![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Determination of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: February 7, 2000 (Volume 65, Number 25)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 5945-5976]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr07fe00-42]
[[Page 5945]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part III
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Determination
of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher; Proposed
Rule
[[Page 5946]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AF32
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed
Determination of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California
Gnatcatcher
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose
designation of critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The
proposed critical habitat unit boundaries encompasses approximately
323,726 hectares (799,916 acres) of gnatcatcher habitat in Los Angeles,
Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, California.
The actual area containing gnatcatcher habitat is smaller.
Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and
unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species
and that may require special management considerations or protection.
The primary constituent elements for the gnatcatcher are those habitat
components that are essential for the primary biological needs of
foraging, nesting, rearing of young, intra-specific communication,
roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering (Atwood 1990).
Areas that do not currently contain all of the primary constituent
elements, but that could develop them in the future, may be essential
to the conservation of the species and may be designated as critical
habitat.
Proposed critical habitat does not include lands covered by an
existing, legally operative, incidental take permit for the coastal
California gnatcatcher under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The
Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) provide for special management and
protection under the terms of the permit and the lands covered by them
are therefore not proposed for inclusion in the critical habitat.
In areas where HCPs have not yet had permits issued, we have
proposed critical habitat for lands encompassing core populations of
gnatcatchers and areas essential for habitat connectivity which may
require special management considerations or protections.
We solicit data and comments from the public on all aspects of this
proposal, including data on economic and other impacts of the
designation and our approaches for handling HCPs. We may revise this
proposal to incorporate or address new information received during the
comment period.
DATES: Comments: We will consider comments received by April 7, 2000.
Public Hearings: The dates of three public hearings scheduled for
this proposal are:
1. Los Angeles and Orange Counties--February 15, 2000.
2. San Diego County--February 17, 2000.
3. Riverside and San Bernardino Counties--February 23, 2000.
All public hearings will be held from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. and
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Comments: If you wish to comment, you may submit your
comments and materials concerning this proposal by any one of several
methods.
You may submit written comments and information to the Field
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California 92008.
You may hand-deliver written comments to our Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue
West, Carlsbad, California 92008.
You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to
fw1cagn@fws.gov. Please submit comments in ASCII file format and avoid
the use of special characters and encryption. Please include ``Attn:
[RIN number]'' and your name and return address in your e-mail message.
If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have
received your e-mail message, contact us directly by calling our
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at phone number 760-431-9440.
Public Hearings: Three public hearings are scheduled. Public
hearing locations are:
1. Los Angeles and Orange Counties--Sheraton Anaheim Hotel, 1015 West
Ball Road, Anaheim, California.
2. San Diego County--San Diego Hilton Mission Valley, 901 Camino del
Rio South, San Diego, California.
3. Riverside and Bernardino Counties--Holiday Inn Select Riverside,
3400 Market Street, Riverside, California.
Availability of Documents: Comments and materials received, as well
as supporting documentation used in the preparation of this proposed
rule, will be available for public inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and
Wildlife Office, at the above address (telephone: 760/431-9440;
facsimile 760/431-9624). For information about western Los Angeles
County, contact the Field Supervisor, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2493 Portola Road Suite B, Ventura,
California 93003 (telephone: 805/644-1766; facsimile 805/644-3958).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The insectivorous coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila
californica californica) is a small (length 11 centimeters (4.5
inches), weight 6 grams (0.2 ounces)), long-tailed member of the old-
world warbler and gnatcatcher family Sylviidae (American Ornithologist
Union 1998). The bird's plumage is dark blue-gray above and grayish-
white below. The tail is mostly black above and below. The male has a
distinctive black cap which is absent during the winter. Both sexes
have a distinctive white eye-ring.
The coastal California gnatcatcher is one of three subspecies of
the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). This taxon is
restricted to coastal southern California and northwestern Baja
California, Mexico, from Ventura and San Bernardino Counties,
California, south to approximately El Rosario, Mexico, at about 30 deg.
north latitude (American Ornithologists' Union 1957, Atwood 1991, Banks
and Gardner 1992, Garrett and Dunn 1981). An evaluation of the historic
range of the coastal California gnatcatcher indicates that about 41
percent of its latitudinal distribution is within the United States and
59 percent within Baja California, Mexico (Atwood 1990). A more
detailed analysis, based on elevational limits associated with
gnatcatcher locality records, reveals that a significant portion (65 to
70 percent) of the coastal California gnatcatcher's historic range may
have been located in southern California rather than Baja California
(Atwood 1992). The analysis suggested that the species occurs below
about 912 meters (m) (3,000 feet (ft)) in elevation. Of the
approximately 8,700 historic or current locations used in the analysis
for this proposed rule, more than 99 percent were below 770 m (2,500
ft).
The coastal California gnatcatcher was considered locally common in
the mid-1940s although a decline in the extent of its habitat was noted
(Grinnell and Miller 1944). By the 1960s, this species had apparently
experienced a significant population decline in the United States that
has been attributed to widespread destruction of its habitat.
[[Page 5947]]
Pyle and Small (1961) reported that ``the California subspecies is very
rare, and lack of recent records of this race compared with older
records may indicate a drastic reduction in population.'' Atwood (1980)
estimated that no more than 1,000 to 1,500 pairs remained in the United
States. He also noted that remnant portions of its habitat were highly
fragmented with nearly all being bordered on at least one side by
rapidly expanding urban centers. Subsequent reviews of coastal
California gnatcatcher status by Garrett and Dunn (1981) and Unitt
(1984) paralleled the findings of Atwood (1980). The species was listed
as threatened in March 1993, due to habitat loss and fragmentation
resulting from urban and agricultural development, and the synergistic
effects of cowbird parasitism and predation (58 FR 16742).
The coastal California gnatcatcher typically occurs in or near sage
scrub habitat, which is a broad category of vegetation that includes
the following plant communities as classified by Holland (1986):
Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan coastal sage scrub, maritime
succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan
(areas created when sediments from the stream are deposited) scrub,
southern coastal bluff scrub, and coastal sage-chaparral scrub. Based
upon dominant species, these communities have been further divided into
series such as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat,
California buckwheat-white sage, California encelia, California
sagebrush, California sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-
California buckwheat, coast prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage,
scalebroom, and white sage (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995).
The majority of plant species found in sage scrub habitat are low-
growing, drought-deciduous shrubs and sub-shrubs. Generally speaking,
most types of sage scrub are dominated by one or more of the
following-- California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), buckwheats
(Eriogonum fasciculatum and E. cinereum), encelias (Encelia californica
and E. farinosa), and various sages (commonly Salvia mellifera, S.
apiana, and S. leucophylla). Sage scrub often occurs in a patchy, or
mosaic, distribution pattern throughout the range of the gnatcatcher.
Gnatcatchers also use chaparral (shrubby plants adapted to dry
summers and moist winters), grassland, and riparian (areas near a
source of water) habitats where they occur in proximity to sage scrub.
These non-sage scrub habitats are used for dispersal and foraging
(Atwood et al. 1998; Campbell et al. 1998). Availability of these non-
sage scrub areas may be essential during certain times of the year,
particularly during drought conditions, for dispersal, foraging, or
nesting.
A comprehensive overview of the life history and ecology of the
coastal California gnatcatcher is provided by Atwood (1990) and is the
basis for much of the discussion presented below. The coastal
California gnatcatcher is non-migratory and defends breeding
territories ranging in size from 1 to 6 hectares (ha) (2 to 14 acres
(ac)). Reported home ranges vary in size from 5 to 15 ha (13 to 39 ac)
for this species (Mock and Jones 1990). The breeding season of the
coastal California gnatcatcher extends from late February through July
with the peak of nest initiations (startups) occurring from mid-March
through mid-May. Nests are composed of grasses, bark strips, small
leaves, spider webs, down, and other materials and are often located in
California sagebrush about 1 m (3 ft) above the ground. Nests are
constructed over a 4- to 10-day period. Clutch size averages four eggs.
The incubation and nestling periods encompass about 14 and 16 days,
respectively. Both sexes participate in all phases of the nesting
cycle. Although the coastal California gnatcatcher may occasionally
produce two broods in one nesting season, the frequency of this
behavior is not known. Juveniles are dependent upon, or remain closely
associated with, their parents for up to several months following
departure from the nest and dispersal from their natal (place of birth)
territory.
Dispersal of juveniles generally requires a corridor of native
vegetation providing certain foraging and shelter requisites to link
larger patches of appropriate sage scrub vegetation (Soule 1991). These
dispersal corridors facilitate the exchange of genetic material and
provide a path for recolonization of areas from which the species has
been extirpated (Soule 1991 and Galvin 1998). It has been suggested
that ``natal dispersal [through corridors] is therefore an important
aspect of the biology of [a] * * * nonmigratory, territorial bird * * *
[such as] the California gnatcatcher * * *'' Galvin (1998). Although it
has also been suggested that juvenile coastal California gnatcatchers
are capable of dispersing long distances (up to 22 kilometers (14
miles)) across fragmented and highly disturbed sage scrub habitat, such
as found along highway and utility corridors or remnant mosaics of
habitat adjacent to developed lands, generally the species disperses
short distances through contiguous, undisturbed habitat (Bailey and
Mock 1998, Famolaro and Newman 1998, and Galvin 1998). Moreover, it is
likely that populations will experience increased juvenile mortality in
fragmented habitats where dispersal distances are greater than average
(Atwood et al. 1998). This would be particularly true if dispersal was
across non-or sub-optimal habitats that function as population sinks
(areas where mortality is greater than reproduction rates) (Soule
1991).
Previous Federal Action
On March 30, 1993, we published a final rule determining the
gnatcatcher to be a threatened species (58 FR 16741). In making this
determination, we relied, in part, on taxonomic studies conducted by
Dr. Jonathan Atwood of the Manomet Bird Observatory. As is standard
practice in the scientific community, we cited the conclusions by Dr.
Atwood in a peer reviewed, published scientific article pertaining to
the subspecific taxonomy of the gnatcatcher (Atwood 1991).
On December 10, 1993, we published a final special rule concerning
the take of the gnatcatcher pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act (58 FR
63088). This rule defines the conditions for which incidental take of
the gnatcatcher resulting from certain land-use practices regulated by
State and local governments through the Natural Community Conservation
Planning Act of 1991 (NCCP) would not be a violation of section 9 of
the Act. We found that implementation of the special 4(d) rule and the
NCCP program provides for conservation and management of the
gnatcatcher and its habitat in a manner consistent with the purposes of
the Act.
The Endangered Species Committee of the Building Industry
Association of Southern California and other plaintiffs filed a suit
challenging the listing on several grounds, but primarily based on our
conclusions regarding gnatcatcher taxonomy. In a Memorandum Opinion and
Order filed in the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia
(District Court) on May 2, 1994, the District Court vacated the listing
determination, holding that the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary)
should have made available the underlying data that formed the basis of
Dr. Atwood's conclusions on the taxonomy of the gnatcatcher.
Following the District Court's decision, Dr. Atwood released his
data to the Service. We made these data available to the public for
review and comment on June 2, 1994 (59 FR 28508). By order dated June
16, 1994, the District Court reinstated the threatened
[[Page 5948]]
status of the gnatcatcher pending a determination by the Secretary
whether the listing should be revised or revoked in light of the public
review and comment of Dr. Atwood's data. On March 27, 1995, we
published a determination to retain the threatened status for the
gnatcatcher (60 FR 15693).
At the time of the listing, we concluded that designation of
critical habitat for the gnatcatcher was not prudent because such
designation would not benefit the species and would make the species
more vulnerable to activities prohibited under section 9 of the Act. We
were aware of several instances of apparently intentional habitat
destruction that had occurred during the listing process. In addition,
most land occupied by the gnatcatcher was in private ownership, and we
did not believe a designation of critical habitat to be of benefit
because of a lack of a Federal nexus (critical habitat has regulatory
applicability only for activities carried out, funded, or authorized by
a Federal agency).
