![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determinations of Prudency for Two Mammal and Four Bird Species in Guam and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Proposed Designations of Critical Habitat for One Mammal and Two Bird Species
Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.
[Federal Register: October 15, 2002 (Volume 67, Number 199)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 63737-63772]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr15oc02-23]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018--AI25
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determinations of
Prudency for Two Mammal and Four Bird Species in Guam and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Proposed Designations
of Critical Habitat for One Mammal and Two Bird Species
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have
reconsidered whether designating critical habitat for the Mariana fruit
bat (Pteropus mariannus mariannus), little Mariana fruit bat (Pteropus
tokudae), Guam Micronesian kingfisher (Halcyon cinnamomina
cinnamomina), Mariana crow (Corvus kubaryi), Guam broadbill (Myiagra
freycineti), and Guam subspecies of bridled white-eye (Zosterops
conspicillatus conspicillatus) would be prudent. We propose designation
of critical habitat for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian
kingfisher, and Mariana crow pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act). We propose designating approximately 10,037
hectares (ha) (24,803 acres (ac)) on the island of Guam for the Mariana
fruit bat and the Guam Micronesian kingfisher. For the Mariana crow, we
propose designating approximately 9,309 ha (23,004 ac) on the island of
Guam and approximately 2,462 ha (6,084 ac) on the island of Rota in the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI). On Guam, the
Mariana fruit bat and Guam Micronesian kingfisher proposed critical
habitat unit boundaries are identical and the boundaries of the
proposed critical habitat for the Mariana crow is contained within
these identical boundaries. On Rota, critical habitat is proposed only
for the Mariana crow.
We have determined that designation of critical habitat would not
be prudent for the little Mariana fruit bat, Guam broadbill, and
bridled white-eye because all three species likely are extinct. These
species inhabited native forests similar to those required by the
Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow, and
the designation of critical habitat for these species on Guam will
provide some insurance in the event that any of the species presumed
extinct are rediscovered.
We solicit data and comments from the public on all aspects of this
proposal, including data on economic and other impacts. We may revise
this proposal to incorporate or address new information received during
the comment period.
DATES: Comments: Comments from all interested parties must be received
by December 16, 2002.
Public Hearings: A public hearing will be held on Rota from 6 to 8
p.m. on Wednesday, November 6, 2002. A public hearing will also be held
on Guam from 6 to 8 p.m., Thursday, November 7, 2002. Prior to each
public hearing, the Service will be available from 3:30 to 4:30 p.m. to
provide information and to answer questions. We also will be available
for questions after each of the hearings.
ADDRESSES: The Rota public hearing will be held at the Rota Resort,
2600 Bishop Drive, As Puladan. The Guam public hearing will be held at
the Outrigger Guam Resort, 1255 Pale San Vitores Road, Tumon Bay.
Anyone wishing to make oral comments for the record at the public
hearing is encouraged to provide a written copy of their statement and
present it to us at the hearing. In the event there is a large
attendance, the time allotted for oral statements may be limited. Oral
and written statements receive equal consideration.
Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and
participate in the public hearing should contact Patti Carroll at 503/
231-2080 as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to
process requests, please call no later than 1 week before the hearing
date.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposal
by any one of the following methods:
You may submit comments and information on this proposed rule to
Paul Henson, Field Supervisor, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room
3-122, Box 50088, Honolulu, HI 96850.
You may hand-deliver written comments to our Pacific Islands Office
at the address given above.
You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to: Mariana_
CritHab@r1.fws.gov. See the Public Comments Solicited section below for
file format and other information about electronic filing.
Availability of Documents: Supporting documentation and references
used in the preparation of this proposed rule and all comments and
materials received will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours in the Pacific Islands Fish
and Wildlife Office in Honolulu at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson, Field Supervisor, or Fred
Amidon, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife
Office, at the above address (telephone: 808/541-3441; facsimile: 808/
541-3470).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Territory of Guam (Guam) is the largest and southernmost of the
16 islands in the Mariana Archipelago. Guam is located at 13o 30' N and
145o E and is approximately 49 kilometers (km) (30 miles (mi)) long and
7 to 15 km (4 to 9 mi) wide. The northern half of Guam is an upraised
limestone plateau and the southern half is primarily of volcanic origin
with a mountainous topography. The major habitat types found on Guam
include limestone forest, grassland, swamp forest (including
mangroves), ravine forest, secondary forest, agricultural forest
(including coconut plantations), coastal forest, open ground (including
pastures and cultivated areas), urban vegetation, and marshland
(Fosberg 1960, Mueller-Dombois and Fosberg 1998). The majority of
Northern Guam is secondary forest, with large areas cleared for
military facilities and business and residential development. Southern
Guam is a mosaic of grassland and patches of ravine, limestone, swamp,
and secondary forests.
Rota is the fourth largest island in the Mariana Archipelago, and
is located 49 km (30 mi) north of Guam at 14[deg]10' N and 145[deg]
E.
The island is approximately 18 km (11 mi) long and 4 to 7 km (2.5 to 4
mi) wide. The western half of the island is dominated by an uplifted
plateau, the Sabana, which supports a combination of limestone forest,
grassland, and agricultural land. The Sabana encompasses 12 km\2\ (5
mi\2\) at an elevation of 450 meters (m) (1,476 feet (ft)). Steep
cliffs border the Sabana on all but the northeast side, where the
plateau slopes down to the eastern part of the island, which supports a
combination of secondary forest and residential and agricultural lands.
