have determined that the Diego because critical habitat species through the objectives as management actions provided through designation does not require beneficial described in Table 10. Exclusion of implementation of the San Diego Bay management actions. Thus, the Port of these lands from critical habitat will Natural Resources Plan, in conjunction San Diego Natural Resources Plan help preserve the partnerships we have with our partnership with the Port of provides a greater benefit to the Pacific developed with the Port of San Diego San Diego, provide a greater benefit to Coast WSP than would designating and project proponents through the Pacific Coast WSP than would critical critical habitat. Therefore, the relative development and ongoing habitat designation in the unoccupied benefits of designation of critical habitat implementation of the San Diego Bay subunit (CA 55G). As outlined in Table on these lands are diminished and Natural Resources Plan. These 10, the San Diego Bay Natural Resources limited. partnerships are focused on Plan outlines numerous measures which Conservation measures that provide a conservation of multiple species, benefit the Pacific Coast WSP including benefit to Pacific Coast WSP and its including Pacific Coast WSP, and secure measures in currently unoccupied areas habitat have been implemented in both conservation benefits for the species such as in subunit CA 55G. These subunits (CA 55E and CA 55G) owned that will lead to recovery, as described measures include restoration of and managed by the Port of San Diego above, beyond those that could be marginal habitat or areas currently not since 2000. These measures will required under a critical habitat being used by the plover. Furthermore, continue to be implemented as the Port designation. Furthermore, these we determine that the additional of San Diego finalizes the revised plan partnerships aid in fostering future regulatory benefits of designating (expected in late 2012). Such measures partnerships for the benefit of listed critical habitat in the occupied subunit include protection of nesting and species, the majority of which do not (CA 55E), such as protection afforded foraging areas, predator management at occur on federal lands and thus are less through the section 7(a)(2) consultation nest sites, prohibition of beach raking, likely to result in a section 7 process, are minimal. We also conclude and trash clean-up at occupied sites consultation. that the educational and ancillary (described in Table 10 above) (U.S. We also conclude that the educational benefits of designating the geographical Navy and San Diego Unified Port benefits of designating critical habitat areas containing the physical or biological features essential to the District 2000, p. 4–109; Maher, pers. on lands owned and managed by the comm. 2012). conservation of the Pacific WSP Port of San Diego would be negligible Excluding the approximately 63 ac provided by the San Diego Bay Natural because there have been several (25 ha) owned and managed by the Port Resources Plan would be negligible opportunities for public education and of San Diego from the critical habitat because of the partnership established outreach related to Pacific Coast WSP. designation will sustain and enhance between the Service and the Port of San As part of the larger San Diego Bay the working relationship between the Diego and the management objectives INRMP, the San Diego Bay Natural Service and the Port of San Diego. The identified in the San Diego Bay Natural Resources Plan has been in place since willingness of the Port of San Diego to Resources Plan. Therefore, in 2000. Additionally, as part of the larger work with the Service on innovative consideration of the relevant impact to ways to manage federally listed species San Diego Bay INRMP, implementation current and future partnerships, as will continue to reinforce those of the revised San Diego Bay Natural summarized in the Benefits of Exclusion conservation efforts and our Resources Plan will be formally section above, we determined the partnership, which contribute reviewed yearly through publicly significant benefits of exclusion significantly toward achieving recovery available annual reports and a public outweigh the minor benefits of critical of Pacific Coast WSP. We consider this meeting, again providing extensive habitat designation. voluntary partnership in conservation opportunity to educate the public and Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction vital to our understanding of the status landowners about the location of, and of the Species—San Diego Bay Natural of species on non-Federal lands and efforts to conserve, the physical or Resources Plan necessary for us to implement recovery biological features essential to the actions such as habitat protection and conservation of Pacific Coast WSP. We determined that the exclusion of restoration, and beneficial management Members of the TOC, and specifically 63 ac (25 ha) from the designation of actions for species. the Port of San Diego, are aware of the critical habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP value of these lands to the conservation of lands owned and managed by the The Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the of Pacific Coast WSP, and conservation Port of San Diego, as identified in the Benefits of Inclusion—San Diego Bay measures are already in place to protect San Diego Bay Natural Resources Plan Natural Resources Plan Pacific Coast WSP habitat. will not result in extinction of the The benefits of including these lands Pacific Coast WSP currently occupies species because current conservation in the designation are small because the one subunit (CA 55E) that is owned and efforts under the plan adequately regulatory, educational, and ancillary managed by the Port of San Diego with protect the geographical areas benefits that would result from critical the Port of San Diego Natural Resources containing the physical or biological habitat designation are almost entirely Plan. Because one of the primary threats features essential to the conservation of redundant with the regulatory, to the Pacific Coast WSP is habitat loss the species. For projects affecting educational, and ancillary benefits and degradation, the consultation plovers in occupied areas, the jeopardy already afforded through the San Diego process under section 7 of the Act for a standard of section 7 of the Act, coupled Bay Natural Resources Plan and under project with a Federal nexus will, in with protection provided by the San State and Federal law. analyzing effects to the plovers, most Diego Bay Natural Resources Plan, The San Diego Bay Natural Resources likely evaluate the effects of the action provide assurances that this species will Plan provides for significant on the conservation or functionality of not go extinct as a result of excluding conservation and management of the the habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP; a these lands from the critical habitat geographical areas that contain the similar analysis would be performed to designation. Based on the above

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36796 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