On May 21, 1997, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
issued an opinion (Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Department
of the Interior, 113 F. 3d 1121) that required us to issue a new
decision regarding the prudency of determining critical habitat for the
gnatcatcher. In this opinion, the Court held that the ``increased
threat'' criterion in the regulations may justify a not prudent finding
only when we have weighed the benefits of designation against the risks
of designation. Secondly, with respect to the ``not beneficial''
criterion explicit in the regulations, the Court ruled that our
conclusion that designation of critical habitat was not prudent because
it would fail to control the majority of land-use activities within
critical habitat was inconsistent with Congressional intent that the
not prudent exception to designation should apply ``only in rare
circumstances.'' The Court noted that a substantial portion of
gnatcatcher habitat would be subject to a future Federal nexus
sufficient to trigger section 7 consultation requirements regarding
critical habitat. Thirdly, the Circuit Court determined that our
conclusion that designation of critical habitat would be less
beneficial to the species than another type of protection (e.g., State
of California Natural Communities Conservation Program (NCCP) efforts)
did not absolve us from the requirement to designate critical habitat.
The Court also criticized the lack of specificity in our analysis.
On February 8, 1999, we published a notice of determination in the
Federal Register (64 FR 5957) regarding the prudency of designating
critical habitat for the gnatcatcher. We found that the designation of
critical habitat was prudent on Federal lands within the range of the
gnatcatcher and nonFederal lands where a current or likely future
Federal nexus exists. We determined that designating critical habitat
on private lands lacking a current or likely future Federal nexus or
any lands subject to the provision of an approved HCP under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act and/or an approved NCCP under which the
gnatcatcher is a covered species would provide no additional benefit to
the species. Further, we determined that the threats (e.g., activities
prohibited under section 9 of the Act) from designating critical
habitat on private lands would outweigh the benefits in certain areas.
On August 4, 1999, in response to a motion filed by the Natural
Resources Defense Council, the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California ordered the Service to propose critical habitat
by October 4, 1999. In response to this order and in preparation of a
proposal using our prudency determination (64 FR 5957), we had
difficulty delineating critical habitat because of the uncertainty
regarding likely future Federal nexuses. Since publication of the
determination, we discovered that the Federal nexuses relied on in our
prudency determination for several development projects no longer
existed. Conversely, other projects were found to have current Federal
nexuses, which were lacking when we developed the prudency
determination. Given the unpredictability of determining whether a
Federal nexus is likely to exist on any given parcel of private land,
we have reevaluated our previous conclusion and now conclude that there
may be a regulatory benefit from designating critical habitat for the
gnatcatcher on private lands now lacking an identifiable Federal nexus
because such lands may have a nexus to a Federal agency action in the
future.
In our prudency determination (64 FR 5957), we described the threat
posed by vandalism towards the gnatcatcher and its habitat, largely
coastal sage scrub. We cited several cases under investigation by our
Law Enforcement Division and various newspaper articles regarding this
threat. We determined that the designation of critical habitat would
increase the instances of habitat destruction and exacerbate threats to
the gnatcatcher. Therefore, we concluded that the threat posed by
vandalism that would result from designating private lands lacking a
Federal nexus as critical habitat would outweigh the benefit that would
be provided. We acknowledged that critical habitat may provide some
benefit by highlighting areas where the species may occur or areas that
are important to recovery. However, we stated that such locational data
are well known, and designation of critical habitat on private lands
may incite some members of the public and increase incidences of
habitat vandalism above current levels.
We have reconsidered our evaluation in the prudency determination
of the threats posed by vandalism. We have determined that the threats
to the gnatcatcher and its habitat from the specific instances of
habitat destruction we identified do not outweigh the broader
educational, and any potential regulatory and other possible benefits,
that a designation of critical habitat would provide for this species.
The instances of likely vandalism, though real, were relatively
isolated given the wide-ranging habitat of the gnatcatcher.
Additionally, having determined that the existence of current or likely
future Federal nexuses is an unreliable basis upon which to include or
exclude private lands as critical habitat, we are not compelled to
identify specific scattered parcels of private land with presumptive
Federal nexuses. Instead, we are able to use a landscape approach in
identifying areas for critical habitat designation that does not appear
to highlight individual parcels of private land. Consequently, we
conclude that designating critical habitat on private lands will not
increase incidences of habitat vandalism above current levels for this
species. In contrast, a designation of critical habitat will provide
some educational benefit by formally identifying on a range-wide basis
those areas essential to the conservation of the species and, thus, the
areas likely to be the focus of our recovery efforts for the
gnatcatcher. Therefore, we conclude that the benefits of designating
critical habitat on nonFederal lands essential for the conservation of
the gnatcatcher outweigh the risks of increased vandalism resulting
from such designation.
The Service considered the existing status of lands in designating
areas as critical habitat. Section 10(a) of the Act authorizes us to
issue permits for the taking of listed species incidental to otherwise
lawful activities. Incidental take permit applications must be
supported by a HCP that identifies conservation measures that the
permittee agrees to implement for the species to minimize and mitigate
the impacts of the requested incidental take. NonFederal lands that are
covered by an
[[Page 5949]]
existing operative permit issued for California gnatcatcher under
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act receive special management and
protection under the terms of the permit and are therefore not being
proposed for inclusion in critical habitat.
We expect that critical habitat may be used as a tool to help
identify areas within the range of the California gnatcatcher most
critical for the conservation of the species, and we will encourage
development of HCPs for such areas on nonFederal lands. We consider
HCPs to be one of the most important methods through which nonFederal
landowners can resolve endangered species conflicts. We provide
technical assistance and work closely with applicants throughout
development of HCPs to help identify special management considerations
for the California gnatcatcher. HCPs provide a package of protection
and management measures sufficient to address the conservation needs of
the species. Therefore, we have not included any lands covered by an
existing legally-operative incidental take permit for California
gnatcatcher in this proposed critical habitat designation.
In light of our decision to reconsider the prudency determination,
we needed additional time to revise the determination (64 FR 5957) and
develop a proposed critical habitat rule based on the revised
determination. We therefore requested an extension of 120 days in which
to reevaluate prudency and propose critical habitat, which the District
Court granted. The Court also ordered us to publish a final critical
habitat rule by September 30, 2000.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) the
specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a species, at the
time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found those
physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of
the species and (II) that may require special management considerations
or protection and; (ii) specific areas outside the geographic area
occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon a determination
that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.
``Conservation'' means the use of all methods and procedures that are
necessary to bring an endangered or a threatened species to the point
at which listing under the Act is no longer necessary.
Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and
unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species
and that may require special management considerations or protection.
Areas that do not currently contain all of the primary constituent
elements, but that could develop them in the future, may be essential
to the conservation of the species and may be designated as critical
habitat.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 also requires conferences on
Federal actions that are likely to result in the adverse modification
or destruction of proposed critical habitat. Aside from the added
protection that may be provided under section 7, the Act does not
provide other forms of protection to lands designated as critical
habitat. Because consultation under section 7 of the Act does not apply
to activities on private or other nonFederal lands that do not involve
a Federal nexus, critical habitat designation would not afford any
protection under the Act against such activities.
Designating critical habitat does not, in itself, lead to recovery
of a listed species. Designation does not create a management plan,
establish a preserve area where no actions are allowed, establish
numerical population goals, prescribe specific management actions
(inside or outside of critical habitat), or directly affect areas not
designated as critical habitat. Specific management recommendations for
areas designated as critical habitat are most appropriately addressed
in recovery plans and management plans, and through section 7
consultation and section 10 HCPs.
Section 3(5)(C) of the Act generally requires that not all areas
that can be occupied by a species be designated as critical habitat.
Therefore, not all areas containing the primary constituent elements
are necessarily essential to the conservation of the species. Areas
that contain one or more of the primary constituent elements that may
support gnatcatchers, but are not included within critical habitat
boundaries, would be considered under other parts of the Act and/or
other conservation laws and regulations.
Methods
In determining areas that are essential to conserve the
gnatcatcher, we used the best scientific and commercial data available.
This included data from research and survey observations published in
peer reviewed articles; regional Geographic Information System (GIS)
coverages; habitat evaluation models for the San Diego County Multiple
Species Conservation Plan (MSCP), the North San Diego County Multiple
Habitat Conservation Plans (MHCP), and the North County Subarea of the
MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego County; approved HCPs; and data
collected from reports submitted by biologists holding section
10(a)(1)(A) recovery permits. Following the listing of the species, a
concerted effort was undertaken to survey significant portions of the
species' range in San Diego and Orange Counties for the purpose of
developing and implementing HCPs, and more recently, surveys of varying
intensity have been conducted in Los Angeles, Riverside, San
Bernardino, and Ventura Counties.
Primary Constituent Elements
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12 in determining which areas to propose as critical
habitat, we are required to base critical habitat determinations on the
best scientific and commercial data available and to consider those
physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation
of the species and that may require special management considerations
and protection. Such requirements include but are not limited to--space
for individual and population growth, and for normal behavior; food,
water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or physiological
requirements; cover or shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction,
rearing of offspring; and habitats that are protected from disturbance
or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological
distributions of a species.
The areas we are proposing to designate as critical habitat provide
some or all of those habitat components essential for the primary
biological needs of the gnatcatcher also called primary constituent
elements.
The primary constituent elements for the gnatcatcher are those
habitat components that are essential for the primary biological needs
of foraging, nesting, rearing of young, intra-specific communication,
roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering (Atwood 1990).
Primary constituent elements are provided in undeveloped areas,
including agricultural lands, that support or have the potential to
support, through natural successional processes, various types of sage
scrub or chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur
proximally to sage scrub and where they may be utilized for biological
needs such as breeding and foraging (Atwood et al. 1998, Campbell et
al. 1998). Primary constituent elements associated with the biological
[[Page 5950]]
needs of dispersal are also found in undeveloped areas, including
agricultural lands, that provide or could provide connectivity or
linkage between or within larger core areas, including open space and
disturbed areas containing introduced plant species that may receive
only periodic use.
Primary constituent elements include, but are not limited to, the
following plant communities--Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub,
Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and
coastal sage-chaparral scrub (Holland 1986). Based upon dominant
species, these communities have been further divided into series such
as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat, California buckwheat-
white sage, California encelia, California sagebrush, California
sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-California buckwheat, coast
prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage, scalebroom, and white sage
(Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). Dominant plants within these communities
include California sagebrush, buckwheats, encelias, and various sages
(commonly Salvia mellifera, S. apiana, and S. leucophylla). Other
commonly occurring plants include coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii),
bush monkeyflower (Mimulus aurantiacus), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus
mexicana), bladderpod (Isomeris arborea), deerweed (Lotus scoparius),
chaparral mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatum), laurel sumac (Malosma
laurina), and several species of Rhus (R. integrifolia, R. ovata, and
R. trilobata). Succulent species, such as boxthorn (Lycium spp.), cliff
spurge (Euphorbia misera), jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), and various
species of cacti (Opuntia littoralis, O. prolifera, and Ferocactus
viridescens), and live-forever (Dudleya spp.), are represented in
maritime succulent scrub, coast prickly-pear scrub, and southern
coastal bluff scrubs.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
We considered several qualitative criteria in the selection and
proposal of specific areas or units for gnatcatcher critical habitat.
Such criteria focused on designating units--(1) Throughout the
geographical and elevational range of the species; (2) within various
occupied plant communities, such as Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub,
Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and
coastal sage-chaparral scrub; (3) in documented areas of large,
contiguous blocks of occupied habitat (i.e., core population areas);
and/or in areas that link core populations areas (i.e., linkage areas).
These criteria are similar to criteria used to identify reserve/
preserve lands in approved HCPs covering the gnatcatcher.
To identify proposed critical habitat units, we first examined
those lands identified for conservation under approved HCPs covering
the gnatcatcher. These planning efforts utilized habitat evaluation
models, gnatcatcher occurrence data, and reserve design criteria to
identify reserve systems of core gnatcatcher populations and linkage
areas that are essential for the conservation of the species.
We then evaluated those areas where on-going habitat conservation
planning efforts have resulted in the preparation of biological
analyses that identify habitat important for the conservation of the
gnatcatcher. These include--the Western Riverside County MSHCP, the
Rancho Palos Verdes MSHCP, the North San Diego County MHCP, the North
County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego County, and the
Southern Subregion of Orange County's NCCP. We used those biological
analyses in concert with data regarding current gnatcatcher
occurrences--(1) sage scrub vegetation, (2) elevation, and (3)
connectivity to identify those lands that are essential for the
conservation of the gnatcatcher within the respective planning area
boundaries.