Because access is difficult, the cliffs surrounding the Sabana support
primary limestone forest. Although approximately 60 percent of Rota is
now forested (Falanruw et al. 1989), and the native vegetation on Rota
is less disturbed than on Guam, much of the forest on Rota is of medium
stature and
[[Page 63739]]
is degraded by development activities, introduced plants and animals,
logging, and the effects of warfare from WWII (Fosberg 1960, Engbring
et al. 1986, NRC 1997, Mueller-Dombois and Fosberg 1998). Prior to
human colonization, both Guam and Rota likely were covered with forest
and had similar vegetation and habitat types.
Taxonomy, Life History, Distribution, and Habitat
Mariana fruit bat--This species is a medium-sized fruit bat
weighing from 330 to 577 grams (g) (12 to 20 ounces (oz)) with a
wingspan of 860 to 1,065 millimeters (mm) (34 to 42 inches (in)) (Perez
1972). The abdomen, wings, and head are dark brown, while the back and
sides of the neck are golden or pale brown. This species is a member of
the Old World fruit bat family Pteropodidae, which is distributed
throughout the Old World tropics. The Mariana fruit bat historically
inhabited all of the major islands in the Mariana archipelago. This
species typically roosts diurnally in colonies in undisturbed native
forests and forages widely at night on nectar, fruit, and leaves of at
least 22 plant species (Wiles 1983). The Mariana fruit bat is
polygynous; colonies usually consist of harems of 2 to 15 females
attended by one male and bachelor groups (Wiles 1982a, 1983). Females
typically produce a single offspring per year; mating and nursing young
have been observed throughout the year (Perez 1972, Wiles 1983, Wiles
et al. 1995).
During the day, Mariana fruit bats roost in native and non-native
trees alone or in groups or colonies of a few to over 800 animals
(Wiles 1987, Pierson and Rainey 1992, Worthington and Taisacan 1995).
Roosting bats sleep during much of the day but also perform other
activities, such as grooming, breeding, and defending roosting
territories within the colony (USFWS 1990a). Several hours after
sunset, bats depart their roost sites to forage for fruit and other
native and non-native plant materials such as leaves and nectar (USFWS
1990a). Little is known about their nightly movements, but fruit bats
have been observed foraging as far as 12 km (7 mi) from known roosting
sites on Guam (Wiles et al. 1995). Radio tracking of the Tongan or
white-necked fruit bat (Pteropus tonganus) in Samoa indicates that
individual animals may travel as far as 15 to 20 km (9 to 12 mi) from
their roosts during a night's foraging (Suzanne Nelson, University of
Florida, pers. comm., 2002). Similar to the Mariana fruit bat, this
species roosts colonially during the day and forages widely at night,
feeding on the fruit, nectar, and leaves of a range of native and non-
native plants (Trail 1994, Banack 1998).
At present, only the Guam population of Mariana fruit bat is listed
as endangered. A proposed rule to reclassify the Guam population of the
species as threatened and also list the population in the CNMI as
threatened was published on March 26, 1998 (63 FR 14641).
On Guam, the Mariana fruit bat was historically found throughout
native forests. In 1958, Woodside (1958) estimated the population on
Guam to number approximately 3,000 fruit bats. By 1995, the island
population had been reduced to between 300 and 500 and was restricted
primarily to forest on the northern tip of the island (Wiles et al.
1995), although there are occasional reports of bats from southern Guam
around the Fena Reservoir (Morton and Wiles, in press). Illegal hunting
is believed to be one of the major causes of decline in this species,
but predation by the brown treesnake (Boiga irregularis) also may be an
important limiting factor (Wiles 1987). The Mariana fruit bat forages
and roosts primarily in native limestone forest, but coconut
plantations and coastal forest are occasionally used as well (Wiles
1987, Worthington and Taisacan 1996). Most other species of Pacific
fruit bats generally use a variety of forest types, including
agricultural forest in close proximity to residential areas (Falunruw
1988, Wiles and Engbring 1992, Banack 1998). On Guam, however,
residential areas generally are not used by the Mariana fruit bat,
probably because they do not provide adequate protection from poaching
(USFWS 1990a). Forested areas protected from human intrusion are
necessary for conservation of the Mariana fruit bat on Guam.
Little Mariana fruit bat--This species is a small fruit bat
weighing approximately 152 g (5 oz) with a wingspan of 650 to 709 mm
(25 to 28 in) (Tate 1934, Perez 1972). The abdomen and wings of the
little Mariana fruit bat are dark brown while the mantle and sides of
the neck are golden or brown. The top of the head is grayish to
yellowish brown while the throat is dark brown. This species was a
member of the Old World fruit bat family Pteropodidae. It was first
described in 1931 (Tate 1934), and is believed to have been endemic to
the island of Guam. Only three specimens of this species have been
collected, and virtually nothing is known of its life history or
distribution. This species typically has been described as ``rare''
(Baker 1948, Perez 1972). It was last recorded in 1968, when one female
was shot by hunters in mature limestone forest at Tarague Point in
Northern Guam (Perez 1972). The little Mariana fruit bat likely is
extinct (USFWS 1990a).