discussion, the Secretary is exercising deal with, or are affected by, the Federal reached after considering the relevant his discretion under section 4(b)(2) of government. impacts of specifying these areas as the Act to exclude from this final This relationship has given rise to a critical habitat. critical habitat designation a portion of special Federal trust responsibility Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe proposed subunits within San Diego involving the legal responsibilities and Bay (Sweetwater Marsh NWR and D obligations of the United States toward The Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe Street Fill (CA 55E) and Chula Vista Indian Tribes and the application of (Tribe) is a Federally-recognized tribe Wildlife Reserve (CA 55G)) that are fiduciary standards of due care with with a relatively small (approximately addressed by the San Diego Bay Natural respect to Indian lands, tribal trust one square mile) reservation in Pacific Resources Plan, totaling 63 ac (25 ha) of resources, and the exercise of tribal County, Washington. Lands within the land. We also anticipate that the rights. Accordingly, we are obligated to Shoalwater Bay Indian Reservation expected revisions to the existing San consult with Tribes based on their boundary include upland forested Diego Bay Natural Resources Plan will unique relationship with the Federal terrestrial habitats, a small residential provide an even greater conservation government. In addition, we evaluate and commercial area, and coastal benefit to the Pacific Coast WSP and its Tribes’ past and ongoing efforts for marine habitats. Critical habitat for the habitat due to our close working species conservation and the benefits of Pacific Coast WSP was proposed in the relationship with the Port of San Diego. including or excluding tribal lands in portion of the reservation with coastal the designation under section 4(b)(2) of beaches as part of unit WA 3B. Through Tribal Lands—Exclusions Under the Act. our ongoing coordination with the Section 4(b)(2) of the Act We contacted all tribes potentially Tribe, we have established a partnership In accordance with the President’s affected by the revised proposed that has benefitted natural resource memorandum of April 29, 1994, designation and met with the management on tribal lands. For our ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations Shoalwater Bay Tribe to discuss their 4(b)(2) balancing analysis, we with Native American Tribal ongoing and future management considered our partnership with the Governments’’ (59 FR 22951); Executive strategies for Pacific Coast WSP. We Tribe and, therefore, analyzed the Order 13175; and the relevant provision subsequently received a letter from the benefits of including and excluding of the Departmental Manual of the Shoalwater Bay Tribe describing those lands under the sovereign control Department of the Interior (512 DM 2), ongoing tribal management, of the Tribe that met the definition of we coordinate with federally-recognized conservation efforts, and tribal critical habitat. Tribes on a government-to-government coordination with the USACE. In their Existing tribal regulations, including basis. Further, Secretarial Order 3206, letter to us, the Shoalwater Bay Tribe the 2001 Tribal Environmental Codes ‘‘American Indian Tribal Rights, stated that they do not participate in that protect the saltmarsh and sand spit Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, nontribal habitat designation processes as natural areas, will ensure any land and the Endangered Species Act’’ (1997) (i.e., process to designate critical habitat use actions, including those funded, states that (1) critical habitat shall not be under the Act). The Tribe requested a authorized, or carried out by Federal designated in areas that may impact section 4(b)(2) exclusion under the Act. agencies, are not likely to result in the tribal trust resources, may impact We determined approximately 425 ac destruction or adverse modification of tribally-owned fee lands, or are used to (172 ha) of lands owned by, or under the all lands considered for exclusion. The exercise tribal rights unless it is jurisdiction of, the Tribe contained Tribe coordinates with the Service on determined essential to conserve a listed biological features essential to the all actions that have the potential to species; and (2) in designating critical conservation of the Pacific Coast WSP, affect habitat for listed species on the habitat, the Service shall evaluate and and therefore meet the definition of reservation, including the Pacific Coast document the extent to which the critical habitat under the Act. These WSP. In 2003, the Service completed a conservation needs of the listed species tribal lands are located in subunit WA Planning Aid Letter, and in 2006, we can be achieved by limiting the 3B. In making our final decision with wrote a Fish and Wildlife Coordination designation to other lands. regard to the designation of critical Act Report for the USACE (Shoalwater Habitat on tribal lands was habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP on Bay Indian Tribe is the project sponsor) determined to be essential to the these tribal lands, we considered several on the proposed Shoalwater Coastal conservation of Pacific Coast WSP due factors, including Secretarial Order Erosion Project, which entails beach to its location within the matrix of 3206, Executive Order 13175, the nourishment along the sand spit used by habitat available for Pacific Coast WSP. President’s memorandum on the Pacific Coast WSP. We completed a Because Pacific Coast WSPs move ‘‘Government-to-Government Relations section 7 consultation for this project in between coastal sites based on site with Native American Tribal 2007. The Service coordinated with the condition and season, connectivity Governments’’ (59 FR 22951; April 29, Tribe and USACE on the project design. among and within habitats is essential 1994), conservation measures in place We are actively working with these for long-term persistence and recovery on these lands that may benefit the partners in implementation of the of the Pacific Coast WSP. Beach and Pacific Coast WSP, economic impacts to project to avoid or minimize impacts to intertidal habitat on or adjacent to tribal tribes, our relationship with tribes, and current Pacific Coast WSP nesting lands were determined to be important impacts to current and future habitat. Since surveys were conducted to maintain nesting, foraging, and partnerships with the Shoalwater Bay and nesting was confirmed in 2006, the roosting habitat, and to maintain Indian Tribe and other tribes we Tribe has played an active role in connectivity between breeding and coordinate with on endangered and surveying for and protecting habitat for wintering habitats. The longstanding threatened species issues. Under section the Pacific Coast WSP. In an email, and distinctive relationship between 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Secretary is dated June 9, 2011, to the Service, the Federal and tribal governments is exercising his discretion to exclude USACE indicated that they were in the defined by treaties, statutes, executive approximately 425 ac (172 ha) of tribal process of developing a Snowy Plover orders, judicial decisions, and land from this revised final critical Management Plan as part of the beach agreements, which differentiate tribal habitat designation. As described in our nourishment and coastal erosion governments from the other entities that analysis below, this conclusion was project. In an August 31, 2011, letter to