Finally, we evaluated other lands for their conservation value for
the gnatcatcher. We delimited a study area by selecting geographic
boundaries based on the following--(1) gnatcatcher occurrences, (2)
sage scrub vegetation, (3) elevation, and (4) connectivity to other
gnatcatcher occurrences. We determined conservation value based on the
presence of, or proximity to, significant gnatcatcher core populations
and/or sage scrub, sage scrub habitat quality, parcel or habitat patch
size, surrounding land-uses, and potential to support resident
gnatcatchers and/or facilitate movement of birds between known habitat
areas.
Proposed Critical Habitat Units are defined by specific map units
that have been delineated using public land survey (PLS) sections
(generally one square mile) or Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM)
coordinates in Spanish Land Grant areas (areas which have not been
surveyed for inclusion into PLS). On Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
we used training area boundaries and UTM coordinates. Within the Orange
County NCCP Central/Coastal Subregions we used boundaries of select
Existing Land Use and North Ranch Policy Plan areas.
We did not map critical habitat in sufficient detail to exclude all
developed areas such as towns, housing developments, and other lands
unlikely to contain primary constituent elements essential for
gnatcatcher conservation. Within the delineated critical habitat unit
boundaries, only lands where one or more constituent elements are found
are proposed for critical habitat. Existing features and structures
within proposed areas, such as buildings, roads, aqueducts, railroads,
and other features, do not contain one or more of the primary
constituent elements. Therefore, these areas are not proposed for
critical habitat.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
The approximate area of proposed critical habitat by county and
land ownership is shown in Table 1. Proposed critical habitat includes
gnatcatcher habitat throughout the species' range in the United States
(i.e., Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego
Counties, California). Lands proposed are under private, State, and
Federal ownership, with Federal lands including lands managed by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Department of Defense (DOD), Service,
and Forest Service. Lands proposed as critical habitat have been
divided into 15 Critical Habitat Units. A brief description of each
unit and reasons for proposing it as critical habitat are presented
below.
Table 1. Approximate proposed critical habitat area (hectares
(acres)) by county and land ownership. Estimates reflect the total area
within critical habitat unit boundaries, without regard to the presence
of primary constituent elements. The area actually proposed as critical
habitat is therefore less than that indicated in Table 1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
County Federal* Local/state Private Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles.................... 4,407 ha........... 1,066 ha.......... 28,795 ha......... 34,268 ha
(10,890 ac)........ (2,633 ac)........ (71,151 ac)....... (84,675 ac)
[[Page 5951]]
Orange......................... 1,428 ha........... 3,736 ha.......... 34,128 ha......... 39,346 ha
(3,529 ac)......... (9,232 ac)........ (84,463 ac)....... (97,224 ac)
Riverside...................... 7,378 ha........... 7,430 ha.......... 90,726 ha......... 105,534 ha
(18,230 ac)........ (18,360 ac)....... (224,181 ac)...... (260,771 ac)
San Bernardino................. 2,952 ha........... 352 ha............ 29,666 ha......... 32,971 ha
(7,295 ac)......... (870 ac).......... (73,304 ac)....... (81,470 ac)
San Diego...................... 35,767 ha.......... 2,597 ha.......... 73,243 ha......... 111,607 ha
(88,378 ac)........ (6,418 ac)........ (180,981 ac)...... (275,777 ac)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................... 51,932 ha.......... 15,181 ha......... 256,558 ha........ 323,726 ha
(128,322 ac)....... (37,513 ac)....... (634,080 ac)...... (799,916 ac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Federal lands include Bureau of Land Management, Department of Defense, National Forest, and Fish and Wildlife
Service lands.
Unit 1: San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)
Unit 1 encompasses approximately 20,697 ha (51,141 ac) within the
MSCP planning area. Lands proposed contain core gnatcatcher
populations, sage scrub and areas providing connectivity between core
populations and sage scrub. Proposed critical habitat includes lands
within the MSCP planning areas that have not received incidental take
permits for the gnatcatcher under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. This
includes lands essential to the conservation of the gnatcatcher within:
the cities of Chula Vista, El Cajon, and Santee; major amendment areas
within the San Diego County Subarea Plan; the Otay-Sweetwater Unit of
the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex; and water district
lands owned by Sweetwater Authority, Helix Water District and Otay
Water District.
Unit 2: Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar
Unit 2 encompasses approximately 4,859 ha (12,007 ac) on Marine
Corps Air Station, Miramar (Station). Lands proposed include areas
identified as occupied by core gnatcatcher populations in the Station's
proposed Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan as well as canyons
and corridors that provide east-west and north-south linkages to
defined preserve lands adjacent to this unit.
Unit 3: Multiple Habitat Conservation Open Space Program (MHCOSP) for
San Diego County
Unit 3 encompasses approximately 6,014 ha (14,860 ac) within the
MHCOSP. Lands proposed include a core population of gnatcatchers on the
Cleveland National Forest south of State Route 78 near the upper
reaches of the San Diego River. It also includes important corridors of
sage scrub for connectivity.
Unit 4: North San Diego County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan
(MHCP)
Unit 4 encompasses approximately 28,542 ha (70,526 ac) within the
MHCP planning area in northwestern San Diego County. Lands proposed
contain core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub identified by the
San Diego Association of Governments' (SANDAG) ``Gnatcatcher Habitat
Evaluation Model,'' dated March 24, 1999, as high or moderate value. In
addition, areas proposed provide connectivity between habitat valued as
high or moderate. This unit also provides connectivity between core
gnatcatcher populations within adjacent units.
Unit 5: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
Unit 5 encompasses approximately 20,613 ha (50,935 ac) on Marine
Corps Base Camp Pendleton (Base). Areas proposed include 26 training
areas and portions of an additional 9 training areas (refer to the
legal description for this unit for the names of the training areas
affected). The Base contains a substantial coastal corridor of
gnatcatcher-occupied sage scrub that provides the primary linkage
between San Diego populations and those in southern Orange County (Unit
8). Another corridor of gnatcatcher-occupied sage scrub occurs along
the Santa Margarita River valley that branches inland, connecting with
habitat in the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station (Unit 6) and further
north into southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).
Unit 6: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station
Unit 6 encompasses approximately 3,606 ha (8,909 ac) on Fallbrook
Naval Weapons Station in northern San Diego County. The unit provides a
significant segment of a corridor of sage scrub between core
gnatcatcher populations on Camp Pendleton (Unit 5) and populations in
southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).
Unit 7: North County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego
County
Unit 7 encompasses approximately 27,295 ha (67,446 ac) within the
planning area for the North County Subarea of the MSCP for San Diego
County. Lands proposed contain several core gnatcatcher populations and
sage scrub identified as high or moderate value. In addition, proposed
areas provide connectivity between habitat valued as high or moderate.
This unit constitutes the primary inland linkage between San Diego
populations and those in southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).
Unit 8: Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County
Unit 8 encompasses approximately 27,828 ha (68,763 ac) within the
planning area for the Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County. This
unit contains significant core populations and provides the primary
linkage for core populations on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (Unit
5) to those further north in Orange County (Unit 9).
Unit 9: Central/Coastal NCCP Subregions of Orange County (Central/
Coastal NCCP)
Unit 9 encompasses approximately 2,337 ha (5,776 ac) within the
Orange County Central/Coastal NCCP planning area. It includes lands
containing core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat
determined to be essential for the conservation and recovery of the
gnatcatcher within select Existing-Use Areas, the western portion of
the North Ranch Policy Plan Area (i.e., west of State Route 241), and
the designated reserve (panhandle portion) of Marine Corps Air Station
El Toro.
Unit 10: Palos Verdes Peninsula Subregion, Los Angeles County
Unit 10 encompasses approximately 5,588 ha (13,808 ac) within the
[[Page 5952]]
subregional planning area for the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles
County, including the City of Rancho Palos Verdes MSHCP area. This unit
includes a core gnatcatcher population and sage scrub habitat.
Unit 11: East Los Angeles County-Matrix NCCP Subregion of Orange County
Unit 11 encompasses approximately 22,130 ha (54,682 ac) within the
Montebello, Chino-Puente Hills, East Coyote Hills and West Coyote Hills
area. The unit provides the primary connectivity between core
gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat within the Central/
Coastal Subregions of the Orange County NCCP (Unit 9), the Western
Riverside County MSHCP (Unit 12), and the Bonelli Regional Park core
population within the North Los Angeles linkage (Unit 14).
Unit 12: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation
Plan (MSHCP)
Unit 12 encompasses approximately 106,908 ha (264,167 ac) within
the proposed planning area for the Western Riverside County MSHCP.
Lands proposed include core populations within the Temecula/Murietta/
Lake Skinner region and the Lake Elsinore/Lake Mathews region. Also
proposed are regions of connectivity and additional core populations
that occur along the I-15 corridor, the Lake Perris area, the
Alessandro Heights area, the Box Spring Mountains/The Badlands, and
along the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains into the Chino-Puente
Hills. These areas provide connectivity between core populations within
Riverside County and to populations in San Diego, San Bernardino,
Orange, and Los Angeles Counties. Unit 12 encompasses some of the Core
Reserves established under the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat HCP. The Lake
Mathews/Estelle Mountain, Steele Peak, Lake Perris/San Jacinto Core
Reserves, the Potrero Area of Critical Environmental Concern, and the
Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Reserve provide essential
habitat for the gnatcatcher and, therefore, have been proposed for
designation as critical habitat.
Unit 13: San Bernardino Valley MSHCP, San Bernardino County
Unit 13 encompasses approximately 30,076 ha (74,316 ac) along the
foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains and within the Jurupa Hills on
the border of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The unit includes
lands within the San Bernardino National Forest and on Norton Air Force
Base. This unit contains breeding gnatcatcher populations and
constitutes a primary linkage between western Riverside County (Unit
12) and eastern Los Angeles County (Unit 11).
Unit 14: East Los Angeles County Linkage
Unit 14 encompasses approximately 3,384 ha (8,361 ac) in eastern
Los Angeles County along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains.
Its main function is in establishing the primary east-west connectivity
of sage scrub habitat between core gnatcatcher populations in San
Bernardino County (Unit 13) to those in southeastern Los Angeles County
(Unit 11).
Unit 15: Western Los Angeles County
Unit 15 encompasses approximately 13,897 ha (34,339 ac) in western
Los Angeles county along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. It
includes breeding gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat in the
Placerita, Box Springs Canyon, and Plum Canyon areas. This unit
encompasses the northern distributional extreme of the gnatcatcher's
current range.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out do
not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat to the extent that the
action appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat for the
survival and recovery of the species. Individuals, organizations,
States, local governments, and other nonFederal entities are affected
by the designation of critical habitat only if their actions occur on
Federal lands, require a Federal permit, license, or other
authorization, or involve Federal funding.
Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the
Service, to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is
proposed or listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its
critical habitat, if any is designated or proposed. Regulations
implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are
codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies
to confer with us on any action that is likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of a proposed species or result in destruction or
adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. Conference reports
provide conservation recommendations to assist the agency in
eliminating conflicts that may be caused by the proposed action. The
conservation recommendations in a conference report are advisory. If a
species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section 7(a)(2)
requires Federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize, fund,
or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
such a species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat.
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical
habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into
consultation with us. Through this consultation we would ensure that
the permitted actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat.
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat, we also provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the
project, if any are identifiable. Reasonable and prudent alternatives
are defined at 50 CFR 402.02 as alternative actions identified during
consultation that can be implemented in a manner consistent with the
intended purpose of the action, that are consistent with the scope of
the Federal agency's legal authority and jurisdiction, that are
economically and technologically feasible, and that the Director
believes would avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat.
Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.
Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where critical
habitat is subsequently designated and the Federal agency has retained
discretionary involvement or control over the action or such
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law.
Consequently, some Federal agencies may request reinitiation of
consultation or conferencing with us on actions for which formal
consultation has been completed if those actions may affect designated
critical habitat or adversely modify or destroy proposed critical
habitat.
We may issue a formal conference report if requested by a Federal
agency. Formal conference reports on proposed critical habitat contain
a biological opinion that is prepared according to 50 CFR 402.14, as if
critical habitat were designated. We may adopt the formal conference
report as the biological opinion when the critical habitat is
[[Page 5953]]
designated, if no significant new information or changes in the action
alter the content of the opinion (see 50 CFR 402.10(d)).