Guam Micronesian kingfisher--The Halcyon kingfishers are widespread
in the Pacific, Australia, and Southeast Asia. The subspecies Halcyon
cinnamomina cinnamomina is endemic to Guam. Other subspecies are
endemic to Palau and Pohnpei. The Guam Micronesian kingfisher weighs
approximately 56 to 76 g (2 to 3 oz) and is sexually dimorphic (Baker
1951). Males have a rusty brown head, neck, upper back, and underparts
and a blue tail and wings. Females look similar to the male but the
chin, throat, and underparts are white. The Guam Micronesian kingfisher
preys on insects and small vertebrates such as skinks and geckoes,
which it typically captures on the ground by ambush from exposed
perches (Jenkins 1983). This species nests in cavities excavated in
soft, rotten wood, and thus requires mature forest harboring relatively
large-diameter, mature trees (Marshall 1989). Nesting activity in the
wild on Guam was documented to occur primarily between December and
July, and the average clutch size was two eggs (Jenkins 1983).
The Guam subspecies was common throughout Guam as recently as 1945
(Marshall 1949), and was found throughout most forest types (Jenkins
1983). Up to 3,000 birds were recorded in 1981 (Engbring and Ramsey
1984), but the kingfisher declined rapidly, and now is extinct in the
wild. However, a captive population of 63 birds has been established
and is maintained at 11 zoos in North America including the Bronx,
Philadelphia, and National Zoos (B. Bahner, National Zoological
Association, in litt. 2002), and the Guam Division of Marine and
Aquatic Resources is initiating a captive translocation program on
Guam. Once the brown tree snake is controlled or eradicated, progeny
produced by this captive flock can be reintroduced to Guam. Adequate
forest habitat containing large trees suitable for nesting is essential
to the successful reintroduction of kingfishers to the wild.
Mariana crow--This species is endemic to Guam and Rota, and is one
of the few members of the worldwide family Corvidae to inhabit oceanic
islands. The Mariana crow is a small, black crow weighing approximately
205 to 270 g (7 to 10 oz) (Baker 1951). Most of the information about
the life history of the Mariana crow comes from Rota, where the species
is more abundant than on Guam, though still rare (Wiles
[[Page 63740]]
1998, Morton et al. 1999). The Mariana crow is omnivorous and forages
on a wide range of invertebrates, small vertebrates, fruit, seeds,
foliage, and bark (USFWS in prep.). Crows forage at all heights in the
forest as well as on the ground. The Mariana crow associates in family
groups, and pairs defend territories of a size dependent upon the
distribution of resources (Morton et al. 1999). Prior to population
declines on Guam (see below), aggregations of up to 66 birds were often
observed prior to the breeding season (Wiles 1998). On Rota, nesting is
concentrated between August and February, but active nests have been
found in every month but June (Morton et al. 1999). Nests are built an
average of 7 m (23 ft) off the ground, with nest trees averaging 17
centimeter (cm) ( 7 in) in diameter (Morton et al. 1999). In a 3-year
period on Rota, an average of 44 percent of Mariana crow pairs
successfully fledged young and averaged 1.2 fledglings per successful
nest (Morton et al. 1999). On Guam, nest predation and low egg
viability seem to account for a much shorter breeding season (Morton
1996).
On Guam, the crow historically was widely distributed in forest
habitats, but densities were highest in limestone forests and lowest in
grasslands and areas with human settlement (Jenkins 1983, Michael
1987). Similar to other Guam forest birds, the crow disappeared from
most of the island with the spread of the brown treesnake, and was
restricted to the northern cliff forests by the mid 1970s. The
population on Guam now numbers 12 birds, 10 of which were translocated
from Rota or mainland zoos (Aguon 2002). This wild population
experiences little or no reproductive success, and captive propagation
efforts on Guam and in mainland zoos since 1984 have produced few
juvenile birds for release (USFWS in prep.).
On Rota, Mariana crows were considered relatively common and widely
distributed in 1976 (Pratt et al. 1979). The first island-wide survey
of crows on Rota in 1982 estimated a population of 1,318 individuals
(Engbring et al. 1986). Crows still are distributed widely on Rota
(Morton et al. 1999), but results of several surveys indicate that the
crow population has declined since the early 1980s. Differences in
survey methods and seasonal variation among surveys has generated
debate over the rate of decline in this 20-year period. Surveys using
the variable circular plot method have been conducted regularly since
1992, however, and these indicate that the current estimate of 343 to
654 crows represents a decline of roughly 38 percent in the Rota
population in the last decade (Fancy et al.1999; Morton et al. 1999;
USFWS in prep.).
The best information on the biology and current population size of
the Mariana crows on Rota comes from a detailed study of six areas by
Morton et al. from 1995 to 1999. Morton et al. (1999) mapped the
locations of all known breeding pairs (n = 85 pairs) on Rota, and
estimated the number of additional pairs inhabiting six non-surveyed
areas by comparing the habitat in these areas to the surveyed habitats
(n = 25 pairs), for a total of 110 breeding pairs on Rota. There likely
are additional, nonbreeding crows on Rota, but it is difficult to
estimate how many there may be (Morton et al. 1999).
