Vol. 80 Thursday, No. 195 October 8, 2015

Part IV

Department of the Interior

Fish and Wildlife Service 50 CFR Part 17 Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter; Proposed Rule

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61030 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR MS: BPHC, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls threatened species at the time it is Church, VA 22041–3803. listed. Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states Fish and Wildlife Service We request that you send comments that the Secretary shall designate and only by the methods described above. make revisions to critical habitat on the 50 CFR Part 17 We will post all comments on http:// basis of the best available scientific data [Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133; www.regulations.gov. This generally after taking into consideration the 4500030113] means that we will post any personal economic impact, national security information you provide us (see impact, and any other relevant impact of RIN 1018–BB05 Information Requested, below, for more specifying any particular area as critical information). habitat. The Secretary may exclude an Endangered and Threatened Wildlife Document availability: The draft area from critical habitat if she and Plants; Designation of Critical economic analysis is available at http:// determines that the benefits of such Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter www.fws.gov/frankfort/, at http:// exclusion outweigh the benefits of AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, www.regulations.gov at Docket No. specifying such area as part of the Interior. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133, and at the critical habitat, unless she determines, ACTION: Proposed rule. Kentucky Ecological Services Field based on the best scientific data Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION available, that the failure to designate SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and CONTACT). such area as critical habitat will result Wildlife Service (Service), propose to The coordinates, plot points, or both in the extinction of the species. We have designate critical habitat for the from which the maps are generated are determined that designating critical Kentucky arrow darter (Etheostoma included in the administrative record habitat is both prudent and spilotum) under the Endangered Species for this critical habitat designation and determinable, and we propose a total of Act (Act). In total, approximately 395 are available at http://www.fws.gov/ approximately 395 skm (246 smi) of stream kilometers (skm) (246 stream frankfort/, at http://www.regulations.gov critical habitat in eastern Kentucky. miles (smi)) are being proposed for at Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133, We prepared a draft economic designation of critical habitat for the and at the Kentucky Ecological Services analysis of the proposed designation of Kentucky arrow darter in Breathitt, Field Office) (see FOR FURTHER critical habitat. In order to consider Clay, Harlan, Jackson, Knott, Lee, Leslie, INFORMATION CONTACT). Any additional economic impacts, we have prepared a Owsley, Perry, and Wolfe Counties, tools or supporting information that we draft economic analysis of the proposed Kentucky. If we finalize this rule as may develop for this critical habitat critical habitat designation and related proposed, it would extend the Act’s designation will also be available at the factors. protections to this species’ critical Fish and Wildlife Service Web site and We will seek peer review. We are habitat. We also announce the Field Office set out above, and may also seeking comments from independent availability of our draft economic be included in this rule or at http:// specialists to ensure that this critical analysis of the proposed designation. www.regulations.gov. habitat proposal is based on scientifically sound data and analyses. DATES: We will accept comments on the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: We have invited these peer reviewers to proposed rule or draft economic Virgil Lee Andrews, Jr., Field comment on our specific assumptions analysis that are received or postmarked Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife and conclusions in this proposal to on or before December 7, 2015. Service, Kentucky Ecological Services designate critical habitat. Because we Comments submitted electronically Field Office, 330 West Broadway, Suite will consider all comments and using the Federal eRulemaking Portal 265, Frankfort, KY 40601; telephone information we receive during the (see ADDRESSES, below) must be 502–695–0468, x108; facsimile 502– comment period, our final designation received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on 695–1024. If you use a may differ from this proposal. the closing date. We must receive telecommunications device for the deaf requests for public hearings, in writing, (TDD), call the Federal Information Information Requested at the address shown in FOR FURTHER Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. We intend that any final action INFORMATION CONTACT by November 23, SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: resulting from this proposed rule will be 2015. based on the best scientific and ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may Executive Summary commercial data available and be as submit comments on the proposed rule Why we need to publish a rule. Under accurate and effective as possible. or draft economic analysis by one of the the Endangered Species Act, when we Therefore, we request comments or following methods: determine that a species is threatened or information from other concerned (1) Electronically: Go to the Federal endangered, we must designate critical government agencies, Native American eRulemaking Portal: http:// habitat to the maximum extent prudent tribes, the scientific community, www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, and determinable. Designations of industry, or any other interested party enter Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2015– critical habitat can only be completed concerning this proposed rule. We 0133, which is the docket number for by issuing a rule. particularly seek comments concerning: this rulemaking. Then, in the Search This document consists of a proposed (1) The reasons why we should or panel on the left side of the screen, rule to designate critical habitat for the should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical under the Document Type heading, Kentucky arrow darter. Elsewhere in habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 click on the Proposed Rules link to today’s Federal Register, we propose to U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) including whether locate this document. You may submit list the Kentucky arrow darter as a there are threats to the species from a comment by clicking on ‘‘Comment threatened species under the Act. human activity, the degree of which can Now!’’ The basis for our action. Section be expected to increase due to the (2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail 4(a)(3) of the Act requires the Secretary designation, and whether that increase or hand-delivery to: Public Comments to designate critical habitat, to the in threat outweighs the benefit of Processing, Attn: FWS–R4–ES–2015– maximum extent prudent and designation such that the designation of 0133; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, determinable, for an endangered or critical habitat may not be prudent.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61031

(2) Specific information on: on the Web site in their entirety as pressures within a given ecosystem (a) The amount and distribution of submitted. For comments submitted via cannot be otherwise relieved, may Kentucky arrow darter habitat; hard copy, we will post your entire include regulated taking. (b) What areas, that were occupied at comment—including your personal Critical habitat receives protection the time of listing (i.e., are currently identifying information—on http:// under section 7 of the Act through the occupied) and that contain features www.regulations.gov. You may request requirement that Federal agencies essential to the conservation of the at the top of your document that we ensure, in consultation with the Service, species, should be included in the withhold personal information such as that any action they authorize, fund, or designation and why; your street address, phone number, or carry out is not likely to result in the (c) Special management email address from public review; destruction or adverse modification of considerations or protection that may be however, we cannot guarantee that we critical habitat. The designation of needed in critical habitat areas we are will be able to do so. critical habitat does not affect land proposing, including managing for the Comments and materials we receive, ownership or establish a refuge, potential effects of climate change; and as well as supporting documentation we wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other (d) What areas not occupied at the used in preparing this proposed rule, conservation area. Such designation time of listing are essential for the will be available for public inspection does not allow the government or public conservation of the species and why. on http://www.regulations.gov, or by to access private lands. Such (3) Land use designations and current appointment, during normal business designation does not require or planned activities in the subject areas hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife implementation of restoration, recovery, and their possible impacts on proposed Service, Kentucky Ecological Services or enhancement measures by non- critical habitat. Field Office (see FOR FURTHER Federal landowners. Where a landowner (4) Information on the projected and INFORMATION CONTACT). requests Federal agency funding or reasonably likely impacts of climate authorization for an action that may change on the Kentucky arrow darter Previous Federal Actions affect a listed species or critical habitat, and proposed critical habitat. All previous Federal actions are the consultation requirements of section (5) Any probable economic, national described in the proposal to list the 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even security, or other relevant impacts of Kentucky arrow darter as a threatened in the event of a destruction or adverse designating any area that may be species under the Act, which is modification finding, the obligation of included in the final designation, and published elsewhere in today’s Federal the Federal action agency and the the benefits of including or excluding Register. landowner is not to restore or recover areas that exhibit these impacts. the species, but to implement (6) Information on the extent to which Critical Habitat reasonable and prudent alternatives to the description of economic impacts in Background avoid destruction or adverse the draft economic analysis (DEA) is a modification of critical habitat. reasonable estimate of the likely Critical habitat is defined in section 3 Under the first prong of the Act’s economic impacts. of the Act as: definition of critical habitat, areas (7) The likelihood of adverse social (1) The specific areas within the within the geographical area occupied reactions to the designation of critical geographical area occupied by the by the species at the time it was listed habitat, as discussed in the associated species, at the time it is listed in are included in a critical habitat documents of the draft economic accordance with the Act, on which are designation if they contain physical or analysis, and how the consequences of found those physical or biological biological features (1) which are such reactions, if likely to occur, would features: essential to the conservation of the relate to the conservation and regulatory (a) Essential to the conservation of the species and (2) which may require benefits of the proposed critical habitat species, and special management considerations or designation. (b) Which may require special protection. For these areas, critical (8) Whether any specific areas we are management considerations or habitat designations identify, to the proposing for critical habitat protection; and extent known using the best scientific designation should be considered for (2) Specific areas outside the and commercial data available, those exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the geographical area occupied by the physical or biological features that are Act, and whether the benefits of species at the time it is listed, upon a essential to the conservation of the potentially excluding any specific area determination that such areas are species (such as space, food, cover, and outweigh the benefits of including that essential for the conservation of the protected habitat). In identifying those area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. species. physical and biological features within (9) Whether we could improve or Conservation, as defined under an area, we focus on the principal modify our approach to designating section 3 of the Act, means to use and biological or physical constituent critical habitat in any way to provide for the use of all methods and procedures elements (primary constituent elements greater public participation and that are necessary to bring an such as roost sites, nesting grounds, understanding, or to better endangered or threatened species to the seasonal wetlands, water quality, tide, accommodate public concerns and point at which the measures provided soil type) that are essential to the comments. pursuant to the Act are no longer conservation of the species. Primary You may submit your comments and necessary. Such methods and constituent elements are those specific materials concerning this proposed rule procedures include, but are not limited elements of the physical or biological by one of the methods listed in to, all activities associated with features that provide for a species’ life- ADDRESSES. We request that you send scientific resources management such as history processes and are essential to comments only by the methods research, census, law enforcement, the conservation of the species. described in ADDRESSES. habitat acquisition and maintenance, Under the second prong of the Act’s All comments submitted propagation, live trapping, and definition of critical habitat, we can electronically via http:// transplantation, and, in the designate critical habitat in areas www.regulations.gov will be presented extraordinary case where population outside the geographical area occupied

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61032 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

by the species at the time it is listed, under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2) activities on the most essential features upon a determination that such areas regulatory protections afforded by the and areas; (3) providing educational are essential for the conservation of the requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act benefits to State or county governments species. For example, an area currently for Federal agencies to ensure their or private entities; and (4) reducing the occupied by the species but that was not actions are not likely to jeopardize the potential for people to cause inadvertent occupied at the time of listing may be continued existence of any endangered harm to the species. Because we have essential for the conservation of the or threatened species, and (3) section 9 determined that the designation of species and may be included in the of the Act’s prohibitions on taking any critical habitat will not likely increase critical habitat designation. We individual of the species, including the degree of threat to the species and designate critical habitat in areas taking caused by actions that affect may provide some measure of benefit, outside the geographical area occupied habitat. Federally funded or permitted we find that designation of critical by a species only when a designation projects affecting listed species outside habitat is prudent for the Kentucky limited to its range would be inadequate their designated critical habitat areas arrow darter. to ensure the conservation of the may still result in jeopardy findings in species. some cases. If we list the Kentucky Critical Habitat Determinability Section 4 of the Act requires that we arrow darter, these protections and Having determined that designation is designate critical habitat on the basis of conservation tools would continue to prudent under section 4(a)(3) of the Act, the best scientific data available. contribute to recovery of this species. we must find whether critical habitat for Further, our Policy on Information Similarly, critical habitat designations the Kentucky arrow darter is Standards Under the Endangered made on the basis of the best available determinable. Our regulations at 50 CFR Species Act (published in the Federal information at the time of designation 424.12(a)(2) state that critical habitat is Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271)), will not control the direction and not determinable when one or both of the Information Quality Act (section 515 substance of future recovery plans, the following situations exist: of the Treasury and General habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or (i) Information sufficient to perform Government Appropriations Act for other species conservation planning required analyses of the impacts of the Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. efforts if new information available at designation is lacking, or 5658)), and our associated Information the time of these planning efforts calls (ii) The biological needs of the species Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, for a different outcome. are not sufficiently well known to establish procedures, and provide Prudency Determination permit identification of an area as guidance to ensure that our decisions critical habitat. Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as are based on the best scientific data When critical habitat is not amended, and implementing regulations available. They require our biologists, to determinable, the Act allows the Service (50 CFR 424.12), require that, to the the extent consistent with the Act and an additional year to publish a critical with the use of the best scientific data maximum extent prudent and habitat designation (16 U.S.C. available, to use primary and original determinable, the Secretary shall 1533(b)(6)(C)(ii)). sources of information as the basis for designate critical habitat at the time the We have reviewed the available recommendations to designate critical species is determined to be an information pertaining to the biological habitat. endangered or threatened species. Our When we are determining which areas regulations (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)) state needs of the species and characteristics should be designated as critical habitat, that the designation of critical habitat is of the species’ habitat. This and other our primary source of information is not prudent when one or both of the information represent the best scientific generally the information developed following situations exist: data available and led us to conclude during the listing process for the (1) The species is threatened by taking that the designation of critical habitat is species. Additional information sources or other human activity, and determinable for the Kentucky arrow may include the recovery plan for the identification of critical habitat can be darter. species, articles in peer-reviewed expected to increase the degree of threat Physical or Biological Features journals, conservation plans developed to the species, or by States and counties, scientific status (2) Such designation of critical habitat In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) surveys and studies, biological would not be beneficial to the species. of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR assessments, other unpublished As discussed in the proposed listing 424.12(b), in determining which areas materials, or experts’ opinions or rule, there is currently no imminent within the geographical area occupied personal knowledge. threat of take attributed to collection or by the species at the time of listing to Habitat is dynamic, and species may vandalism (listing factor B) for this designate as critical habitat, we consider move from one area to another over species, and identification and mapping the physical or biological features that time. We recognize that critical habitat of critical habitat is not expected to are essential to the conservation of the designated at a particular point in time initiate any such threat. In the absence species and which may require special may not include all of the habitat areas of finding that the designation of critical management considerations or that we may later determine are habitat would increase threats to a protection. These include, but are not necessary for the recovery of the species, if there are any benefits to a limited to: species. For these reasons, a critical critical habitat designation, then a (1) Space for individual and habitat designation does not signal that prudent finding is warranted. Here, the population growth and for normal habitat outside the designated area is potential benefits of designation behavior; unimportant or may not be needed for include: (1) Triggering consultation (2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or recovery of the species. Areas that are under section 7 of the Act, in areas for other nutritional or physiological important to the conservation of the actions in which there may be a Federal requirements; listed species, both inside and outside nexus where it would not otherwise (3) Cover or shelter; the critical habitat designation, will occur because, for example, it is or has (4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or continue to be subject to: (1) become unoccupied or the occupancy is rearing (or development) of offspring; Conservation actions implemented in question; (2) focusing conservation and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61033

(5) Habitats that are protected from 1983, p. 71). Streams inhabitated by habitats is essential in accommodating disturbance or are representative of the Kentucky arrow darters tend to be clear feeding, breeding, growth, and other historic, geographical, and ecological and cool (generally less than or equal to normal behaviors of the Kentucky arrow distributions of a species. 24 degrees Celsius (°C) (72 degrees darter and in promoting gene flow We derive the specific physical or Fahrenheit (°F))), with shaded corridors within the species. biological features essential for the and naturally vegetated, intact riparian Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Kentucky arrow darter from studies of zones (Lotrich 1973, p. 378; Thomas Other Nutritional or Physiological its habitat, ecology, and life history as 2008, pp. 7, 23). described below. Additional Limited information exists about Requirements information can be found in the upstream or downstream movements of Feeding habits of the Kentucky arrow proposed listing rule published Kentucky arrow darters; however, there darter were documented by Lotrich elsewhere in today’s Federal Register. is evidence that the species can utilize (1973, pp. 380–382) in the Clemons To identify the physical or biological relatively long stream reaches. Fork system, Breathitt County, features essential to the conservation of Observations by Lowe (1979, pp. 26–27) Kentucky. The primary prey item was the species, we have relied on current of potential dispersal behavior for a mayflies (Order Ephemeroptera), which conditions at locations where the related species (the Cumberland arrow comprised 77 percent of identifiable species survives, the limited darter (Etheostoma sagitta)) in food items (420 of 542 items) in 57 information available on the species and Tennessee, preliminary findings from a Kentucky arrow darter stomachs its closest relatives, and factors movement study at Eastern Kentucky (Lotrich 1973, p. 381). Large Kentucky associated with the decline of other University (EKU), and recent survey arrow darters (greater than 70 fishes that occupy similar habitats in the results by Kentucky Department of Fish millimeters (mm) (2.8 in) total length Southeast. We have determined that the and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) (TL)) utilized small crayfishes, as 7 of 8 following physical or biological features suggest that Kentucky arrow darters can stomachs examined by Lotrich (1973, p. are essential to the Kentucky arrow utilize stream reaches of over 4 skm (2.5 381) contained crayfishes ranging in darter. smi) and disperse to other tributaries size from 11 to 24 mm (0.4 to 0.9 in). (Baxter 2014, pers. comm.; Thomas Lotrich (1973, p. 381) considered this to Space for Individual and Population 2015, pers. comm.) (see ‘‘Habitat and be noteworthy because stomachs of Growth and for Normal Behavior Life History’’ section of our proposed small Kentucky arrow darters (less than Little is known about the specific listing rule published elsewhere in 70 mm (2.8 in) TL) and stomachs of space requirements of the Kentucky today’s Federal Register). other darter species did not contain arrow darter; however, the species is The current range of the Kentucky crayfishes. Other food items reported by typically observed in moderate- to high- arrow darter has been reduced from 74 Lotrich (1973, p. 381) and Etnier and gradient, first- to third-order, historically occupied streams to 47 Starnes (1993, p. 523) included larval geomorphically stable streams (Lotrich currently occupied streams due to blackflies (family Simuliidae) and 1973, p. 382; Thomas 2008, p. 6). destruction, modification, and midges (Chironomidae), with lesser Geomorphically stable streams transport fragmentation of habitat. Fragmentation amounts of caddisfly larvae, stonefly sediment while maintaining their of the species’ habitat has subjected nymphs, and beetle larvae. Etnier and horizontal and vertical dimensions these small populations to genetic Starnes (1993, p. 523) reported that (width to depth ratio and cross-sectional isolation, reduced space for rearing and juvenile arrow darters feed on area), pattern (sinuosity), and reproduction, reduced adaptive microcrustaceans and dipteran larvae. longitudinal profile (riffles, runs, and capabilities, and an increased likelihood Like most other darters, the Kentucky pools), thereby conserving the physical of local extinctions (Burkhead et al. arrow darter depends on perennial characteristics of the stream, including 1997, pp. 397–399; Hallerman 2003, pp. stream flows that create suitable habitat bottom features such as riffles, runs, and 363–364). Genetic variation and conditions needed for successful pools and the transition zones between diversity within a species are essential completion of its life cycle. An ample these features (Rosgen 1996, p. 1–3). to recovery, adaptation to supply of flowing water provides a The protection and maintenance of environmental change, and long-term means of transporting nutrients and these habitat features accommodate viability (capability to live, reproduce, food items, moderating water spawning, rearing, growth, migration, and develop) (Noss and Cooperrider temperatures and dissolved oxygen and other normal behaviors of the 1994, pp. 282–297; Harris 1984, pp. 93– levels, removing fine sediments that species. 107; Fluker et al. 2007, p. 2). The long- could damage spawning or foraging During most of the year (late spring term viability of a species is founded on habitats, and diluting nonpoint-source through winter), Kentucky arrow darters the conservation of numerous local pollutants. Water withdrawals do not occupy shallow pools between 10–45 populations throughout its geographic represent a significant threat to the centimeters (cm) (4–18 inches (in)) or range (Harris 1984, pp. 93–104). species, but the species is faced with transitional areas between riffles and Connectivity of these habitats is occasional low-flow conditions that pools (runs and glides) with cobble and essential in preventing further occur during periods of drought. boulder substrates that are interspersed fragmentation and isolation of Kentucky Water quality is also important to the with clean (relatively silt free) sand and arrow darter populations and promoting persistence of the Kentucky arrow gravel (Lotrich 1973, p. 382; Thomas species movement and genetic flow darter. The species requires relatively 2008, p. 6). Most individuals are between populations. clean, cool, flowing water to encountered near some type of instream Therefore, based on the information successfully complete its life cycle. cover: Large cobble, boulders, bedrock above, we identify shallow pools, runs, Specific water quality requirements, ledges, or woody debris piles (Thomas glides, and riffles and associated stream such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, 2008, p. 6). During the spawning period segments of geomorphically stable, first- pH (a measure of the acidity or (April through June), Kentucky arrow to third-order streams to be physical or alkalinity of water), and conductivity (a darters utilize riffle habitats with biological features essential to the measure of electrical conductance in the relatively silt free, gravel, cobble, and conservation of the Kentucky arrow water column that increases as the sand substrates (Kuehne and Barbour darter. The maintenance of these concentration of dissolved solids