Activities on Federal lands that may affect the coastal California
gnatcatcher or its critical habitat will require section 7
consultation. Activities on private or State lands requiring a permit
from a Federal agency, such as a permit from the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers (Army Corps) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or
some other Federal action, including funding (e.g., Federal Highway
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or Federal Emergency
Management Agency) will also continue to be subject to the section 7
consultation process. Federal actions not affecting listed species or
critical habitat and actions on nonFederal lands that are not federally
funded or permitted do not require section 7 consultation.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to evaluate briefly in any
proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat those
activities involving a Federal action that may adversely modify such
habitat or that may be affected by such designation. Activities that
may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat include those that
alter the primary constituent elements to an extent that the value of
critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher
is appreciably reduced. We note that such activities may also
jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Activities that,
when carried out, funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, may
directly or indirectly adversely affect critical habitat include, but
are not limited to--
(1) Removing, thinning, or destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as
defined in the primary constituent elements discussion), whether by
burning or mechanical, chemical, or other means (e.g., woodcutting,
grubbing, grading, overgrazing, construction, road building, mining,
herbicide application, etc.) and
(2) Appreciably decreasing habitat value or quality through
indirect effects (e.g., noise, edge effects, invasion of exotic plants
or animals, or fragmentation).
To properly portray the effects of critical habitat designation, we
must first compare the section 7 requirements for actions that may
affect critical habitat with the requirements for actions that may
affect a listed species. Section 7 prohibits actions funded,
authorized, or carried out by Federal agencies from jeopardizing the
continued existence of a listed species or destroying or adversely
modifying the listed species' critical habitat. Actions likely to
``jeopardize the continued existence'' of a species are those that
would appreciably reduce the likelihood of the species' survival and
recovery. Actions likely to ``destroy or adversely modify'' critical
habitat are those that would appreciably reduce the value of critical
habitat for the survival and recovery of the listed species.
Common to both definitions is an appreciable detrimental effect on
both survival and recovery of a listed species. Given the similarity of
these definitions, actions likely to destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat would almost always result in jeopardy to the species
concerned, particularly when the area of the proposed action is
occupied by the species concerned. In those cases, critical habitat
provides little additional protection to a species, and the
ramifications of its designation are few or none. However, if occupied
habitat becomes unoccupied in the future, there is a potential benefit
to critical habitat in such areas.
Federal agencies already consult with us on activities in areas
currently occupied by the species to ensure that their actions do not
jeopardize the continued existence of the species. These actions
include, but are not limited to--
(1) Regulation of activities affecting waters of the United States
by the Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water
Act;
(2) Regulation of water flows, damming, diversion, and
channelization by Federal agencies;
(3) Regulation of grazing, mining, and recreation by the BLM or
Forest Service;
(4) Road construction and maintenance, right of way designation,
and regulation of agricultural activities;
(5) Regulation of airport improvement activities by the Federal
Aviation Administration jurisdiction;
(6) Military training and maneuvers on Marine Corps Base Camp
Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar and other applicable
DOD lands;
(7) Construction of roads and fences along the International Border
with Mexico, and associated immigration enforcement activities by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service;
(8) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency;
(9) Construction of communication sites licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission; and
(10) Activities funded by the U. S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Department of Energy, or any other Federal agency.
All proposed critical habitat is within the geographical area
occupied by the species and is likely used by gnatcatchers, whether by
reproductive, territorial birds, or by birds merely moving through the
area. Thus, in a broad sense, we consider all critical habitat to be
occupied by the species. Federal agencies already consult with us on
activities in areas currently occupied by the species to ensure that
their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species,
thus we do not anticipate additional regulatory protection will result
from critical habitat designation.
Relationship to Incidental Take Permits Issued Under Section 10
Several habitat conservation planning efforts have been completed
within the range of the gnatcatcher. Principal among these are NCCP
efforts in Orange and San Diego Counties. NCCP plans completed and
permitted to date have resulted in the conservation of 40,208 ha
(99,310 ac) of gnatcatcher habitat.
In southwestern San Diego County, the development of the MSCP has
resulted in our approval of three subarea plans under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. These three southern subarea plans account for
approximately 95 percent of the gnatcatcher habitat in southern San
Diego County. When fully implemented, the MSCP will result in the
establishment of conservation areas that collectively contain 28,844 ha
(71,274 ac) of coastal sage scrub vegetation within a 69,573-ha
(171,917-ac) preserve area.
Additionally, we have approved the Orange County Central-Coastal
NCCP/HCP and issued an incidental take permit under section 10(a)(1)(B)
of the Act. Implementation of the plan will result in the conservation
of 15,677 ha (38,738 ac) of Reserve lands, which contain 7,621 ha
(18,831 ac) of coastal sage scrub.
The gnatcatcher habitat in the approved planning areas in San Diego
and Orange Counties was selected, with our technical assistance and
that of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), for
permanent preservation and configuration into a biologically viable
interlocking system of reserves by the local jurisdictions. The reserve
system established within the approved planning areas includes those
habitat areas that we consider essential to the long-term survival and
recovery of the gnatcatcher. In addition, the plans detail management
measures for the reserve lands that protect, restore, and enhance their
value as gnatcatcher habitat.
The essential gnatcatcher habitat that is within planning areas is
permanently
[[Page 5954]]
protected in the habitat reserves; no additional private lands within
the planning areas warrant designation as critical habitat. Because the
gnatcatcher habitat preserved in the planning areas is managed for the
benefit of the gnatcatcher under the terms of the plans, and associated
section 10 (a)(1)(B) permits there are no ``additional management
considerations or protections'' required for those lands. Therefore, we
have determined that private lands within approved HCP planning areas
and covered by an existing section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the
gnatcatcher do not meet the definition of critical habitat in the Act,
and we are not proposing designation of such lands as critical habitat.
We also have approved several smaller multiple species HCPs in San
Diego Riverside, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties. These include,
Bennett Property, Meadowlark Estates, Fieldstone, and Poway Subarea
Plan in San Diego County; Coyote Hills East and Shell Oil in Orange
County; Ocean Trails in Los Angeles County; and Lake Mathews in
Riverside County. These efforts have resulted in the protection of
3,743 ha (9,250 ac) of gnatcatcher habitat.
The currently approved and permitted HCPs are designed to ensure
the long-term survival of covered species, including the gnatcatcher,
within the plan areas. The reserve lands and other conservation lands
that require protection under these approved plans encompass those
lands essential for the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher. The
HCPs and implementation agreements outline management measures and
protections for the conservation lands that are crafted to protect,
restore, and enhance their value as gnatcatcher habitat. Because
appropriate management and protection of areas essential for the
conservation of the gnatcatcher are required under these approved and
permitted plans, we do not believe these areas meet the definition of
critical habitat nor do we believe they require designation.
As is the case with existing approved gnatcatcher HCPs, the
gnatcatcher plans currently under development will provide for
protection and management of habitat areas essential for the
conservation of the gnatcatcher while directing development and habitat
modification to nonessential areas of lower habitat value. The HCP
development process provides an opportunity for more intensive data
collection and analysis regarding the use of particular habitat areas
by gnatcatchers. The process also enables us to conduct detailed
evaluations of the importance of such lands to the long term survival
of the species in the context of constructing a biologically configured
system of interlinked habitat blocks. We fully expect that HCPs
undertaken by local jurisdictions (e.g., counties, cities) and other
parties will identify, protect, and provide appropriate management for
those specific lands within the boundaries of the plans that are
essential for the long-term conservation of the species. We believe and
fully expect that our analyses of these proposed HCPs and proposed
permits under section 7 will show that covered activities carried out
in accordance with the provisions of the HCPs and permits will not
result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
We provide technical assistance and work closely with applicants
throughout the development of HCPs to identify appropriate conservation
management and lands essential for the long-term conservation of the
gnatcatcher. Several HCP efforts are now underway for the gnatcatcher
and other listed and non-listed species, in Orange, Los Angeles,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties in areas proposed
herein as critical habitat. These HCPs, coupled with appropriate
adaptive management, should provide for the conservation of the
species. We are soliciting comments on whether future approval of HCPs
and issuance of section 10(a)(1)(B) permits for the gnatcatcher should
trigger revision of designated critical habitat to exclude lands within
the HCP area and, if so, by what mechanism (see Public Comments
Solicited section).
Relationship to the 4(d) Special Rule for the Gnatcatcher
On December 10, 1993, a final special rule concerning take of the
gnatcatcher was published pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act (58 FR
63088). Under the 4(d) special rule, incidental take of gnatcatchers is
not considered to be a violation of section 9 of the Act if--(1) Take
results from activities conducted pursuant to the requirements of the
NCCP and in accordance with an approved NCCP plan for the protection of
coastal sage scrub habitat, prepared consistent with the State of
California's Conservation and Process Guidelines (Guidelines) dated
November 1993; and (2) the Service issues written concurrence that the
plan meets the standards for issuance of an incidental take permit
under 50 CFR 17.32(b)(2). Within enrolled subregions actively engaged
in the preparation of an NCCP plan, the take of gnatcatchers will not
be a violation of section 9 of the Act if such take results from
activities conducted in accordance with the Guidelines. The Guidelines
limit habitat loss during the interim planning period to no more than 5
percent of coastal sage scrub with lower long-term conservation
potential in existence at the time of adoption of the 4(d) special
rule.
The Guidelines specify criteria to evaluate the long-term
conservation potential of sage scrub that is proposed for loss during
the period that NCCP plans are being developed to assist participating
jurisdictions in providing interim protection for areas that support
habitat that is likely to be important to conservation of the
gnatcatcher. These jurisdictions are--the Southern and Matrix
subregions of Orange County; the cities of Rancho Palos Verdes and San
Dimas in Los Angeles County; MSCP subareas in the cities of Santee, El
Cajon, Chula Vista, and Coronado; the MHCP Subregion of northwestern
San Diego County; the North County Subarea of San Diego's MSCP; San
Diego County's MHCOSP; and six water districts in San Diego County.
We intend that participating jurisdictions will be able to continue
to apply the 4(d) special rule within designated critical habitat and
to issue Habitat Loss Permits, with the joint concurrence of us and the
CDFG, provided the jurisdictions are actively working to complete their
subarea plans and adhere to the Guidelines. To be consistent with the
Guidelines, the jurisdictions must find, and we and CDFG must concur,
that:
1. The proposed habitat loss is consistent with the interim loss
criteria in the Guidelines and with any subregional process if
established by the subregion:
(a) the habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the 5 percent
guideline;
(b) the habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas
of high habitat values;
(c) the habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation
of the subregional NCCP;
(d) the habitat loss has been minimized and mitigated to the
maximum extent practicable in accordance with section 4.3 of the
Guidelines.
2. The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of
the survival and recovery of listed species in the wild, and
3. The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
Because, in addition to avoiding jeopardy to the gnatcatcher, the
Guidelines direct habitat loss to areas with low long-term conservation
potential that will not preclude
[[Page 5955]]
development of adequate NCCP plans and ensure that connectivity between
areas of high habitat value will be maintained, we believe that
allowing a small percentage of habitat loss within designated critical
habitat pursuant to the 4(d) rule is not likely to adversely modify or
destroy critical habitat by appreciably reducing its value for both the
survival and recovery of the species. When we make a final critical
habitat determination, we will prepare a new biological opinion on the
4(d) rule to formally evaluate the effects of the rule on designated
critical habitat.
Requests for copies of the regulations on listed wildlife and
inquiries about prohibitions and permits may be addressed to the U. S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Endangered Species, 911 NE. 11th
Ave., Portland, OR 97232 (telephone 503-231-2063, facsimile 503-231-
6143).
Economic Analysis
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate critical
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data
available and to consider the economic and other relevant impacts of
designating a particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude areas
from critical habitat upon a determination that the benefits of such
exclusions outweigh the benefits of specifying such areas as critical
habitat. We cannot exclude such areas from critical habitat when such
exclusion will result in the extinction of the species. Although we
could not identify any incremental effects of this proposed critical
habitat designation above those impacts of listing, we will conduct an
economic analysis to further evaluate this finding. We will conduct the
economic analysis for this proposal prior to a final determination.
When the draft economic analysis is completed, we will announce its
availability with a notice in the Federal Register, and we will reopen
the comment period for 30 days at that time to accept comments on the
economic analysis or further comment on the proposed rule.
Public Comments Solicited
It is our intent that any final action resulting from this proposal
will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental
agencies, the scientific community, industry or any other interested
party concerning this proposed rule.