Compared to other forest birds of Guam and Rota, Mariana crows have
large territories and require relatively large tracts of limestone
forest that have low levels of human activity or disturbance (Morton
1996, Morton et al. 1999). More forest is necessary to maintain a
genetically viable population of crows than for other forest birds on
Guam because each pair of crows requires more space than do smaller
species. Research on Guam and Rota also indicates that human
disturbance can affect nesting success and placement of nest sites
(Morton 1996, Morton et al.1999).
Although human persecution of crows has occurred on Rota (National
Research Council (NRC) 1997, USFWS in prep.), we believe the threat to
the species will not be increased by the designation of critical
habitat. The small crow population on Guam is located on refuge lands
that overlie military lands where access is highly restricted. On Rota,
the proposed critical habitat is occupied by crows, and critical
habitat designation thus will not place additional regulatory burdens
on the local community that might generate increased persecution of
crows. However, we are seeking public input on this important question.
Guam broadbill--This flycatcher was a member of the family
Monarchidae. Most of the eight or nine genera in this family are
widespread in the tropical Pacific, and many species are endemic to a
single island or archipelago (Pratt et al. 1987). The Guam broadbill
was closely related to congeners in Palau (Myiagra erythrops), Chuuk
(M. oceanica), and Pohnpei (M. pluto). The Guam broadbill weighed
approximately 12 g (0.4 oz) and had a bluish head, neck, back, wings,
and tail and a white throat and light cinnamon breast (Baker 1951).
Similar to other monarch flycatchers, the Guam broadbill was
insectivorous and fed both by gleaning prey from twigs and foliage and
by hawking insects from the air (Jenkins 1983). This species nested
year-round, and nests usually were placed in a fork of branches in
understory trees or shrubs (Jenkins 1983). Both sexes incubated eggs
and brooded young (Jenkins 1983).
Although once widespread in all but grassland habitats, by 1979 the
Guam broadbill was restricted primarily to mature limestone forests
along the north end of the island (Jenkins 1983). In 1983, the
population was restricted to the Pajon Basin, a small area on the north
coast, and was estimated at less than 100 individuals (Beck 1984). The
last sightings of this species took place in 1984, one in March in
Northwest Field and one in August adjacent to the Navy golf course in
Barrigada (52 FR 2239). Since 1984, spring bird surveys and other
ornithological activities in areas where this species would likely
occur have yielded no observations (Wiles et al. 1995). The primary
cause of decline likely was predation by the introduced brown treesnake
(Savidge 1986, 1987). The Guam broadbill likely is extinct, and the
proposed rule to remove this species from the Endangered Species list
was published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2002 (67 FR 3675).
Bridled white-eye--The white-eye family Zosteropidae is widespread
in the Old World tropics and occurs in the tropical Pacific as far east
as Samoa. The Guam subspecies of bridled white-eye, Zosterops
conspicillatus conspicillatus, was endemic to Guam (Baker 1951), and
was one of two subspecies in the Mariana Islands (Slikas et al. 2000).
The bridled white-eye weighed approximately 10.0 g (0.3 oz) and had a
white eye ring, greenish yellow back, wings, and tail, and a yellow
throat, breast, and abdomen (Baker 1951). Although white-eyes are known
to feed on fruit and nectar as well as insects, this subspecies was
primarily insectivorous (Jenkins 1983). Similar to other white-eyes,
the bridled white-eye on Guam was a flocking bird that displayed little
territoriality, even while nesting (Jenkins 1983). Little is known of
its nesting habitats on Guam.
The bridled white-eye was recorded historically in virtually all
habitats at all elevations on Guam (Jenkins 1983). By the mid 1940s,
however, the subspecies had dwindled in southern Guam (Stophet 1946),
and in central Guam it was last observed in the early 1960s (Jenkins
1983). By 1983 the population was restricted to northern Guam and was
thought to have dropped below 50 individuals (Beck 1984). The last
family group, including a fledgling, was
[[Page 63741]]
observed in the Pajon Basin in 1982, and the last individual was
observed at this site in 1983 (Beck 1984). Since this sighting in 1983,
spring bird surveys and other ornithological activities in areas where
this species would likely occur have yielded no observations (Wiles et
al. 1995). The primary cause of decline most likely was predation by
the brown tree snake (Savidge 1986, 1987). The Guam subspecies of
bridled white-eye likely is extinct.
Threats
The primary factor in the decline and disappearance of native bird
and bat species on Guam certainly has been predation by non-native
species, including the brown treesnake (on Guam), three species of rat
(Rattus rattus, R. norvegicus, and R. exulans), and the mangrove
monitor lizard (Varanus indicus) (Savidge 1986, 1987). The effects of
these predators likely have been most severe on birds, and the brown
treesnake in particular has played a major role in the precipitous
decline in Guam's native birds (Savidge 1987). Predation by the brown
treesnake on juvenile Mariana fruit bats also is associated with the
decline of this species on Guam (Wiles et al. 1995). On Rota, rats in
particular are thought to be a major nest predator of the Mariana crow
(Morton et al. 1999).