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61034 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

increases), that define suitable habitat have no appreciable reduction in pools and tend to remain there even conditions for the Kentucky arrow spawing, breeding, growth, and feeding) when summer and autumn rains restore darter have not been determined; to the species. stream flow (Kuehne and Barbour 1983, however, the species appears to be Therefore, based on the information p. 71). sensitive to elevated conductivity and is above, we identify stable, shallow pools, Therefore, based on the information generally absent when levels exceed 350 runs, and glides with boulder and above, we identify first- to third-order microsiemens (mS)/cm. In general, cobble substrates, ample cover (e.g., slab streams containing moderately flowing optimal water quality conditions for rocks, bedrock ledges, woody debris riffle, pool, run, and glide habitats with fishes and other aquatic organisms are piles), to be physical or biological gravel and cobble substrates, root mats characterized by (1) moderate stream features essential to the conservation of along the bank, undercut banks, and low temperatures (generally less than or the Kentucky arrow darter. levels of siltation to be physical or ° ° biological features essential to the equal to 24 C (72 F) for the Kentucky Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or conservation of the Kentucky arrow arrow darter); (2) acceptable dissolved Rearing (or Development) of Offspring oxygen concentrations; and (3) the lack darter. of harmful levels of pollutants, such as Prior to spawning, male Kentucky arrow darters establish territories over Habitats Protected From Disturbance or inorganic contaminants like iron, Representative of the Historic, manganese, selenium, and cadmium; riffles from March to May, when they are quite conspicuous in water 5 to 15 Geographical, and Ecological organic contaminants such as human Distributions of the Species and animal waste products; pesticides cm (2 to 6 in) deep (Kuehne and and herbicides; nitrogen, potassium, Barbour 1983, p. 71). Males fan out a As described above, stable substrates and phosphorus fertilizers; and depression in the substrate (typically a with low levels of siltation, adequate petroleum distillates. mixture of cobble, gravel, and sand) and water quality, and healthy aquatic insect Therefore, based on the information defend these sites vigorously. Initial populations are habitat features above, we identify aquatic courtship behavior involves rapid essential to the Kentucky arrow darter. macroinvertebrate prey items, which are dashes, fin-flaring, nudging, and Historically, first- to third-order streams typically dominated by mayflies; quivering motions by the male followed across the species’ range would have permanent surface flows, as measured by similar quivering responses of the contained these habitat features. during average rainfall years; and female, who then precedes the male to All current and historical capture adequate water quality to be physical or the nest. The female partially buries locations of the Kentucky arrow darter biological features essential to the herself in the gravel substrate, is are from first- to third-order order, conservaton of the Kentucky arrow mounted by the male, and spawning warmwater streams within the upper darter. occurs (Etnier and Starnes 1993, p. 523). Kentucky River drainage (Gilbert 1887, It is assumed that the male continues to pp. 53–54; Woolman 1892, pp. 275–281; Cover or Shelter defend the nest until the eggs have Kuehne and Bailey 1961, pp. 3–4; Kentucky arrow darters depend on hatched. The spawning period extends Kuehne 1962, pp. 608–609; Thomas specific habitats and bottom substrates from April to June, but peak activity 2008, entire; Service 2012, entire). The for normal life processes such as occurs when water temperatures reach species was historically distributed in at spawning, rearing, resting, and foraging. 13 °C (55 °F), typically in mid-April least six sub-basins of the Kentucky As described above, the species (Bailey 1948, pp. 82–84; Lowe 1979, p. River, but it is now extirpated from at typically inhabits shallow pools, riffles, 44). Females produce between 200 and least 36 historical streams within those runs, and glides dominated by cobble 600 eggs per season, with tremendous sub-basins. Forty-four percent of the and boulder substrates and interspersed variation resulting from size, age, species’ extirpations (16 streams) have with clean sand and gravel and low condition of females, and stream occurred since the mid-1990s, and the levels of siltation (Thomas 2008, p. 6; temperature (Rakes 2014, pers. comm.). species appears to have disappeared Service unpublished data). Kentucky As mentioned above, substrates with completely from several minor arrow darters are typically observed low levels of siltation are essential in watersheds (e.g., Sexton Creek, South near some type of cover (boulders, rock accommodating the species’ normal Fork Quicksand Creek, Troublesome ledges, large cobble, or woody debris behaviors, including breeding, Creek headwaters). Most remaining piles) and at depths ranging from 10 to reproduction, and rearing. The species populations are highly fragmented and 91 cm (4 to 36 in) (Thomas 2008, p. 6; has suffered population declines and restricted to short stream reaches. Given Service unpublished data). extirpations where sedimentation has the species’ reduced range and Sedimentation (siltation) has been listed been severe (Etnier and Starnes 1993, p. fragmented distribution, it is vulnerable repeatedly as a threat to the Kentucky 524; Thomas 2008, p. 7; Service 2012, to extirpation from intentional or arrow darter (Kuehne and Barbour 1983, p. 1). accidental toxic chemical spills, habitat p. 71; Etnier and Starnes 1993, p. 523; Juvenile arrow darters can exceed 25 modification, progressive degradation Thomas 2008, pp. 3–7), and the species mm (1 in) TL by mid-June and grow up from runoff (nonpoint-source has suffered population declines and to 50 mm (2 in) TL during the first year pollutants), natural catastrophic changes extirpations where sedimentation has (Kuehne and Barbour 1983, p. 71; Etnier to their habitat (e.g., flood scour, been severe (Etnier and Starnes 1993, p. and Starnes 1993, p. 523). Juvenile drought), and other stochastic 524; Thomas 2008, p. 7; Service 2012, arrow darters can be found throughout disturbances, such as loss of genetic p. 1). Substrates with low levels of the channel but are often observed in variation and inbreeding (Soule´ 1980, siltation are essential in accommodating shallow water along stream margins pp. 157–158; Hunter 2002, pp. 97–101; the species’ feeding, breeding, growth, near roots mats, rock ledges, or some Allendorf and Luikart 2007, pp. 117– and other normal behaviors. The term other cover. One-year olds are generally 146). In addition, the level of isolation ‘‘low levels of siltation’’ is defined for sexually mature and participate in seen in this species makes natural the purpose of this rule as silt or fine spawning along with older classes repopulation following localized sand within interstitial spaces of (Etnier and Starnes 1993, p. 523). As extirpations virtually impossible substrates in amounts low enough to stream flow lessens and riffles begin to without human intervention. Greater have minimal impact (i.e., that would shrink, most arrow darters move into connectivity within extant populations

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61035

is needed to provide some protection rule as the quality necessary for normal addition to random effects of drought, against these threats and would be more behavior, growth, and viability of all life floods, or other natural phenomena. representative of the historic, stages of the Kentucky arrow darter. At least portions of 32 proposed (5) Primary Constituent Element 5—A geographical distribution of the species. critical habitat units are located on Based on the biological information prey base of aquatic macroinvertebrates, and needs discussed above, we identify including mayfly nymphs, midge larvae, private property (16 are located entirely stable, undisturbed stream beds and caddisfly larvae, stonefly nymphs, and on private property) and are not banks, and ability for populations to be small crayfishes. presently under the protection provided distributed in multiple first- to third- by the management plan or candidate Special Management Considerations or order streams throughout the upper conservation agreement for the species. Protection Kentucky River drainage that are Activities in or adjacent to these areas protected from disturbance or are When designating critical habitat, we of proposed critical habitat may affect representative of the historic, assess whether the specific areas within one or more of the physical or biological geographical, and ecological the geographical area occupied by the features essential to the Kentucky arrow distributions of the species to be species at the time of listing contain darter. For example, features in this physical or biological features essential features which are essential to the proposed critical habitat designation to the conservation of the Kentucky conservation of the species and which may require special management due to arrow darter. may require special management threats associated with resource considerations or protection. The 38 Primary Constituent Elements for the extraction (coal surface mining, logging, units we are proposing to designate as natural gas and oil exploration), Kentucky Arrow Darter critical habitat for the Kentucky arrow agricultural runoff (livestock, row According to 50 CFR 424.12(b), we are darter will require some level of crops), lack of adequate riparian buffers, required to identify the physical or management to address the current and construction and maintenance of State biological features essential to the future threats to the physical or and county roads, land development, conservation of the Kentucky arrow biological features of the species. Due to darter in areas occupied at the time of their location on the Daniel Boone off-road vehicle use, and other listing, focusing on the features’ primary National Forest (DBNF), at least a nonpoint-source pollution. These constituent elements. We consider portion of 20 proposed critical habitat threats are in addition to adverse effects primary constituent elements to be units (Units 15–16, 18–32, and 36–38) of drought, floods, or other natural those specific elements of the physical are being managed and protected under phenomena. Other activities that may or biological features that provide for a DBNF’s land and resource management affect physical and biological features in species’ life-history processes and are plan (LRMP) (United States Forest the proposed critical habitat units essential to the conservation of the Service (USFS) 2004, pp. 1–14), and include those listed in the Effects of species. additional conservation measures will Critical Habitat Designation section, Based on our current knowledge of be provided upon completion of a below. candidate conservation agreement the physical or biological features and Management activities that could between DBNF and the Service (see habitat characteristics required to ameliorate these threats include, but are Available Conservation Measures sustain the species’ life-history not limited to, the use of best processes, we determine that the section of the proposed listing rule management practices (BMPs) designed primary constituent elements specific to published elsewhere in today’s Federal to reduce sedimentation, erosion, and the Kentucky arrow darter are: Register). (1) Primary Constituent Element 1— Two of the 38 proposed critical stream bank destruction; development Riffle-pool complexes and transitional habitat units (Units 3 and 4) are located of alternatives that avoid and minimize areas (glides and runs) of wholly (Unit 3) or partially (Unit 4) on stream bed disturbances; an increase of geomorphically stable, first- to third- State property, specifically Robinson stormwater management and reduction order streams with connectivity Forest, a 4,047-hectare (10,000-acre) of stormwater flows into stream between spawning, foraging, and resting research, education, and extension systems; preservation of headwater sites to promote gene flow throughout forest in Breathitt and Knott Counties springs and streams; regulation of off- the species’ range. owned by the University of Kentucky road vehicle use; and reduction of other (2) Primary Constituent Element 2— (UK) and managed by the Department of watershed and floodplain disturbances Stable bottom substrates composed of Forestry in the College of Agriculture, that release sediments, pollutants, or gravel, cobble, boulders, bedrock ledges, Food, and Environment. Management nutrients into the water. guidelines approved by the University and woody debris piles with low levels In summary, we find that the areas we of Kentucky’s Board of Trustees in 2004 of siltation. are proposing as critical habitat for the (3) Primary Constituent Element 3— provide general land use allocations, Kentucky arrow darter that are occupied An instream flow regime (magnitude, sustainable allowances for active at the time of listing contain the frequency, duration, and seasonality of research and demonstration projects discharge over time) sufficient to involving overstory manipulation, physical or biological features for the provide permanent surface flows, as allocations of net revenues from species, and that these features may measured during years with average research and demonstration activities, require special management rainfall, and to maintain benthic and management and oversight considerations or protection. Special habitats utilized by the species. responsibilities (Stringer 2015, pers. management consideration or protection (4) Primary Constituent Element 4— comm.). Activities within Robinson may be required to eliminate, or to Adequate water quality characterized by Forest may require special management reduce to negligible levels, the threats moderate stream temperatures, considerations or protection to address affecting the physical or biological acceptable dissolved oxygen minor siltation associated with timber features of each unit. Additional concentrations, moderate pH, and low management research, stormwater discussion of threats facing individual levels of pollutants. Adequate water runoff from unpaved roads, and limited units is provided in the individual unit quality is defined for the purpose of this off-road vehicle use. These threats are in descriptions below.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61036 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

Criteria Used To Identify Critical occupied due to the poor habitat stream reach. In the unit descriptions, Habitat conditions and the high likelihood that distances between landmarks used to As required by section 4(b)(2) of the these individuals had simply migrated identify the upstream or downstream Act, we use the best scientific data from a nearby source stream. To identify extent of a stream segment are given in available to designate critical habitat. In the unoccupied stream reaches, we stream kilometers and equivalent miles, accordance with the Act and our evaluated historical data (late 1880s– as measured tracing the course of the implementing regulations at 50 CFR 2006) and the results of our recent stream, not straight-line distance. The 424.12(b) we review available surveys (2007–2014) (Thomas 2008, proposed critical habitat areas were then information pertaining to the habitat entire; Service 2012, entire; Service mapped using ArcGIS software to requirements of the species and identify unpublished data). If the species was produce the critical habitat unit maps. Because fishes are naturally restricted occupied areas at the time of listing that known to occur in a stream prior to by certain physical conditions within a contain the features essential to the 2007, but was not observed during our stream reach (i.e., flow, substrate, conservation of the species. If after recent rangewide survey, the stream cover), they may be unevenly identifying occupied areas, a reach was considered to be unoccupied. Based on our review, we made a distributed within these habitat units. determination is made that those areas determination to not propose to Uncertainty on some downstream are inadequate to ensure conservation of designate as critical habitat any distributional limits for some the species, in accordance with the Act unoccupied stream reaches. We populations (e.g., Frozen Creek) may and our implementing regulations at 50 concluded that the proposed units have resulted in small areas of occupied CFR 424.12(e), we then consider occupied by the species at the time of habitat not being included in, or areas whether designating additional areas— listing are representative of the species’ of unoccupied habitat included in, the outside those occupied at the time of historical range and include both the designation. We recognize that both listing—are essential for the core population areas of Kentucky arrow historical and recent collection records conservation of the species. We are not darters, as well as remaining peripheral upon which we relied are incomplete, currently proposing to designate any population areas. We determined that and that there may be stream segments areas outside the geographical area there was sufficient area for the or small tributaries not included in this occupied by the species because we conservation of the species within the proposed designation that harbor small, believe that occupied areas (a total of 47 occupied areas. limited populations of the species streams) are adequate to ensure the Following the identification of considered in this proposed conservation of the species. The occupied stream reaches, the next step designation, or that others may become following discussion describes how we was to delineate the probable upstream suitable in the future. The omission of identified and delineated those and downstream extent of the species’ such areas does not diminish their occupied areas. distribution. We used U.S. Geological potential individual or cumulative We began our analysis by considering Survey (USGS) 1:100,000 digital stream importance to the conservation of the the historical and current ranges of the maps to delineate these boundaries of Kentucky arrow darter. The habitat Kentucky arrow darter. We used various proposed critical habitat units according areas contained within the proposed sources including published literature, to the criteria explained below. We set units described below constitute our museum collection databases, surveys, the upstream and downstream limits of best evaluation of areas needed for the reports, and collection records obtained each critical habitat unit by identifying conservation of this species at this time. from the KDFWR, Kentucky State landmarks (bridges, confluences, and The areas proposed for critical habitat Nature Preserves Commission, Kentucky road crossings), and in some instances below include only stream channels Division of Water, and our own files latitude and longitude coordinates and within the ordinary high-water line and (see ‘‘Historical Range and Distribution’’ secton lines, above and below the upper do not contain any developed areas or and ‘‘Current Range and Distribution’’ and lowermost reported locations of the structures. When determining proposed sections of our proposed listing rule Kentucky arrow darter in each stream critical habitat boundaries, we made published elsewhere in today’s Federal reach to ensure incorporation of all every effort to avoid including Register). We then identified the potential sites of occurrence. We developed areas such as lands covered specific areas that are occupied by the considered stream order and watershed by buildings, pavement, and other species and that contain one or more of size to select the upstream terminus. structures because such areas usually the physical or biological features The species can occur in small, first- lack physical and biological features essential to the species’ conservation. order reaches (Thomas 2008, entire; essential to the conservation of the We defined occupied habitat as those Service 2012, entire), but recent surveys species. The scale of the maps we stream reaches known to be currently have also demonstrated that the species prepared under the parameters for occupied by the species. To identify the is typically absent in these reaches once publication within the Code of Federal currently occupied stream reaches, we the watershed size (the upstream basin Regulations may not reflect the used post-2006 survey data that or catchment) falls below 1.3 square exclusion of such developed areas. Any provided information on distribution kilometers (km2) (0.5 square miles such areas inadvertently left inside and habitat condition (Thomas 2008, (mi2)). Consequently, we searched for critical habitat boundaries shown on the entire; Service 2012, entire; Service this point within the watershed and maps of this proposed rule have been unpublished data). Generally, if the selected the nearest tributary confluence excluded by text in the proposed rule species was collected or observed in a as the upstream terminus. When a and are not proposed for designation as particular stream during our recent tributary was not available, a road- critical habitat. Therefore, if the critical rangewide surveys (2007–2014), the crossing (bridge or ford) or dam was habitat is finalized as proposed, a stream reach was considered to be used to mark the boundary. For the Federal action involving these areas occupied. A few transient individuals downstream boundary of a unit, we would not trigger section 7 consultation were observed in streams with typically selected a stream confluence of with respect to critical habitat and the unsuitable habitat conditions (e.g., a named tributary below the requirement of no adverse modification elevated conductivity), but these downstream-most occurrence record unless the specific action would affect streams were not considered to be and within a third-order or smaller the physical or biological features in the

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61037

adjacent critical habitat. The FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133, on our history processes for the Kentucky designation of critical habitat does not Internet site at http://www.fws.gov/ arrow darter. The 38 areas we propose imply that lands outside of critical frankfort/, and at the field office as critical habitat are listed in Table 1 habitat do not play an important role in responsible for the designation (see FOR below. the conservation of the species. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, above). Critical habitat units are either in The proposed critical habitat Proposed Critical Habitat Designation private, Federal (DBNF), or State (UK) designation is defined by the map or We are proposing to designate ownership. In Kentucky, adjacent maps, as modified by any accompanying approximately 395 skm (246 smi) in 38 landowners also own the land under regulatory text, presented at the end of units as critical habitat in Kentucky for streams (e.g., the stream channel or this document in the Proposed the Kentucky arrow darter. These stream bottom), but the water is under State Regulation Promulgation section. We reaches comprise the entire currently jurisdiction. Portions of the public-to- include more detailed information on known range of the species (and all private boundary for Units 16, 18, 19, the boundaries of the proposed critical extant populations). All proposed units 21, 22, 24, 32, and 36 were located along habitat designation in the individual are considered to be occupied at the the mid-line of the stream channel; unit descriptions below. We will make time of listing and contain the physical lengths for these segments were divided the coordinates, plot points, or both on or biological features in the appropriate equally between public and private which each map is based available to quantity and spatial arrangement ownership. Ownership and lengths of the public on http:// essential to the conservation of this proposed Kentucky arrow darter critical www.regulations.gov at Docket No. species and support multiple life- habitat units are provided in Table 1.