In this proposed rule, we do not propose to designate critical
habitat on nonFederal lands within the boundaries of an existing
approved HCP and covered by an existing legally operative incidental
take permit for California gnatcatchers issued under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act because the existing HCPs provide for
development in nonessential areas and establish long-term commitments
to conserve the species and areas essential to the conservation of the
gnatcatcher. Therefore, we believe that such areas do not meet the
definition of critical habitat because they do not need special
management considerations or protection. However, we are specifically
soliciting comments on the appropriateness of this approach and on the
following or other alternative approaches for critical habitat
designation in areas covered by existing approved HCPs:
(1) Designate critical habitat without regard to existing HCP
boundaries and allow the section 7 consultation process on the issuance
of the incidental take permit to ensure that any take we authorized
will not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat;
(2) Designate reserves, preserves, and other conservation lands
identified by approved HCPs, on the premise that they encompass areas
that are essential to conservation of the species within the HCP area
and that will continue to require special management protection in the
future. Under this approach, all other lands covered by existing
approved HCPs where incidental take for the gnatcatcher is authorized
under a legally operative permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act would be excluded from critical habitat.
The amount of critical habitat we designate for the gnatcatcher in
a final rule may either increase or decrease, depending upon which
approach we adopt for dealing with designation in areas of existing
approved HCPs.
Additionally, we are seeking comments on critical habitat
designation relative to future HCPs. Several conservation planning
efforts are now underway for the gnatcatcher (and other listed and
nonlisted species) in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino,
and San Diego Counties in areas we are proposing as critical habitat.
For areas where HCPs are currently under development, we are proposing
to designate critical habitat for areas that we believe are essential
to the conservation of the species and need special management or
protection. We invite comments on the appropriateness of this approach.
In addition, we invite comments on the following or other
approaches for addressing critical habitat within the boundaries of
future approved HCPs upon issuance of section 10(a)(1)(B) permits for
the gnatcatcher--
(1) Retain critical habitat designation within the HCP boundaries
and use the section 7 consultation process on the issuance of the
incidental take permit to ensure that any take we authorize will not
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat;
(2) Revise the critical habitat designation upon approval of the
HCP and issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) permit to retain only
preserve areas, on the premise that they encompass areas essential for
the conservation of the species within the HCP area and require special
management and protection in the future. Assuming that we conclude, at
the time an HCP is approved and the associated incidental take permit
is issued, that the plan protects those areas essential to the
conservation of the gnatcatcher, we would revise the critical habitat
designation to exclude areas outside the reserves, preserves, or other
conservation lands established under the plan. Consistent with our
listing program priorities, we would publish a proposed rule in the
Federal Register to revise the critical habitat boundaries;
(3) As in (2) above, retain only preserve lands within the critical
habitat designation, on the premise that they encompass areas essential
for conservation of the species within the HCP area and require special
management and protection in the future. However, under this approach,
the exclusion of areas outside the preserve lands from critical habitat
would occur automatically upon issuance of the incidental take permit.
The public would be notified and have the opportunity to comment on the
boundaries of the preserve lands and the revision of designated
critical habitat during the public review and comment process for HCP
approval and permitting;
(4) Remove designated critical habitat entirely from within the
boundaries of an HCP when the plan is approved (including preserve
lands), on the premise that the HCP establishes long-term commitments
to conserve the species and no further special management or protection
is required. Consistent with our listing program priorities, we would
publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register to revise the critical
habitat boundaries; or
(5) Remove designated critical habitat entirely from within the
boundaries of HCPs when the plans are approved (including preserve
lands), on the premise that the HCP establishes long-term commitments
to conserve the species and no additional special management or
protection is required.
[[Page 5956]]
This exclusion from critical habitat would occur automatically upon
issuance of the incidental take permit. The public would be notified
and have the opportunity to comment on the revision of designated
critical habitat during the public notification process for HCP
approval and permitting.
Additionally, we are seeking comments on the following--
(1) The reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined
to be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act, including
whether the benefits of designation will outweigh any threats to the
species due to designation or other consequences to conservation of the
gnatcatcher resulting from designation;
(2) Specific information on the amount and distribution of
gnatcatchers and what habitat is essential to the conservation of the
species and why;
(3) Land use practices and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
(4) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on
small entities or families; and
(5) Economic and other values associated with designating critical
habitat for the gnatcatcher such as those derived from non-consumptive
uses (e.g., hiking, camping, bird-watching, enhanced watershed
protection, improved air quality, increased soil retention, ``existence
values,'' and reductions in administrative costs).
Our practice is to make comments, including names and home
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold
their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to
the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which
we would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity,
as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or
address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your
comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make
all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals
identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations
or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate
and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose
of such review is to ensure decisions are based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send these peer reviewers
copies of this proposed rule immediately following publication in the
Federal Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to comment,
during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions and
conclusions regarding the proposed designation of critical habitat.
We will consider all comments and data received during the 60-day
comment period on this proposed rule during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this
proposal.
Public Hearings
The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal,
if requested. Given the large geographic extent covered by this
proposal, the high likelihood of multiple requests, and the need to
publish the final determination by September 30, 2000, we have
scheduled three hearings. The hearings are scheduled to be held in
Anaheim for Los Angeles and Orange Counties on February 15, 2000; in
San Diego for San Diego County on February 17, 2000; and in Riverside
for Riverside and San Bernardino Counties on February 23, 2000. Written
comments submitted during the comment period will receive equal
consideration as comments presented at a public hearing. For additional
information on public hearings see the ADDRESSES section.
Clarity of the Rule
Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations and
notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to
make this proposed rule easier to understand including answers to
questions such as the following--(1) Are the requirements in the
document clearly stated? (2) Does the proposed rule contain technical
language or jargon that interferes with the clarity? (3) Does the
format of the proposed rule (grouping and order of sections, use of
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the
description of the proposed rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
section of the preamble helpful in understanding the document? (5) What
else could we do to make the proposed rule easier to understand?
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
This document has been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), in accordance with Executive Order 12866. OMB makes the
final determination under Executive Order 12866.
(a) This rule will not have an annual economic effect of $100
million or adversely affect an economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of government. A cost-benefit and economic
analysis is not required. The coastal California gnatcatcher was listed
as a threatened species in 1993. In fiscal years 1998 through 2000 we
have conducted 50 formal section 7 consultations with other Federal
agencies to ensure that their actions would not jeopardize the
continued existence of the gnatcatcher. We have also issued an
estimated 15 section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits for entities
that have prepared HCPs for areas where the species occurs.
The areas proposed for critical habitat are currently occupied by
the coastal California gnatcatcher. Under the Act, critical habitat may
not be adversely modified by a Federal agency action; it does not
impose any restrictions on nonFederal persons unless they are
conducting activities funded or otherwise sponsored or permitted by a
Federal agency (see Table 2 below). Section 7 requires Federal agencies
to ensure that they do not jeopardize the continued existence of the
species. Based upon our experience with the species and its needs, we
conclude that any Federal action or authorized action that could
potentially cause an adverse modification of the proposed critical
habitat would currently be considered as ``jeopardy'' under the Act.
Accordingly, the designation of currently occupied areas as critical
habitat does not have any incremental impacts on what actions may or
may not be conducted by Federal agencies or nonFederal persons that
receive Federal authorization or funding. NonFederal persons that do
not have a Federal ``sponsorship'' of their actions are not restricted
by the designation of critical habitat (they continue to be bound by
the provisions of the Act concerning ``take'' of the species).
(b) This rule will not create inconsistencies with other agencies'
actions. As discussed above, Federal agencies have been required to
ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of
the coastal California gnatcatcher since the listing in 1993. The
prohibition against adverse modification of critical habitat is not
[[Page 5957]]
expected to impose any additional restrictions to those that currently
exist because all proposed critical habitat is occupied. Because of the
potential for impacts on other Federal agency activities, we will
continue to review this proposed action for any inconsistencies with
other Federal agency actions.
(c) This rule will not materially affect entitlements, grants, user
fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their recipients.
Federal agencies are currently required to ensure that their activities
do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species, and as
discussed above we do not anticipate that the adverse modification
prohibition (resulting from critical habitat designation) will have any
incremental effects.
(d) This rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. The
proposed rule follows the requirements for determining critical habitat
contained in the Endangered Species Act.
Table 2.--Impacts of Gnatcatcher Listing and Critical Habitat Designation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additional activities
Activities potentially affected by species potentially affected by
Categories of activities listing only \1\ critical habitat
designation \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Activities Potentially Activities such as removing, thinning, or None
Affected \3\. destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as defined in
the primary constituent elements discussion),
whether by burning or mechanical, chemical, or
other means (e.g. woodcutting, grubbing,
grading, overgrazing, construction, road
building, mining, herbicide application, etc.)
and appreciably decreasing habitat value or
quality through indirect effects (e.g. noise,
edge effects, invasion of exotic plants or
animals, or fragmentation that the Federal
Government carries out.
Private Activities Potentially Activities such as removing, thinning, or None
Affected \4\. destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as defined in
the primary constituent elements discussion),
whether by burning or mechanical, chemical, or
other means (e.g. woodcutting, grubbing,
grading, overgrazing, construction, road
building, mining, herbicide application, etc.)
and appreciably decreasing habitat value or
quality through indirect effects (e.g. noise,
edge effects, invasion of exotic plants or
animals, or fragmentation that require a
Federal action (permit, authorization, or
funding).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This column represents the activities potentially affected by listing the gnatcatcher as a threatened
species (March 30, 1993; 58 FR 16741) under the Endangered Species Act.
\2\ This column represents the activities potentially affected by the critical habitat designation in addition
to those activities potentially affected by listing the species.
\3\ Activities initiated by a Federal agency.
\4\ Activities initiated by a private entity that may need Federal authorization or funding.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of
critical habitat will have a significant effect on a substantial number
of small entities. As discussed under Regulatory Planning and Review
above, this rule is not expected to result in any restrictions in
addition to those currently in existence. As indicated on Table 1 (see
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation section) we have designated
property owned by Federal, State and local governments, and private
property.
Within these areas, the types of Federal actions or authorized
activities that we have identified as potential concerns are:
(1) Regulation of activities affecting waters of the United States
by the Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water
Act;
(2) Regulation of water flows, damming, diversion, and
channelization by Federal agencies;
(3) Regulation of grazing, mining, and recreation by the BLM or
Forest Service;
(4) Road construction and maintenance, right of way designation,
and regulation of agricultural activities;
(5) Regulation of airport improvement activities by the Federal
Aviation Administration jurisdiction;
(6) Military training and maneuvers on Marine Corps Base Camp
Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar and other applicable
DOD lands;
(7) Construction of roads and fences along the International Border
with Mexico, and associated immigration enforcement activities by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service;
(8) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the
Federal Emergency Management Agency;
(9) Construction of communication sites licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission; and
(10) Activities funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Department of Energy, or any other Federal agency.
Many of these activities sponsored by Federal agencies within the
proposed critical habitat areas are carried out by small entities (as
defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act) through contract, grant,
permit, or other Federal authorization. As discussed in section 1
above, these actions are currently required to comply with the listing
protections of the Act, and the designation of critical habitat is not
anticipated to have any additional effects on these activities.
For actions on nonFederal property that do not have a Federal
connection (such as funding or authorization), the current restrictions
concerning take of the species remain in effect, and this rule will
have no additional restrictions.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2))
In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of
critical habitat will cause (a) any effect on the economy of $100
million or more, (b) any increases in costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or
geographic regions in the economic analysis, or (c) any significant
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity,
innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with
foreign-based enterprises.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
et seq.):
(a) This rule will not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. Small
governments will only be affected to the extent that any Federal funds,
permits or other authorized activities must ensure that their actions
will not adversely affect the critical habitat. However, as discussed
in
[[Page 5958]]
section 1, these actions are currently subject to equivalent
restrictions through the listing protections of the species, and no
further restrictions are anticipated.
(b) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or
greater in any year, that is, it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The designation of
critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or local governments.