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36797

the Service, the Tribe confirmed that and their habitats. Designation of Endangered Species Act, we recognize they will continue to use their existing critical habitat may contribute to that we must carry out our regulatory structure to ‘‘provide habitat conservation efforts by other parties by responsibilities under the Act in a protection for the Pacific Coast WSP’’ delineating areas of high conservation manner that harmonizes the Federal and ‘‘keep trespassers off those areas value for the Pacific Coast WSP. trust responsibility to tribes and tribal considered most important to the The primary benefit of including an sovereignty while striving to ensure that species,’’ and references the USACE’s area in a critical habitat designation is tribes do not bear a disproportionate intent to ‘‘develop a Pacific Coast WSP the requirement for Federal agencies to burden for the conservation of listed habitat protection plan as part of the ensure actions they fund, authorize, or species, so as to avoid or minimize the erosion control project.’’ The Tribe and carry out are not likely to result in the potential for conflict and confrontation. Service are coordinating with the destruction or adverse modification of In accordance with the Presidential USACE on drafting the habitat any designated critical habitat, the memorandums of April 29, 1994, and protection plan and implementation of regulatory standard of section 7(a)(2) of November 9, 2009, to the maximum the project, which is scheduled to start the Act under which consultation is extent possible, tribes are the in late summer 2012 (pending surveys completed. Federal agencies must also appropriate governmental entities to for the Pacific Coast WSP). We are also consult with us on actions that may manage their lands and tribal trust coordinating with the Tribe and the affect a listed species and refrain from resources, and we are responsible for USACE on the planting/vegetation undertaking actions that are likely to strengthening government-to- management plan. We are currently jeopardize the continued existence of government relationships with tribes. working on a memorandum of such species. The analysis of effects of Federal regulation through critical understanding with the Tribe regarding a proposed project on critical habitat is habitat designation may affect the tribal plover protection. Any potential separate and different from that of the working relationships we now have and impacts to the Pacific Coast WSP from effects of a proposed project on the which we are strengthening throughout future proposed activities on the tribal species itself. The jeopardy analysis the United States. Maintaining positive lands will be addressed through a evaluates the action’s impact to survival working relationships with tribes is key section 7 consultation using the and recovery of the species, while the to implementing natural resource jeopardy standard, and such activities destruction or adverse modification programs of mutual interest, including would also be subject to the take analysis evaluates the action’s effects to habitat conservation planning efforts. In prohibitions in section 9 of the Act. the designated habitat’s contribution to light of the above-mentioned orders and conservation. Therefore, the difference for a variety of other reasons described Benefits of Inclusion—Shoalwater Bay in outcomes of these two analyses Tribe in their comment letters and represents the regulatory benefit of communications, critical habitat The main benefit of any designated critical habitat. This will, in many designation is typically viewed by tribes critical habitat is that Federal activities instances, lead to different results and as an unwarranted and unwanted will require section 7 consultations to different regulatory requirements. Thus, intrusion into tribal self-governance. ensure that adequate protection is critical habitat designations may provided to avoid adverse modification provide greater benefits to the recovery In the case of the Pacific Coast WSP or destruction of critical habitat. This of a species than listing alone would do. proposed critical habitat, the Shoalwater would provide an additional benefit However, for some species, and in some Bay Indian Tribe submitted a letter and beyond that provided under the locations, the outcome of these analyses email (August 31, 2011) requesting to be jeopardy standard. In evaluating project will be similar, because effects to habitat excluded from the critical habitat effects on critical habitat, the Service will often also result in effects to the designation. In their letter, they stated must be satisfied that the PCEs and, species. that the Tribe ‘‘continues to demonstrate therefore, the essential features of the Public education is often cited as its desire to protect threatened and/or critical habitat likely will not be altered another possible benefit of including endangered species through its or destroyed by proposed activities to lands in critical habitat as it may help management and stewardship the extent that the conservation of the focus conservation efforts on areas of capabilities’’ without ‘‘externally affected species would be appreciably high value for certain species. defined designated critical habitat reduced. If critical habitat were Partnership efforts with the Shoalwater designations.’’ The Tribe stated that designated in areas of unoccupied Bay Indian Tribe to conserve the Pacific they wish to make ‘‘their own habitat or currently occupied areas Coast WSP and other coastal species of determinations regarding the subsequently become unoccupied, concern have resulted in heightened Reservation and tribal trust resources’’ different outcomes or requirements are awareness about the species. and ‘‘are pleased that the Tribe has been also likely because effects to The designation of critical habitat for able to provide for the Pacific Coast unoccupied areas of critical habitat are the Pacific Coast WSP may strengthen or WSP and steps are being taken to not likely to trigger the need for a reinforce some Federal laws, such as continue that effort in the most effective jeopardy analysis. NEPA or Clean Water Act. These laws way possible’’ (letter prepared by Gary In Sierra Club v. Fish and Wildlife analyze the potential for projects to Burns, Environmental Program Director Service, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. 2001), significantly affect the environment. and signed by the Tribal Council the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stated Critical habitat may signal the presence Chairperson). These communications that the identification of habitat of sensitive habitat that could otherwise clearly indicate that designation of tribal essential to the conservation of the be missed in the review process for lands as critical habitat for Pacific Coast species can provide informational these other environmental law. WSP would impact future conservation benefits to the public, State and local partnership opportunities with the governments, scientific organizations, Benefits of Exclusion—Shoalwater Bay Tribe. Therefore, a critical habitat and Federal agencies. The court also Tribe designation could potentially damage noted that critical habitat designation Under Secretarial Order 3206, our relationship with the Shoalwater may focus and heighten public American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal- Bay Indian Tribe. The commitment by awareness of the plight of listed species Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the the Tribe to restore habitat for this

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36798 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

native plant and efforts to control the future. Although a jeopardy and have concluded that the Tribe’s invasive species such as smooth adverse modification analysis must voluntary conservation efforts will cordgrass (Spartina alterniflora) satisfy two different standards, because provide tangible conservation benefits supports their commitment to protect any modifications to proposed actions that will reduce the likelihood of habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP and resulting from a section 7 consultation extinction and increase the likelihood strengthens the ongoing partnership to minimize or avoid impacts to the for Pacific Coast WSP recovery. with the Service. In their comments to Pacific Coast WSP will be habitat-based, Therefore, we assign great weight to the Service on the proposed rule, the it is likely that measures implemented these benefits of exclusion. To the Tribe indicated they would use their to minimize impacts to the critical extent that there are regulatory benefits existing regulations to protect the habitat will also minimize impacts to of including tribal lands in critical Pacific Coast WSP and its habitat. the Pacific Coast WSP. Therefore, in the habitat, there would be associated costs Significant benefits would be realized case of the Pacific Coast WSP, the that could be avoided by excluding the by forgoing designation of critical benefits of critical habitat designation area from designation. As we expect the habitat on lands managed by the are very similar to the benefits of listing, regulatory benefits to be low, we Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe. These and in some respects would be likewise give weight to avoidance of benefits include: indistinguishable from the benefits of those associated costs, as well as the (1) Continuing and strengthening of listing. Few additional benefits are additional transaction costs related to our effective relationship with the Tribe provided by including these tribal lands section 7 compliance. to promote conservation of Pacific Coast in this critical habitat designation We reviewed and evaluated the WSP and its habitat; and beyond what will be achieved through benefits of inclusion and the benefits of (2) Allowing continued meaningful the implementation of the existing tribal exclusion of Shoalwater Bay Indian collaboration and cooperation in management or conservation plans. In tribal lands as critical habitat for the working toward recovering this species, addition, we expect that the benefit of Pacific Coast WSP. Past, present, and including conservation actions that informing the public of the importance future coordination with the Shoalwater might not otherwise occur. of this area to Pacific Coast WSP Bay Indian Tribe has provided and will The Shoalwater Bay Indian Tribe conservation would be low. Inclusion of continue to provide Pacific Coast WSP coordinates regularly with the tribal lands will not significantly habitat conservation needs on tribal Washington State Department of Fish improve habitat protections for Pacific lands, such that there would be no and Wildlife on annual surveys for the Coast WSP beyond what is already additional benefit from designation of Pacific Coast WSP and is partnering provided for in the Tribe’s own critical habitat. Further, because any with the Service (Willapa National protective policies and practices, potential impacts to the Pacific Coast Wildlife Refuge and Ecological Services) discussed above. WSP from future projects will be to control nonnative/invasive species Given the cooperative relationship addressed through a section 7 and restore habitat for the Pacific Coast between the Shoalwater Bay Indian consultation with us under the jeopardy WSP and other coastal species on the Tribe and the Service, and all of the standard, critical habitat designation on outer beach. Service coordination conservation benefits taken together, the the Shoalwater Bay Indian Reservation includes attending meetings with tribal additional regulatory and educational would largely be redundant with the representatives to discuss ongoing benefits of including the tribal lands as combined benefits of listing and existing projects, management plans, and other critical habitat are relatively small. The tribal regulations and management. issues as that arise. designation of critical habitat can serve Therefore, the benefits of designating Because the Tribe is the entity that to educate the public regarding the critical habitat on tribal lands are not enforces protective regulations on tribal potential conservation value of an area, significant. land, and we have a working but this goal is already being On the other hand, the benefits of relationship with them, exclusion of accomplished through the identification excluding the Shoalwater Bay Indian these lands will yield a significant of these areas in the tribal management Reservation from critical habitat are partnership benefit. We will continue to planning, development of tribal Fish significant. Exclusion of these lands work cooperatively with the Tribe on and Wildlife Codes, and through their from critical habitat will help preserve efforts to conserve the Pacific Coast outreach efforts. and strengthen the conservation WSP. Therefore, excluding these lands Because of the ongoing relationship partnership we have developed with the from critical habitat provides the between the Service and the Shoalwater Tribe and will foster future partnerships significant benefit of maintaining and Bay Indian Tribe through a variety of and development of management plans; strengthening our existing conservation forums, we find the benefits of these inclusion, however, would negatively partnerships and the potential of coordination efforts to be greater than impact our relationships with the Tribe fostering new tribal partnerships. the benefits of applying the Act’s and other tribes. We are committed to section 7 consultations for critical working with the Shoalwater Bay Indian Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh Benefits habitat to Federal activities on tribal Tribe to further the conservation of the of Inclusion—Shoalwater Bay Tribe lands. Based upon our consultations Pacific Coast WSP and other endangered Based on the above considerations with the Tribes, designation of tribal and threatened species on the and consistent with the direction lands as critical habitat would adversely reservation. The Tribe will continue to provided in section 4(b)(2) of the Act, impact our working relationship and the use their existing regulatory structure to the Service has determined that the benefits resulting from this relationship. protect Pacific Coast WSP and its benefits of excluding the above tribal In contrast, although the benefits of habitat. The Tribe continues to provide lands outweigh the benefits of including encouraging tribal participation in for indirect conservation of Pacific Coast them as critical habitat. This conclusion resource management planning may be WSP habitat by implementing is based on the following factors. The indirect, enthusiastic tribal participation conservation measures for other coastal tribal lands considered for exclusion are and an atmosphere of cooperation are species that use some of the same currently occupied by Pacific Coast crucial to the long-term effectiveness of habitat. Therefore, in consideration of WSPs and will be subject to the implementing successful endangered the relevant impact to our partnership consultation requirements of the Act in species conservation programs. Also, we and our government-to-government