TABLE 1—LOCATION, OWNERSHIP, AND LENGTHS FOR PROPOSED KENTUCKY ARROW DARTER CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS

Ownership—skm (smi) Unit Stream County Total length Private Federal State skm (smi)

1 ...... Buckhorn Creek and Prince Fork ...... Knott ...... 1.1 (0.7) 0 0 1.1 (0.7) 2 ...... Eli Fork ...... Knott ...... 1.0 (0.6) 0 0 1.0 (0.6) 3 ...... Coles Fork and Snag Ridge Fork ...... Breathitt, Knott ..... 0 0 11.0 (6.8) 11.0 (6.8) 4 ...... Clemons Fork ...... Breathitt ...... 0.1 (0.1) 0 6.9 (4.3) 7.0 (4.4) 5 ...... Laurel Fork Quicksand Creek and Knott ...... 19.8 (12.4) 0 0 19.8 (12.4) Tributaries. 6 ...... Middle Fork Quicksand Creek and Knott ...... 22.5 (13.9) 0 0 22.5 (13.9) Tributaries. 7 ...... Spring Fork Quicksand Creek ...... Breathitt ...... 2.2 (1.4) 0 0 2.2 (1.4) 8 ...... Hunting Creek and Tributaries ...... Breathitt ...... 15.6 (9.7) 0 0 15.6 (9.7) 9 ...... Frozen Creek and Tributaries ...... Breathitt ...... 26.4 (16.4) 0 0 26.4 (16.4) 10 ...... Holly Creek and Tributaries ...... Wolfe ...... 18.3 (11.5) 0 0 18.3 (11.5) 11 ...... Little Fork ...... Lee, Wolfe ...... 3.8 (2.3) 0 0 3.8 (2.3) 12 ...... Walker Creek and Tributaries ...... Lee, Wolfe ...... 25.0 (15.5) 0 0 25.0 (15.5) 13 ...... Hell Creek and Tributaries ...... Lee ...... 12.0 (7.4) 0 0 12.0 (7.4) 14 ...... Big Laurel Creek ...... Harlan ...... 9.1 (5.7) 0 0 9.1 (5.7) 15 ...... Laurel Creek ...... Leslie ...... 0.7 (0.5) 3.4 (2.1) 0 4.1 (2.6) 16 ...... Hell For Certain Creek and Tribu- Leslie ...... 11.4 (7.0) 4.4 (2.8) 0 15.8 (9.8) taries. 17 ...... Squabble Creek ...... Perry ...... 12.0 (7.5) 0 0 12.0 (7.5) 18 ...... Blue Hole Creek and Left Fork Blue Clay ...... 0 5.7 (3.5) 0 5.7 (3.5) Hole Creek. 19 ...... Upper Bear Creek and Tributaries .... Clay ...... 0.2 (0.1) 6.6 (4.2) 0 6.8 (4.3) 20 ...... Katies Creek ...... Clay ...... 1.7 (1.0) 4.0 (2.5) 0 5.7 (3.5) 21 ...... Spring Creek and Little Spring Creek Clay ...... 3.6 (2.2) 5.6 (3.5) 0 9.2 (5.7) 22 ...... Bowen Creek and Tributaries ...... Leslie ...... 2.0 (1.2) 11.6 (7.3) 0 13.6 (8.5) 23 ...... Elisha Creek and Tributaries ...... Leslie ...... 3.0 (1.9) 6.6 (4.0) 0 9.6 (5.9) 24 ...... Gilberts Big Creek ...... Clay, Leslie ...... 2.0 (1.2) 5.2 (3.3) 0 7.2 (4.5) 25 ...... Sugar Creek ...... Clay, Leslie ...... 1.1 (0.7) 6.1 (3.8) 0 7.2 (4.5) 26 ...... Big Double Creek and Tributaries ..... Clay ...... 0 10.3 (6.4) 0 10.3 (6.4) 27 ...... Little Double Creek ...... Clay ...... 0 3.4 (2.1) 0 3.4 (2.1) 28 ...... Jacks Creek ...... Clay ...... 5.4 (3.4) 0.5 (0.3) 0 5.9 (3.7) 29 ...... Long Fork ...... Clay ...... 0 2.2 (1.4) 0 2.2 (1.4) 30 ...... Horse Creek ...... Clay ...... 3.0 (1.9) 2.0 (1.2) 0 5.0 (3.1) 31 ...... Bullskin Creek ...... Clay, Leslie ...... 21.3 (13.3) 0.4 (0.2) 0 21.7 (13.5) 32 ...... Buffalo Creek and Tributaries ...... Owsley ...... 23.2 (14.5) 14.9 (9.3) 0 38.1 (23.8) 33 ...... Lower Buffalo Creek ...... Lee, Owsley ...... 7.3 (4.6) 0 0 7.3 (4.6) 34 ...... Silver Creek ...... Lee ...... 6.2 (3.9) 0 0 6.2 (3.9) 35 ...... Travis Creek ...... Jackson ...... 4.1 (2.5) 0 0 4.1 (2.5) 36 ...... Wild Dog Creek ...... Jackson, Owsley .. 4.3 (2.7) 3.8 (2.4) 0 8.1 (5.1) 37 ...... Granny Dismal Creek ...... Lee, Owsley ...... 4.4 (2.7) 2.5 (1.6) 0 6.9 (4.3) 38 ...... Rockbridge Fork ...... Wolfe ...... 0 4.5 (2.8) 0 4.5 (2.8)

Total ...... 273.8 (170.3) 103.7 (64.7) 17.9 (11.1) 395.4 (246.1)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61038 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

We present brief descriptions of all except for any small amount that is and maintenance of county roads. These units below. We consider each proposed publicly owned in the form of bridge threats are in addition to random effects unit to contain all the physical or crossings and road easements. The of drought, floods, or other natural biological features and primary watershed surrounding proposed Unit 1 phenomena. constituent elements (PCEs) identified is dominated by forest and remains Unit 3: Coles Fork and Snag Ridge Fork, above that are essential to the relatively undisturbed; however, Breathitt and Knott Counties, Kentucky conservation of the species. In general, downstream reaches of Buckhorn Creek stream channels within these units are have been degraded by siltation and This proposed unit is located entirely stable, with ample pool, glide, riffle, and nonpoint-source pollutants associated within Robinson Forest, a 4,047-hectare run habitats (PCE 1) that maintain with surface coal mining, oil and gas (10,000-acre) research, education, and surface flows year round (PCE 3) and exploration, logging, and runoff from extension forest in Breathitt and Knott contain gravel, cobble, and boulder unpaved roads (Service 2012, pp. 1–4). Counties owned by UK and managed by substrates with low levels of siltation This unit helps to maintain the the Department of Forestry in the (PCE 2). Such characteristics are geographical range of the species (adds College of Agriculture, Food, and necessary for reproductive, foraging, population redundancy) and provides Environment. Unit 3 includes 2.1 skm and sheltering requirements of opportunity for population growth. (1.3 smi) of Snag Ridge Fork from its Kentucky arrow darters. We consider Within proposed Unit 1, the Kentucky headwaters downstream to its water quality in each of these units to arrow darter and its habitat may require confluence with Coles Fork and 8.9 skm be characterized by moderate special management considerations or (5.5 smi) of Coles Fork from its temperatures, relatively high dissolved protection to address potential adverse confluence with Saddle Branch oxygen concentrations, moderate pH, effects (e.g., water pollution, siltation) downstream to its confluence with and low levels of pollutants (PCE 4). associated with surface coal mining, Buckhorn Creek. Live Kentucky arrow These conditions support abundant logging (timber harvests on private darters have been observed throughout populations of aquatic land), natural gas and oil exploration, proposed Unit 3 (Thomas 2008, p. 5; macroinvertebrates that serve as prey construction and maintenance of county Service 2012, pp. 1–4), and Coles Fork items for Kentucky arrow darters (PCE roads (Buckhorn Road), the lack of continues to be one of the species’ best 5). adequate riparian buffers (near the remaining habitats. This unit is located The proposed critical habitat units confluence with Emory Branch), and entirely on lands owned by UK. The include the stream channels of the creek off-road vehicle use. These threats are in watershed surrounding proposed Unit 3 within the ordinary high water line. As addition to random effects of drought, is intact and densely forested, water defined at 33 CFR 329.11, the ordinary floods, or other natural phenomena. quality conditions are excellent (very high water mark on nontidal rivers is close to baseline levels), and instream Unit 2: Eli Fork, Knott County, Kentucky the line on the shore established by the habitats are ideal for the species. This fluctuations of water and indicated by This proposed unit is located in the unit represents a stronghold for the physical characteristics, such as a clear, headwaters of the Buckhorn Creek species (core population) and likely natural line impressed on the bank; drainage between KY 1098 and KY contributes to range expansion (source shelving; changes in the character of 1087. It includes 1.0 skm (0.6 smi) of Eli population). soil; destruction of terrestrial vegetation; Fork from its confluence with Stonecoal Within proposed Unit 3, the Kentucky the presence of litter and debris; or Branch downstream to its confluence arrow darter and its habitat may require other appropriate means that consider with Boughcamp Branch (of Buckhorn special management considerations or the characteristics of the surrounding Creek). Live Kentucky arrow darters protection to address siltation areas. For each stream reach proposed have been collected from proposed Unit associated with timber management (on as a critical habitat unit, the upstream 2 near the confluence of Eli Fork and Robinson Forest), stormwater runoff and downstream boundaries are Boughcamp Branch (ATS 2011, p. 6). from unpaved roads, and limited off- described generally below. More precise This unit is located almost entirely on road vehicle use. These threats are in definitions are provided in the Proposed private land, except for any small addition to random effects of drought, Regulation Promulgation at the end of amount that is publicly owned in the floods, or other natural phenomena. this proposed rule. form of bridge crossings and road easements. The watershed surrounding Unit 4: Clemons Fork, Breathitt County, Unit 1: Buckhorn Creek and Prince proposed Unit 2 is dominated by forest Kentucky Fork, Knott County, Kentucky and remains relatively undisturbed; Proposed Unit 4 is located along Proposed Unit 1 is located off however, its receiving stream, Clemons Fork Road in southeastern Buckhorn Road in the headwaters of the Boughcamp Branch, and adjacent Breathitt County. This unit includes 7.0 Buckhorn Creek drainage and between watersheds have been degraded by skm (4.4 smi) of Clemons Fork from its Kentucky Highway 1098 (KY 1098) and siltation and nonpoint-source pollutants confluence with Maple Hollow KY 1087. It includes 0.7 skm (0.4 smi) associated with surface coal mining and downstream to its confluence with of Prince Fork from its confluence with logging (Service 2012, pp. 1–4). This Buckhorn Creek. Live Kentucky arrow Mart Branch downstream to its unit helps to maintain the geographical darters have been observed throughout confluence with Buckhorn Creek and range of the species (adds population proposed Unit 4 (Lotrich 1973, p. 380; 0.4 skm (0.3 smi) of Buckhorn Creek redundancy) and provides opportunity Thomas 2008, p. 5; Service 2012, pp. 1– from its confluence with Prince Fork for population growth. 4). A portion of this unit near the mouth downstream to its confluence with Within proposed Unit 2, the Kentucky of Clemons Fork is privately owned (0.1 Emory Branch. Live Kentucky arrow arrow darter and its habitat may require skm (0.1 smi)), but the majority is darters have been collected from special management considerations or located on lands owned by UK (see proposed Unit 1 in Prince Fork and just protection to address potential adverse description for Unit 3). The watershed upstream of the confluence of Buckhorn effects (e.g., water pollution, siltation) surrounding proposed Unit 4 is intact Creek and Emory Branch (ATS 2011, p. associated with surface coal mining, and densely forested, water quality 6; Service 2012, pp. 1–4). This unit is logging, natural gas and oil exploration, conditions are excellent (very close to located almost entirely on private land, off-road vehicle use, and construction baseline levels), and instream habitats

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61039

are ideal for the species. Clemons Fork Unit 6: Middle Fork Quicksand Creek publicly owned in the form of bridge continues to be one of the species’ best and Tributaries, Knott County, Kentucky crossings and road easements. Most of remaining habitats. This unit represents Proposed Unit 6 is located along the watershed surrounding proposed a stronghold for the species (core Middle Fork of Quicksand Creek Road Unit 7 is forested, but mine reclamation population) and likely contributes to in northeastern Knott County. This unit activities have created open, pasture- range expansion (source population). includes 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) of Big like habitats along ridgetops and slopes Within proposed Unit 4, the Kentucky Firecoal Branch from its headwaters to the north. This unit helps to maintain arrow darter and its habitat may require downstream to its confluence with the geographical range of the species special management considerations or Middle Fork Quicksand Creek, 2.1 skm within the Quicksand Creek watershed protection to address siltation (adds population redundancy) and (1.3 smi) of Bradley Branch from its associated with timber management (on provides opportunity for population headwaters downstream to its Robinson Forest), stormwater runoff growth. confluence with Middle Fork Quicksand from unpaved roads, and limited off- Within proposed Unit 7, the Kentucky road vehicle use. These threats are in Creek, 2.0 skm (1.2 smi) of Lynn Log arrow darter and its habitat may require addition to random effects of drought, Branch from its headwaters downstream special management considerations or floods, or other natural phenomena. to its confluence with Middle Fork protection to address adverse effects Quicksand Creek, and 17.6 skm (10.9 (e.g., siltation, water pollution) Unit 5: Laurel Fork Quicksand Creek smi) of Middle Fork Quicksand Creek associated with surface coal mining, and Tributaries, Knott County, Kentucky from its headwaters downstream to its natural gas and oil exploration Proposed Unit 5 generally runs confluence with Big Branch. Live activities, logging, and off-road vehicle parallel to KY 1098 and Laurel Fork Kentucky arrow darters have been use. These threats are in addition to Road in northern Knott County. This captured within proposed Unit 6 near random effects of drought, floods, or unit includes 1.2 skm (0.8 smi) of Fitch the confluence of Middle Fork and Jack other natural phenomena. Branch from its headwaters downstream Branch and the confluence of Middle to its confluence with Laurel Fork Fork and Upper Bear Pen Branch Unit 8: Hunting Creek and Tributaries, Quicksand Creek, 2.7 skm (1.7 smi) of (Thomas 2008, p. 5; Service 2012, pp. 1– Breathitt County, Kentucky Newman Branch from its headwaters 4). This unit is located almost entirely Proposed Unit 8 is located along KY downstream to its confluence with on private land, except for any small 1094 in eastern Breathitt County and Laurel Fork Quicksand Creek, 2.1 skm amount that is publicly owned in the includes 0.9 skm (0.5 smi) of Wolf Pen (1.3 smi) of Combs Branch from its form of bridge crossings and road Branch from its headwaters downstream headwaters downstream to its easements. The watershed surrounding to its confluence with Hunting Creek, confluence with Laurel Fork Quicksand proposed Unit 6 is dominated by forest 2.3 skm (1.4 smi) of Fletcher Fork from Creek, and 13.8 skm (8.6 smi) of Laurel and continues to be relatively its headwaters downstream to its Fork Quicksand Creek from KY 80 undisturbed. An unpaved, road confluence with Hunting Creek, 1.6 skm downstream to its confluence with traverses the length of the unit, but the (1.0 smi) of Negro Fork from its Patten Fork. Live Kentucky arrow rough condition of the road limits its headwaters downstream to its darters have been captured within use to off-road vehicles. This unit helps confluence with Hunting Creek, 3.1 skm proposed Unit 5 just upstream of the to maintain the geographical range of (1.9 smi) of Licking Fork from its Laurel Fork and Patten Fork confluence the species (adds population headwaters downstream to its and farther upstream at the first Laurel redundancy) and likely serves as a confluence with Hunting Creek, and 7.7 Fork Road crossing (Thomas 2008, p. 5; source population within the Quicksand skm (4.8 smi) of Hunting Creek from its Service 2012, pp. 1–4). This unit is Creek watershed. confluence with Wells Fork downstream located almost entirely on private land, Within proposed Unit 6, the Kentucky to its confluence with Quicksand Creek. except for any small amount that is arrow darter and its habitat may require Live Kentucky arrow darters have been publicly owned in the form of bridge special management considerations or captured within proposed Unit 8 near crossings and road easements. Hillsides protection to address adverse effects the confluence with Winnie Branch and ridgetops above proposed Unit 5 are (e.g., siltation, water pollution) (Service unpublished data). This unit is forested, but the valley is more associated with natural gas and oil located almost entirely on private land, developed with scattered residences exploration activities, logging, surface except for any small amount that is along Laurel Fork Road. This unit helps coal mining, inadequate riparian publicly owned in the form of bridge to maintain the geographical range of buffers, construction and maintenance crossings and road easements. The the species (adds population of county roads, and off-road vehicle narrow valley surrounding proposed redundancy) and likely serves as a use. These threats are in addition to Unit 8 contains a few scattered source population within the Quicksand random effects of drought, floods, or residences and fields along Hunting Creek watershed. other natural phenomena. Creek Road, but the majority of the Within proposed Unit 5, the Kentucky watershed is relatively intact and arrow darter and its habitat may require Unit 7: Spring Fork Quicksand Creek, dominated by forest. This unit helps to special management considerations or Breathitt County, Kentucky maintain the geographical range of the protection to address adverse effects Proposed Unit 7 is located of KY 2465 species within the Quicksand Creek (e.g., siltation, water pollution) in southeastern Breathitt County and watershed (adds population associated with logging, inadequate includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) of Spring redundancy) and provides opportunity sewage treatment, surface coal mining, Fork Quicksand Creek from its for population growth. natural gas and oil exploration headwaters downstream to its Within proposed Unit 8, the Kentucky activities, inadequate riparian buffers, confluence with an unnamed tributary. arrow darter and its habitat may require construction and maintenance of county Live Kentucky arrow darters have been special management considerations or roads, and off-road vehicle use. These captured within proposed Unit 7 protection to address adverse effects threats are in addition to random effects (Service unpublished data). This unit is (e.g., siltation, water pollution) of drought, floods, or other natural located almost entirely on private land, associated with natural gas and oil phenomena. except for any small amount that is exploration activities, logging, surface

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61040 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

coal mining, inadequate sewage includes 2.8 skm (1.8 smi) of Spring captured within proposed Unit 11 just treatment, inadequate riparian buffers, Branch from its headwaters downstream upstream of the confluence of Little construction and maintenance of county to its confluence with Holly Creek, 2.0 Fork and Lower Devil Creek (Thomas roads, and off-road vehicle use. These skm (1.3 smi) of Pence Branch from its 2008, p. 5; Service 2012, pp. 1–4). This threats are in addition to random effects headwaters downstream to its unit is located almost entirely on private of drought, floods, or other natural confluence with Holly Creek, 4.0 skm land, except for any small amount that phenomena. (2.5 smi) of Cave Branch from its is publicly owned in the form of bridge headwaters downstream to its crossings and road easements. This unit Unit 9: Frozen Creek and Tributaries, confluence with Holly Creek, and 9.5 helps to maintain the geographical range Breathitt County, Kentucky skm (5.9 smi) of Holly Creek from KY of the species (population redundancy) Proposed Unit 9 is located along KY 1261 (first bridge crossing north of KY and provides opportunity for population 378 in northern Breathitt County. This 15) downstream to its confluence with growth. unit includes 4.7 skm (2.9 smi) of Clear the North Fork Kentucky River. Live The valley bottom surrounding this Fork from its headwaters downstream to Kentucky arrow darters have been proposed unit is densely forested, but a its confluence with Frozen Creek, 3.6 captured within proposed Unit 10 near network of unpaved roads and oil and skm (2.3 smi) of Negro Branch from its the confluence of Holly Creek and gas well sites are located along the headwaters downstream to its Spring Branch (Thomas 2008, p. 5). This ridgetops to the east and west of the confluence with Frozen Creek, 4.2 skm unit is located almost entirely on private stream. Within proposed Unit 11, the (2.6 smi) of Davis Creek from its land, except for any small amount that Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat headwaters downstream to its is publicly owned in the form of bridge may require special management confluence with Frozen Creek, and 13.9 crossings and road easements. This unit considerations or protection to address skm (8.6 smi) of Frozen Creek from its helps to maintain the geographical range adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water headwaters downstream to its of the species and provides opportunity pollution) associated with oil and gas confluence with Morgue Fork. Live for population growth. exploration activities, off-road vehicle Kentucky arrow darters have been The valley bottom surrounding use, road runoff, canopy loss, logging, captured within proposed Unit 9 proposed Unit 10 is consistently wider and surface coal mining (legacy effects). upstream of Rock Lick in the (approximately 320 m (1050 ft) at its These threats are in addition to random headwaters of Frozen Creek (Thomas widest) than other occupied stream effects of drought, floods, or other 2008, p. 5; Service unpublished data). valleys (e.g., Frozen Creek), and natural phenomena. This unit is located almost entirely on agricultural land use is more extensive. Unit 12: Walker Creek and Tributaries, private land, except for any small Multiple small farms (e.g., pasture, row Lee and Wolfe Counties, Kentucky amount that is publicly owned in the crops, hayfields) and residences are form of bridge crossings and road scattered along KY 1261, while the Proposed Unit 12 is located between easements. The individual valleys ridgetops and hillsides are dominated KY 11 and Shumaker Road to the west surrounding proposed Unit 9 are by forest. We are not designating critical and KY 2016 to the east in northern Lee relatively narrow (approximately 100– habitat in upstream reaches of the County and southwestern Wolfe County. 160 meters (m) (328–525 feet (ft)) at drainage (e.g., Kelse Holland Fork, This unit includes 3.9 skm (2.4 smi) of their widest) and comprised of small Mandy Holland Fork, Terrell Fork) an unnamed tributary of Walker Creek farms and scattered residences. The because these streams do not contain from its headwaters downstream to its ridgetops and hillsides are relatively the PCEs essential to the species’ confluence with Walker Creek, 2.4 skm undisturbed and dominated by forest. conservation. Habitat conditions in (1.5 smi) of Cowan Fork from its This unit helps to maintain the these upstream reaches are poor, as headwaters downstream to its geographical range of the species (adds characterized by straightened, incised confluence with Hell for Certain Creek, population redundancy), contributes to channels; a lack of canopy cover; and 2.0 skm (1.2 smi) of Hell for Certain genetic exchange between several unstable substrates. Creek from the outflow of an unnamed streams in the Frozen Creek watershed, Within proposed Unit 10, the reservoir downstream to its confluence and likely serves as an important source Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat with Walker Creek, 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) of population in the northern limits of the may require special management Boonesboro Fork from its headwaters species’ range. considerations or protection to address downstream to its confluence with Within proposed Unit 9, the Kentucky adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water Walker Creek, 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) of arrow darter and its habitat may require pollution) associated with agricultural Peddler Creek from its headwaters special management considerations or runoff, canopy loss, inadequate riparian downstream to its confluence with protection to address adverse effects buffers, construction and maintenance Walker Creek, 1.1 skm (0.7 smi) of Huff (e.g., siltation, water pollution) of county roads, inadequate sewage Cave Branch from its headwaters associated with inadequate sewage treatment, logging, surface coal mining downstream to its confluence with treatment, canopy loss, agricultural (legacy effects), and off-road vehicle use. Walker Creek, and 12.6 skm (7.8 smi) of runoff, inadequate riparian buffers, These threats are in addition to random Walker Creek from its headwaters construction and maintenance of county effects of drought, floods, or other (reservoir) downstream to its confluence roads, logging, natural gas and oil natural phenomena. with North Fork Kentucky River. Live exploration activities, surface coal Kentucky arrow darters have been Unit 11: Little Fork, Lee and Wolfe mining (legacy effects), and off-road captured at several locations within County, Kentucky vehicle use. These threats are in proposed Unit 12 (Thomas 2008, p. 5; addition to random effects of drought, This proposed unit is located between Service 2012, pp. 1–4), including the floods, or other natural phenomena. KY 2016 and Booth Ridge Road in Old Fincastle Road low-water crossing, southern Wolfe County and includes 3.8 a site upstream near the confluence with Unit 10: Holly Creek and Tributaries, skm (2.3 smi) of Little Fork from its Boonesboro Fork, and in the headwaters Wolfe County, Kentucky headwaters downstream to its just upstream of the confluence of Proposed Unit 10 is located along KY confluence with Lower Devil Creek. Walker Creek with Hell For Certain 1261 in southern Wolfe County and Live Kentucky arrow darters have been Creek. This unit is located almost