Habitat loss and degradation also have contributed to the decline
of native species in the Marianas archipelago. Large areas of Guam were
cleared of native vegetation during and immediately after World War II
(Fosberg 1960), and the encroachment of weedy non-native plants,
especially Leucaena leucocephala (tangentangen), has increased since
1945. Over the last five decades, the clearing of land for
agricultural, housing, and private development (e.g., golf courses and
hotels) continued throughout Guam as tourism and the human population
increased. Little development has occurred on military lands since they
were first developed after the war. However, recently an area of
approximately 100 ha (247 ac) on Andersen Air Force Base was cleared
for military training purposes (USAF 2001). Significant areas of native
forest and other vegetation types still remain, (Mueller-Dombois and
Fosberg 1998).
On both Guam and Rota, some closed canopy forests have been
degraded by a combination of human development and road building, alien
weeds that flourish in disturbed areas, suppression of forest regrowth
by introduced ungulates such as deer (Cervus mariannus), pigs (Sus
scrofa), and, on Guam, carabao (Bubalus bubalis), and invasive vines
that cover regenerating forest. Between 1945 and 1976 there was
approximately a 10 percent increase in forest coverage on Rota
(Plentovich et al. unpubl. data), but between 1982 and 1995, 5 to 10
percent of closed-canopy forest habitat was lost again to development.
Typhoons are a common occurrence in the Mariana Islands. Guam, for
example, has been affected by typhoons in 74 percent of the last 50
years (based on records compiled by U.S. Navy, Joint Typhoon Warning
Center). Major typhoons hit Guam in 1961 and 1976 and Rota in 1988 and
1997, causing significant habitat destruction and probably direct
mortality of bats and birds. The islands of Tinian and Saipan (CNMI),
however, also have sustained major habitat losses and typhoon damage,
but have retained their avian communities to a greater degree than has
Guam, although some species survive in precariously low numbers
(Engbring et al. 1986). Habitat loss and damage from typhoons has
influenced the abundance of native birds and bats in the Marianas, but
these species have evolved in an environment where typhoons have always
been a natural occurrence. The habitat alteration caused by these
storms has become a serious threat to these species only recently as
their populations and distributions have declined for other reasons.
Direct human impacts (e.g., hunting, persecution) do not appear to
be a major factor in the decline of forest birds on Guam, although some
evidence exists of killing and harassment of crows on Rota (NRC 1997;
N. Johnson, CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife, pers. comm., 2000). The
harvest of native birds has been outlawed on Guam since the turn of the
century (Executive Order No. 61, Naval Governor of Guam, 1903). In
contrast, hunting has had a significant impact on the Mariana fruit bat
and little Mariana fruit bat. Fruit bats were hunted extensively for
human consumption in the early 1900s (Coultas 1931, Baker 1948), and
although this hunting was outlawed in 1966, poaching of fruit bats has
continued (USFWS 1990a).
Pesticides, disease, and competition with non-native species all
have been examined to assess their role in the declines of native
forest vertebrates in the Mariana Islands, but none of these variables
has been found to have had a major impact on the six species treated in
this document (Maben 1982; Grue 1985; Savidge 1986; USFWS 1990a,
1990b).
The likely extinctions of the little Mariana fruit bat, the Guam
broadbill, and the bridled white-eye on Guam probably are attributable
to a combination of predation by non-native animals, habitat loss,
severe storms, and, in the case of the little Mariana fruit bat,
hunting (USFWS 1990a, 1990b). The importance of these factors likely
varied among the three species, but the lack of life history
information and long-term monitoring data for these three species make
it difficult to assess the exact degree of threat in each case.
All six species have been listed under the Federal Endangered
Species Act since 1984 and receive protection through section 7
(interagency consultation) and section 9 (take prohibitions). However,
the populations of all six species are extremely low or do not occur in
the landscape. ESA sections 7 and 9 provide limited protection for
unoccupied habitat. On Guam, approximately 9,106 ha (22,500 ac) of
military land are included as refuge overlay lands that are managed
under cooperative agreements between the Service and the U.S. Navy
(Navy) and U.S. Air Force (Air Force) (U.S. Navy and USFWS 1994, and
U.S. Air Force and USFWS 1994). However, these overlay lands are
managed primarily for the military mission and secondarily for
conservation purposes. Approximately 1,700 ha (4,200 ac) of Government
of Guam land are zoned as conservation areas under the jurisdiction of
the Chamorro Land Trust Commission. However, the Chamorro Land Trust
Commission has the authority to change the status of these lands at any
time, and we were unable to obtain information about what conservation
activities take place on these lands.
On Rota, the critical habitat unit proposed for the Mariana crow
includes a small portion of the Sabana Protected Area and most of the
Afatung Wildlife Management Area and Ichenchon Bird Sanctuary. The
conservation rules in the draft management plan for the Sabana
Protected Area (SPAMC 1996) do not specifically address conservation of
the Mariana crow, nor do they prohibit activities that have the
potential to affect crows or crow habitat, such as forest clearing and
hunting of non-protected bird species. Furthermore, this draft plan has
not been finalized or implemented. No management documents exist for
the Afatung Wildlife Management Area or the Ichenchon Bird Sanctuary.
Previous Federal Action
The six species treated here were listed as endangered along with
three other vertebrate species in a final rule published in the Federal
Register on
[[Page 63742]]
August 27, 1984 (49 FR 33881). A review of the status of 12 Guam and
CNMI vertebrate species was published on May 18, 1979 (44 FR 29128).