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36799

relationship with the Shoalwater Indian reduce burdens and maintain flexibility considered the types of activities that Bay Tribe, and the ongoing conservation and freedom of choice for the public might trigger regulatory impacts under management practices of the Tribe and where these approaches are relevant, this rule, as well as types of project our current and future conservation feasible, and consistent with regulatory modifications that may result. In partnerships with them, we determined objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes general, the term ‘‘significant economic the significant benefits of exclusion further that regulations must be based impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical outweigh the benefits of inclusion in the on the best available science and that small business firm’s business critical habitat designation. the rulemaking process must allow for operations. In summary, we find that excluding public participation and an open To determine if the rule could the Shoalwater Bay Indian tribal lands exchange of ideas. We have developed significantly affect a substantial number from this revised final critical habitat this rule in a manner consistent with of small entities, we consider the will preserve our partnership and may these requirements. number of small entities affected within foster future habitat management and particular types of economic activities Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 (e.g., development industry, recreation, species conservation plans with the et seq.) Tribe and with other tribes now and in mining). We apply the ‘‘substantial the future. These partnership benefits Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act number’’ test individually to each are significant and outweigh the (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended industry to determine if certification is additional regulatory benefits of by the Small Business Regulatory appropriate. However, the SBREFA does including these lands in final critical Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of not explicitly define ‘‘substantial habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP. As a 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an number’’ or ‘‘significant economic result, the regulatory benefits of critical agency must publish a notice of impact.’’ Consequently, to assess habitat designation on tribal land would rulemaking for any proposed or final whether a ‘‘substantial number’’ of largely be redundant with the combined rule, it must prepare and make available small entities is affected by this benefits of listing and existing tribal for public comment a regulatory designation, this analysis considers the regulations. flexibility analysis that describes the relative number of small entities likely effects of the rule on small entities to be impacted in an area. In some Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction (small businesses, small organizations, circumstances, especially with critical of the Species—Shoalwater Bay Tribe and small government jurisdictions). habitat designations of limited extent, We determined that the exclusion of However, no regulatory flexibility we may aggregate across all industries 425 ac (172 ha) of tribal lands from the analysis is required if the head of an and consider whether the total number designation of Pacific Coast WSP critical agency certifies the rule will not have a of small entities affected is substantial. habitat will not result in extinction of significant economic impact on a In estimating the number of small the species. The jeopardy standard of substantial number of small entities. entities potentially affected, we also section 7 of the Act and routine The SBREFA amended the RFA to consider whether their activities have implementation of conservation require Federal agencies to provide a any Federal involvement. measures through the section 7 process certification statement of the factual Designation of critical habitat only due to Pacific Coast WSP occupancy basis for certifying that the rule will not affects activities authorized, funded, or and protection provided by under Title have a significant economic impact on carried out by Federal agencies. Some 23 of the Tribal Environmental a substantial number of small entities. kinds of activities are unlikely to have Ordinances provide assurances that this In this final rule, we are certifying that any Federal involvement and so will not species will not go extinct as a result of the revised critical habitat designation be affected by critical habitat excluding these lands from the critical for the Pacific Coast WSP will not have designation. In areas where the species habitat designation. Therefore, based on a significant economic impact on a is present, Federal agencies already are the above discussion the Secretary is substantial number of small entities. required to consult with us under The following discussion explains our exercising his discretion to exclude section 7 of the Act on activities they rationale. approximately 425 ac (172 ha) of tribal authorize, fund, or carry out that may According to the Small Business lands managed by the Shoalwater Bay affect the Pacific Coast WSP. Federal Administration, small entities include agencies also must consult with us if Indian Tribe from this final critical small organizations, such as their activities may affect critical habitat designation. independent nonprofit organizations; habitat. Designation of critical habitat, Required Determinations small governmental jurisdictions, therefore, could result in an additional including school boards and city and economic impact on small entities due Regulatory Planning and Review— town governments that serve fewer than to the requirement to reinitiate Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 50,000 residents; as well as small consultation for ongoing Federal Executive Order 12866 provides that businesses. Small businesses include activities (see Application of the the Office of Information and Regulatory manufacturing and mining concerns ‘‘Adverse Modification Standard’’ Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant with fewer than 500 employees, section). rules. The OIRA has determined that wholesale trade entities with fewer than In our final economic analysis of the this rule is not significant. 100 employees, retail and service critical habitat designation, we Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the businesses with less than $5 million in evaluated the potential economic effects principles of E.O. 12866 while calling annual sales, general and heavy on small business entities resulting from for improvements in the nation’s construction businesses with less than conservation actions related to the regulatory system to promote $27.5 million in annual business, listing of the Pacific Coast WSP and the predictability, to reduce uncertainty, special trade contractors doing less than designation of critical habitat. The and to use the best, most innovative, $11.5 million in annual business, and analysis is based on the estimated and least burdensome tools for agricultural businesses with annual impacts associated with the rulemaking achieving regulatory ends. The sales less than $750,000. To determine as described in Chapters 1 through 5 executive order directs agencies to if potential economic impacts to these and Appendix A of the analysis and consider regulatory approaches that small entities are significant, we evaluates the potential for economic