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61041

entirely on private land, except for any (proposed Unit 11) and Walker Creek Unit 15: Laurel Creek, Leslie County, small amount that is publicly owned in (proposed Unit 12). The valley bottom Kentucky the form of bridge crossings and road surrounding this proposed unit is Proposed Unit 15 is located south of easements. forested, but numerous unpaved roads, US 421/KY 80 in western Leslie County Land use surrounding this proposed oil and gas well sites, and scattered and includes 4.1 skm (2.6 smi) of Laurel unit is similar to that of Little Fork residences occur along the ridgetops to Creek from its confluence with Sandlick (proposed Unit 11) and Hell Creek the east and west of the stream. A Branch downstream to its confluence (proposed Unit 13). The valley bottom is narrow, unmaintained dirt road runs with Left Fork Rockhouse Creek. A densely forested, but numerous parallel to and east of proposed Unit 13 single live Kentucky arrow darter has unpaved roads, oil and gas well sites, upstream of the Hell Creek Road been captured from this unit, and scattered residences occur along the ridgetops to the east and west of the crossing; off-road vehicle use is approximately 0.48 skm (0.3 smi) from stream. A narrow, unmaintained dirt common. This unit helps to maintain the confluence with Left Fork road (Walker Creek Road) runs parallel the geographical range of the species Rockhouse Creek (Thomas 2013, pers. to and east of this unit for its entire (population redundancy) and provides comm.). A small portion of this length; off-road vehicle use is common. opportunity for population growth. proposed unit is privately owned (0.7 skm (0.5 smi)), but the remainder of the This unit helps to maintain the Within proposed Unit 13, the geographical range of the species (adds unit is in Federal ownership Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat (administered by DNBF). Land and population redundancy), contributes to may require special management genetic exchange between several resource management decisions and considerations or protection to address activities within the DBNF are guided streams in the Walker Creek watershed, adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water and likely serves as an important source by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1– pollution) associated with oil and gas 14). This unit adds population population in the northern limits of the exploration activities, off-road vehicle species’ range. redundancy and provides opportunity use, road runoff, canopy loss, and legacy Within proposed Unit 12, the for population growth. Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat effects of previous oil and gas well The watershed surrounding proposed may require special management development. These threats are in Unit 15 is entirely forested, with no considerations or protection to address addition to random effects of drought, private residences or other structures. adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water floods, or other natural phenomena. Within proposed Unit 15, the Kentucky pollution) associated with oil and gas arrow darter and its habitat may require Unit 14: Big Laurel Creek, Harlan special management considerations or exploration activities, off-road vehicle County, Kentucky use, road runoff, canopy loss, and legacy protection to address adverse effects effects of previous oil and gas well Proposed Unit 14 is located off KY (e.g., siltation, water pollution) development. These threats are in 221 and Big Laurel Creek Road in associated with illegal off-road vehicle addition to random effects of drought, northern Harlan County and includes use, road runoff, and timber floods, or other natural phenomena. 9.1 skm (5.7 smi) of Big Laurel Creek management. These threats are in addition to random effects of drought, from its confluence with Combs Fork Unit 13: Hell Creek and Tributaries, Lee floods, or other natural phenomena. County, Kentucky downstream to its confluence with Unit 16: Hell For Certain Creek and Proposed Unit 13 is located between Greasy Creek. Live Kentucky arrow Tributaries, Leslie County, Kentucky KY 11 and Shumaker Road in northern darters have been captured from this Lee County. This unit includes 2.3 skm unit near its confluence with White Oak Proposed Unit 16 is located off Hell (1.4 smi) of Miller Fork from its Branch (Thomas 2008, p. 5; Service For Certain Road between KY 1482 and headwaters downstream to its 2012, pp. 1–4). This unit is located KY 257 in northern Leslie County. This confluence with Hell Creek, 0.7 skm (0.4 almost entirely on private land, except unit includes 1.3 skm (0.8 smi) of smi) of Bowman Fork from its for any small amount that is publicly Cucumber Branch from its headwaters headwaters downstream to its owned in the form of bridge crossings downstream to its confluence with Hell confluence with Hell Creek, 1.9 skm (1.2 and road easements. This unit adds For Certain Creek, 3.1 skm (1.9 smi) of smi) of an unnamed tributary of Hell population redundancy at the Big Fork from its headwaters Creek from its headwaters downstream southeastern edge of the species’ range. downstream to its confluence with Hell to its confluence with Hell Creek, and The valley bottom and hillsides For Certain Creek, and 11.4 skm (7.1 smi) of Hell For Certain Creek from its 7.1 skm (4.4 smi) of Hell Creek from the surrounding proposed Unit 14 are headwaters downstream to its outflow of an unnamed reservoir densely forested, but extensive surface downstream to its confluence with confluence with Middle Fork Kentucky coal mining within the watershed has North Fork Kentucky River. Live River. Live Kentucky arrow darters have created clearings along the ridgetops Kentucky arrow darters have been been captured from proposed Unit 16 at captured within proposed Unit 13 from and has resulted in five valley (hollow) multiple locations upstream of its the Hell Creek mainstem near the Hell fills that are located within tributaries of confluence with Big Fork (Thomas 2008, Creek Road low-water crossing and from Big Laurel Creek. Within proposed Unit p. 4; Service unpublished data). A an unnamed tributary of Hell Creek near 14, the Kentucky arrow darter and its portion of this proposed unit is in the Hell Creek Road low-water crossing habitat may require special management Federal ownership (administered by (Thomas 2008, p. 5; Service 2012, pp. 1– considerations or protection to address DBNF) (4.4 skm (2.8 smi)), but the 4). This unit is located almost entirely adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water majority of the unit is in private on private land, except for any small pollution) associated with historical ownership. For the portion of the unit amount that is publicly owned in the surface coal mining, off-road vehicle in Federal ownership, land and resource form of bridge crossings and road use, road runoff, logging, and canopy management decisions and activities easements. loss. These threats are in addition to within the DBNF are guided by DBNF’s Land use surrounding this proposed random effects of drought, floods, or LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit unit is similar to that of Little Fork other natural phenomena. represents a stronghold for the species

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61042 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

within the Middle Fork Kentucky River adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water drought, floods, or other natural sub-basin and likely acts a source pollution) associated with road runoff, phenomena. population. This unit is also important inadequate sewage treatment, Unit 19: Upper Bear Creek and for maintaining the distribution and agricultural runoff, inadequate riparian Tributaries, Clay County, Kentucky genetic diversity of the species within buffers, construction and maintenance the Middle Fork sub-basin. of county roads, illegal off-road vehicle Proposed Unit 19 is located along KY The valley bottom surrounding use, logging, and historical surface coal 1524 and Upper Bear Creek Road in proposed Unit 16 is narrow mining. These threats are in addition to southeastern Clay County. This unit (approximately 100 m (328 ft) at its random effects of drought, floods, or includes 1.5 skm (1.0 smi) of Left Fork widest) and comprised of a mixture of other natural phenomena. Upper Bear Creek from its headwaters small farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields) and downstream to its confluence with scattered residences along Hell For Unit 18: Blue Hole Creek and Left Fork Upper Bear Creek, 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) of Certain Road. The ridgetops and Blue Hole Creek, Clay County, Kentucky Right Fork Upper Bear Creek from its hillsides are relatively undisturbed and Proposed Unit 18 is located along KY headwaters downstream to its dominated by forest. Within proposed 1524 in southeastern Clay County. This confluence with Upper Bear Creek, and Unit 16, the Kentucky arrow darter and unit includes 1.8 skm (1.1 smi) of Left 4.5 skm (2.8 smi) of Upper Bear Creek its habitat may require special Fork from its headwaters downstream to from its confluence with Left Fork and management considerations or its confluence with Blue Hole Creek and Right Fork Upper Bear Creek protection to address adverse effects 3.9 skm (2.4 smi) of Blue Hole Creek downstream to its confluence with the (e.g., siltation, water pollution) from its confluence with Dry Branch Red Bird River. Live Kentucky arrow associated with road runoff, inadequate downstream to its confluence with the darters have been captured from sewage treatment, inadequate riparian Red Bird River. Live Kentucky arrow proposed Unit 19 in two locations buffers, construction and maintenance darters have been captured from Unit 18 downstream of the Left and Right Forks of county roads, agricultural runoff, near the mouth of Cow Hollow (Thomas (Thomas 2008, p. 4). A small portion of illegal off-road vehicle use, logging, and 2008, p. 4). This unit is entirely in this unit is privately owned (0.2 skm timber management (on DBNF). These Federal ownership (administered by (0.1 smi)), but the majority of the unit threats are in addition to random effects DNBF). Land and resource management is in Federal ownership (administered of drought, floods, or other natural decisions and activities within the by DNBF). Land and resource phenomena. DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP management decisions and activities within the DBNF are guided by DBNF’s Unit 17: Squabble Creek, Perry County, (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit comprises a portion of the species’ core LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit Kentucky comprises a portion of the species’ core This proposed unit is located south of population within the Red Bird River watershed and contributes to population within the Red Bird River KY 28, just downstream of Buckhorn watershed and contributes to Lake Dam and near the community of connectivity of streams within the watershed. connectivity of streams within the Buckhorn in northwestern Perry watershed. County. Proposed Unit 17 includes 12.0 The watershed surrounding proposed The watershed surrounding proposed skm (7.5 smi) of Squabble Creek from its Unit 18 is entirely forested, with no Unit 19 is primarily forested, but a few confluence with Long Fork downstream private residences or other structures. scattered residences and small farms are to its confluence with Middle Fork The only interruption in the canopy is located along KY 1524 in the upstream Kentucky River. Live Kentucky arrow the KY 1525 corridor, which traverses (western) half of the watershed. Upper darters have been captured from this most of the valley. One additional road, Bear Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird River unit near its confluence with Big Branch Blue Hole School Road, is located at the tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) that (Service unpublished data). This unit is headwaters of Blue Hole Creek, leading support Kentucky arrow populations located almost entirely on private land, to a small cemetery site. Blue Hole (Thomas 2008, entire; Service 2012, except for any small amount that is Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird River entire). See the description of proposed publicly owned in the form of bridge tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) that Unit 18 for more information regarding crossings and road easements. This unit support Kentucky arrow populations the characterization of the streams helps to maintain the geographical range (Thomas 2008, entire; Service 2012, within this drainage. of the species and provides opportunity entire). Collectively, these streams Within proposed Unit 19, the for population growth. represent the largest, most significant Kentucky arrow darter and its habitats The valley surrounding proposed Unit cluster of occupied streams and are may require special management 17 is narrow (approximately 113 m (370 characterized by intact riparian zones considerations or protection to address ft) at its widest) and comprised of a with negligible residential development, adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water mixture of residences (many in clusters) high gradients with abundant riffles, pollution) associated with road runoff, and small farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields) cool temperatures, low conductivities illegal off-road vehicle use, agricultural scattered along KY 2022, which (less than 100 mS/cm), and stable runoff, and timber management (on parallels Squabble Creek for much of its channels with clean cobble and boulder DBNF). These threats are in addition to length. Ridgetops and hillsides in most substrates (Thomas 2008, p. 4; Service random effects of drought, floods, or of the Squabble Creek valley are 2014, p. 6). other natural phenomena. relatively undisturbed and dominated Within proposed Unit 18, the by forest; however, surface coal mining Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat Unit 20: Katies Creek, Clay County, has occurred along ridgetops (to the may require special management Kentucky north and south of Squabble Creek) in considerations or protection to address Proposed Unit 20 is located along the downstream half of the drainage. adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water Katies Creek Road in southeastern Clay Within proposed Unit 17, the pollution) associated with road runoff, County and includes 5.7 skm (3.5 smi) Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat illegal off-road vehicle use, and timber of Katies Creek from its confluence with may require special management management (on DBNF). These threats Cave Branch downstream to its considerations or protection to address are in addition to random effects of confluence with the Red Bird River.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61043

Live Kentucky arrow darters have been connectivity of streams within the connectivity of streams within the captured from this unit approximately watershed. watershed. 0.2 skm (0.12 smi) upstream of the The watershed surrounding proposed The watershed surrounding this unit mouth of Katies Creek (Thomas 2008, p. Unit 21 is relatively undisturbed and is relatively undisturbed and dominated 4). A small portion of this unit is dominated by forest; however, a few by forest. A few scattered residences are privately owned (1.7 skm (1 smi)), but scattered residences are located along a located along Bowen Creek Road near the majority of the unit is in Federal short segment (approximately 0.8 skm the mid-point of the valley, and others ownership (administered by DNBF). (0.5 smi)) of Lower Spring Creek Road are located further upstream along KY Land and resource management near its junction with KY 66 and along 406. Bowen Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird decisions and activities within the Sand Hill Road and Spring Creek Road River tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP at the western (upstream) end of the that support Kentucky arrow (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit drainage. The stream corridor between populations (Thomas 2008, entire; comprises a portion of the species’ core these two areas, an approximate 6.4-skm Service 2012, entire). See the population within the Red Bird River (4-smi) segment, is inaccessible except description of proposed Unit 18 for watershed and contributes to by off-road vehicle. About 10 oil wells more information regarding the connectivity of streams within the are located along ridgetops and hillsides characterization of the streams within watershed. near the mouth of Spring Creek, and this drainage. The watershed surrounding proposed these sites are connected by a network Within Unit 22, the Kentucky arrow Unit 20 is entirely forested, with no of unpaved roads. Spring Creek is 1 of darter and its habitat may require private residences or other structures. 11 Red Bird River tributaries (proposed special management considerations or The only interruption in the canopy is Units 18–28) that support Kentucky protection to address adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water pollution) the Katies Creek Road corridor, which arrow populations (Thomas 2008, associated with road runoff, illegal off- traverses the valley. Katies Creek is 1 of entire; Service 2012, entire). See the road vehicle use, inadequate sewage 11 Red Bird River tributaries (proposed description of proposed Unit 18 for treatment, logging (on private land), and Units 18–28) that support Kentucky more information regarding the timber management (on DBNF). These arrow populations (Thomas 2008, characterization of the streams within threats are in addition to random effects entire; Service 2012, entire). See the this drainage. Within proposed Unit 21, the of drought, floods, or other natural description of proposed Unit 18 for Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat phenomena. more information regarding the may require special management characterization of the streams within Unit 23: Elisha Creek and Tributaries, considerations or protection to address Leslie County, Kentucky this drainage. adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water Within proposed Unit 20, the pollution) associated with road runoff, Proposed Unit 23 is located east of KY Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat off-road vehicle use, inadequate sewage 66 and adjacent to Elisha Creek Road in may require special management treatment, logging (on private land), western Leslie County. This unit considerations or protection to address timber management (on DBNF), and oil includes 4.4 skm (2.7 smi) of Right Fork adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water and gas exploration activities. These Elisha Creek from its headwaters pollution) associated with road runoff, threats are in addition to random effects downstream to its confluence with illegal off-road vehicle use, logging (on of drought, floods, or other natural Elisha Creek, 2.3 skm (1.4 smi) of Left private land), and timber management phenomena. Fork Elisha Creek from its headwaters (on DBNF). These threats are in addition downstream to its confluence with to random effects of drought, floods, or Unit 22: Bowen Creek and Tributaries, Elisha Creek, and 2.9 skm (1.8 smi) of other natural phenomena. Leslie County, Kentucky Elisha Creek from its confluence with Unit 21: Spring Creek and Little Spring Proposed Unit 22 is located east of KY Right Fork Elisha Creek downstream to 66 and adjacent to Bowen Creek Road in Creek, Clay County, Kentucky its confluence with the Red Bird River. western Leslie County. This unit Live Kentucky arrow darters have been Proposed Unit 21 is located west of includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) of Laurel captured throughout proposed Unit 23 KY 66 in southeastern Clay County. Fork from its headwaters downstream to (Service unpublished data). A portion of This unit includes 1.0 skm (0.6 smi) of its confluence with Bowen Creek, 1.8 this proposed unit is privately owned Little Spring Creek from its headwaters skm (1.1 smi) of Amy Branch from its (3.0 skm (1.9 smi)), but the majority of downstream to its confluence with headwaters downstream to its the unit is in Federal ownership Spring Creek and 8.2 skm (5.1 smi) of confluence with Bowen Creek, and 9.6 (administered by DNBF). Land and Spring Creek from its headwaters skm (6.0 smi) of Bowen Creek from its resource management decisions and downstream to its confluence with the headwaters downstream to the Red Bird activities within the DBNF are guided Red Bird River. Live Kentucky arrow River. Live Kentucky arrow darters have by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1– darters have been captured within been captured from proposed Unit 22 14). This unit comprises a portion of the proposed Unit 21 approximately 0.2 near its confluence with Blevins Branch species’ core population within the Red skm (0.1 smi) upstream of the mouth of and Hurricane Branch (Service Bird River watershed and contributes to Spring Creek (Thomas 2008, p. 4). A unpublished data). A portion of this connectivity of streams within the portion of this unit is privately owned unit is privately owned (2.0 skm (1.2 watershed. (3.6 skm (2.2 smi)), but the majority of smi)), but the majority of the unit is in The watershed surrounding proposed the unit is in Federal ownership Federal ownership (administered by Unit 23 is relatively undisturbed and (administered by DNBF). Land and DNBF). Land and resource management dominated by forest. A few scattered resource management decisions and decisions and activities within the residences are located along Elisha activities within the DBNF are guided DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP Creek Road at the downstream end of by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1– (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit the Elisha Creek valley (near the mouth 14). This unit comprises a portion of the comprises a portion of the species’ core of Elisha Creek). A few oil and gas wells species’ core population within the Red population within the Red Bird River are scattered throughout the drainage. Bird River watershed and contributes to watershed and contributes to Elisha Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird River