This review, which led to the listing of nine species in 1984, resulted
from three separate petitions to the Service filed by three Governors
or Acting Governors of Guam in 1978, 1979, and 1981, and a fourth
petition filed by the International Council for Bird Preservation in
1980. In the Service's Review of Vertebrate Wildlife published December
30, 1981 (47 FR 58454), five of the six species treated in the present
proposed rule were included in Category 1. Category 1 candidate species
were taxa for which we had sufficient information on biological
vulnerability and threats to support preparation of listing proposals.
The little Mariana fruit bat was classified as Category 2. Category 2
candidates were taxa for which data in our possession indicated listing
was possibly appropriate but for which substantial information on
biological vulnerability and threats were not known or on file to
support preparation of proposed rules. In a proposed rule published on
November 29, 1983 (48 FR 53729), the Service determined endangered
status for nine of the 12 species in the four petitions. The final
listing rule for the nine species, including the six species treated in
the current proposed rule, was published on August 27, 1984 (49 FR
33881).
A proposed rule to designate critical habitat for these six
endangered species on Guam was published in the Federal Register on
June 14, 1991 (56 FR 27485). This proposed rule was withdrawn on April
4, 1994, (59 FR 15696) because most of the lands proposed as critical
habitat had by this time been incorporated in the Guam National
Wildlife Refuge overlay lands, and the Service therefore determined
that critical habitat designation was not prudent because it would not
provide these species with any benefit beyond that already provided by
the refuge overlay lands.
Since the withdrawal of the proposed critical habitat, several
judicial decisions in court cases examining critical habitat
determinations have rejected rationales used by the Service in ``not
prudent'' findings. These cases included Natural Resources Defense
Council v. U.S. Department of the Interior, 113 F. 3d 1121 (9th Cir.
1997) involving the threatened coastal California gnatcatcher, and
Conservation Council for Hawaii v. Babbitt, 2 F. Supp. 2d 1280 (D. Haw.
1998) involving 245 listed plant species. The decisions in these cases
rejected the Service's rationales of ``increased threat'' and ``no
benefit'' in the case of the gnatcatcher, and of ``increased threat,''
``no benefit on private lands,'' and ``no additional benefit on federal
lands'' in the case of the Hawaiian plants.
On April 3, 2000, the Marianas Audubon Society and the Center for
Biological Diversity filed a suit to challenge the Service's 1994
withdrawal of critical habitat for the six species. On September 7,
2000, the Service filed a motion to voluntarily remand the withdrawal
and non-prudency decision based on the subsequent court decisions. This
motion set a deadline of June 3, 2003, for the Service to determine
prudency and designate final critical habitat, if prudent, for these
six species. On January 25, 2002, the Government of Guam filed a motion
for preliminary injunction against the Service to prevent our re-
consideration of the 1994 ``not prudent'' critical habitat
determinations for the six species. On February 8, 2002, the Service
filed its opposition to the Government of Guam's motion for preliminary
injunction. On April 16, 2002, the Guam District Court dismissed the
Government of Guam's motion for preliminary injunction and issued a
ruling upholding the settlement based on a voluntary remand.
On December 7, 2001, we mailed letters to four major landowners
(Chamorro Land Trust Commission, U.S. Air Force, U.S. Navy, and Guam
National Wildlife Refuge) on Guam informing them that the Service was
in the process of determining the prudency of designating critical
habitat for the little Mariana fruit bat, Mariana fruit bat, Mariana
crow, Guam broadbill, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and the bridled
white-eye and requested from them information on management of lands
that currently or recently (within the past 30 years) support these six
species. The letters contained a fact sheet describing the six listed
species and critical habitat, the 1991 proposed rule to designate
critical habitat, the 1994 withdrawal of the proposed rule, and a
questionnaire designed to gather information about land management
practices, which we requested be returned to us by January 14, 2002. We
received three responses to our landowner mailing with varying types
and amounts of information on current land management activities. Some
responses included natural resource management plans, cooperative
agreements, and descriptions of management activities such as brown
treesnake and feral ungulate control.
On February 7 and 8, 2002, the Service met with several landowners
and managers in Guam, including the Navy and Air Force, to obtain more
specific information on management activities and suitability of
certain habitat areas for these six species. On June 8 and July 31,
2002, we sent to landowners, other stakeholders, and scientific experts
a request for comments on copies of draft maps of areas on Guam and
Rota identified as being important to the species. The information
provided by landowners and managers and scientists during the meetings,
in subsequent informal discussions, and in the responses to our written
request for comments was considered and incorporated into this proposed
rule.
Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) 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 (16 U.S.C. 1532(5)(A)). ``Conservation,'' as defined by the
Act, 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 (16 U.S.C. 1532 (3)).
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the requirement that Federal agencies insure against
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat with regard to
actions they carry out, fund, or authorize. Section 7 also requires
conferences on Federal actions that are likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. Aside
from the added protection that may be provided under section 7, the Act
does not provide other forms of regulatory protection to lands
designated as critical habitat. Because consultation under section 7 of
the Act does not apply to activities on private or other non-Federal
lands that do not involve a Federal nexus, critical habitat designation
would not afford any additional protections under the Act against such
activities.