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36800 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

impacts related to: (1) Recreation; (2) entities. Therefore, we are certifying that funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal commercial and residential the designation of critical habitat for governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust development; (3) gravel mining; (4) Pacific Coast WSP will not have a accordingly. At the time of enactment, military activities; and (5) habitat and significant economic impact on a these entitlement programs were: species management (IEc 2012). substantial number of small entities, Medicaid; Aid to Families with In the FEA of the revised proposed and a regulatory flexibility analysis is Dependent Children work programs; critical habitat, we evaluate the not required. Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social potential economic effects on small Services Block Grants; Vocational Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— business entities resulting from Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, Executive Order 13211 implementation of conservation actions Adoption Assistance, and Independent related to the proposed revisions to Executive Order 13211 (Actions Living; Family Support Welfare critical habitat for the Pacific Coast Concerning Regulations That Services; and Child Support WSP. The FEA is based on the estimated Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector incremental impacts associated with the Distribution, or Use) requires agencies mandate’’ includes a regulation that proposed rulemaking as described in to prepare Statements of Energy Effects ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty Chapter 4. The FEA evaluates the when undertaking certain actions. OMB upon the private sector, except (i) a potential for direct economic impacts has provided guidance for condition of Federal assistance; or (ii) a related to activity categories identified implementing this Executive Order that duty arising from participation in a above as well as for indirect impacts outlines nine outcomes that may voluntary Federal program.’’ related to CEQA, uncertainty, and delay. constitute ‘‘a significant adverse effect’’ The designation of critical habitat The FEA concludes that the incremental when compared to not taking the does not impose a legally binding duty impacts resulting from this rulemaking regulatory action under consideration. on non-Federal government entities or that may be borne by small businesses The economic analysis finds that private parties. Under the Act, the only will be associated only with recreation. none of these criteria are relevant to this regulatory effect is that Federal agencies Incremental impacts are either not analysis. Thus, based on information in must ensure that their actions do not expected for the other types of activities the economic analysis, energy-related destroy or adversely modify critical considered or, if expected, will not be impacts associated with Pacific Coast habitat under section 7. While non- borne by small entities. WSP conservation activities within Federal entities that receive Federal As discussed in Appendix A of the critical habitat are not expected. As funding, assistance, or permits, or that FEA, Exhibit A–1 describes the non- such, the designation of critical habitat otherwise require approval or Federal entities that may be affected by is not expected to significantly affect authorization from a Federal agency for critical habitat designation and assesses energy supplies, distribution, or use. an action, may be indirectly impacted whether they are considered small Therefore, this action is not a significant by the designation of critical habitat, the entities under the RFA. The State of energy action, and no Statement of legally binding duty to avoid California (CDPR), Santa Barbara Energy Effects is required. destruction or adverse modification of County, Monterey County, Santa Cruz Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 critical habitat rests squarely on the County, and City of Coronado will U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) Federal agency. Furthermore, to the participate in the future consultations extent that non-Federal entities are with the Service. Of these entities, only In accordance with the Unfunded indirectly impacted because they the City of Coronado meets the RFA’s Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et receive Federal assistance or participate definition of a small governmental seq.), we make the following findings: in a voluntary Federal aid program, the jurisdiction. Third-party administrative (1) This rule will not produce a Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would costs for the City of Coronado are Federal mandate. In general, a Federal not apply, nor would critical habitat expected to be $818 in 2012, assuming mandate is a provision in legislation, shift the costs of the large entitlement a 7 percent discount rate. This impact statute, or regulation that would impose programs listed above onto State represents less than 0.01 percent of the an enforceable duty upon State, local, or governments. City’s annual revenues of $40.3 million. tribal governments, or the private sector, (2) We do not believe that this rule In addition, the FEA has identified the and includes both ‘‘Federal will significantly or uniquely affect potential for critical habitat to possibly intergovernmental mandates’’ and small governments because it will not indirectly influence future litigation or ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ produce a Federal mandate of $100 State review of environmental permits These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. million or greater in any year; that is, it within Oceano Dunes SVRA (Unit CA 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 31) and the two development projects in mandate’’ includes a regulation that under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Sand City (Unit CA 22). Critical habitat ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty Act. The FEA concludes incremental may indirectly serve as a lever for future upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ impacts may occur due to project litigation aimed at reducing or with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a modifications that may need to be made eliminating OHV-recreation on the condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also for real estate development; however, beach. Such action would indirectly excludes ‘‘a duty arising from these are not expected to significantly affect recreators and businesses in the participation in a voluntary Federal affect small governments. The City of local community. program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates Coronado has been identified as the In summary, we considered whether to a then-existing Federal program only small government affected by the this designation will result in a under which $500,000,000 or more is designation, and the total estimated cost significant economic effect on a provided annually to State, local, and associated with the designation is $818 substantial number of small entities. tribal governments under entitlement in 2012, assuming a 7 percent discount Based on the above reasoning and authority,’’ if the provision would rate. This impact represents less than currently available information, we ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of 0.01 percent of the City’s annual concluded that this rule would not assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or revenues of $40.3 million. result in a significant economic impact otherwise decrease, the Federal Consequently, we do not believe that on a substantial number of small Government’s responsibility to provide this revised final critical habitat