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61044 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) that land), timber management (on DBNF), Big Double Creek from its headwaters support Kentucky arrow populations inadequate sewage treatment, downstream to its confluence with Big (Thomas 2008, entire; Service 2012, agricultural runoff, and natural gas and Double Creek, 1.8 skm (1.1 smi) of Right entire). See the description of proposed oil exploration activities. These threats Fork Big Double Creek from its Unit 18 for more information regarding are in addition to random effects of headwaters downstream to its the characterization of the streams drought, floods, or other natural confluence with Big Double Creek, and within this drainage. phenomena. 7.1 skm (4.4 smi) of Big Double Creek Within proposed Unit 23, the from its headwaters downstream to its Kentucky arrow darter and its habitats Unit 25: Sugar Creek, Clay and Leslie Counties, Kentucky confluence with the Red Bird River. may require special management Live Kentucky arrow darters have been considerations or protection to address Proposed Unit 25 is located off Sugar captured from numerous localities in adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water Creek Road in southeastern Clay County proposed Unit 26, which has been pollution) associated with road runoff, and western Leslie County and includes surveyed regularly by KDFWR and illegal off-road vehicle use, logging (on 7.2 skm (4.5 smi) of Sugar Creek from private land), timber management (on its headwaters downstream to its Service personnel (Thomas 2008, p. 4; DBNF), inadequate sewage treatment, confluence with the Red Bird River. Thomas et al. 2014, p. 23; Service and natural gas and oil exploration Live Kentucky arrow darters have been unpublished data). This unit is entirely activities. These threats are in addition captured throughout this unit (Thomas in Federal ownership (administered by to random effects of drought, floods, or 2008, p. 4; Thomas et al. 2014, p. 23). DNBF). Land and resource management other natural phenomena. A portion of this unit is privately owned decisions and activities within the (1.1 skm (0.7 smi)), but the majority of DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP Unit 24: Gilberts Big Creek, Clay and the unit is in Federal ownership (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit Leslie Counties, Kentucky (administered by DNBF). Land and comprises a portion of the species’ core Proposed Unit 24 is located east of KY resource management decisions and population within the Red Bird River 66 and generally parallel to Gilberts activities within the DBNF are guided watershed and contributes to Creek Road in southeastern Clay County by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1– connectivity of streams within the and western Leslie County. This 14). This unit comprises a portion of the watershed. proposed unit includes 7.2 skm (4.5 species’ core population within the Red The watershed surrounding proposed smi) of Gilberts Big Creek from its Bird River watershed and contributes to Unit 26 is relatively undisturbed and headwaters downstream to its connectivity of streams within the confluence with the Red Bird River. watershed. dominated by forest, with about 90 Live Kentucky arrow darters have been The watershed surrounding proposed percent in Federal ownership captured throughout this unit. A portion Unit 25 is relatively undisturbed and (administered by DBNF). The only of this unit is privately owned (2.0 skm dominated by forest. A few scattered residential development is concentrated (1.2 smi)), but the majority of the unit residences and small farms are located along Arnett Fork Road, which parallels is in Federal ownership (administered along Sugar Creek Road at the Arnett Fork, a first order tributary of Big by DNBF). Land and resource downstream end of the valley near the Double Creek. A USFS public use area management decisions and activities mouth of Sugar Creek. Several gas and (Big Double Creek Recreational Area) is within the DBNF are guided by DBNF’s oil wells are also scattered throughout located adjacent to Unit 26, LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit the valley. Sugar Creek is 1 of 11 Red approximately 1.6 skm (1.0 smi) comprises a portion of the species’ core Bird River tributaries (proposed Units upstream of Arnett Fork. This area population within the Red Bird River 18–28) that support Kentucky arrow consists of a gravel road and parking lot, watershed and contributes to populations (Thomas 2008, entire; a bathroom facility, several picnic connectivity of streams within the Service 2012, entire). See the tables, and two maintained fields watershed. description of proposed Unit 18 for connected by a pedestrian bridge over The watershed surrounding proposed more information regarding the Big Double Creek. Upstream of the Unit 24 is relatively undisturbed and characterization of the streams within public use area, Big Double Creek can be dominated by forest. A few scattered this drainage. accessed via USFS Road 1501, which residences and small farms are located Within proposed Unit 25, the extends upstream to the confluence of along Gilberts Creek Road at the Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat the Left and Right Forks. Big Double downstream end of the valley near the may require special management Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird River mouth of Gilberts Big Creek. Several gas considerations or protection to address tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) that and oil wells are also scattered adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water support Kentucky arrow populations throughout the valley. Gilberts Big pollution) associated with road runoff, (Thomas 2008, entire; Service 2012, Creek is 1 of 11 Red Bird River off-road vehicle use, logging (on private entire). See the description of proposed tributaries (proposed Units 18–28) that land), timber management (on DBNF), Unit 18 for more information regarding support Kentucky arrow populations inadequate sewage treatment, the characterization of the streams (Thomas 2008, entire; Service 2012, agricultural runoff, and natural gas and within this drainage. entire). See the description of proposed oil exploration activities. These threats Unit 18 for more information regarding are in addition to random effects of Within proposed Unit 26, the the characterization of the streams drought, floods, or other natural Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat within this drainage. phenomena. may require special management Within proposed Unit 24, the considerations or protection to address Kentucky arrow darter and its habitats Unit 26: Big Double Creek and adverse effects (e.g., siltation) associated may require special management Tributaries, Clay County, Kentucky with road runoff, off-road vehicle use, considerations or protection to address Proposed Unit 26 is located adjacent and timber management (on DBNF). adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water to Big Double Creek Road in These threats are in addition to random pollution) associated with road runoff, southeastern Clay County. This unit effects of drought, floods, or other off-road vehicle use, logging (on private includes 1.4 skm (0.9 smi) of Left Fork natural phenomena.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61045

Unit 27: Little Double Creek, Clay For the portion of the unit in Federal species’ core population within the Red County, Kentucky ownership (administered by DBNF), Bird River watershed and contributes to Proposed Unit 27 is located adjacent land and resource management connectivity of streams within the to Little Double Creek Road in decisions and activities within the watershed. The watershed surrounding proposed southeastern Clay County. This unit DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP Unit 29 is entirely forested, with no includes 3.4 skm (2.1 smi) of Little (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit private residences or other structures. Double Creek from its headwaters comprises a portion of the species’ core The only minor interruption in the downstream to its confluence with the population within the Red Bird River watershed and contributes to canopy of the watershed is the USFS Red Bird River. Live Kentucky arrow connectivity of streams within the Road 1633 corridor, which parallels darters have been captured from two watershed. Long Fork for part of its length. Habitats localities in proposed Unit 27 (Thomas The valley bottom surrounding in Long Fork are similar to other 2008, p. 4; Service unpublished data). proposed Unit 28 is comprised of a occupied streams (proposed Units 18– One hundred percent of this unit is in mixture of residences (many in clusters) 28) in the Red Bird River drainage. See Federal ownership (administered by and small farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields) the description of proposed Unit 18 for DBNF), and the DBNF’s Redbird Ranger scattered along Jacks Creek Road, which more information regarding the District headquarters is located off KY parallels Jacks Creek for most of its characterization of the streams within 66 at the mouth of Little Double Creek. length. Ridgetops and hillsides in most the Red Bird drainage. Land and resource management of the valley are relatively undisturbed Within proposed Unit 29, the decisions and activities within the and dominated by forest. Jacks Creek is Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP 1 of 11 Red Bird River tributaries may require special management (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit (proposed Units 18–28) that support considerations or protection to address comprises a portion of the species’ core Kentucky arrow populations (Thomas adverse effects (e.g., siltation) associated population within the Red Bird River 2008, entire; Service 2012, entire). See with road runoff, illegal off-road vehicle watershed and contributes to the description of proposed Unit 18 for use, and timber management (on DBNF). connectivity of streams within the more information regarding the These threats are in addition to random watershed. characterization of the streams within effects of drought, floods, or other The watershed surrounding proposed this drainage. natural phenomena. Unit 27 is entirely forested, with no Within proposed Unit 28, the Unit 30: Horse Creek, Clay County, private residences or other structures. Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat Kentucky The only interruption in the canopy of may require special management the watershed is the Little Double Creek considerations or protection to address Proposed Unit 30 is located adjacent Road corridor, which traverses the adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water to Reynolds Road and Elijah Feltner length of the valley. Little Double Creek pollution) associated with road runoff, Road in southwestern Clay County. It is 1 of 11 Red Bird River tributaries inadequate sewage treatment, includes 5.0 skm (3.1 smi) of Horse (proposed Units 18–28) that support agricultural runoff, inadequate riparian Creek from its headwaters downstream Kentucky arrow populations (Thomas buffers, construction and maintenance to its confluence with Pigeon Roost 2008, entire; Service 2012, entire). See of county roads, illegal off-road vehicle Branch. Live Kentucky arrow darters the description of proposed Unit 18 for use, logging (on private land), and have been captured within this unit more information regarding the timber management (on DBNF). These approximately 1.9 skm (1.2 smi) characterization of the streams within threats are in addition to random effects downstream of the confluence of Horse this drainage. of drought, floods, or other natural Creek and Tuttle Branch (Service Within proposed Unit 27, the phenomena. unpublished data). A portion of Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat proposed Unit 30 is in Federal may require special management Unit 29: Long Fork, Clay County, ownership (2.0 skm (1.2 smi)), but the considerations or protection to address Kentucky majority of the unit is privately owned. adverse effects (e.g., siltation) associated Proposed Unit 29 is located along For the portion of the basin in Federal with road runoff, illegal off-road vehicle USFS Road 1633, which is west of KY ownership (administered by DBNF), use, and timber management (on DBNF). 149 and the Hal Rogers Parkway in land and resource management These threats are in addition to random eastern Clay County. Unit 29 includes decisions and activities within the effects of drought, floods, or other 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) of Long Fork from its DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP natural phenomena. headwaters downstream to its (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit helps confluence with Hector Branch. Live to maintain the geographical range of Unit 28: Jacks Creek, Clay County, Kentucky arrow darters have been the species and represents the only Kentucky captured throughout proposed Unit 29 occupied habitat within the Goose Creek This proposed unit is located along as a result of a reintroduction effort by watershed. Jacks Creek Road, north of Hal Rogers KDFWR and Conservation Fisheries, The valley bottom surrounding Parkway and east of KY 66 in eastern Inc. (CFI) of Knoxville, Tennessee proposed Unit 30 is comprised of a Clay County. Unit 28 includes 5.9 skm (Thomas et al. 2014, p. 23) (see mixture of forest, small farms, and (3.7 smi) of Jacks Creek from its Available Conservation Measures residences. Ridgetops and hillsides in headwaters downstream to its section of our proposed listing rule most of the valley are relatively confluence with the Red Bird River. published elsewhere in today’s Federal undisturbed and dominated by forest. Live Kentucky arrow darters have been Register). One hundred percent of this Within proposed Unit 30, the Kentucky captured from proposed Unit 28 just unit is in Federal ownership arrow darter and its habitat may require downstream of the Crib Branch (administered by DBNF). Land and special management considerations or confluence (Service 2012, entire). A resource management decisions and protection to address adverse effects small portion of this unit is in Federal activities within the DBNF are guided (e.g., siltation, water pollution) ownership (0.5 skm (0.3 smi)), but the by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, pp. 1– associated with road runoff, agricultural majority of the unit is privately owned. 14). This unit comprises a portion of the runoff, inadequate sewage treatment,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61046 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

lack of riparian buffers, construction Unit 32: Buffalo Creek and Tributaries, maintenance of roads, illegal off-road and maintenance of county roads, illegal Owsley County, Kentucky vehicle use, logging (on private land), off-road vehicle use, and logging on Proposed Unit 32 is located north of and timber management (on DBNF). private land and timber management on Oneida, Kentucky, and east of KY 11 in These threats are in addition to random DBNF. These threats are in addition to southeastern Owsley County. This unit effects of drought, floods, or other random effects of drought, floods, or includes 2.0 skm (1.2 smi) of Cortland natural phenomena. other natural phenomena. Fork from its headwaters downstream to Unit 33: Lower Buffalo Creek, Lee and Unit 31: Bullskin Creek, Clay and Leslie its confluence with Laurel Fork, 6.4 skm Owsley Counties, Kentucky Counties, Kentucky (4.0 smi) of Laurel Fork from its Proposed Unit 33 is located along KY headwaters downstream to its 1411 and Straight Fork-Zeke Branch Proposed Unit 31 is located along KY confluence with Left Fork Buffalo Creek, Road in southern Lee and northern 1482, east of the town of Oneida, 4.6 skm (2.9 smi) of Lucky Fork from its Owsley Counties. This unit includes 2.2 Kentucky, in eastern Clay County and headwaters downstream to its skm (1.4 smi) of Straight Fork from its northwestern Leslie County. It includes confluence with Left Fork Buffalo Creek, headwaters downstream to its 21.7 skm (13.5 smi) of Bullskin Creek 5.1 skm (3.2 smi) of Left Fork Buffalo confluence with Lower Buffalo Creek from its confluence with Old House Creek from its headwaters downstream and 5.1 skm (3.2 smi) of Lower Buffalo Branch downstream to its confluence to its confluence with Buffalo Creek, Creek from its confluence with Straight with the South Fork Kentucky River. 17.3 skm (10.8 smi) of Right Fork Fork downstream to its confluence with Live Kentucky arrow darters have been Buffalo Creek from its headwaters the South Fork Kentucky River. Live captured from Unit 31 at the confluence downstream to its confluence with Kentucky arrow darters have been of Long Branch and just upstream of the Buffalo Creek, and 2.7 skm (1.7 smi) of captured within proposed Unit 33 at the confluence of Barger Branch (Thomas Buffalo Creek from its confluence with confluence of Lower Buffalo Creek and 2008, p. 4; Service 2012, entire). A small Left Fork Buffalo Creek and Right Fork Straight Fork (Thomas 2008, p. 4). This portion of this unit is in Federal Buffalo Creek downstream to its unit is located almost entirely on private ownership (0.4 skm (0.2 smi)), but the confluence with the South Fork land, except for any small amount that majority of the unit is privately owned. Kentucky River. Live Kentucky arrow is publicly owned in the form of bridge For the portion of the basin in Federal darters have been captured from crossings and road easements. This unit ownership (administered by DBNF), multiple locations throughout proposed helps to maintain the geographical range land and resource management Unit 32 (Thomas 2008, p. 4; Service of the species and provides opportunity decisions and activities within the 2012, entire). A portion of this unit is for population growth. DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP in Federal ownership (administered by Ridgetops and hillsides in most of the (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit helps DBNF) (14.9 skm (9.3 smi)), but the valley surrounding proposed Unit 33 are to maintain the geographical range of majority of the unit is in private relatively undisturbed and dominated the species and provides opportunity for ownership. For the portion in Federal by forest, but large portions of the valley population growth. ownership, land and resource bottom surrounding proposed Unit 33 management decisions and activities are The valley bottom surrounding have been cleared and consist of a guided by DBNF’s LRMP (USFS 2004, mixture of residences (many in clusters) proposed Unit 31 is comprised of a pp. 1–14). This unit represents a mixture of residences (many in clusters) and small farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields, stronghold for the species within the row crops). Extensive logging has and small farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields) lower half of the South Fork Kentucky scattered along KY 1482, which occurred recently (within the last 7 River sub-basin and likely acts a source years) within Jerushia Branch, a first parallels Bullskin Creek for its entire population. length. Ridgetops and hillsides in most order tributary of Lower Buffalo Creek. Ridgetops and hillsides in most of the Within this unit, the Kentucky arrow of the valley are relatively undisturbed valley surrounding proposed Unit 32 are darter and its habitat may require and dominated by forest, but a few relatively undisturbed and dominated special management considerations or watersheds show signs of active or by forest, but portions of the valley protection to address adverse effects recent disturbance. Surface coal mining bottom surrounding Unit 32 have been (e.g., siltation, water pollution) is currently ongoing in the watersheds cleared and consist of a mixture of associated with road runoff, of Wiles Branch (Permit #826–0649), residences (many in clusters) and small construction and maintenance of roads, Barger Branch (Permit #826–0664), and farms (e.g., pasture, hayfields, row inadequate sewage treatment, a few unnamed tributaries of Bullskin crops) scattered along roadways. Surface inadequate riparian buffers, agricultural Creek (Permit #826–0664). Recent coal mining has has been conducted runoff, illegal off-road vehicle use, and logging activities have occurred in the recently or is currently ongoing in the logging. These threats are in addition to watershed of Panco Branch. headwaters of Left Fork Buffalo Creek, random effects of drought, floods, or Within proposed Unit 31, the specifically Stamper Branch of Lucky other natural phenomena. Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat Fork (Permit #895–0175), Cortland Fork may require special management of Laurel Fork (Permit #813–0271), and Unit 34: Silver Creek, Lee County, considerations or protection to address Joyce Fork of Laurel Fork (Permit #895– Kentucky adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water 0175). Proposed Unit 34 is located along pollution) associated with road runoff, Within proposed Unit 32, the along Silver Creek Road, partially surface coal mining, inadequate sewage Kentucky arrow darter and its habitat within the city limits of Beattyville in treatment, agricultural runoff, lack of may require special management central Lee County. This unit includes riparian buffers, construction and considerations or protection to address 6.2 skm (3.9 smi) of Silver Creek from maintenance of county roads, illegal off- adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water its headwaters downstream to its road vehicle use, and logging. These pollution) associated with road runoff, confluence with the Kentucky River. threats are in addition to random effects surface coal mining, inadequate sewage Live Kentucky arrow darters have been of drought, floods, or other natural treatment, inadequate riparian buffers, captured within proposed Unit 34 phenomena. agricultural runoff, construction and approximately 1.4 skm (0.9 smi)

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61047

upstream of the mouth of Silver Creek effects of drought, floods, or other species’ range and increases population (Thomas 2008, p. 5). This unit is located natural phenomena. redundancy within the species’ range. almost entirely on private land, except The watershed surrounding proposed Unit 36: Wild Dog Creek, Jackson and for any small amount that is publicly Unit 37 is relatively undisturbed and Owsley Counties, Kentucky owned in the form of bridge crossings dominated by forest, but a few scattered and road easements. This unit helps to Proposed Unit 36 is located west of residences and small farms occur in the maintain the geographical range of the Sturgeon Creek in eastern Jackson and headwaters just east of KY 587. Within species and provides opportunity for northwestern Owsley Counties. This proposed Unit 37, the Kentucky arrow population growth. unit includes 8.1 skm (5.1 smi) of Wild darter and its habitat may require The valley surrounding proposed Unit Dog Creek from its headwaters special management considerations or 34 is unusual among occupied downstream to its confluence with protection to address adverse effects watersheds because it is not located in Sturgeon Creek. Live Kentucky arrow (e.g., siltation, water pollution) a rural area. The mouth of Silver Creek darters have been captured within associated with road runoff, (downstream terminus of Unit 34) is proposed Unit 36 just upstream of the construction and maintenance of roads, located within the city limits of mouth of Wild Dog Creek. A portion of illegal off-road vehicle use, inadequate Beattyville, and the downstream half of this unit is in Federal ownership (3.8 riparian buffers, agricultural runoff, the watershed is moderately developed, skm (2.4 smi)), but the majority of the logging (on private land), timber with numerous residences along Silver unit is in private ownership. For the management (on DBNF), and inadequate Creek Road. The upstream half of the portion of the unit in Federal ownership sewage treatment. These threats are in watershed is less developed and (administered by DBNF), land and addition to random effects of drought, dominated by forest. Within this unit, resource management decisions and floods, or other natural phenomena. the Kentucky arrow darter and its activities are guided by DBNF’s LRMP habitat may require special management Unit 38: Rockbridge Fork, Wolfe County, (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit Kentucky considerations or protection to address represents the western extent of the adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water species’ range and increases population Proposed Unit 38 is located within pollution) associated with road runoff, redundancy within the species’ range. the Red River Gorge region in construction and maintenance of roads, The watershed surrounding proposed northwestern Wolfe County and inadequate sewage treatment, Unit 36 is relatively undisturbed and represents the only occupied habitat inadequate riparian buffers, and illegal dominated by forest, but a few scattered within the Red River drainage. This unit off-road vehicle use. These threats are in residences and small farms occur in the includes 4.5 skm (2.8 smi) of Rockbridge addition to random effects of drought, headwaters just east of KY 587. Within Fork from its confluence with Harris floods, or other natural phenomena. proposed Unit 36, the Kentucky arrow Branch downstream to its confluence Unit 35: Travis Creek, Jackson County, darter and its habitat may require with Sturgeon Creek. Live Kentucky Kentucky special management considerations or arrow darters have been captured within proposed Unit 38 approximately 0.2 Proposed Unit 35 is located along protection to address adverse effects (e.g., siltation, water pollution) skm (0.1 smi) upstream of the mouth of Travis Creek Road in eastern Jackson Rockbridge Fork. This unit is entirely in County. This unit includes 4.1 skm (2.5 associated with road runoff, construction and maintenance of roads, Federal ownership (administered by smi) of Travis Creek from its headwaters DBNF). Land and resource management downstream to its confluence with illegal off-road vehicle use, inadequate decisions and activities within the Hector Branch. Live Kentucky arrow riparian buffers, agricultural runoff, DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP darters have been captured within logging (on private land), timber (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit proposed Unit 35 approximately 1.8 management (on DBNF), and inadequate represents the northern extent of the skm (1.1 smi) upstream of the mouth of sewage treatment. These threats are in species’ range and increases population Travis Creek. This unit is located almost addition to random effects of drought, redundancy within the species’ range. entirely on private land, except for any floods, or other natural phenomena. The watershed surrounding proposed small amount that is publicly owned in Unit 37: Granny Dismal Creek, Lee and Unit 38 is relatively undisturbed and the form of bridge crossings and road Owsley Counties, Kentucky dominated by forest, but a few scattered easements. This unit represents the residences and small farms occur in the western extent of the species’ range and Proposed Unit 37 is located west of headwaters of Rockbridge Fork near the increases population redundancy within Sturgeon Creek in western Lee and Mountain Parkway (KY 402). Within the species’ range. eastern Owsley Counties. This unit A few agricultural fields are located includes 6.9 skm (4.3 smi) of Granny proposed Unit 38, the Kentucky arrow near the mouth of Travis Creek, but Dismal Creek from its confluence with darter and its habitat may require most of the watershed surrounding Harris Branch downstream to its special management considerations or proposed Unit 35 is forested, with no confluence with Sturgeon Creek. Live protection to address adverse effects private residences or other structures. Kentucky arrow darters have been (e.g., siltation, water pollution) Some of the forest is early successional captured within proposed Unit 37 associated with road runoff, illegal off- due to recent logging in the watershed. approximately 1.1 skm (0.7 smi) road vehicle use, agricultural runoff, Within proposed Unit 35, the Kentucky upstream of the mouth of Granny timber management (on DBNF), and arrow darter and its habitat may require Dismal Creek. A portion (2.5 skm (1.6 inadequate sewage treatment. These special management considerations or smi)) of this unit is in Federal threats are in addition to random effects protection to address adverse effects ownership (administered by DBNF), but of drought, floods, or other natural (e.g., siltation, water pollution) the majority of the unit is privately phenomena. associated with road runoff, off-road owned. Land and resource management Effects of Critical Habitat Designation vehicle use, inadequate riparian buffers, decisions and activities within the construction and maintenance of county DBNF are guided by DBNF’s LRMP Section 7 Consultation roads, agricultural runoff, and logging. (USFS 2004, pp. 1–14). This unit Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires These threats are in addition to random represents the western extent of the Federal agencies, including the Service,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61048 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