Critical habitat also provides non-regulatory benefits to the
species by informing the public and private sectors of areas that are
important for species conservation and where management
[[Page 63743]]
actions would be most effective. Designation of critical habitat can
help focus conservation activities for a listed species by identifying
areas that contain the physical and biological features that are
essential for conservation of that species, and can alert the public as
well as land-managing agencies to the importance of those areas.
Critical habitat also identifies areas that may require special
management considerations or protection, and may help provide
protection to areas where significant threats to the species have been
identified or help to avoid accidental damage to such areas.
In order to be included in a critical habitat designation, the
habitat must be ``essential to the conservation of the species.''
Critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the
best scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that
provide essential life cycle needs of the species (i.e., areas on which
are found the primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR
424.12(b)). Section 3(5)(C) of the Act states that not all areas that
can be occupied by a species should be designated as critical habitat
unless the Secretary determines that all such areas are essential to
the conservation of the species. Our regulations (50 CFR 424.12(e))
also state that, ``The Secretary shall designate as critical habitat
areas outside the geographic area presently occupied by the species
only when a designation limited to its present range would be
inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species.''
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we take into consideration
the economic impact, and any other relevant impact, of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude areas from critical
habitat designation when the benefits of exclusion outweigh the
benefits of including the areas within critical habitat, provided the
exclusion will not result in extinction of the species.
Our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species
Act, published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271), provides criteria,
establishes procedures, and provides guidance to ensure that decisions
made by the Service represent the best scientific and commercial data
available. It requires that our biologists, to the extent consistent
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific and commercial
data available, use primary and original sources of information as the
basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat. When
determining which areas are critical habitat, a primary source of
information should be the listing package for the species. Additional
information may be obtained from a recovery plan, articles in peer-
reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by states and counties,
scientific status surveys and studies, and biological assessments or
other unpublished materials.
Section 4 generally requires that we designate critical habitat at
the time of listing and based on what we know at the time of the
designation. Habitat is often dynamic, however, and populations may
move from one area to another over time. Furthermore, we recognize that
designation of critical habitat may not include all of the habitat
areas that may eventually be determined to be necessary for the
recovery of the species. For these reasons, all should understand that
critical habitat designations do not signal that habitat outside the
designation is unimportant or may not be required for recovery. Areas
outside the critical habitat designation may continue to be available
for conservation actions that may be implemented under section 7(a)(1)
or subject to the regulatory protections afforded by the section
7(a)(2) jeopardy standard and the section 9 take prohibition, as
determined on the basis of the best available information at the time
of the action. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the
basis of the best available information at the time of designation will
be subject to review in light of future recovery plans, habitat
conservation plans (HCP), or other species conservation planning and
recovery efforts.
Prudency Determination
Designation of critical habitat is not prudent when one or both of
the following situations exists: (i) the species is threatened by
taking or other human activity, and identification of critical habitat
can be expected to increase the degree of such threat to the species;
or (ii) such designation of critical habitat would not be beneficial to
the species (50 CFR 424.12(a)(1)). To determine whether critical
habitat would be prudent for each species, we analyzed the potential
threats and benefits for each species.
The little Mariana fruit bat, Guam broadbill, and bridled white-eye
are believed extinct on Guam. The little Mariana fruit bat was last
observed in 1968 and subsequent surveys for this species in the 1970s
and 1980s yielded no observations (USFWS 1990a). The Guam broadbill was
last observed in 1984 and subsequent forest bird surveys and other
ornithological activities in areas where this species would likely
occur have yielded no observations (Wiles et al. 1995). A proposed rule
to remove the Guam broadbill from the Endangered Species list was
published in the Federal Register on January 25, 2002 (67 FR 3675). The
bridled white-eye was last observed on Guam in 1984 and subsequent
forest bird surveys and other ornithological activities in areas where
this species would likely occur have yielded no observations (Wiles et
al. 1995). Therefore, because these species are believed extinct on
Guam, we propose that designation of critical habitat for the little
Mariana fruit bat, Guam broadbill, and bridled white-eye is not prudent
because such designation would be of no benefit to these species. If
these species are rediscovered, we may revise this proposal to address
the new information (see 16 U.S.C. 1532 (5)(B); 50 CFR 424.13(f)).
We examined the evidence available for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow, and did not find that the
taking of any of these species would be exacerbated by the designation
of critical habitat. There is evidence that Mariana crows and Guam
Micronesian kingfishers occasionally are killed on other islands in
Micronesia (USFWS in prep., D. Kesler, U.S. Geological Survey,
Biological Resources Division, in litt., 2002). However, this is not
considered a major factor in the decline of these two bird species on
Guam or Rota (USFWS 1990b). We do not believe that designation of
critical habitat will lead to increased taking of these species on
Guam, but we believe some crows may be harassed in agricultural
homestead areas on Rota. Poaching of roosting Mariana fruit bats is
considered a major factor in the decline of this species and is still
considered an important threat to their conservation (USFWS 1990a).
However, because critical habitat designation does not identify the
exact location of roost sites, we believe it will not lead to increased
Mariana fruit bat poaching.