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36801

designation will significantly or to the conservation of the species are National Environmental Policy Act uniquely affect small government more clearly defined, and the elements (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) entities. As such, a Small Government of the features of the habitat necessary It is our position that, outside the Agency Plan is not required. to the conservation of the species are jurisdiction of the Circuit Court of Takings—Executive Order 12630 specifically identified. This information Appeals of the United States for the does not alter where and what federally In accordance with E.O. 12630 Tenth Circuit, we do not need to sponsored activities may occur. (‘‘Government Actions and Interference prepare environmental analyses as However, it may assist local with Constitutionally Protected Private defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 Property Rights’’), we have analyzed the governments in long-range planning et seq.) in connection with designating potential takings implications of (rather than having them wait for case- critical habitat under the Act. We designating revised critical habitat for by-case section 7 consultations to published a notice outlining our reasons the Pacific Coast WSP in a takings occur). for this determination in the Federal implications assessment. As discussed Where State and local governments Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR above, the designation of critical habitat require approval or authorization from a 49244). This assertion was upheld by the Court of Appeals of the United affects only Federal actions. Although Federal agency for actions that may States for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas private parties that receive Federal affect critical habitat, consultation County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. funding, assistance, or require approval under section 7(a)(2) would be required. or authorization from a Federal agency 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 1042 While non-Federal entities that receive (1996)). for an action may be indirectly impacted Federal funding, assistance, or permits, by the designation of critical habitat, the or that otherwise require approval or Government-to-Government legally binding duty to avoid authorization from a Federal agency for Relationship With Tribes destruction or adverse modification of an action, may be indirectly impacted critical habitat rests squarely on the In accordance with the President’s Federal agency. The FEA has identified by the designation of critical habitat, the memorandum of April 29, 1994, that all the incremental costs are legally binding duty to avoid Government-to-Government Relations entirely administrative in nature. No destruction or adverse modification of with Native American Tribal incremental project modifications are critical habitat rests squarely on the Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, anticipated to result from section 7 Federal agency. and the Department of the Interior’s consultations with the majority of manual at 512 DM 2, we readily Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order acknowledge our responsibility to consultation costs being incurred by the 12988 Service and other Federal action communicate meaningfully with agencies. Of the approximately 76 In accordance with Executive Order recognized Federal tribes on a government-to-government basis. In anticipated consultations over the 20- 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 year period of analysis, only nine will of the Solicitor has determined that the of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal involve third parties. The takings rule does not unduly burden the judicial implications assessment concludes that Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust system and that it meets the applicable Responsibilities, and the Endangered this revised designation of critical standards as set forth in sections 3(a) habitat for the Pacific Coast WSP does Species Act), we readily acknowledge and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are not pose significant takings implications our responsibilities to work directly designating revised critical habitat in for lands within or affected by the with tribes in developing programs for designation. accordance with the provisions of the healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that Act. This revised final rule uses tribal lands are not subject to the same Federalism—Executive Order 13132 standard property descriptions in the controls as Federal public lands, to In accordance with Executive Order preamble’s critical habitat unit remain sensitive to Indian culture, and 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not descriptions and identifies the elements to make information available to tribes. have significant Federalism effects. A of physical or biological features In the proposed revisions to critical federalism impact summary statement is essential to the conservation of the habitat published in the Federal not required. In keeping with Pacific Coast WSP within the designated Register on March 22, 2011 (76 FR Department of the Interior and areas to assist the public in 16046), we proposed to designate 1,121 Department of Commerce policy, we understanding the habitat needs of the ac in subunit WA 3B Shoalwater/ requested information from, and species. Graveyard Spit, of which we claimed coordinated development of, this approximately 336 ac (136 ha) to be revised final critical habitat designation Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 within the Shoalwater Bay Tribal lands. with appropriate State resource agencies U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) After further review and additional in California, Oregon, and Washington. information provided by the Shoalwater This rule does not contain any new We did receive comments from State Bay Tribe, we have identified Park managers in both Oregon and collections of information that require approximately 425 ac (172 ha) belonging California. The ORPD requested that approval by OMB under the Paperwork to the Tribe and meeting the definition lands under their approved HCP be Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 of critical habitat. We worked directly excluded from designation. The CDPR et seq.). This rule will not impose with the Tribe to determine economic commented that portions of Oceano recordkeeping or reporting requirements and other burdens expected to result Dunes SVRA should be excluded from on State or local governments, from critical habitat designation on designation; however, that park unit individuals, businesses, or tribal lands, and as a result of does not have an approved HCP or other organizations. An agency may not information exchanged, the Secretary is management plan. The designation may conduct or sponsor, and a person is not exercising his discretion to exclude all have some benefit to these governments required to respond to, a collection of Shoalwater Bay Tribal lands meeting the in that the areas that contain the information unless it displays a definition of critical habitat for the physical or biological features essential currently valid OMB control number. Pacific Coast WSP from this final

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 36802 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

revised designation under section Office and Pacific Southwest Regional PART 17—[AMENDED] 4(b)(2) of the Act (see Exclusions Under Office. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act—Tribal Lands ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 section above). List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 continues to read as follows: References Cited Endangered and threatened species, Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C. Exports, Imports, Reporting and 1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99– A complete list of all references cited recordkeeping requirements, 625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted. is available on the Internet at http:// Transportation. ■ 2. Amend § 17.11(h) by revising the www.regulations.gov and upon request entry for ‘‘Plover, western snowy’’ from the Field Supervisor, Arcata Fish Regulation Promulgation under BIRDS to read as follows: and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). Accordingly, we amend part 17, § 17.11 Endangered and threatened Authors subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the wildlife. The primary authors of this rule are Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth * * * * * staff of the Arcata Fish and Wildlife below: (h) * * *

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

******* BIRDS

******* Plover, western Charadrius nivosus Pacific Coast popu- Pacific Coast popu- T 493 17.95(b) NA snowy (Pacific nivosus. lation DPS— lation DPS— Coast population U.S.A. (CA, OR, U.S.A. (CA, OR, DPS). WA), Mexico. WA), Mexico (with- in 50 miles of Pa- cific coast).

*******

■ 3. Amend § 17.95(b) by revising the are sandy beaches, dune systems (iv) Minimal disturbance from the entry for ‘‘Western Snowy Plover immediately inland of an active beach presence of humans, pets, vehicles, or (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus)— face, salt flats, mud flats, seasonally human-attracted predators which Pacific Coast Population’’ to read as exposed gravel bars, artificial salt ponds provide relatively undisturbed areas for follows: and adjoining levees, and dredge spoil individual and population growth and sites, with: for normal behavior. § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. (i) Areas that are below heavily (3) Critical habitat does not include * * * * * vegetated areas or developed areas and (b) Birds. manmade structures (such as buildings, above the daily high tides; roads, paved areas, boat ramps, and * * * * * (ii) Shoreline habitat areas for feeding, other developed areas) and the land on with no or very sparse vegetation, that Western Snowy Plover (Charadrius which such structures are directly are between the annual low tide or low- nivosus nivosus)—Pacific Coast located and existing within the legal water flow and annual high tide or high- Population boundaries on the effective date of this water flow, subject to inundation but rule. (1) Critical habitat units are depicted not constantly under water, that support for: Washington—Grays Harbor and small invertebrates, such as crabs, (4) Critical habitat map units. Data Pacific Counties; Oregon—Clatsop, worms, flies, beetles, spiders, sand layers defining map units were created Tillamook, Lane, Douglas, Coos, and hoppers, clams, and ostracods, that are on a base of USGS digital ortho-photo Curry Counties; and California—Del essential food sources; quarter-quadrangles, and critical habitat Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Marin, (iii) Surf- or water-deposited organic units were then mapped using Universal Napa, Alameda, San Mateo, Santa Cruz, debris, such as seaweed (including kelp Transverse Mercator (UTM) Zone 10N Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa and eelgrass) or driftwood located on and 11N coordinates. Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange, open substrates that supports and (5) The coordinates for these maps are and San Diego Counties, on the maps attracts small invertebrates described in available on the Internet at http:// below. paragraph (ii) of this entry for food, and www.regulations.gov at Docket No. (2) Within these areas, the primary provides cover or shelter from predators FWS–R8–ES–2010–0070, at http:// constituent elements of the physical or and weather, and assists in avoidance of www.fws.gov/arcata/, or at the Arcata biological features essential to the detection (crypsis) for nests, chicks, and Fish and Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon conservation of the Pacific Coast incubating adults; and Road, Arcata, CA 95521. population of the western snowy plover