to ensure that any action they fund, adversely affect, listed species or critical appreciably reduces the conservation authorize, or carry out is not likely to habitat. value of critical habitat for the Kentucky jeopardize the continued existence of When we issue a biological opinion arrow darter. As discussed above, the any endangered species or threatened concluding that a project is likely to role of critical habitat is to support life- species or result in the destruction or jeopardize the continued existence of a history needs of the species and provide adverse modification of designated listed species and/or destroy or for the conservation of the species. critical habitat of such species. In adversely modify critical habitat, we Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act provide reasonable and prudent to briefly evaluate and describe, in any requires Federal agencies to confer with alternatives to the project, if any are proposed or final regulation that the Service on any agency action which identifiable, that would avoid the designates critical habitat, activities is likely to jeopardize the continued likelihood of jeopardy and/or involving a Federal action that may existence of any species proposed to be destruction or adverse modification of destroy or adversely modify such listed under the Act or result in the critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable habitat, or that may be affected by such destruction or adverse modification of and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR designation. proposed critical habitat. 402.02) as alternative actions identified Activities that may affect critical Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit during consultation that: habitat, when carried out, funded, or Courts of Appeals have invalidated our (1) Can be implemented in a manner authorized by a Federal agency, should regulatory definition of ‘‘destruction or consistent with the intended purpose of result in consultation for the Kentucky adverse modification’’ (50 CFR 402.02) the action, arrow darter. These activities include, (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. (2) Can be implemented consistent but are not limited to: Fish and Wildlife Service, 378 F.3d 1059 with the scope of the Federal agency’s (1) Actions that would alter the (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. legal authority and jurisdiction, geomorphology of stream habitats. Such Fish and Wildlife Service, 245 F.3d 434 (3) Are economically and activities could include, but are not (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do not rely on technologically feasible, and limited to, instream excavation or this regulatory definition when (4) Would, in the Director’s opinion, dredging, impoundment, analyzing whether an action is likely to avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the channelization, road and bridge destroy or adversely modify critical continued existence of the listed species construction, surface coal mining, and habitat. Under the statutory provisions and/or avoid the likelihood of discharge of fill materials. These of the Act, we determine destruction or destroying or adversely modifying activities could cause aggradation or adverse modification on the basis of critical habitat. degradation of the channel bed whether, with implementation of the Reasonable and prudent alternatives elevation or significant bank erosion proposed Federal action, the affected can vary from slight project that would degrade or eliminate habitats critical habitat would continue to serve modifications to extensive redesign or necessary for growth and reproduction its intended conservation role for the relocation of the project. Costs of the Kentucky arrow darter. species. associated with implementing a (2) Actions that would significantly If a Federal action may affect a listed reasonable and prudent alternative are alter the existing flow regime or water species or its critical habitat, the similarly variable. quantity. Such activities could include, responsible Federal agency (action Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require but are not limited to, impoundment, agency) must enter into consultation Federal agencies to reinitiate water diversion, water withdrawal, and with us. Examples of actions that are consultation on previously reviewed hydropower generation. These activities subject to the section 7 consultation actions in instances where we have could eliminate or reduce the habitat process are actions on State, tribal, listed a new species or subsequently necessary for growth and reproduction local, or private lands that require a designated critical habitat that may be of this species. Federal permit (such as a permit from affected and the Federal agency has (3) Actions that would significantly the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under retained discretionary involvement or alter water quality (for example, section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 control over the action (or the agency’s temperature, pH, contaminants, and U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the discretionary involvement or control is excess nutrients). Such activities could Service under section 10 of the Act) or authorized by law). Consequently, include, but are not limited to, the that involve some other Federal action Federal agencies sometimes may need to release of chemicals, biological (such as funding from the Federal request reinitiation of consultation with pollutants, or heated effluents into Highway Administration, Federal us on actions for which formal surface water or connected groundwater Aviation Administration, or the Federal consultation has been completed, if at a point source or by dispersed release Emergency Management Agency). those actions with discretionary (non-point source). These activities Federal actions not affecting listed involvement or control may affect could alter water conditions to levels species or critical habitat, and actions subsequently listed species or that are beyond the tolerances of the on State, tribal, local, or private lands designated critical habitat. Kentucky arrow darter (e.g., elevated that are not federally funded or conductivity) and result in direct or Application of the ‘‘Adverse cumulative adverse effects to the species authorized, do not require section 7 Modification’’ Standard consultation. and its life cycle. As a result of section 7 consultation, The key factor related to the adverse (4) Actions that would significantly we document compliance with the modification determination is whether, alter stream bed material composition requirements of section 7(a)(2) through with implementation of the proposed and quality by increasing sediment our issuance of: Federal action, the affected critical deposition or filamentous algal growth. (1) A concurrence letter for Federal habitat would continue to serve its Such activities could include, but are actions that may affect, but are not intended conservation role for the not limited to, construction projects, likely to adversely affect, listed species species. Activities that may destroy or channel alteration, livestock grazing, or critical habitat; or adversely modify critical habitat are timber harvests, off-road vehicle use, (2) A biological opinion for Federal those that alter the physical or and other watershed and floodplain actions that may affect and are likely to biological features to an extent that disturbances that release sediments or

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61049

nutrients into the water. These activities arrow darter due to protection from species. The incremental conservation could eliminate or degrade habitats adverse modification or destruction of efforts and associated impacts would necessary for the growth and critical habitat. In practice, situations not be expected without the designation reproduction of the Kentucky arrow with a Federal nexus exist primarily on of critical habitat for the species. In darter by increasing the sediment Federal lands or for projects undertaken other words, the incremental costs are deposition to levels that would by Federal agencies. those attributable solely to the adversely affect its ability to complete After identifying the benefits of designation of critical habitat, above and its life cycle. inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, beyond the baseline costs. These are the we carefully weigh the two sides to costs we use when evaluating the Exemptions evaluate whether the benefits of benefits of inclusion and exclusion of Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. particular areas from the final If our analysis indicates that the benefits designation of critical habitat should we Section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act of exclusion outweigh the benefits of choose to conduct an optional 4(b)(2) provides that: ‘‘The Secretary shall not inclusion, we then determine whether exclusion analysis. designate as critical habitat any lands or exclusion would result in extinction. If For this proposed designation, we other geographical areas owned or exclusion of an area from critical habitat developed an incremental effects controlled by the Department of will result in extinction, we will not memorandum (IEM) considering the Defense, or designated for its use, that exclude it from the designation. probable incremental economic impacts are subject to an integrated natural The final decision on whether to that may result from this proposed resources management plan [INRMP] exclude any areas will be based on the designation of critical habitat. The prepared under section 101 of the Sikes best scientific data available at the time information contained in our IEM was Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary of the final designation, including then used to develop a screening determines in writing that such plan information obtained during the analysis of the probable effects of the provides a benefit to the species for comment period. designation of critical habitat for the which critical habitat is proposed for Consideration of Economic Impacts Kentucky arrow darter (Abt Associates designation.’’ There are no Department 2015, p. 1). The purpose of the of Defense lands with a completed Section 4(b)(2) of the Act and its screening analysis is to filter out the INRMP within the proposed critical implementing regulations require that geographic areas in which the critical habitat designation. we consider the economic impact that habitat designation is unlikely to result may result from a designation of critical Consideration of Impacts Under Section in probable incremental economic habitat. To assess the probable 4(b)(2) of the Act impacts. In particular, the screening economic impacts of a designation, we analysis considers baseline costs (i.e., Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that must first evaluate specific land uses or absent critical habitat designation) and the Secretary shall designate and make activities and projects that may occur in includes probable economic impacts revisions to critical habitat on the basis the area of the critical habitat. We then where land and water use may be of the best available scientific data after must evaluate the impacts that a specific subject to conservation plans, land taking into consideration the economic critical habitat designation may have on management plans, best management impact, national security impact, and restricting or modifying specific land practices, or regulations that protect the any other relevant impact of specifying uses or activities for the benefit of the habitat area as a result of the Federal any particular area as critical habitat. species and its habitat within the areas listing status of the species. The The Secretary may exclude an area from proposed. We then identify which screening analysis filters out particular critical habitat if she determines that the conservation efforts may be the result of areas of critical habitat that are already benefits of such exclusion outweigh the the species being listed under the Act subject to such protections and are benefits of specifying such area as part versus those attributed solely to the therefore unlikely to incur incremental of the critical habitat, unless she designation of critical habitat for this economic impacts. Ultimately, the determines, based on the best scientific particular species. The probable screening analysis allows us to focus data available, that the failure to economic impact of a proposed critical our analysis on evaluating the specific designate such area as critical habitat habitat designation is analyzed by areas or sectors that may incur probable will result in the extinction of the comparing scenarios both ‘‘with critical incremental economic impacts as a species. In making that determination, habitat’’ and ‘‘without critical habitat.’’ result of the designation. This screening the statute on its face, as well as the The ‘‘without critical habitat’’ scenario analysis combined with the information legislative history, are clear that the represents the baseline for the analysis, contained in our IEM are what we Secretary has broad discretion regarding which includes the existing regulatory consider our draft economic analysis which factor(s) to use and how much and socio-economic burden imposed on (DEA) of the proposed critical habitat weight to give to any factor. landowners, managers, or other resource designation for the Kentucky arrow When considering the benefits of users potentially affected by the darter and is summarized in the exclusion, we consider, among other designation of critical habitat (e.g., narrative below. things, whether exclusion of a specific under the Federal listing as well as Executive Orders (E.O.) 12866 and area is likely to result in conservation; other Federal, State, and local 13563 direct Federal agencies to assess the continuation, strengthening, or regulations). The baseline, therefore, the costs and benefits of available encouragement of partnerships; or represents the costs of all efforts regulatory alternatives in quantitative implementation of a management plan. attributable to the listing of the species (to the extent feasible) and qualitative In the case of the Kentucky arrow darter, under the Act (i.e., conservation of the terms. Consistent with the E.O. the benefits of critical habitat include species and its habitat incurred regulatory analysis requirements, our public awareness of the presence of the regardless of whether critical habitat is effects analysis under the Act may take Kentucky arrow darter and the designated). The ‘‘with critical habitat’’ into consideration impacts to both importance of habitat protection, and, scenario describes the incremental directly and indirectly impacted where a Federal nexus exists, increased impacts associated specifically with the entities, where practicable and habitat protection for the Kentucky designation of critical habitat for the reasonable. We assess to the extent

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61050 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

practicable, the probable impacts, if essential physical or biological features we receive during the public comment sufficient data are available, to both of critical habitat. The IEM outlines our period. In particular, we may exclude an directly and indirectly impacted rationale concerning this limited area from critical habitat if we entities. As part of our screening distinction between baseline determine that the benefits of excluding analysis, we considered the types of conservation efforts and incremental the area outweigh the benefits of economic activities that are likely to impacts of the designation of critical including the area, provided the occur within the areas likely affected by habitat for this species. This evaluation exclusion will not result in the the critical habitat designation. In our of the incremental effects has been used extinction of this species. as the basis to evaluate the probable evaluation of the probable incremental Exclusion Based on Economic Impacts economic impacts that may result from incremental economic impacts of this the proposed designation of critical proposed designation of critical habitat. Our DEA did not identify any habitat for the Kentucky arrow darter, The proposed critical habitat disproportionate costs that are likely to first we identified, in the IEM dated July designation for the Kentucky arrow result from the designmation. 23, 2015, probable projects associated consists of 38 units, encompassing Consequently, the Secretary is not with the following land use sectors: (1) approximately 395 skm (246 smi) in exercising her discretion to excule any Agriculture; (2) conservation/ eastern Kentucky. Included lands (i.e., areas from this proposed designation of restoration; (3) development; (4) forest stream bottoms; as noted previously, critical habitat for the Kentucy arrow management; (5) grazing; (6) mining; (7) waters are owned by the State) are darter based on economic impacts. oil and gas; (8) recreation; (9) under Federal, State, and private During the development of a final silviculture/timber; (10) transportation; ownership, and all are within the area designation, we will consider any and (11) water quality. We considered occupied by the Kentucky arrow darter additional economic impact information each industry or category individually. at the time of listing. Federal land is received through the public comment Additionally, we considered whether predominant in Units 15, 19–27, and 38. period, and as such areas may be their activities have any Federal In these units, Federal lands make up excluded from the final critical habitat involvement. Critical habitat over 50 percent of the acreage, which designation under section 4(b)(2) of the designation will not affect activities that accounts for 26.3 percent of the total Act and our implementing regulations at do not have any Federal involvement, proposed critical habitat acreage. State- 50 CFR 424.19. owned lands are located in two units but rather only activities conducted, Exclusions Based on National Security (proposed Units 3 and 4) and make up funded, permitted, or authorized by Impacts Federal agencies. In areas where the 4.5 percent of the total proposed critical Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we Kentucky arrow darter is present, habitat acreage. Privately owned land is must consider whether there are areas Federal agencies already are required to present in all but six units, ranging from where designation of critical habitat consult with the Service under section 0 to 100 percent. Private lands account might have an impact on national 7 of the Act on activities they fund, for 69.2 percent of the total proposed security. In preparing this proposal, we permit, or implement that may affect the critical habitat acreage. Because all of the units proposed as have determined that the areas within species. If we finalize this proposed critical habitat for the Kentucky arrow the proposed designation of critical critical habitat designation, darter are currently occupied by the habitat for the Kentucky arrow darter consultations to avoid the destruction or species, any actions that may affect the are not owned or managed by the adverse modification of critical habitat species or its habitat would also affect Department of Defense or Department of would be incorporated into the existing critical habitat and it is unlikely that Homeland Security, and, therefore, we consultation process. any additional conservation efforts anticipate no impact on national In our IEM, we attempted to clarify would be recommended to address the security. Consequently, the Secretary is the distinction between the effects that adverse modification standard over and not intending to exercise her discretion will result from the species being listed above those recommended as necessary to exclude any areas from the final and those attributable to the critical to avoid jeopardizing the continued designation based on impacts on habitat designation (i.e., difference existence of the Kentucky arrow darter. national security. between the jeopardy and adverse Any anticipated incremental costs of the modification standards) for the critical habitat designation will Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Kentucky arrow darter’s critical habitat. predominantly be administrative in Impacts Because the designation of critical nature and would not be significant. Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we habitat for the Kentucky arrow darter is Critical habitat may impact property consider any other relevant impacts, in proposed concurrently with the listing, values indirectly if developers assume addition to economic impacts and it has been our experience that it is the designation will limit the potential impacts on national security. We more difficult to discern which use of that land. However, the consider a number of factors, including conservation efforts are attributable to designation of critical habitat is not whether the landowners have developed the species being listed and those which likely to result in an increase of any HCPs or other management plans will result solely from the designation of consultations, but rather only the for the area, or whether there are critical habitat. However, the following additional administrative effort within conservation partnerships that would be specific circumstances in this case help each consultation to address the effects encouraged by designation of, or to inform our evaluation: (1) The of each proposed agency action on exclusion from, critical habitat. In essential physical or biological features critical habitat. addition, we look at any tribal issues, identified for critical habitat are the As we stated earlier, we are soliciting and consider the government-to- same features essential for the life data and comments from the public on government relationship of the United requisites of the species, and (2) any the DEA, as well as all aspects of the States with tribal entities. We also actions that would result in sufficient proposed rule and required consider any social impacts that might harm or harassment to constitute determinations. We may revise the occur because of the designation. jeopardy to the Kentucky arrow darter proposed rule or supporting documents In preparing this proposal, we have would also likely adversely affect the to incorporate or address information determined that there are currently no

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61051

HCPs or other management plans for the consider regulatory approaches that small business firm’s business Kentucky arrow darter, and the reduce burdens and maintain flexibility operations. proposed designation does not include and freedom of choice for the public The Service’s current understanding any tribal lands or trust resources. We where these approaches are relevant, of the requirements under the RFA, as anticipate no impact on tribal lands, feasible, and consistent with regulatory amended, and following recent court partnerships, or HCPs from this objectives. Executive Order 13563 decisions, is that Federal agencies are proposed critical habitat designation. emphasizes further that regulations only required to evaluate the potential Accordingly, the Secretary does not must be based on the best available incremental impacts of rulemaking on intend to exercise her discretion to science and that the rulemaking process those entities directly regulated by the exclude any areas from the final must allow for public participation and rulemaking itself, and therefore, not designation based on other relevant an open exchange of ideas. We have required to evaluate the potential impacts. developed this rule in a manner impacts to indirectly regulated entities. consistent with these requirements. The regulatory mechanism through Peer Review which critical habitat protections are Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 realized is section 7 of the Act, which In accordance with our joint policy on et seq.) peer review published in the Federal requires Federal agencies, in Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act consultation with the Service, to ensure we will seek the expert opinions of at (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), as amended that any action authorized, funded, or least three appropriate and independent by the Small Business Regulatory carried out by the agency is not likely specialists regarding this proposed rule. Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 to destroy or adversely modify critical The purpose of peer review is to ensure (SBREFA; 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), habitat. Therefore, under section 7, only that our critical habitat designation is whenever an agency is required to Federal action agencies are directly based on scientifically sound data and publish a notice of rulemaking for any subject to the specific regulatory analyses. We have invited these peer proposed or final rule, it must prepare requirement (avoiding destruction and reviewers to comment during this and make available for public comment adverse modification) imposed by public comment period. a regulatory flexibility analysis that critical habitat designation. We will consider all comments and describes the effects of the rule on small Consequently, it is our position that information we receive during this entities (i.e., small businesses, small only Federal action agencies will be comment period on this proposed rule organizations, and small government directly regulated by this designation. during our preparation of a final jurisdictions). However, no regulatory Moreover, Federal agencies are not determination. Accordingly, the final flexibility analysis is required if the small entities. Therefore, because no decision may differ from this proposal. head of the agency certifies the rule will small entities are directly regulated by not have a significant economic impact this rulemaking, the Service certifies Public Hearings on a substantial number of small that, if promulgated, the proposed Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for entities. The SBREFA amended the RFA critical habitat designation will not have one or more public hearings on this to require Federal agencies to provide a a significant economic impact on a proposal, if requested. Requests must be certification statement of the factual substantial number of small entities. received within 45 days after the date of basis for certifying that the rule will not In summary, we have considered publication of this proposed rule in the have a significant economic impact on whether the proposed designation Federal Register. Such requests must be a substantial number of small entities. would result in a significant economic According to the Small Business sent to the address shown in the FOR impact on a substantial number of small Administration, small entities include FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. entities. For the above reasons and small organizations such as We will schedule public hearings on based on currently available independent nonprofit organizations; this proposal, if any are requested, and information, we certify that, if small governmental jurisdictions, announce the dates, times, and places of promulgated, the proposed critical including school boards and city and those hearings, as well as how to obtain habitat designation would not have a town governments that serve fewer than reasonable accommodations, in the significant economic impact on a 50,000 residents; and small businesses Federal Register and local newspapers substantial number of small business (13 CFR 121.201). Small businesses at least 15 days before the hearing. entities. Therefore, an initial regulatory include manufacturing and mining flexibility analysis is not required. Required Determinations concerns with fewer than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— Regulatory Planning and Review with fewer than 100 employees, retail Executive Order 13211 (Executive Orders 12866 and 13563) and service businesses with less than $5 Executive Order 13211 (Actions Executive Order 12866 provides that million in annual sales, general and Concerning Regulations That the Office of Information and Regulatory heavy construction businesses with less Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant than $27.5 million in annual business, Distribution, or Use) requires agencies rules. The Office of Information and special trade contractors doing less than to prepare Statements of Energy Effects Regulatory Affairs has determined that $11.5 million in annual business, and when undertaking certain actions. In this rule is not significant. agricultural businesses with annual our economic analysis, we did not find Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the sales less than $750,000. To determine that the designation of this proposed principles of E.O. 12866 while calling if potential economic impacts to these critical habitat will significantly affect for improvements in the nation’s small entities are significant, we energy supplies, distribution, or use. regulatory system to promote considered the types of activities that Natural gas and oil exploration and predictability, to reduce uncertainty, might trigger regulatory impacts under development activities occur or could and to use the best, most innovative, this designation as well as types of potentially occur in all proposed units and least burdensome tools for project modifications that may result. In for the Kentucky arrow darter; however, achieving regulatory ends. The general, the term ‘‘significant economic compliance with State regulatory executive order directs agencies to impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical requirements or voluntary BMPs would

