52488 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE documentation used in the preparation I. Background and Previous Federal of this final rule, are available for public Action National Oceanic and Atmospheric inspection by appointment, during We are responsible for determining Administration normal business hours, at the National whether species, subspecies, or distinct Marine Fisheries Service, NMFS, population segments of Pacific salmon 50 CFR Part 226 Protected Resources Division, 501 W. and steelhead (Oncorhynchus spp.) are [Docket No. 041123329–5202–02; I.D. Ocean Blvd., Suite 4200, Long Beach, threatened or endangered, and for No.110904F] CA 90802–4213. The final rule, maps, designating critical habitat for them and other materials relating to these RIN 0648–AO04 under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq). designations can be found on our Web To qualify as a distinct population Endangered and Threatened Species; site at http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov. segment, a Pacific salmon or steelhead Designation of Critical Habitat for FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: population must be substantially Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units Craig Wingert at the above address, at reproductively isolated from other of Pacific Salmon and Steelhead in 562/980–4021, or Marta Nammack at conspecific populations and represent California 301/713–1401 ext. 180. an important component in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: evolutionary legacy of the biological AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Organization of the Final Rule species. According to agency policy, a Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and population meeting these criteria is Atmospheric Administration, This Federal Register notice describes considered to be an Evolutionarily Commerce. the final critical habitat designations for Significant Unit (ESU) (56 FR 58612, ACTION: Final rule. seven ESUs of West Coast salmon and November 20, 1991). steelhead listed under the ESA. The We are also responsible for SUMMARY: We, the National Marine pages that follow summarize the designating critical habitat for species Fisheries Service (NMFS), are issuing a comments and information received in listed under our jurisdiction. Section 3 final rule designating critical habitat for response to proposed designations of the ESA defines critical habitat as (1) two Evolutionarily Significant Units published on December 10, 2004 (69 FR specific areas within the geographical (ESUs) of chinook salmon 71880), describe any changes from the area occupied by the species at the time (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and five proposed designations, and detail the of listing, on which are found those ESUs of steelhead (O. mykiss) listed as final designations for seven ESUs. To physical or biological features that are of the date of this designation under the assist the reader, the content of this essential to the conservation of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as notice is organized as follows: listed species and that may require amended (ESA). The specific areas special management considerations or designated in the rule text set out below I. Background and Previous Federal Action protection, and (2) specific areas outside include approximately 8,935 net mi II. Summary of Comments and the geographical area occupied by the (14,269 km) of riverine habitat and 470 Recommendations species at the time of listing that are 2 2 mi (1,212 km ) of estuarine habitat Notification and General Comments essential for the conservation of a listed (primarily in San Francisco-San Pablo- Identification of Critical Habitat Areas species. Our regulations direct us to Suisun Bays) in California. Some of the Economics Methodology focus on ‘‘primary constituent Weighing the Benefits of Designation vs. areas designated are occupied by two or elements,’’ or PCEs, in identifying these more ESUs. The annual net economic Exclusion Effects of Designating Critical Habitat physical or biological features. Section impacts of changes to Federal activities 7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each as a result of the critical habitat ESU-specific Issues III. Summary of Revisions Federal agency shall, in consultation designations (regardless of whether IV. Methods and Criteria Used to Identify with and with the assistance of NMFS, those activities would also change as a Critical Habitat ensure that any action authorized, result of the ESA’s jeopardy Salmon Life History funded or carried out by such agency is requirement) are estimated to be Identifying the Geographical Area not likely to jeopardize the continued Occupied by the Species and Specific approximately $81,647,439. We existence of an endangered or solicited information and comments Areas within the Geographical Area Primary Constituent Elements threatened salmon or steelhead ESU or from the public in an Advanced Notice result in the destruction or adverse of Proposed Rulemaking and on all Special Management Considerations or Protections modification of critical habitat. Section aspects of the proposed rule. This rule Unoccupied Areas 4 of the ESA requires us to consider the is being issued to meet the timeline Lateral Extent of Critical Habitat economic impacts, impacts on national established in litigation between NMFS Military Lands security, and other relevant impacts of and Pacific Coast Federation of Critical Habitat Analytical Review Teams specifying any particular area as critical Fishermen’s Associations (PCFFA et. al V. Application of ESA Section 4(b)(2) habitat. v. NMFS (Civ.No. 03–1883)). In the Exclusions Based on ‘‘Other Relevant Impacts’’ The timeline for completing the proposed rule, we identified a number critical habitat designations described in of potential exclusions we were Impacts to Tribes Impacts to Landowners with Contractual this Federal Register notice was considering including exclusions for Commitments to Conservation established pursuant to litigation federal lands subject to the Pacific Exclusions Based on National Security between NMFS and the Pacific Coast Northwest Forest Plan, PACFISH and Impacts Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, INFISH. We are continuing to analyze Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts Institute for Fisheries Resources, the whether exclusion of those federal lands VI. Critical Habitat Designation Center for Biological Diversity, the is appropriate. VII. Effects of Critical Habitat Designation Section 7 Consultation Oregon Natural Resources Council, the DATES: This rule becomes effective Activities Affected by Critical Habitat Pacific Rivers Council, and the January 2, 2006. Designation Environmental Protection Information ADDRESSES: Comments and materials VIII. Required Determinations Center (PCFFA, et al.) and is subject to received, as well as supporting IX. References Cited a Consent Decree and Stipulated Order VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 52489 of Dismissal (Consent Decree) approved notice in accordance with the Consent this Federal Register notice as well as by the D.C. District Court. A complete Decree. We are able to do so because in in other documents supporting this summary of previous court action developing critical habitat designations proposed rule.’’ In the proposed rule, regarding these designations can be for this species we have focused on the we described the methods and criteria found in the proposed rule (69 FR co-occurring range of both the we applied to address these questions, 71880; December 10, 2004). anadromous and resident forms. relying upon the unique life history In keeping with the Consent Decree, Therefore, both the proposed and final traits and habitat requirements of on December 10, 2004 (69 FR 71880), designations were restricted to the salmon and steelhead. we published proposed critical habitat species’ anadromous range, although we In issuing the final rule, we designations for two ESUs of Chinook did consider and propose to designate considered the comments we received salmon and five ESUs of O. mykiss. (For some areas occupied solely by resident to determine whether a change in our the latter ESUs we used the species’ fish in upper Alameda Creek in the San proposed approach to designating scientific name rather than ‘‘steelhead’’ Francisco Bay area. We focused on the critical habitat for salmon and steelhead because at the time they were being co-occurring range due to uncertainties was warranted. In some instances, we proposed for revision to include both about: (1) The distribution of resident concluded based on comments received anadromous (steelhead) and resident fish outside the range of co-occurrence, that a change was warranted. For (rainbow/redband) forms of the (2) the location of natural barriers example, in this final rule we have species—see 69 FR 33101, June 14, impassable to steelhead and upstream of revised our approach to allow us to 2004). The seven ESUs addressed in the habitat areas proposed for designation, consider excluding areas covered by proposed rule were: (1) California and (3) the final listing status of the habitat conservation plans in those Coastal Chinook salmon; (2) Northern resident form. Section 4(a)(3)(B) of the cases where the benefits of exclusion California O. mykiss; (3) Central ESA provides for the revision of critical outweigh the benefits of designation. California Coast O. mykiss; (4) South- habitat designations as appropriate, and