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36803

(6) Index map of critical habitat units plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) in for the Pacific Coast western snowy Washington follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.000 36804 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(7) Unit WA 1: Copalis Spit, Grays Harbor County, Washington. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00078 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.001 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36805

(8) Unit WA 2: Damon Point, Grays Harbor County, Washington. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00079 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.002 36806 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(9) Subunit WA 3A: Midway Beach, Pacific County, Washington. Map of Subunits WA 3A and WA 3B follows.

(10) Subunit WA 3B: Shoalwater/ Washington. Map of Subunits WA 3A and WA 3B is provided at paragraph (8) Graveyard Spit, Pacific County, of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00080 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.003 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36807

(11) Subunit WA 4A: Leadbetter Spit, Pacific County, Washington. Map of Subunits WA 4A and WA 4B follows.

(12) Subunit WA 4B: Gunpowder Washington. Map of Subunits WA 4A and WA 4B is provided at paragraph Sands Island, Pacific County, (11) of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.004 36808 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(13) Index map of critical habitat units plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) in for the Pacific Coast western snowy Oregon follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.005 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36809

(14) Unit OR 2: Necanicum River Spit, Clatsop County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00083 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.006 36810 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(15) Unit OR 4: Bayocean Spit, Tillamook County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00084 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.007 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36811

(16) Unit OR 6: Sand Lake South, Tillamook County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00085 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.008 36812 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(17) Unit OR 7: Sutton/Baker Beaches, Lane County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.009 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36813

(18) Subunit OR 8A: Siltcoos Breach, Lane County, Oregon. Map of Subunits OR 8A, OR 8B, and OR 8C follows:

(19) Subunit OR 8B: Siltcoos River Oregon. Map of Subunits OR 8A, OR 8B, and OR 8C is provided at paragraph (18) Spit, Douglas and Lane Counties, of this entry. (20) Subunit OR 8C: Dunes Overlook Tahkenitch Creek Spit, Douglas County, Oregon. Map of Subunits OR 8A, OR 8B, and OR 8C is provided at paragraph (18) of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.010 36814 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(21) Subunit OR 8D: North Umpqua River Spit, Douglas County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00088 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.011 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36815

(22) Unit OR 9: Tenmile Creek Spit, Coos County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.012 36816 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(23) Unit OR 10: Coos Bay North Spit, Coos County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00090 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.013 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36817

(24) Unit OR 11: Bandon to New River, Coos and Curry Counties, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00091 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.014 36818 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(25) Unit OR 13: Euchre Creek Spit, Curry County, Oregon. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.015 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36819

(26) Index map of critical habitat units plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) in for the Pacific Coast western snowy Northern California follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00093 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.016 36820 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(27) Unit CA 1: Lake Earl, Del Norte County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.017 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36821

(28) Unit CA 2: Gold Bluffs Beach, Humboldt County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.018 36822 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(29) Subunit CA 3A: Stone Lagoon, Humboldt County, California. Map of Subunits CA 3A and CA 3B follows:

(30) Subunit CA 3B: Big Lagoon, Subunits CA 3A and CA 3B is provided Humboldt County, California. Map of at paragraph 29 of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.019 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36823

(31) Subunit CA 4A: Clam Beach/ California. Map of Subunits CA 4A and Little River, Humboldt County, CA 4B follows:

(32) Subunit CA 4B: Mad River Beach, Subunits CA 4A and CA 4B is provided Humboldt County, California. Map of at paragraph 31 of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.020 36824 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(33) Subunit CA 5A: Humboldt Bay California. Map of Subunit CA 5A and South Spit, Humboldt County, CA 5B follows:

(34) Subunit CA 5B: Eel River North California. Map of Subunits CA 5A and CA 5B is provided at paragraph 33 of Spit and Beach, Humboldt County, this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.021 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36825

(35) Subunit CA 5C: Eel River South Spit and Beach, Humboldt County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.022 36826 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(36) Unit CA 6: Eel River Gravel Bars, Humboldt County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.023 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36827

(37) Unit CA 7: MacKerricher Beach, Mendocino County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.024 36828 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(38) Unit CA 8: Manchester Beach, Mendocino County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.025 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36829

(39) Unit CA 9: Dillon Beach, Marin County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.026 36830 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(40) Subunit CA 10A: Point Reyes, Marin County, California. Map of Subunits CA 10A and CA 10B follows:

(41) Subunit CA 10B: Limantour, Subunits CA 10A and CA 10B is Marin County, California. Map of provided at paragraph 40 of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.027 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36831

(42) Unit CA 11: Napa-Sonoma, Napa County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.028 36832 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(43) Unit CA 12: Hayward, Alameda County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.029 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36833

(44) Subunit CA 13A: Eden Landing, Subunits CA 13A, CA 13B, and CA 13C Alameda County, California. Map of follows:

(45) Subunit CA 13B: Eden Landing, is provided at paragraph 44 of this Subunits CA 13A, CA 13B, and CA 13C Alameda County, California. Map of entry. is provided at paragraph 44 of this Subunits CA 13A, CA 13B, and CA 13C (46) Subunit CA 13C: Eden Landing, entry. Alameda County, California. Map of

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.030 36834 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(47) Unit CA 14: Ravenswood, San Mateo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.031 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36835

(48) Unit CA 15: Warm Springs, Alameda County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.032 36836 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(49) Unit CA 16: Half Moon Bay, San Mateo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.033 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36837

(50) Unit CA 17: Waddell Creek Beach, Santa Cruz County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.034 36838 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(51) Unit CA 18: Scott Creek Beach, Santa Cruz County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.035 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36839

(52) Unit CA 19: Wilder Creek Beach, Santa Cruz County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.036 36840 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(53) Index map of critical habitat units plover (Charadrius nivosus nivosus) in for the Pacific Coast western snowy Southern California follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.037 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36841