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61052 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

be expected to minimize impacts of to a then-existing Federal program required. We will, however, further natural gas and oil exploration and under which $500,000,000 or more is evaluate this issue through the public development in the areas of proposed provided annually to State, local, and review and comment period and revise critical habitat for the species. The tribal governments under entitlement this assessment if appropriate. measures for natural gas and oil authority,’’ if the provision would Takings—Executive Order 12630 exploration and development are ‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of generally not considered a substantial assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or In accordance with E.O. 12630 cost compared with overall project costs otherwise decrease, the Federal (Government Actions and Interference and are already being implemented by Government’s responsibility to provide with Constitutionally Protected Private oil and gas companies. funding,’’ and the State, local, or tribal Property Rights), we have analyzed the Surface coal mining occurs or could governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust potential takings implications of potentially occur in all proposed critical accordingly. At the time of enactment, designating critical habitat for Kentucky habitat units for the Kentucky arrow these entitlement programs were: arrow darter in a takings implications darter. Incidental take for listed species Medicaid; Aid to Families with assessment. The Act does not authorize associated with surface coal mining Dependent Children work programs; the Service to regulate private actions activities is currently covered under a Child Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social on private lands or confiscate private programmatic, non-jeopardy biological Services Block Grants; Vocational property as a result of critical habitat opinion between the Office of Surface Rehabilitation State Grants; Foster Care, designation. Designation of critical Mining Reclamation and Enforcement Adoption Assistance, and Independent habitat does not affect land ownership, and the Service completed in 1996 Living; Family Support Welfare or establish any closures, or restrictions (Service 1996, entire). The biological Services; and Child Support on use of or access to the designated opinion covers existing, proposed, and Enforcement. ‘‘Federal private sector areas. Furthermore, the designation of future endangered and threatened mandate’’ includes a regulation that critical habitat does not affect species that may be affected by the ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty landowner actions that do not require implementation and administration of upon the private sector, except (i) a Federal funding or permits, nor does it surface coal mining programs under the condition of Federal assistance or (ii) a preclude development of habitat Surface Mining Control and duty arising from participation in a conservation programs or issuance of Reclamation Act of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1201 voluntary Federal program.’’ incidental take permits to permit actions et seq.). Through its analysis, the The designation of critical habitat that do require Federal funding or Service concluded that the proposed does not impose a legally binding duty permits to go forward. However, Federal action (surface coal mining and on non-Federal Government entities or agencies are prohibited from carrying reclamation activities) was not likely to private parties. Under the Act, the only out, funding, or authorizing actions that jeopardize the continued existence of regulatory effect is that Federal agencies would destroy or adversely modify any endangered or threatened species, must ensure that their actions do not critical habitat. A takings implications or any species proposed for listing as an destroy or adversely modify critical assessment has been completed and endangered or threatened species, or habitat under section 7. While non- concludes that this designation of result in adverse modification of Federal entities that receive Federal critical habitat for Kentucky arrow designated or proposed critical habitat. funding, assistance, or permits, or that darter does not pose significant takings Therefore, this action is not a significant otherwise require approval or implications for lands within or affected energy action, and no Statement of authorization from a Federal agency for by the designation. Energy Effects is required. However, we an action, may be indirectly impacted Federalism—Executive Order 13132 will further evaluate this issue and by the designation of critical habitat, the review and revise this assessment as legally binding duty to avoid In accordance with E.O. 13132 warranted. destruction or adverse modification of (Federalism), this proposed rule does critical habitat rests squarely on the not have significant Federalism effects. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 Federal agency. Furthermore, to the A federalism summary impact statement U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) extent that non-Federal entities are is not required. In keeping with In accordance with the Unfunded indirectly impacted because they Department of the Interior and Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et receive Federal assistance or participate Department of Commerce policy, we seq.), we make the following findings: in a voluntary Federal aid program, the request information from, and (1) This rule would not produce a Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would coordinated development of this Federal mandate. In general, a Federal not apply, nor would critical habitat proposed critical habitat designation mandate is a provision in legislation, shift the costs of the large entitlement with, appropriate State resource statute, or regulation that would impose programs listed above onto State agencies in Kentucky. From a federalism an enforceable duty upon State, local, or governments. perspective, the designation of critical tribal governments, or the private sector, (2) We do not believe that this rule habitat directly affects only the and includes both ‘‘Federal would significantly or uniquely affect responsibilities of Federal agencies. The intergovernmental mandates’’ and small governments because this species Act imposes no other duties with ‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ occurs primarily in Federally-owned respect to critical habitat, either for These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. river channels or in remote privately States and local governments, or for 658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental owned stream channels. Also, this rule anyone else. As a result, the rule does mandate’’ includes a regulation that would not produce a Federal mandate of not have substantial direct effects either ‘‘would impose an enforceable duty $100 million or greater in any year, that on the States, or on the relationship upon State, local, or tribal governments’’ is, it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory between the national government and with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a action’’ under the Unfunded Mandates the States, or on the distribution of condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also Reform Act. The designation of critical powers and responsibilities among the excludes ‘‘a duty arising from habitat imposes no obligations on State various levels of government. The participation in a voluntary Federal or local governments and, as such, a designation may have some benefit to program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates Small Government Agency Plan is not these governments because the areas

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61053

that contain the features essential to the National Environmental Policy Act (42 section. To better help us revise the conservation of the species are more U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) rule, your comments should be as clearly defined, and the physical or It is our position that, outside the specific as possible. For example, you biological features of the habitat jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals should tell us the numbers of the necessary to the conservation of the for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to sections or paragraphs that are unclearly species are specifically identified. This prepare environmental analyses written, which sections or sentences are information does not alter where and pursuant to the National Environmental too long, the sections where you feel what federally sponsored activities may Policy Act in connection with lists or tables would be useful, etc. occur. However, it may assist these local designating critical habitat under the References Cited governments in long-range planning Act. We published a notice outlining A complete list of references cited in (because these local governments no our reasons for this determination in the this rulemaking is available on the longer have to wait for case-by-case Federal Register on October 25, 1983 Internet at http://www.regulations.gov section 7 consultations to occur). (48 FR 49244). This position was upheld and upon request from the Kentucky Where State and local governments by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR require approval or authorization from a Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Federal agency for actions that may Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), affect critical habitat, consultation cert. denied 516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). Authors under section 7(a)(2) would be required. Government-to-Government The primary authors of this proposed While non-Federal entities that receive Relationship With Tribes rulemaking are the staff members of the Federal funding, assistance, or permits, Kentucky Ecological Services Field or that otherwise require approval or In accordance with the President’s Office. authorization from a Federal agency for memorandum of April 29, 1994 an action, may be indirectly impacted (Government-to-Government Relations List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 by the designation of critical habitat, the with Native American Tribal Endangered and threatened species, legally binding duty to avoid Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Exports, Imports, Reporting and destruction or adverse modification of Order 13175 (Consultation and recordkeeping requirements, critical habitat rests squarely on the Coordination With Indian Tribal Transportation. Federal agency. Governments), and the Department of the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we Proposed Regulation Promulgation Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order readily acknowledge our responsibility Accordingly, we propose to amend 12988 to communicate meaningfully with part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title recognized Federal Tribes on a In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, government-to-government basis. In as set forth below: Justice Reform), the Office of the accordance with Secretarial Order 3206 Solicitor has determined that the rule of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal PART 17—ENDANGERED AND does not unduly burden the judicial Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust THREATENED WILDLIFE AND PLANTS system and that it meets the Responsibilities, and the Endangered requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) Species Act), we readily acknowledge ■ 1. The authority citation for part 17 of the Order. We have proposed our responsibilities to work directly continues to read as follows: designating critical habitat in with tribes in developing programs for Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531– accordance with the provisions of the healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that 1544; and 4201–4245, unless otherwise Act. To assist the public in tribal lands are not subject to the same noted. understanding the habitat needs of the controls as Federal public lands, to ■ 2. In § 17.95, amend paragraph (e) by species, the rule identifies the elements remain sensitive to Indian culture, and of physical or biological features adding an entry for ‘‘Kentucky Arrow to make information available to tribes. Darter (Etheostoma spilotum)’’ in the essential to the conservation of the We are not proposing to designate species. The designated areas of critical same alphabetical order that the species critical habitat for the Kentucky arrow appears in the table at § 17.11(h), to read habitat are presented on maps, and the darter on tribal lands. rule provides several options for the as follows: interested public to obtain more Clarity of the Rule § 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife. detailed location information, if desired. We are required by Executive Orders * * * * * Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 12866 and 12988 and by the (e) Fishes. U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) Presidential Memorandum of June 1, * * * * * 1998, to write all rules in plain This rule does not contain any new language. This means that each rule we Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma collections of information that require publish must: spilotum) approval by the Office of Management (1) Be logically organized; (1) Critical habitat units are depicted and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork (2) Use the active voice to address on the maps below for Breathitt, Clay, Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 readers directly; Harlan, Jackson, Knott, Lee, Leslie, et seq.). This rule will not impose (3) Use clear language rather than Owsley, Perry, and Wolfe Counties, recordkeeping or reporting requirements jargon; Kentucky. on State or local governments, (4) Be divided into short sections and (2) Within these areas, the primary individuals, businesses, or sentences; and constituent elements of the physical or organizations. An agency may not (5) Use lists and tables wherever biological features essential to the conduct or sponsor, and a person is not possible. conservation of the Kentucky arrow required to respond to, a collection of If you feel that we have not met these darter consist of five components: information unless it displays a requirements, send us comments by one (i) Riffle-pool complexes and currently valid OMB control number. of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES transitional areas (glides and runs) of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 61054 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

geomorphically stable, first- to third- (v) A prey base of aquatic roads and streams) used to delineate the order streams with connectivity macroinvertebrates, including mayfly upstream and downstream extents of between spawning, foraging, and resting nymphs, midge larvae, caddisfly larvae, critical habitat units: NHD+ flowline sites to promote gene flow throughout stonefly nymphs, and small crayfishes. and waterbody data, 2011 Navteq roads the species’ range. (3) Critical habitat does not include data, USA Topo ESRI online basemap (ii) Stable bottom substrates manmade structures (such as buildings, service, DeLorme Atlas and Gazetteers, composed of gravel, cobble, boulders, aqueducts, runways, roads, and other and USGS 7.5 minute topographic bedrock ledges, and woody debris piles paved areas) and the land on which they maps. The maps in this entry, as with low levels of siltation. are located existing within the legal modified by any accompanying (iii) An instream flow regime boundaries on [INSERT EFFECTIVE regulatory text, establish the boundaries (magnitude, frequency, duration, and DATE OF FINAL RULE]. seasonality of discharge over time) (4) Critical habitat map units. Data of the critical habitat designation. The sufficient to provide permanent surface layers defining map units were created coordinates, plot points, or both on flows, as measured during years with on a base of U.S. Geological Survey which each map is based are available average rainfall, and to maintain benthic (USGS) National Hydrography Dataset to the public at the Service’s Internet habitats utilized by the species. (NHD+) GIS data. The 1:100,000 river site, (http://fws.gov/frankfort/ (iv) Adequate water quality reach (route) files were used to calculate www.regulations.gov at Docket No. characterized by moderate stream river kilometers and miles. ESRIs FWS–R4–ES–2015–0133, and at the temperatures, acceptable dissolved ArcGIS 10.0 software was used to field office responsible for this oxygen concentrations, moderate pH, determine longitude and latitude designation. You may obtain field office and low levels of pollutants. Adequate coordinates using decimal degrees. The location information by contacting one water quality is defined for the purpose projection used in mapping all units of the Service regional offices, the of this entry as the quality necessary for was USA Contiguous Albers Equal Area addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR normal behavior, growth, and viability Conic USGS version, NAD 83, meters. 2.2. of all life stages of the Kentucky arrow The following data sources were darter. referenced to identify features (like

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61055

(5) Note: Index map follows:

Index Map: Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum)

' " ''"'""~"'""''"'f'"'"{ \

l tA,,,lt"'"'""''":l

,~~""'''

'"'-' Critical Habitat County Boundaries 0 10 Miles j I Kentucky 0 10 Kilometers

(6) Unit 1: Buckhorn Creek and Prince (37.41825, ¥83.07341), and 0.4 skm (0.3 (ii) Unit 2 includes 1.0 skm (0.6 smi) Fork, and Unit 2: Eli Fork, Knott smi) of Buckhorn Creek from its of Eli Fork from its headwaters at County, Kentucky. headwaters at (37.41825, ¥83.07341) (37.44078, ¥83.05884), downstream to (i) Unit 1 includes 0.7 skm (0.4 smi) downstream to its confluence with its confluence with Boughcamp Branch of Prince Fork from Mart Branch Emory Branch (37.42006, ¥83.07738) in (37.43259, ¥83.05591) in Knott County, (37.41291, ¥83.07000) downstream to Knott County, Kentucky. Kentucky. its confluence with Buckhorn Creek

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.005 61056 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(iii) Map of Units 1 and 2 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter {Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 1 - Buckhorn Creek and Prince Fork: Knott County, Kentucky Unit 2 - Eli Fork: Knott County, Kentucky

Knott Co.

Unit 1 - Buckhorn Creek and Prince Fork

"""-' Critical Habitat

0'---~"-''"_-_'"''-R-oa_d_s _.__ __....__ _ __,"'"" j

0 1 Kilometers

(7) Unit 3: Coles Fork and Snag Ridge at (37.47746, ¥83.11139), downstream ¥83.07124), downstream to its Fork, Breathitt and Knott Counties, to its confluence with Coles Fork confluence with Buckhorn Creek Kentucky. (37.46391, ¥83.13468) in Knott County; (37.45720, ¥83.13468) in Knott County, (i) Unit 3 includes 2.1 skm (1.3 smi) and 8.9 skm (5.5 smi) of Coles Fork from Kentucky. of Snag Ridge Fork from its headwaters its headwaters at (37.45096,

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.006 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61057

(ii) Map of Unit 3 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter {Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 3 -Coles Fork and Snag Ridge Branch: Knott and Breathitt Counties, Kentucky

""-'Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

0 1 Kilometers

(8) Unit 4: Clemons Fork, Breathitt (37.49772, ¥83.13390), downstream to County, Kentucky. its confluence with Buckhorn Creek (i) Unit 4 includes 7.0 skm (4.4 smi) (37.45511, ¥83.16582) in Breathitt of Clemons Fork from its headwaters at County, Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.007 61058 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 4 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 4 -Clemons Fork: Breathitt County, Kentucky

Breathitt Co.

'"""'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 "''" J

0 1 Kilometers

(9) Unit 5: Laurel Fork Quicksand Newman Branch from its headwaters at Quicksand Creek (37.44758, Creek and Tributaries, Knott County, (37.44120, ¥82.95810), downstream to ¥82.99476); and 13.8 skm (8.6 smi) of Kentucky. its confluence with Laurel Fork Laurel Fork Quicksand Creek from its (i) Unit 5 includes 1.2 skm (0.8 smi) Quicksand Creek (37.45893, headwaters at (37.43001, ¥82.93016), of Fitch Branch from its headwaters at ¥82.97417); 2.1 skm (1.3 smi) of Combs downstream to its confluence with ¥ (37.46745, 82.95373), downstream to Branch from its headwaters at Quicksand Creek (37.45100, ¥83.02303) its confluence with Laurel Fork (37.43848, ¥82.97731), downstream to in Knott County, Kentucky. Quicksand Creek (37.45855, its confluence with Laurel Fork ¥82.96089); 2.7 skm (1.7 smi) of

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.008 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61059

(ii) Map of Unit 5 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum} Unit 5 - Laurel Fork Quicksand Creek and Tributaries: Knott County, Kentucky

Knott Co.