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is
not required. As discussed above, the designation of critical habitat
affects only Federal agency actions. The rule will not increase or
decrease the current restrictions on private property concerning take
of the coastal California gnatcatcher. Due to current public knowledge
of the species protection, the prohibition against take of the species
both within and outside of the designated areas, and the fact that
critical habitat provides no incremental restrictions, we do not
anticipate that property values will be affected by the critical
habitat designation. Additionally, critical habitat designation does
not preclude development of habitat conservation plans and issuance of
incidental take permits. Landowners in areas that are included in the
designated critical habitat will continue to have opportunity to
utilize their property in ways consistent with the survival of the
gnatcatcher.
Federalism
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently
occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher imposes no additional
restrictions to those currently in place, and therefore has little
incremental impact on State and local governments and their activities.
The designation may have some benefit to these governments in that the
areas essential to the conservation of the species are more clearly
defined, and the primary constituent elements of the habitat necessary
to the survival of the species are specifically identified. While this
definition and identification does not alter where and what federally
sponsored activities may occur, it may assist these local governments
in long range planning (rather than waiting for case by case section 7
consultations to occur).
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the Order. We designate critical habitat in accordance with the
provisions of the Endangered Species Act and plan public hearings on
the proposed designation during the comment period. The rule uses
standard property descriptions and identifies the primary constituent
elements within the designated areas to assist the public in
understanding the habitat needs of the gnatcatcher.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any information collection requirements
for which OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act is required.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that an Environmental Assessment and/or an
Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 need not be prepared in connection with regulations
adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining our
reason for this determination was published in the Federal Register on
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This proposed rule does not constitute
a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human
environment.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951) and 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. The Appendix to Secretarial
Order 3206 ``American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act'' (1997) provides that
critical habitat shall not be designated in an area that may impact
Tribal trust resources unless it is determined essential to conserve a
listed species. The Appendix further provides that in designating
critical habitat; ``the Service shall evaluate and document the extent
to which the conservation needs of a listed species can be achieved by
limiting the designation to other lands.''
We have determined that there are no Tribal lands essential for the
conservation of the gnatcatcher because they do not support core
gnatcatcher populations, nor do they provide essential linkages between
core populations. Therefore, we are not proposing to designate critical
habitat for the gnatcatcher on Tribal lands.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available upon request from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES section).
Author. The primary author of this notice is Douglas Krofta (see
ADDRESSES section)
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. In Sec. 17.11(h) revise the entry for ``Gnatcatcher, coastal
California''' under ``BIRDS'' to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
[[Page 5959]]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
------------------------------------------------------------ population where Critical Special
Historic range endangered or Status When listed habitat rules
Common name Scientific name threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Birds
* * * * * * *
Gnatcatcher, coastal California.... Polioptila............ U.S.A. (CA),......... do T 496 17.95(b) 17.41(b)
californica........... Mexico...............
californica...........
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. In Sec. 17.95 add critical habitat for the coastal California
gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) under paragraph (b) in
the same alphabetical order as this species occurs in Sec. 17.11(h), to
read as follows:
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.
* * * * *
(b) Birds.
* * * * *
Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica)
1. Critical Habitat Units are depicted for Los Angeles, Orange,
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, California, on
the maps below.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 5960]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.000
2. Within these areas, the primary constituent elements for the
gnatcatcher are those habitat components that are essential for the
primary biological needs of foraging, nesting, rearing of young,
intra-specific communication, roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange,
or sheltering (Atwood 1990). Primary constituent elements are
provided in undeveloped areas, including agricultural lands, that
support or have the potential to support, through natural
successional processes, various types of sage scrub or support
chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur
proximal to sage scrub and where they may be utilized for biological
needs such as breeding and foraging (Atwood et al. 1998, Campbell et
al. 1998). Primary constituent elements associated with the
biological needs of dispersal are also found in undeveloped areas,
including agricultural lands, that provide or could provide
connectivity or linkage between or within larger core areas,
including open space and disturbed areas that may receive only
periodic use.
Primary constituent elements include, but are not limited to,
the following plant communities: Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage
scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub,
and coastal sage-chaparral scrub (Holland 1986). Based upon dominant
species, these communities have been further divided into series
such as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat, California
buckwheat-white sage, California encelia, California sagebrush,
California sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-California
buckwheat, coast prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage, scalebroom,
and white sage (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). Dominant species
within these plant communities include California sagebrush
(Artemisia californica), buckwheats (Eriogonum fasciculatum and E.
cinereum), encelias (Encelia californica and E. farinosa), and
various sages (commonly Salvia mellifera, S. apiana, and S.
leucophylla). Other commonly occurring plants include coast
goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), bush monkeyflower (Mimulus
aurantiacus), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), bladderpod
(Isomeris arborea), deerweed (Lotus scoparius), chaparral mallow
(Malacothamnus fasciculatum), and laurel sumac (Malosma laurina),
and several species of Rhus (R. integrifolia, R. ovata, and R.
trilobata). Succulent species, such as boxthorn (Lycium spp.), cliff
spurge (Euphorbia misera), jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), and
various species of cacti (Opuntia littoralis, O. prolifera, and
Ferocactus viridescens), and live-forever (Dudleya spp.), are
represented in maritime succulent scrub, coast prickly-pear scrub,
and southern coastal bluff scrubs.
[[Page 5961]]
3. Critical habitat does not include nonFederal lands covered by
a legally operative incidental take permit for the coastal
California gnatcatcher issued under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act
on or before February 7, 2000.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.001
Map Unit 1: San Diego County MSCP, San Diego County, California.
From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps San Diego (1980) and El Cajon
(1982), California. Lands defined by the boundaries of the Otay-
Sweetwater Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex
and the San Miguel Major Amendment Area for the San Diego Multiple
Species Conservation Program. Lands within T. 12 S., R. 01 E., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T. 12 S., R. 01 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20 and 30; T. 13 S., R. 01
E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 13 S., R. 02 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 03 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2, 10, and 13; T. 14 S., R. 01
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29 and 32; T. 14 S., R.
02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 35; T. 15 S., R. 01
E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 9; T. 15 S., R. 01 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 3-5; T. 15 S., R. 02 E.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 6; T. 15 S., R. 02 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2, 3, and 12; T. 15 S., R. 03
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 9; T. 16 S., R. 01 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 17 S., R. 01 E., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 27, and 33-35; T. 17 S., R.
01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 10, 11, 15-17,
23-28, and 33; T. 18 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 3-5, 8, 9, 16, 19, 28-30, 32, and 33; T. 18 S., R.
01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 13, 17, 18, and 20-
23. The following lands within Rincon del Diablo Land Grant: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3667600; 497100, 3667600; 500000,
3664000; 497000, 3662400; 497000, 3667600. The following lands
within San Bernardino (Snook) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
492200, 3661600; 495500, 3661600; 495500, 3658500; 497200, 3658500;
497000, 3657000; 496600, 3656700; 490600, 3656700; 490600, 3660000;
492200, 3660000; 492200, 3661600. The following lands within Canada
de San Vicente y Mesa del Padre Barona Land Grant: UTM coordinates
(X, Y) 515000, 3651400; 515000, 3650400; 513300, 3650400; 513300,
3651100; 515000, 3651400. The following lands within El Cajon Land
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 501000, 3640000; 503600, 3640400;
503600, 3635600; 502000, 3635600; 502000, 3634100; 500300, 3634100;
500300, 3637200; 498100, 3637200; 501000, 3640000; 511600, 3638900;
511700, 3638900; 511700, 3634000; 508400, 3634000; 508400, 3635600;
510000, 3635600; 510000, 3638500; 511600, 3638900; 497000, 3632500;
502000, 3632500; 502000, 3627600; 500300, 3627600; 500300, 3629200;
498700, 3629200; 498700, 3630900; 497000, 3630900; 497000, 3632500.
The following lands within Mission San Diego Land Grant: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3632500; 502000, 3632500; 502000,
3627600; 500300, 3627600; 500300, 3629200; 498700, 3629200; 498700,
3630900; 497000, 3630900; 497000, 3632500. The following lands
within Mission San Diego and Pueblo Lands of San Diego Land Grants:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 481600, 3637800; 485800, 3637400; 485800,
3636600; 484200, 3636600; 484200, 3635900; 483400, 3635900; 483400,
3635100; 489700, 3635100; 489700, 3635900; 490600, 3635900; 490600,
3636500; 489000, 3636500; 489000, 3635800; 488000, 3635800; 488000,
3636600; 488900, 3636600; 488900, 3637300; 491700, 3637300; 491700,
3636600; 492300, 3636600; 492300, 3635800; 493100, 3635800; 493100,
3634300; 491500, 3634300; 491500, 3633400; 489800, 3633400; 489800,
3632600; 489000, 3632600; 489000, 3634400; 485800, 3634400; 485800,
3633900; 483300, 3633900; 483300, 3634500; 482500, 3634500; 482500,
3635900; 481600, 3635900; 481600, 3637800. The following lands
within Jamacho and La Nacion Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
500300, 3619600; 504500, 3619600; 504500, 3619500; 504000, 3618000;
503000, 3617800; 502000, 3617800; 502000, 3617200; 500300, 3616200;
498700, 3616200; 498700, 3617900; 500300, 3617900; 500300, 3619600.
The following lands within La Nacion, Otay (Dominguez), and Otay
(Estudillo) Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 498700, 3614600;
500500, 3614600; 501500, 3611300; 500400, 3611300; 500400, 3608200;
502000, 3608200; 502000, 3606500; 503600, 3606500; 503600, 3609800;
505200, 3609800; 505200, 3613000; 506900, 3613000; 506900, 3608000;
507000, 3607000; 507000, 3606000; 506300, 3606400; 505300, 3606400;
505300, 3606000; 501900, 3604900; 499900, 3604900; 497000,
[[Page 5962]]
3607600; 497000, 3609700; 495400, 3609700; 495400, 3613100; 498700,
3613100; 498700, 3614600. The following lands within Jamul Land
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 514600, 3613200; 515200, 3613200;
515200, 3612700; 514000, 3611000; 510000, 3610000; 510000, 3612000;
511900, 3613000; 513000, 3613000; 513000, 3613100; 514600, 3613100;
514600, 3613200.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.002
Map Unit 2: Marine Corps Station, Miramar, San Diego County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps El Cajon (1982) and
San Diego (1980), California. Lands within the following: T. 15 S.,
R. 3 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, SE. \1/4\ sec. 9; S. \1/
2\ sec. 12. Lands within T. 14 S., R. 2 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, E.\1/2\ sec. 35. Federal lands within T. 15 S., R. 2 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 2; S. \1/2\ sec. 7; S. \1/2\
sec. 8; S\1/2\ sec. 9; sec. 10 except SE. \1/4\. Lands within T. 14
S., R. 1 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, E. \1/2\ sec. 31;
sec. 32. Lands within T. 15 S., R. 1 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, NE. \1/4\ sec. 6; sec. 5; S. \1/2\ sec. 7; and sec. 8.
Lands within T. 15 S., R. 2 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
SE. \1/4\ sec. 12. The following lands within El Cajon Land Grant:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 501000, 3640000; 503600, 3640400; 503600,
3635600; 502000, 3635600; 502000, 3634100; 500300, 3634100; 500300,
3637200; 498100, 3637200; 501000, 3640000. The following lands
within Mission San Diego and Pueblo Lands of San Diego Land Grants:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 481600, 3637800; 485800, 3637400; 485800,
3636600; 484200, 3636600; 484200, 3635900; 483400, 3635900; 483400,
3635100; 489700, 3635100; 489700, 3635900; 490600, 3635900; 490600,
3636500; 489000, 3636500; 489000, 3635800; 488000, 3635800; 488000,
3636600; 488900, 3636600; 488900, 3637300; 491700, 3637300; 491700,
3636600; 492300, 3636600; 492300, 3635800; 493100, 3635800; 493100,
3634300; 491500, 3634300; 491500, 3633400; 489800, 3633400; 489800,
3632600; 489000, 3632600; 489000, 3634400; 485800, 3634400; 485800,
3633900; 483300, 3633900; 483300, 3634500; 482500, 3634500; 482500,
3635900; 481600, 3635900; 481600, 3637800.
[[Page 5963]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.003
Map Unit 3: Multiple Habitat Conservation Open Space Program
(MHCOSP), San Diego County, California. From USGS 1:100,000
quadrangle map Borrego Valley, California (1983). Lands within T. 12
S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T.
13 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 22-27, 35,
and 36; T. 13 S., R. 03 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
17-19, and 31; T. 14 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 1-3, 12, and 13; T. 14 S., R. 03 E., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 6 and 7; T. 15 S., R. 02 E., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5 and 6.