(54) Unit CA 20: Jetty Road to Aptos, California. Map of Units CA 20 and CA Santa Cruz and Monterey Counties, 21 follows:

(55) Unit CA 21: Elkhorn Slough Map of Units CA 20 and CA 21 is Mudflats, Monterey County, California. provided at paragraph 54.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.038 36842 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(56) Unit CA 22: Monterey to Moss Landing, Monterey County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.039 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36843

(57) Unit CA 23: Point Sur Beach, Monterey County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.040 36844 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(58) Unit CA 24: San Carpoforo Creek, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.041 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36845

(59) Unit CA 25: Arroyo Laguna Creek, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.042 36846 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(60) Unit CA 26: San Simeon State Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.043 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36847

(61) Unit CA 27: Villa Creek Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.044 36848 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(62) Unit CA 28: Toro Creek, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map of Units CA 28 and CA 29 follows:

(63) Unit CA 29: Atascadero Beach/ Obispo County, California. Map of Units CA 28 and CA 29 is provided at Morro Strand State Beach: San Luis paragraph 62 of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.045 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36849

(64) Unit CA 30: Morro Bay Beach, San Luis Obispo County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.046 36850 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(65) Unit CA 31: Pismo Beach/ Santa Barbara Counties, California. Map Nipomo Dunes, San Luis Obispo and follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.047 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36851

(66) Unit CA 34: Devereaux Beach, Santa Barbara County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.048 36852 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(67) Unit CA 35: Santa Barbara Beaches, Santa Barbara County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.049 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36853

(68) Subunit CA 36A: Santa Rosa Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Island Beaches, Santa Barbara County, CA 36A through CA 36K follows: California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa

(69) Subunit CA 36B: Santa Rosa CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Island Beaches, Santa Barbara County, paragraph 68 of this entry. CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa (72) Unit CA 36E: Santa Rosa Island paragraph 68 of this entry. Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Beaches, Santa Barbara County, (75) Unit CA 36H: Santa Rosa Island CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa Beaches, Santa Barbara County, paragraph 68 of this entry. Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa (70) Unit CA 36C: Santa Rosa Island CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits paragraph 68 of this entry. CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Beaches, Santa Barbara County, paragraph 68 of this entry. California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa (73) Unit CA 36F: Santa Rosa Island Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Beaches, Santa Barbara County, (76) Unit CA 36I: Santa Rosa Island California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa Beaches, Santa Barbara County, CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa paragraph 68 of this entry. CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits (71) Unit CA 36D: Santa Rosa Island paragraph 68 of this entry. CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Beaches, Santa Barbara County, (74) Unit CA 36G: Santa Rosa Island paragraph 68 of this entry. California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa Beaches, Santa Barbara County, (77) Unit CA 36J: Santa Rosa Island Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa Beaches, Santa Barbara County,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.050 36854 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa (78) Unit CA 36K: Santa Rosa Island CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Beaches, Santa Barbara County, paragraph 68 of this entry. CA 36A through CA 36K is provided at California. Map of Unit CA 36: Santa (79) Unit CA 37: San Buenaventura paragraph 68 of this entry. Rosa Island Beaches, including Subunits Beach, Ventura County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.051 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36855

(80) Unit CA 38: Mandalay Beach to Santa Clara River, Ventura County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.052 36856 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(81) Unit CA 39: Ormond Beach, Ventura County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.053 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36857

(82) Unit CA 43: Zuma Beach, Los Angeles County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.054 36858 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(83) Unit CA 44: Malibu Beach, Los Angeles County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.055 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36859

(84) Subunit CA 45A: Santa Monica Beach, Los Angeles County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.056 36860 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(85) Subunit CA 45B: Dockweiler Map of Subunits CA 45B and CA 45C North, Los Angeles County, California. follows:

(86) Subunit CA 45C: Dockweiler Map of Subunits CA 45B and CA 45C is provided at paragraph 85 of this South, Los Angeles County, California. entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.057 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36861

(87) Subunit CA 45D: Hermosa State Beach, Los Angeles County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.058 36862 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(88) Subunit CA 46A: Bolsa Chica Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA State Beach, Orange County, California. 46F follows:

(89) Subunit CA 46B: Bolsa Chica 46F is provided at paragraph 88 of this Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA Reserve, Orange County, California. entry. 46F is provided at paragraph 88 of this Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA (91) Subunit CA 46D: Bolsa Chica entry. 46F is provided at paragraph 88 of this Reserve, Orange County, California. (93) Subunit CA 46F: Bolsa Chica entry. Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA Reserve, Orange County, California. (90) Subunit CA 46C: Bolsa Chica 46F is provided at paragraph 88 of this Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA Reserve, Orange County, California. entry. 46F is provided at paragraph 88 of this Map of Subunits CA 46A through CA (92) Subunit CA 46E: Bolsa Chica entry. Reserve, Orange County, California.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.059 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36863

(94) Unit CA 47: Santa Ana River Mouth, Orange County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.060 36864 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(95) Unit CA 48: Balboa Beach, Orange County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.061 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36865

(96) Subunit CA 51A: San Elijo County, California. Map of Subunits CA Lagoon Ecological Reserve, San Diego 51A, CA 51B, and CA 51C follows:

(97) Subunit CA 51B: San Elijo 51B, and CA 51C is provided at California. Map of Subunits CA 51A, CA Ecological Reserve, San Diego County, paragraph 96 of this entry. 51B, and CA 51C is provided at California. Map of Subunits CA 51A, CA (98) Subunit CA 51C: San Elijo paragraph 96 of this entry. Ecological Reserve, San Diego County,

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.062 36866 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(99) Subunit CA 52A: San Dieguito Lagoon, San Diego County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.063 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36867

(100) Subunit CA 55B: Coronado Beach, San Diego County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.064 36868 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

(101) Subunit CA 55E: Sweetwater Subunits CA 55E, CA 55F, and CA 55I Marsh National Wildlife Refuge, San follows: Diego County, California. Map of

(102) Subunit CA 55F: Silver Strand (103) Subunit CA 55I: San Diego 55I is provided at paragraph 101 of this State Beach, San Diego County, National Wildlife Refuge—South Bay entry. California. Map of Subunits CA 55E, CA Unit, San Diego County, California. Map 55F, and CA 55I is provided at of Subunits CA 55E, CA 55F, and CA paragraph 101 of this entry.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00142 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.065 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 118 / Tuesday, June 19, 2012 / Rules and Regulations 36869

(104) Subunit CA 55J: Tijuana Estuary and Border Field State Park, San Diego County, California. Map follows:

* * * * * Dated: May 30, 2012. Rachel Jacobson, Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2012–13886 Filed 6–18–12; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

VerDate Mar<15>2010 18:08 Jun 18, 2012 Jkt 226001 PO 00000 Frm 00143 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\19JNR3.SGM 19JNR3 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 ER19JN12.066