Friday, September 2, 2005 Part III Department of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 50 CFR Part 226 Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units of West Coast Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho; Final Rule VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:43 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\02SER3.SGM 02SER3 52630 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE v. NMFS (Civ. No. 03–1883)). In the Exclusions Based on ‘‘Other Relevant proposed rule, we identified a number Impacts’’ National Oceanic and Atmospheric of potential exclusions we were Impacts to Tribes Administration considering including exclusions for Impacts to Landowners With Contractual federal lands subject to the Pacific Commitments to Conservation 50 CFR Part 226 Exclusions Based on National Security Northwest Forest Plan, PACFISH and Impacts [Docket No. 030716175–5203–04; I.D. No. INFISH. We are continuing to analyze Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts 070303A] whether exclusion of those federal lands VI. Critical Habitat Designation is appropriate. VII. Effects of Critical Habitat Designation RIN 0648–AQ77 DATES: This rule becomes effective Section 7 Consultation January 2, 2006. Activities Affected by Critical Habitat Endangered and Threatened Species; Designation ADDRESSES: Comments and materials Designation of Critical Habitat for 12 VIII. Required Determinations Evolutionarily Significant Units of West received, as well as supporting IX. References Cited Coast Salmon and Steelhead in documentation used in the preparation I. Background and Previous Federal Washington, Oregon, and Idaho of this final rule, are available for public inspection by appointment, during Action AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries normal business hours, at the National Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, We are responsible for determining Atmospheric Administration, Protected Resources Division, 1201 NE whether species, subspecies, or distinct Commerce. Lloyd Blvd., Suite 1100, Portland, OR population segments of West Coast salmon and steelhead (Oncorhynchus ACTION: Final rule. 97232–1274. The final rule, maps, and other materials relating to these spp.) are threatened or endangered, and SUMMARY: We, the National Marine designations can be found on our for designating critical habitat for them Fisheries Service (NMFS), are issuing a website at http://www.nwr.noaa.gov/ under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq). final rule designating critical habitat for 1salmon/salmesa/crithab/CHsite.htm. To qualify as a distinct population segment, a West Coast salmon or 12 Evolutionarily Significant Units FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: steelhead population must be (ESUs) of West Coast salmon (chum, Steve Stone at the above address, at substantially reproductively isolated Oncorhynchus keta; sockeye, O. nerka; (503) 231–2317, or Marta Nammack at from other conspecific populations and chinook, O. tshawytscha) and steelhead (301) 713–1401 ext. 180. represent an important component in (O. mykiss) listed as of the date of this SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: designation under the Endangered the evolutionary legacy of the biological Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA). Organization of the Final Rule species. According to agency policy, a The specific areas designated in the rule This Federal Register notice describes population meeting these criteria is text set out below include the final critical habitat designations for considered to be an Evolutionarily approximately 20,630 mi (33,201 km) of 12 ESUs of West Coast salmon and Significant Unit (ESU) (56 FR 58612; lake, riverine, and estuarine habitat in steelhead under the ESA. The pages that November 20, 1991). Washington, Oregon, and Idaho, as well follow summarize the comments and We are also responsible for as approximately 2,312 mi (3,721 km) of information received in response to designating critical habitat for species marine nearshore habitat in Puget proposed designations published on listed under our jurisdiction. Section 3 Sound, Washington. Some of the areas December 14, 2004 (69 FR 74572), of the ESA defines critical habitat as (1) designated are occupied by two or more describe any changes from the proposed specific areas within the geographical ESUs. The annual net economic impacts designations, and detail the final area occupied by the species at the time of changes to Federal activities as a designations for 12 ESUs. To assist the of listing, on which are found those result of critical habitat designation reader, the content of this document is physical or biological features that are (regardless of whether those activities organized as follows: essential to the conservation of the would also change as a result of the I. Background and Previous Federal Action listed species and that may require ESA’s jeopardy requirement) are II. Summary of Comments and special management considerations or estimated to be approximately $201.2 Recommendations protection, and (2) specific areas outside million. Fish and wildlife conservation Notification and General Comments the geographical area occupied by the actions for the Federal Columbia River Identification of Critical Habitat Areas species at the time of listing that are Power System and other major Economics Methodology essential for the conservation of a listed hydropower projects in the Pacific Weighing the Benefits of Designation vs. species. Our regulations direct us to Northwest are expected to generate Exclusion focus on ‘‘primary constituent another $500–700 million in annual Effects of Designating Critical Habitat elements,’’ or PCEs, in identifying these ESU-Specific Issues costs, including forgone power III. Summary of Revisions physical or biological features. Section revenues. While these hydropower IV. Methods and Criteria Used To Identify 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each projects are covered by ESA section 7, Critical Habitat Federal agency shall, in consultation the conservation actions that generate Salmon Life History with and with the assistance of NMFS, these costs are imposed by a wide Identifying the Geographical Area ensure that any action authorized, variety of laws. We solicited Occupied by the Species and Specific funded or carried out by such agency is information and comments from the Areas Within the Geographical Area not likely to jeopardize the continued public in an Advance Notice of Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) existence of an endangered or Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) and on Special Management Considerations or threatened salmon or steelhead ESU or Protections all aspects of the proposed rule. This Unoccupied Areas result in the destruction or adverse rule is being issued to meet the timeline Lateral Extent of Critical Habitat modification of critical habitat. Section established in litigation between NMFS Military Lands 4 of the ESA requires us to consider the and Pacific Coast Federation of Critical Habitat Analytical Review Teams economic impacts, impacts on national Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA et. al V. Application of ESA Section 4(b)(2) security, and other relevant impacts of VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:43 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER3.SGM 02SER3 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52631 specifying any particular area as critical announced that we would reassess the species at the time of listing? What habitat. listing status of these and other ESUs physical and biological features are The timeline for completing the (67 FR 6215; February 11, 2002). We essential to the species’ conservation? critical habitat designations described in recently published final listing Are those essential features ones that this Federal Register document was decisions for seven of the 13 ESUs and may require special management established pursuant to litigation extended the deadline for the Oregon considerations or protection? Are areas between NMFS and the Pacific Coast Coast coho salmon ESU and the five outside those currently occupied Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, ESUs of O. mykiss (70 FR 37160; June ‘essential for conservation’? What are Institute for Fisheries Resources, the 28, 2005). Final listing determinations the benefits to the species of critical Center for Biological Diversity, the for these six ESUs are expected by habitat designation? What economic and Oregon Natural Resources Council, the December 2005 (70 FR 37217 and other relevant impacts would result Pacific Rivers Council, and the 37219, June 28, 2005). However, the from a critical habitat designation, even Environmental Protection Information Consent Decree governing the schedule if coextensive with other causes such as Center (PCFFA et al.) and is subject to for our final critical habitat designations listing? What is the appropriate a Consent Decree and Stipulated Order requires that we complete final geographic scale for weighing the of Dismissal (Consent Decree) approved designations for those of the 13 ESUs benefits of exclusion and benefits of by the D.C. District Court. A complete identified above that are listed as of designation? What is the best way to summary of previous court action August 15, 2005. We are not issuing a determine if the failure to designate an regarding these designations can be final critical habitat designation for the area as critical habitat will