[[Page 5964]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.004
Map Unit 4: North San Diego County MHCP, San Diego County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California
(1984). Lands within T. 10 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 22-24, 27, 28, and 33; T. 11 S., R. 01 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 31; T. 11 S., R. 02 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20, 21, 27-29, and 32-35; T. 11
S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3, 9, 11,
12, 16-21, 29-33, and 35; T. 11 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 12-14, and 23-25; T. 12 S., R. 01 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 17-20, and 30; T. 12 S.,
R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1 and 2; T. 12
S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 18, 19,
22, 23, and 27-35; T. 12 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 12, 13, 21-28, and 33-36; T. 13 S., R. 02 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 03 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-6, 8-10, and 13; T. 13 S., R.
04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3, 11, 24-26, and
35. The following lands within Guajome Land Grant: UTM coordinates
(X, Y) 473300, 3679600; 474600, 3679600; 477300, 3677800; 477200,
3677700; 477200, 3677800; 475700, 3677800; 475700, 3676300; 475600,
3676300; 474000, 3677300; 474000, 3677800; 473300, 3677800; 472000,
3678000; 473300, 3679600. The following lands within Agua Hedionda
Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 474000, 3672000; 475700, 3670900;
475700, 3668100; 477100, 3668100; 478000, 3664000; 470700, 3664000;
470700, 3666500; 469200, 3666500; 469200, 3668200; 470800, 3668200;
470800, 3669800; 469400, 3669800; 470000, 3672000; 474000, 3672000;
excluding UTM coordinates (X, Y) 474100, 3666500; 474100, 3664900;
475600, 3664900; 475600, 3666500; 474100, 3666500. The following
lands within Rincon del Diablo Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
492000, 3672000; 492700, 3669600; 491600, 3669600; 492000, 3672000;
497000, 3667600; 497100, 3667600; 500000, 3664000; 497000, 3662400;
497000, 3667600; 497000, 3662100; 497100, 3662100; 497400, 3661600;
497400, 3661500; 497000, 3661500; 497000, 3662100; 492200, 3661600;
495500, 3661600; 495500, 3658500; 497200, 3658500; 497000, 3657000;
496600, 3656700; 490600, 3656700; 490600, 3660000; 492200, 3660000;
492200, 3661600. The following lands within Los Vallecitos de San
Marcos Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 479000, 3669000; 479100,
3669000; 479100, 3668000; 478800, 3668000; 479000, 3669000. The
following lands within San Bernardino (Snook) Land Grant: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 492200, 3661600; 495500, 3661600; 495500,
3658500; 497200, 3658500; 497000, 3657000; 496600, 3656700; 490600,
3656700; 490600, 3660000; 492200, 3660000; 492200, 3661600. The
following lands within Los Encinitos and San Dieguito Land Grants:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 475000, 3660000; 480000, 3661000; 480000,
3656700; 479500, 3656700; 479500, 3658300; 476300, 3658300; 476300,
3657400; 476200, 3657400; 475000, 3660000; 477000, 3655100; 477900,
3655100; 477900, 3652000; 477800, 3652000; 477000, 3653000.
[[Page 5965]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.005
Map Unit 5: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, San Diego County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California
(1984). Lands within T. 11 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, sec. 22. The following lands within Santa Margarita y Las
Flores Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400, 3727400; 442300,
3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400; 450100, 3718600; 451100,
3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400; 452700, 3715400; 452700,
3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700; 451600, 3712700; 451600,
3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200; 450000, 3702200; 450000,
3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600; 447000, 3701600; 447000,
3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700; 445100, 3704800; 443600,
3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600; 441900, 3701600; 441900,
3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700; 438700, 3701700; 438700,
3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700; 443200, 3704700; 442000,
3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500; 440500, 3709200; 437000,
3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000; 438900, 3716100; 442100,
3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300; 440400, 3721000; 442100,
3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100; 440400, 3727400; 449800,
3692900; 451400, 3692900; 451400, 3691300; 453200, 3691300; 453200,
3689700; 455000, 3689700; 455000, 3688000; 453000, 3688000; 449800,
3690900; 449800, 3692900; 469200, 3691000; 470900, 3691000; 470900,
3684400; 475100, 3684400; 470800, 3680600; 470800, 3682700; 469200,
3682700; 469200, 3684400; 466100, 3684400; 466100, 3687800; 469200,
3687800; 469200, 3691000; 458200, 3688000; 459800, 3688000; 459800,
3686200; 461200, 3686200; 461200, 3681300; 459600, 3681300; 459600,
3682700; 458200, 3682700; 458200, 3684500; 456500, 3684500; 456500,
3686200; 458200, 3686200; 458200, 3688000; 462600, 3678000; 467700,
3678000; 467700, 3677700; 464400, 3674700; 462400, 3674700; 462600,
3675400. The Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Station Designated Areas
(1996); Alpha One; Alpha Two; Bravo One; Bravo Two; Bravo Three;
Juliett; Lima; Mike; November; Oscar One; Tango; Uniform; Victor;
Agriculture Lease Area (North); 52 Area; 62 Area; 63 Area; 64 Area;
San Onofre Housing Area; State Park Lease Area; Red Beach, White
Beach; Asistencia de Las Flores; Edson Range Impact Area;
Agriculture Lease Area (South); Mass 3; and Golf Course.
[[Page 5966]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.006
Map Unit 6: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station, San Diego County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California
(1984): The following lands within the Santa Margarita y Las Flores
Land Grant: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station. The following Federal
Lands associated with the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station within T.
9 S., R. 4 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 35 and 36;
T. 10 S., R. 4 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1 and 2.
[[Page 5967]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.007
Map Unit 7: North County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated
San Diego County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map
Oceanside, California (1984). Lands within T. 09 S., R. 02 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 20, and 29-32; T. 09 S., R.
03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-16, 22-26, and 36;
T. 09 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 12 and
13; T. 10 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5-
8, 17-20, 31, and 32; T. 10 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 12-14, 19-26, and 29-36; T. 11 S., R. 02 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4-9 and 16-18; T. 11 S., R. 03
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-6 and 10-13; T. 13
S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 5, 7, 8,
24, 25, 35, and 36; T. 13 S., R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 19-21, 28-30, 33, and 34; T. 14 S., R. 02 E., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 4. The following lands within
Santa Margarita y Las Flores Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
477000, 3697000; 476100, 3694000; 475700, 3694000; 475700, 3696200;
477000, 3697000. The following lands within Monserate Land Grant:
UTM coordinates (X ,Y) 485000, 3693000; 488000, 3689000; 487000,
3685000; 484000, 3685900; 482200, 3685900; 482200, 3689200; 483800,
3689200; 483800, 3692500; 485000, 3693000. The following lands
within Valle de Paro (or Santa Maria) Land Grant: UTM coordinates
(X, Y) 511700, 3660000; 511700, 3656700; 506800, 3656700; 506800,
3656800; 511000, 3660000; 511700, 3660000; 514900, 3655200; 515300,
3655200; 515400, 3651900; 515000, 3651900; 515000, 3651700; 513300,
3651700; 513300, 3653600; 514900, 3653600; 514900, 3655200. The
following lands within Canada de San Vicente y Mesa del Padre Barona
Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 516000, 3655000; 520000, 3655000;
519000, 3653000; 518100, 3652200; 518100, 3653600; 516400, 3653600;
516500, 3653300; 516500, 3651900; 516300, 3651900; 516000, 3653000;
519000, 3653000; 523000, 3652000; 523000, 3651000; 519800, 3649500;
519800, 3651900; 518500, 3651900; 518500, 3652000; 515000, 3651400;
515000, 3650400; 513300, 3650400; 513300, 3651100.
[[Page 5968]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.008
Map Unit 8: Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Oceanside (1984) and
Santa Ana (1985), California. Lands within T. 06 S., R. 06 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 18, 19, 30, and 32; T. 06
S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-4, 9-14,
and 23-25; T. 07 S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
sec. 9; T. 07 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
30 and 31; T. 07 S., R. 08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
secs. 24, 25, and 36; T. 08 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 4, 7-9, 16-18, 21, 23, and 26; T. 08 S., R. 068 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 13. The following lands
within Boca de La Playa, Canada de Los Alisos, Mission Viejo/La Paz,
and Trabuco Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400, 3727400;
442300, 3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400; 450100, 3718600;
451100, 3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400; 452700, 3715400;
452700, 3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700; 451600, 3712700;
451600, 3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200; 450000, 3702200;
450000, 3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600; 447000, 3701600;
447000, 3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700; 445100, 3704800;
443600, 3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600; 441900, 3701600;
441900, 3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700; 438700, 3701700;
438700, 3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700; 443200, 3704700;
442000, 3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500; 440500, 3709200;
437000, 3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000; 438900, 3716100;
442100, 3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300; 440400, 3721000;
442100, 3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100; 440400, 3727400.
[[Page 5969]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.009
Map Unit 9: NCCP for Central/Coastal Subregions of Orange County
(Central/Coastal NCCP), Orange County, California. From USGS
1:100,000 quadrangle maps Santa Ana (1985) and Oceanside (1984),
California. Lands defined by the boundary of the designated reserve
within Marine Corps Air Station El Toro within the Natural
Communities Conservation Plan for the Central/Coastal Subregions.
Lands within T. 06 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
sec. 4; T. 07 S., R. 08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
25 and 36. The following lands within Canon de Santa Ana and Lomas
de Santiago Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800;
414500, 3759800; 414500, 3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600;
421100, 3759600; 421700, 3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500;
435600, 3751500; 435600, 3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000;
438000, 3748000; 437800, 3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000;
430700, 3748000; 430700, 3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400;
427800, 3751400; 427800, 3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500;
422800, 3751500; 422800, 3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100;
419400, 3753100; 419400, 3754700; 416100, 3754700; 416100, 3756400;
414500, 3756400; 414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000; 409000, 3759000;
412300, 3759700; 412300, 3759800. The following lands within Canada
de Los Alisos and Trabuco Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
440400, 3727400; 442300, 3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400;
450100, 3718600; 451100, 3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400;
452700, 3715400; 452700, 3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700;
451600, 3712700; 451600, 3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200;
450000, 3702200; 450000, 3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600;
447000, 3701600; 447000, 3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700;
445100, 3704800; 443600, 3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600;
441900, 3701600; 441900, 3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700;
438700, 3701700; 438700, 3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700;
443200, 3704700; 442000, 3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500;
440500, 3709200; 437000, 3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000;
438900, 3716100; 442100, 3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300;
440400, 3721000; 442100, 3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100;
440400, 3727400.
[[Page 5970]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.010
Map Unit 10: Palos Verdes Peninsula Subregion, Los Angeles
County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Long Beach,
California (1981). The following lands within Los Palos Verdes Land
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 369800, 3739900; 370700, 3739900;
370700, 3738700; 372100, 3738700; 372100, 3739900; 373800, 3739900;
373800, 3737100; 377200, 3737100; 377200, 3738500; 380400, 3738500;
380400, 3736900; 378700, 3736900; 378700, 3731800; 376500, 3731800;
369000, 3734000; 368700, 3735900; 368700, 3739300; 369800, 3739900.