"'-' Critical Habitat ,;,..,"'"'? Roads

County Boundaries 0 Miles

I I 0 1 Kilometers

(10) Unit 6: Middle Fork Quicksand Middle Fork Quicksand Creek headwaters at (37.50190, ¥83.01921), Creek and Tributaries, Knott County, (37.48990, ¥82.97148); 2.1 skm (1.3 downstream to its confluence with and Unit 7: Spring Fork Quicksand smi) of Bradley Branch from its Middle Fork Quicksand Creek Creek, Breathitt County, Kentucky. headwaters at (37.47180, ¥82.99819), (37.49286. ¥83.03524); and 17.6 skm (i) Unit 6 includes 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) downstream to its confluence with (10.9 smi) of Middle Fork Quicksand of Big Firecoal Branch from its Middle Fork Quicksand Creek Creek from its headwaters at (37.48562, headwaters at (37.49363, ¥82.96426), (37.47899, ¥83.01823); 2.0 skm (1.2 ¥82.93667), downstream to its downstream to its confluence with smi) of Lynn Log Branch from its confluence with Quicksand Creek

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.009 61060 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(37.504451, ¥83.07150) in Knott headwaters at (37.50746, ¥82.96647), Laurel Fork (37.51597, ¥82.98436) in County, Kentucky. downstream to its confluence with Breathitt County, Kentucky. (ii) Unit 7 includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) (iii) Map of Units 6 and 7 follows: of Spring Fork Quicksand Creek from its

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 6 -Middle Fork Quicksand Creek and Tributaries: Knott County, Kentucky Unit 7 - Spring Fork Quicksand Creek: Breathitt County, Kentucky

... UnitS­ Middle Fork Quicksand Creek and Tributaries

""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 i Miles I I I I fTTTl 0 1 Kilometers

(11) Unit 8: Hunting Creek and (37.64023, ¥83.24424); 1.6 skm (1.0 headwaters at (37.61315, ¥83.26521), Tributaries, Breathitt County, Kentucky. smi) of Negro Fork from its headwaters downstream to its confluence with ¥ ¥ (i) Unit 8 includes 0.9 skm (0.5 smi) at (37.62992, 83.25760), downstream Hunting Creek (37.61956, 83.24370); of Wolf Pen Branch from its headwaters to its confluence with Hunting Creek 3.1 skm (1.9 smi) of Licking Fork from at (37.64580, ¥83.23885), downstream (37.62121, ¥83.24433); 2.3 skm (1.4 its headwaters at (37.63553, ¥83.21754, to its confluence with Hunting Creek smi) of Fletcher Fork from its ¥83.21754), downstream to its

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.010 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61061

confluence with Hunting Creek confluence with Wells Fork (37.64629, (37.59235, ¥83.22803) in Breathitt (37.61794, ¥83.23938); and 7.7 skm (4.8 ¥83.24708), downstream to its County, Kentucky. smi) of Hunting Creek from its confluence with Quicksand Creek (ii) Map of Unit 8 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter {Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 8 - Hunting Creek and Tributaries: Breathitt County, Kentucky

""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

0 1 Kilometers

(12) Unit 9: Frozen Creek and smi) of Negro Branch from its confluence with Frozen Creek Tributaries, Breathitt County, Kentucky. headwaters at (37.67146, ¥83.31971), (37.63402, ¥83.34953); and 13.9 skm (i) Unit 9 includes 4.7 skm (2.9 smi) downstream to its confluence with (8.6 smi) of Frozen Creek from its of Clear Fork from its headwaters at Frozen Creek (37.64319, ¥83.33068); headwaters at (37.66115, ¥83.26945), (37.63899, ¥83.27706), downstream to 4.2 skm (2.6 smi) of Davis Creek from downstream to its confluence with its confluence with Frozen Creek its headwaters at (37.66644, Morgue Fork (37.62761, ¥83.37622) in (37.64109, ¥83.31969); 3.6 skm (2.3 ¥83.34599), downstream to its Breathitt County, Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.011 61062 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 9 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter {Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 9 - Frozen Creek and Tributaries: Breathitt County, Kentucky

Frozen Creek ',and Tributaries

""'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles I I I I I 0 1 Kilometers

(13) Unit 10: Holly Creek and its headwaters at (37.64048, Wolfe County; 9.5 skm (5.9 smi) of Tributaries, Wolfe County, Kentucky. ¥83.45703), downstream to its Holly Creek from KY 1261 (37.67758, (i) Unit 10 includes 2.8 skm (1.8 smi) confluence with Holly Creek (37.63413, ¥83.46792) in Wolfe County, of Spring Branch from its headwaters at ¥83.47608) in Wolfe County; 4.0 skm downstream to its confluence with the (37.67110, ¥83.44406), downstream to (2.5 mi) of Cave Branch from its North Fork Kentucky River (37.62289, its confluence with Holly Creek headwaters at (37.66023, ¥83.49916), ¥83.49948) in Wolfe County, Kentucky. (37.66384, ¥83.46780) in Wolfe County; downstream to its confluence with 2.0 skm (1.3 smi) of Pence Branch from Holly Creek (37.63149, ¥83.48725) in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.012 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61063

(ii) Map of Unit 10 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 10 - Holly Creek and Tributaries: Wolfe County, Kentucky

"""-'Critical Habitat Roads County Boundaries 0 Miles J I Kilometers

(14) Unit 11: Little Fork, Lee and Lower Devil Creek (37.66148, Fork from its headwaters at (37.69624, Wolfe Counties; Unit 12: Walker Creek ¥83.59961) in Lee County, Kentucky. ¥83.66366) in Wolfe County, and Tributaries, Lee and Wolfe (ii) Unit 12 includes 3.9 skm (2.4 smi) downstream to its confluence with Hell ¥ Counties; and Unit 13: Hell Creek and of an unnamed tributary of Walker for Certain Creek (37.67718, 83.65931) Tributaries, Lee County, Kentucky. Creek from its headwaters at (37.71373, in Lee County; 2.0 skm (1.2 smi) of Hell (i) Unit 11 includes 3.8 skm (2.3 smi) ¥83.64553) in Wolfe County, for Certain Creek from an unnamed of Little Fork from its headwaters at downstream to its confluence with reservoir at (37.68377, ¥83.66804), (37.68456, ¥83.62465) in Wolfe County, Walker Creek (37.68567, ¥83.65045) in downstream to its confluence with downstream to its confluence with Lee County; 2.4 skm (1.5 smi) of Cowan Walker Creek (37.67340, ¥83.65449) in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.013 61064 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

Lee County; 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) of (37.65138, ¥83.65034) in Lee County; downstream to its confluence with Hell Boonesboro Fork from its headwaters at and 12.6 skm (7.8 smi) of Walker Creek Creek (37.64070, ¥83.67848); 1.9 skm (37.66706, ¥83.66053), downstream to from an unnamed reservoir (37.70502, (1.2 smi) of an unnamed tributary of its confluence with Walker Creek ¥83.65490) in Wolfe County, Hell Creek from its headwaters at (37.66377, ¥83.65408) in Lee County; downstream to its confluence with (37.63199, ¥83.83.68064), downstream 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) of Peddler Creek from North Fork Kentucky River (37.60678, to its confluence with Hell Creek its headwaters at (37.67054, ¥83.64652) in Lee County, Kentucky. (37.62516, ¥83.66246); and 7.1 skm (4.4 ¥83.63456), downstream to its (iii) Unit 13 includes 2.3 skm (1.4 smi) of Hell Creek from an unnamed confluence with Walker Creek smi) of Miller Fork from its headwaters reservoir (37.64941, ¥83.68907), (37.65696, ¥83.64879) in Lee County; at (37.66074, ¥83.68005), downstream downstream to its confluence with 1.1 skm (0.7 smi) of Huff Cave Branch to its confluence with Hell Creek North Fork Kentucky River (37.60480. from its headwaters at (37.65664, (37.64261, ¥83.67912); 0.7 skm (0.4 ¥83.65440) in Lee County, Kentucky. ¥83.66033), downstream to its smi) of Bowman Fork from its (iv) Map of Units 11, 12, and 13 confluence with Walker Creek headwaters at (37.64142, ¥83.68594), follows:

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61065

(15) Unit 14: Big Laurel Creek, Harlan with Combs Fork (36.99520, (36.97893, ¥83.21907) in Harlan County, Kentucky. ¥83.14086), downstream to its County, Kentucky. (i) Unit 14 includes 9.1 skm (5.7 smi) confluence with Greasy Creek of Big Laurel Creek from its confluence

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.014 61066 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 14 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 14- Big Laurel Creek: Harlan County, Kentucky

Perry Co.

Leslie Co.

Harlan Co.

""-'Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I I 0 1 Kilometers

(16) Unit 15: Laurel Creek, Leslie Sandlick Branch (37.10825, Creek (37.13085, ¥83.43699) in Leslie County, Kentucky. ¥83.45036), downstream to its County, Kentucky. (i) Unit 15 includes 4.1 skm (2.6 smi) confluence with Left Fork Rockhouse of Laurel Creek from its confluence with

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.015 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61067

(ii) Map of Unit 15 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 15 - Laurel Creek: Leslie County, Kentucky

Leslie Co.

""'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I I 0 1 Kilometers

(17) Unit 16: Hell For Certain Creek For Certain Creek (37.21929, its headwaters at (37.20904, and Tributaries, Leslie County, ¥83.44355); 3.1 skm (1.9 smi) of Big ¥83.47489), downstream to its Kentucky. Fork from its headwaters at (37.20930, confluence with the Middle Fork (i) Unit 16 includes 1.3 skm (0.8 smi) ¥83.42356), downstream to its Kentucky River (37.24611, ¥83.38192) of Cucumber Branch from its confluence with Hell For Certain Creek in Leslie County, Kentucky. headwaters at (37.20839, ¥83.44644), (37.23082, ¥83.40720); and 11.4 skm downstream to its confluence with Hell (7.1 smi) of Hell For Certain Creek from

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.016 61068 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 16 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 16 - Hell for Certain Creek and Tributaries: Leslie County, Kentucky

""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I I 0 1 Kilometers

(18) Unit 17: Squabble Creek, Perry with Long Fork (37.29162, ¥83.54202), County, Kentucky. downstream to its confluence with the (i) Unit 17 includes 12.0 skm (7.5 smi) Middle Fork Kentucky River (37.34597, of Squabble Creek from its confluence ¥83.46883) in Perry County, Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.017 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61069

(ii) Map of Unit 17 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum} Unit 17- Squabble Creek: Perry County, Kentucky

""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I 0 1 Kilometers

(19) Unit 18: Blue Hole Creek and Left (i) Unit 18 includes 1.8 skm (1.1 smi) Red Bird River (36.99288, ¥83.53672) Fork Blue Hole Creek, Unit 19: Upper of Left Fork from its headwaters at in Clay County, Kentucky. ¥ Bear Creek and Tributaries, Unit 20: (36.97278, 83.56898), downstream to (ii) Unit 19 includes 1.5 skm (1.0 smi) Katies Creek, and Unit 21: Spring Creek its confluence with Blue Hole Creek of Left Fork Upper Bear Creek from its ¥ and Little Spring Creek, Clay County; (36.98297, 83.55687); and 3.9 skm (2.4 headwaters at (36.99519, ¥83.58446), and Unit 22: Bowen Creek and smi) of Blue Hole Creek from its downstream to its confluence with ¥ Tributaries, Leslie County, Kentucky. headwaters at (36.98254, 83.57376), Upper Bear Creek (37.00448, downstream to its confluence with the ¥83.57354); 0.8 skm (0.5 smi) of Right

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.018 61070 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

Fork Upper Bear Creek from its confluence with the Red Bird River (v) Unit 22 includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) headwaters at (37.00858, ¥83.58013), (37.03527, ¥83.53999) in Clay County, of Laurel Fork from its headwaters at downstream to its confluence with Kentucky. (37.05536, ¥83.47452), downstream to Upper Bear Creek (37.00448, (iv) Unit 21 includes 1.0 skm (0.6 smi) its confluence with Bowen Creek ¥83.57354); and 4.5 skm (2.8 smi) of ¥ of Little Spring Creek from its (37.04702, 83.49641); 1.8 skm (1.1 Upper Bear Creek from its confluence headwaters at (37.05452, ¥83.57483), smi) of Amy Branch from its headwaters with Left Fork and Right Fork Upper at (37.05979, ¥83.50083), downstream Bear Creek (37.02109, ¥83.53423), downstream to its confluence with Spring Creek (37.05555, ¥83.56339); to its confluence with Bowen Creek downstream to its confluence with the (37.05031, ¥83.51498); and 9.6 skm (6.0 Red Bird River (37.00448, ¥83.57354) and 8.2 skm (5.1 smi) of Spring Creek from its headwaters at (37.02874, smi) of Bowen Creek from its in Clay County, Kentucky. ¥ (iii) Unit 20 includes 5.7 skm (3.5 ¥83.59815), downstream to its headwaters at (37.03183, 83.46124), smi) of Katies Creek from its confluence confluence with the Red Bird River downstream to its confluence with the ¥ with Cave Branch (37.01837, (37.06189, ¥83.54134) in Clay County, Red Bird River (37.06777, 83.53840) ¥83.58848), downstream to its Kentucky. in Leslie County, Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61071

(vi) Map of Units 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 18 - Blue Hole Creek and Left Fork Blue Hole Creek: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 19- Upper Bear Creek and Tributaries: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 20 - Katies Creek: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 21- Spring Creek and Little Spring Creek: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 22- Bowen Creek and Tributaries: Leslie County, Kentucky

, Clay Co.

"'-'Critical Habitat ,...-,,,_, Roads

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles I I I I rrrrl 0 1 Kilometers

(20) Unit 23: Elisha Creek and Creek, Clay and Leslie Counties, headwaters at (37.07255, ¥83.47839), Tributaries, Leslie County; and Unit 24: Kentucky. downstream to its confluence with Gilberts Big Creek, and Unit 25: Sugar (i) Unit 23 includes 4.4 skm (2.7 smi) Elisha Creek (37.08165, ¥83.51802); 2.3 of Right Fork Elisha Creek from its skm (1.4 smi) of Left Fork Elisha Creek

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.019 61072 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

from its headwaters at (37.09632, (37.08794, ¥83.54676) in Leslie County, (iii) Unit 25 includes 7.2 skm (4.5 ¥83.51108), downstream to its Kentucky. smi) of Sugar Creek from its headwaters confluence with Elisha Creek (37.08528, (ii) Unit 24 includes 7.2 skm (4.5 smi) at (37.12446, ¥83.49420) in Leslie ¥83.52645); and 2.9 skm (1.8 smi) of of Gilberts Big Creek from its County, downstream to its confluence ¥ Elisha Creek from its confluence with headwaters at (37.10825, 83.49164) in with the Red Bird River (37.11804, Right Fork Elisha Creek (37.08165, Leslie County, downstream to its ¥83.55952) in Clay County, Kentucky. ¥ confluence with the Red Bird River 83.51802), downstream to its ¥ (iv) Map of Units 23, 24, and 25 confluence with the Red Bird River (37.10784, 83.55590) in Clay County, Kentucky. follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 23 - Elisha Creek and Tributaries: Leslie County, Kentucky Unit 24 - Gilberts Big Creek: Clay and Leslie Counties, Kentucky Unit 25- Sugar Creek: Clay and Leslie Counties, Kentucky

Elisha Creek and Tributaries

"'-" Critical Habitat

/)'""'·-·? Roads County Boundaries 0 1 Miles j

I I 0 1 Kilometers

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.020 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61073

(21) Unit 26: Big Double Creek and Double Creek from its headwaters at Red Bird River (37.14045, ¥83.58768) Tributaries, and Unit 27: Little Double (37.09021, ¥83.62010), downstream to in Clay County, Kentucky. Creek, Clay County, Kentucky. its confluence with Big Double Creek (ii) Unit 27 includes 3.4 skm (2.1 smi) (i) Unit 26 includes 1.4 skm (0.9 smi) (37.09053, ¥83.60245); and 7.1 skm (4.4 of Little Double Creek from its of Left Fork Big Double Creek from its smi) of Big Double Creek from its headwaters at (37.11816, ¥83.61251), headwaters at (37.07967, ¥83.60719), confluence with the Left and Right downstream to its confluence with the ¥ downstream to its confluence with Big Forks (37.09053, ¥83.60245), Red Bird River (37.14025, 83.59197) ¥ Double Creek (37.09053, 83.60245); downstream to its confluence with the in Clay County, Kentucky. 1.8 skm (1.1 smi) of Right Fork Big (iii) Map of Units 26 and 27 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter {Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 26- Big Double Creek and Tributaries: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 27 - Little Double Creek: Clay County, Kentucky

4'. . ·· .,.-~-·-·· .f·"' t -.,.,..__._....__~ Clay Co.

""'""-' Critical Habitat / ....., .... "Roads

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles j

I 0 1 Kilometers

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.021 61074 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(22) Unit 28: Jacks Creek, and Unit 29: its confluence with the Red Bird River (37.16889, ¥83.65490), downstream to Long Fork, Clay County, Kentucky. (37.19113, ¥83.59185) in Clay County, its confluence with Hector Branch (i) Unit 28 includes 5.9 skm (3.7 smi) Kentucky. (37.17752, ¥83.63464) in Clay County, of Jacks Creek from its headwaters at (ii) Unit 29 includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) Kentucky. (37.21472, ¥83.54108), downstream to of Long Fork from its headwaters at (iii) Map of Units 28 and 29 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 28 -Jacks Creek: Clay County, Kentucky Unit 29 - Long Fork: Clay County, Kentucky

Leslie ·· Co.

"""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I I I I 0 1 Kilometers

(23) Unit 30: Horse Creek, Clay (37.07370, ¥83.87756), downstream to County, Kentucky. its confluence with Pigeon Roost Branch (i) Unit 30 includes 5.0 skm (3.1 smi) (37.09926, ¥83.84582) in Clay County, of Horse Creek from its headwaters at Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.022 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61075

(ii) Map of Unit 30 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 30 - Horse Creek: Clay County, Kentucky

""'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

0 1 Kilometers

(24) Unit 31: Bullskin Creek, Clay and confluence with Old House Branch South Fork Kentucky River (37.27322, Leslie Counties, Kentucky. (37.21218, ¥83.48798) in Leslie County, ¥83.64441) in Clay County, Kentucky. (i) Unit 31 includes 21.7 skm (13.5 downstream to its confluence with the smi) of Bullskin Creek from its

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.023 61076 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 31 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 31 - Bullskin Creek: Clay and Leslie Counties, Kentucky

"'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles I I I fiTTl 0 1 Kilometers

(25) Unit 32: Buffalo Creek and to its confluence with Left Fork Buffalo (37.35713, ¥83.59367), downstream to Tributaries, Owsley County, Kentucky. Creek (37.347758, ¥83.56466); 4.6 skm its confluence with Buffalo Creek (i) Unit 32 includes 2.0 skm (1.2 smi) (2.9 smi) of Lucky Fork from its (37.35197, ¥83.63583); 17.3 skm (10.8 of Cortland Fork from its headwaters at headwaters at (37.37682, ¥83.55711), smi) of Right Fork Buffalo Creek from its (37.35052, ¥83.54570), downstream to downstream to its confluence with Left headwaters at (37.26972, ¥83.53646), its confluence with Laurel Fork Fork Buffalo Creek (37.35713, downstream to its confluence with (37.34758, ¥83.56466); 6.4 skm (4.0 ¥83.59367); 5.1 skm (3.2 smi) of Left Buffalo Creek (37.35197, ¥83.63583); smi) of Laurel Fork from its headwaters Fork Buffalo Creek from its confluence and 2.7 skm (1.7 smi) of Buffalo Creek at (37.32708, ¥83.56450), downstream with Lucky Fork and Left Fork from its confluence with the Left and

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.024 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61077

Right Forks (37.35197, ¥83.63583), ¥83.65233) in Owsley County, downstream to its confluence with the Kentucky. South Fork Kentucky River (37.35051, (ii) Map of Unit 32 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 32 - Buffalo Creek and Tributaries: Owsley County, Kentucky

""""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles I I I I I 0 1 Kilometers

(26) Unit 33: Lower Buffalo Creek, Lee its confluence with Lower Buffalo Creek Owsley County, downstream to its and Owsley Counties, Kentucky. (37.50980, ¥83.65015) in Owsley confluence with the South Fork (i) Unit 33 includes 2.2 skm (1.4 smi) County; and 5.1 skm (3.2 smi) of Lower Kentucky River (37.53164, ¥83.68732) of Straight Fork from its headwaters at Buffalo Creek from its confluence with in Lee County, Kentucky. (37.49993, ¥83.62996), downstream to Straight Fork (37.50980, ¥83.65015) in

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.025 61078 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(ii) Map of Unit 33 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 33 - Lower Buffalo Creek: Owsley and Lee Counties, Kentucky

"'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

'>~~) I 0 Kilometers ,Ke'ltucky' "'~·~'~

(27) Unit 34: Silver Creek, Lee (37.61857, ¥83.72442), downstream to County, Kentucky. its confluence with the Kentucky River (i) Unit 34 includes 6.2 skm (3.9 smi) (37.57251, ¥83.71264) in Lee County, of Silver Creek from its headwaters at Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.026 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61079

(ii) Map of Unit 34 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 34 -Silver Creek: Lee County, Kentucky

"""'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 Miles

0 1 Kilometers

(28) Unit 35: Travis Creek, Jackson (37.43600, ¥83.84609) in Jackson (iii) Unit 37 includes 6.9 skm (4.3 County; Unit 36: Wild Dog Creek, County, Kentucky. smi) of Granny Dismal Creek from its Jackson and Owsley Counties; and Unit (ii) Unit 36 includes 8.1 skm (5.1 smi) headwaters at (37.49862, ¥83.88435) in 37: Granny Dismal Creek, Owsley and of Wild Dog Creek from its headwaters Owsley County, downstream to its Lee Counties, Kentucky. at (37.47081, ¥83.89329) in Jackson confluence with Sturgeon Creek (i) Unit 35 includes 4.1 skm (2.5 smi) County, downstream to its confluence (37.49586, ¥83.81629) in Lee County, of Travis Creek from its headwaters at with Sturgeon Creek (37.48730, Kentucky. (37.43039, ¥83.88516), downstream to ¥83.82319) in Owsley County, its confluence with Sturgeon Creek Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.027 61080 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules

(iv) Map of Units 35, 36, and 37 follows:

Ovvsley Co.

Jackson Co.

"""-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

I I 0 1 Kilometers

(29) Unit 38: Rockbridge Fork, Wolfe at (37.76228, ¥83.59553), downstream County, Kentucky. to its confluence with Swift Camp Creek (i) Unit 38 includes 4.5 skm (2.8 smi) (37.76941, ¥83.56134) in Wolfe County, of Rockbridge Fork from its headwaters Kentucky.

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4702 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.028 Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 195 / Thursday, October 8, 2015 / Proposed Rules 61081

(ii) Map of Unit 38 follows:

Critical Habitat for Kentucky Arrow Darter (Etheostoma spilotum) Unit 38 - Rockbridge Fork: Wolfe County, Kentucky

Wolfe Co.

'"'-' Critical Habitat

County Boundaries 0 1 Miles

0 i Kilometers

* * * * * Dated: September 22, 2015. Karen Hyun, Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks. [FR Doc. 2015–25290 Filed 10–7–15; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333–15–P

VerDate Sep<11>2014 18:08 Oct 07, 2015 Jkt 238001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\08OCP4.SGM 08OCP4 mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS4 EP08OC15.029