[[Page 5971]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.011
Map Unit 11: East Los Angeles-Orange County Matrix NCCP
Subregion of Orange County, Los Angeles County and Orange County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Long Beach (1981),
Los Angeles (1983), San Bernardino (1982), and Santa Ana (1985),
California. Lands within T. 01 S., R. 09 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T. 02 S., R. 08 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 31; T. 02 S., R. 09 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, and 32-
36; T. 02 S., R. 10 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20,
29, and 30; T. 02 S., R. 11 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
secs. 3, 9, 10, 13-16, 21-23, 25, 26, and 36; T. 03 S., R. 08 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 14, 17, and 18; T. 03
S., R. 10 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3. The
following lands within La Puente and San Jose Dalton et al. Land
Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 424400, 3774200; 427700, 3774200;
427700, 3769200; 424400, 3769200; 424400, 3767900; 424200, 3767600;
419600, 3767600; 419600, 3766000; 417900, 3766000; 417900, 3769300;
424400, 3769300; 424400, 3774200. The following lands within Paso de
Bartolo (Pico), Potrero Grande, San Antonion (Lugo), San
Francisquito (Dalton), and unnamed Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X,
Y) 401800, 3767900; 401800, 3764400; 398600, 3764400; 398600,
3767900; 401800, 3767900. The following lands within Paso de Bartolo
(Pico) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 403400, 3764500; 405100,
3764500; 405000, 3762000; 403500, 3761300; 401700, 3761300; 401700,
3763000; 403400, 3763000; 403400, 3764500. The following lands
within La Puente Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 405500, 3764500;
408400, 3764500; 408400, 3761400; 406000, 3762000; 406000, 3763000;
405500, 3764500. The following lands within Canon de Santa Ana, La
Habra, La Puente, Lomas de Santiago, Rincon de La Brea, San Juan
Cajon de Santa Ana, Santiago de Santa Ana, and unnamed Land Grants:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800; 414500, 3759800; 414500,
3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600; 421100, 3759600; 421700,
3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500; 435600, 3751500; 435600,
3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000; 438000, 3748000; 437800,
3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000; 430700, 3748000; 430700,
3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400; 427800, 3751400; 427800,
3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500; 422800, 3751500; 422800,
3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100; 419400, 3753100; 419400,
3754700; 416100, 3754700;
[[Page 5972]]
416100, 3756400; 414500, 3756400; 414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000;
409000, 3759000; 412300, 3759700; 412300, 3759800. The following
lands within Santa Ana del Chino (addition to) Land Grants: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 425900, 3759600; 429300, 3759600; 429300,
3757000; 426700, 3757100; 425900, 3758700; 425900, 3759600. The
following lands within La Habra and Los Coyotes Land Grants: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 409700, 3753300; 412900, 3753300; 412900,
3750000; 408300, 3750000; 408300, 3751700; 409700, 3751700; 409700,
3753300. The following lands within San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana Land
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 416100, 3751600; 417800, 3751600;
417800, 3749900; 416100, 3749900; 416100, 3751600.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.012
Map Unit 12: Western Riverside County MSHCP, Riverside County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Santa Ana (1985) and
San Bernardino (1982), California. Lands defined by the boundary of
the Lake Perris/San Jacinto Core Reserve. Lands within T. 01 S., R.
05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29 and 31-33; T. 01
S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 35; T. 02 S.,
R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 8, 16-21, and 28-
33; T. 02 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 7,
8, 13-29, and 36; T. 02 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 9-16, 21-24, 27-29, and 32-34; T. 02 S., R. 05 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4 and 6; T. 02 S., R. 06
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3; T. 03 S., R. 01
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 20, and 29-32; T.
03 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-6, 8-11,
13-15, 21-26, and 36; T. 03 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 21and 29; T. 03 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 5-7; T. 03 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 1, 12-1420-24, and 27; T. 03 S., R. 07 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29-33; T. 03 S., R. 08 W.,
[[Page 5973]]
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 25 and 36; T. 04 S., R. 01
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 04 S., R. 02 W.,
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20 and 28-32; T. 04 S., R.
03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 25 and 36; T. 04 S.,
R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 27, 28, 32, and
33; T. 04 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28-
34; T. 04 S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 16,
18, 21, 22, 25-30, and 32-36; T. 04 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 5, 9-11, 13, 14, 24, and 25; T. 05 S.,
R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28-31 and 33; T.
05 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 6, 8,
9, 16, 17, 20, 21, 29, and 33-36; T. 05 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 18-20, 29, and 30; T. 05 S., R. 04 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 8, 9, 12-14, 16, 17, 19, 20,
23, 24, 26-30, and 32-34; T. 05 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 2-11, 13-16, 18, 19, and 22-28; T. 05 S.,
R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-4, 9-14, and
24; T. 06 S., R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4,
7-9, 16-20, and 29-31; T. 06 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 3, 4, 10, 12-17, 19, 20, 22-25, and 34-36; T. 06 S.,
R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 24, 25, 29-33,
and 36; T. 06 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
3, 4, 9, 10, 13-15, 24, and 25; T. 07 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 16-21 and 27-34; T. 07 S., R. 01 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-18, 24, 25, and 32-36; T. 07
S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1, 2, 6, 7,
and 11-22; T. 07 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
secs. 1-4, 11-13, and 24; T. 08 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 4-10, 15, and 16; T. 08 S., R. 01 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-5; T. 08 S., R. 03 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 23-28 and 31-36. The following
lands within Jurupa (Rubidoux) and Jurupa (Stearns) Land Grants: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 463100, 3766300; 463100, 3762500; 461400,
3762500; 461400, 3765700; 463100, 3766300; 459900, 3765100; 459900,
3764100; 457400, 3764100; 457400, 3764200; 459900, 3765100. The
following lands within Canon de Santa Ana, Lomas de Santiago Land
Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800; 414500, 3759800;
414500, 3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600; 421100, 3759600;
421700, 3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500; 435600, 3751500;
435600, 3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000; 438000, 3748000;
437800, 3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000; 430700, 3748000;
430700, 3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400; 427800, 3751400;
427800, 3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500; 422800, 3751500;
422800, 3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100; 419400, 3753100;
419400, 3754700; 416100, 3754700; 416100, 3756400; 414500, 3756400;
414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000; 409000, 3759000; 412300, 3759700;
412300, 3759800. The following lands within El Sobrante de San
Jacinto Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 463000, 3750000; 463100,
3748500; 463100, 3746300; 461400, 3746300; 461400, 3747900; 458200,
3747900; 458200, 3746300; 456700, 3746300; 456700, 3743200; 460000,
3743200; 460000, 3741600; 463300, 3741600; 463300, 3739000; 456000,
3739000; 452000, 3742000; 452800, 3743200; 453700, 3743200; 453700,
3744800; 455300, 3744800; 455300, 3746500; 456400, 3746500; 456400,
3749600; 458100, 3749600; 463000, 3750000. The following lands
within La Sierra (Yorba) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400,
3749500; 440400, 3748000; 443700, 3748000; 443700, 3746600; 444100,
3746600; 444100, 3745300; 443900, 3745300; 438700, 3747900; 438700,
3749500; 440400, 3749500; 444500, 3744900; 447300, 3744900; 447300,
3743200; 450500, 3743200; 450000, 3741000; 448000, 3741000; 444500,
3744800; 444500, 3744900. The following lands within San Jacinto
Viejo Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3730400; 502000,
3730400; 502000, 3726400; 500300, 3725800; 500300, 3728000; 497000,
3729000; 497000, 3730400. The following lands within La Laguna
(Stearns) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 466000, 3730000;
467000, 3730000; 467600, 3728600; 465500, 3728600; 466000, 3730000;
472000, 3725000; 472200, 3723900; 472200, 3723800; 471300, 3723800;
471300, 3724500. The following lands within Temecula Land Grant: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 480000, 3718000; 481000, 3718000; 483400,
3715700; 480900, 3715700; 480900, 3717300; 480200, 3717300; 480200,
3717400; 480000, 3718000; 484100, 3714100; 484100, 3715100; 485200,
3714100; 484100, 3714100; 488000, 3712000; 488700, 3710900; 487500,
3710900; 487500, 3702000; 480800, 3701000; 480800, 3703700; 482500,
3703700; 482500, 3705300; 484200, 3705300; 484200, 3710900; 485800,
3710900; 485800, 3713600; 488000, 3712000. The following lands
within Santa Rosa (Morino) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y)
488000, 3712000; 488700, 3710900; 487500, 3710900; 487500, 3702000;
480800, 3701000; 480800, 3703700; 482500, 3703700; 482500, 3705300;
484200, 3705300; 484200, 3710900; 485800, 3710900; 485800, 3713600;
488000, 3712000; 478300, 3700700; 479900, 3700700; 479900, 3700600;
479000, 3700000; 478300, 3700600. The following lands within San
Jacinto Neuvo y Potrero Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 490000,
3754000; 490900, 3752800; 488900, 3752800; 488900, 3749600; 487200,
3749600; 487200, 3753000; 490000, 3754000; 490500, 3751300; 492100,
3751300; 493900, 3749600; 490500, 3749600; 490500, 3751300; 482300,
3744800; 484000, 3744800; 484000, 3741600; 485700, 3741600; 485700,
3740000; 490400, 3740000; 489000, 3739000; 485600, 3739100; 485600,
3739900; 482300, 3739900; 482300, 3744800. The following lands
within Pauba Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 503000, 3715000;
501800, 3713000; 498700, 3713000; 498700, 3711400; 497300, 3711400;
497300, 3711100; 495700, 3711100; 495700, 3711000; 493500, 3711000;
493500, 3710900; 492300, 3710900; 492300, 3711000; 492000, 3712000;
502000, 3716000; 503000, 3715000; 498700, 3709700; 500400, 3709700;
506000, 3707000; 506300, 3706400; 504800, 3706400; 504800, 3706300;
498700, 3706300.
[[Page 5974]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.013
Map Unit 13: San Bernardino Valley MSHCP, San Bernardino County,
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map San Bernardino,
California (1982). Lands within T. 01 N., R. 03 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 16-19, 21, 22, 26-28, 30, and 33-36; T. 01
N., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 6, 9-15,
and 24; T. 01 N., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
1, 4, 7, 8, 17-20, and 29; T. 01 N., R. 06 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 13-22 and 27-30; T. 01 N., R. 07 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 13-16, and 19-24. T. 01 N., R.
08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 24; T. 01 S., R. 02
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5-9, 14-18, 20-22, 28,
and 31-33; T. 01 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian,
secs. 1, 4, 8, 9, 12-16, and 36; T. 02 N., R. 05 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 21, 27, 28, 33, and 35; T. 02 S., R. 02
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6-10; T. 02 S., R. 03
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-6 and 8-12; T. 02 S.,
R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 1. The following
lands within Muscupiabe Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 461600,
3788400; 463000, 3788400; 464800, 3787300; 464800, 3786900; 466300,
3786900; 466400, 3785500; 466400, 3785200; 467000, 3785200; 469300,
3785100; 469700, 3785100; 472000, 3784000; 473700, 3781900; 466400,
3781900; 466400, 3778600; 464700, 3778600; 464700, 3780200; 461400,
3780200; 459000, 3782000; 459000, 3783600; 461400, 3783600; 461400,
3784200; 461600, 3786200; 461600, 3788400; excluding UTM coordinates
463200, 3785100; 463200, 3782000; 464700, 3782000; 464700, 3785100;
463200, 3785100. The following lands within Cucamonga Land Grant:
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 437000, 3781000; 445000, 3781000; 445000,
3778800; 437000, 3778800; 437000, 3781000. The following lands
within San Bernardino Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 479200,
3773800; 480100, 3773800; 480100, 3772200; 480900, 3772200; 480900,
3770500; 479200, 3770500; 479200, 3773800; 488000, 3767300; 489700,
3767300; 489700, 3765700; 488900, 3765700; 488900, 3764100; 488000,
3764100; 488000, 3767300; 489700, 3764100; 493700, 3764100; 493700,
3762400; 489600, 3762400; 489700, 3764100.
[[Page 5975]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.014
Map Unit 14: East Los Angeles County Linkage, Los Angeles
County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Los Angeles,
California (1983). Lands within T. 01 N., R. 08 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 19-24; T. 01 N., R. 09 W., San Bernardino
Principal Meridian, secs. 22-27, 34, and 35; T. 01 S., R. 09 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 2. The following lands within
Cucamonga Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 437000, 3781000;
445000, 3781000; 445000, 3778800; 437000, 3778800; 437000, 3781000.
The following lands within San Jose (Dalton et al.) and San Jose
Addition Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 427000, 3776000;
427300, 3775700; 424400, 3775700; 424400, 3776500; 427000, 3776000.
[[Page 5976]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.015
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
Map Unit 15: Western Los Angeles County, California. From USGS
1:100,000 quadrangle map Los Angeles, California (1983). Lands
within T. 03 N., R. 14 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs.
6, 7, 18, and 19; T. 03 N., R. 15 W., San Bernardino Principal
Meridian, secs. 1, 4-9, and 15-24; T. 04 N., R. 14 W., San
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 18, 19, 30, and 31; T. 04 N.,
R. 15 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 7-11, 13-36. The
following lands within Ex Mission de San Fernando Land Grant: UTM
coordinates (X, Y) 369500, 3799000; 369600, 3799000; 370200,
3798700; 364300, 3798700; 364300, 3798800; 369500, 3799000.
Dated: February 1, 2000.
Donald J. Barry,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 00-2600 Filed 2-2-00; 1:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P