In the absence of a finding that critical habitat would increase
the degree of threat to a listed species, if there are any benefits to
critical habitat designation, then a prudent finding is warranted. The
potential benefits of critical habitat designation include: (1) The
protection of unoccupied areas by the triggering of section 7
consultation, (2) focusing conservation activities on designated areas,
and (3) potential public education and awareness benefits accruing to
the species. All of the above benefits apply to the Mariana fruit bat,
Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow. Therefore, we propose
that designation of critical habitat is prudent
[[Page 63744]]
for the Mariana fruit bat and Guam Micronesian kingfisher on Guam, and
for the Mariana crow on Guam and Rota.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designations
As required by the Act and regulations (section 4(b)(2) and 50 CFR
424.12), we used the best scientific information available to identify
areas that contain the physical and biological features that are
essential for the conservation of the Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow. This information included:
peer-reviewed scientific publications (e.g., Baker 1951, Jenkins 1983,
Wiles et al. 1995, NRC 1997); published and draft revised recovery
plans (USFWS 1990a, 1990b, 2002); the final listing rule (49 FR 33881);
unpublished reports by the Guam Division of Aquatic and Wildlife
Resources (GDAWR), CNMI Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), and the
Service (e.g., Wiles 1982a, Engbring and Ramsey 1984, Morton 1996,
Morton et al. 1999); aerial photographs and satellite imagery of Guam
and Rota; personal communications with scientists familiar with the
species and habitats; and responses to critical habitat outreach
packages mailed to Federal, Territory of Guam, CNMI, and private
landowners. Specific information we used from these sources includes
estimates of historic and current distribution, abundance, and
territory sizes for the three species, as well as data on resource and
habitat requirements. From recovery plans, we considered the recovery
objectives and the assessments of the habitat necessary to meet these
objectives, as well as life history information.
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 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
features are termed ``primary constituent elements'', and include but
are not limited to: Space for individual and population growth and for
normal behavior; food, water, air, light, minerals and other
nutritional or physiological requirements; cover or shelter; sites for
nesting and rearing of offspring; and habitats that are protected from
disturbance and are representative of the historic geographical and
ecological distributions of the species.
The primary constituent elements for each of the three species for
which we are proposing critical habitat are found predominantly in the
remaining tracts of mature limestone forest on Guam and Rota. These
forests in general are disturbed little by human activities and exhibit
the biotic and structural characteristics necessary for foraging,
sheltering, roosting, nesting, and rearing of young of the Mariana
fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow on Guam, and
for these same life functions of the crow on Rota. Guam and Rota
experience a high frequency of severe storms, and these regularly and
significantly alter forest structure (NRC 1997). Therefore, sufficient
habitat area is necessary to absorb the variable impacts of these
natural disturbances and still maintain the integrity of the primary
constituent elements to support fruit bat, kingfisher, and crow
populations. Specific details of primary constituent elements for each
species are described below.
Mariana fruit bat--This species feeds on a variety of plant
material but is primarily frugivorous (Wiles and Fujita 1992).
Specifically, Mariana fruit bats forage on the fruit of at least 28
plant species, the flowers of 15 species, and the leaves of two plant
species (Wiles and Fujita 1992). Some of the plants used for foraging
include Artocarpus sp. (breadfruit), Carica papaya (papaya), Cycas
circinalis (fadang), Ficus spp. (figs), Pandanus tectorius (kafu),
Cocos nucifera (coconut), and Terminalia catappa (talisai). Many of
these plant species are found in a variety of forested habitats on Guam
including limestone, ravine, coastal, and secondary forests (Stone
1970, Raulerson and Rhinehart 1991).
During the day, Mariana fruit bats roost in trees in groups or
colonies and occasionally alone (Wiles 1987, Pierson and Rainey 1992).
These roost sites are an important aspect of their biology because they
are used for sleeping, grooming, breeding, and intra-specific
interactions (USFWS 1990a). Published reports of roost sites on Guam
indicate these sites occur in mature limestone forest and are found
within 100 m (328 ft) of 80 to 180 m (262 to 591 ft) tall clifflines
(USFWS 1990a). On Guam, Mariana fruit bats prefer to roost in mature
fig and Mammea odorata (chopak) trees but will also roost in other tree
species such as Casuarina equisetifolia (gago), Macaranga thompsonii
(pengua), Guettarda speciosa (panao), and Neisosperma oppositifolia
(fagot) (Wheeler and Aguon 1978; Wiles 1981, 1982b). On other islands
in the Mariana Archipelago, Mariana fruit bats have been observed in
secondary forest and gago groves (Glass and Taisacan 1988, Marshall et
al. 1995, Worthington and Taisacan 1996). Factors involved in roost
site selection are not clear, but data from Guam indicate that some
sites may be selected for their inaccessibility by humans and thus
limited human disturbance. Fruit bats will abandon roost sites if
disturbed and have been reported to move to new locations up to 10 km
(6 mi) away (USFWS 1990a).
In summary, the primary constituent elements required by the
Mariana fruit bat for the biological needs of foraging, sheltering,
roosting, and rearing of young are found in areas supporting limestone,
secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and coastal forests composed of
native and introduced plant species. These forest types provide the
primary constituent elements of:
(1) Plant species used for foraging such as breadfruit, papaya,
fadang, fig, kafu, coconut palm, and talisai; and
(2) Remote locations, often within 100 m (328 ft) of 80 to 180 m
(262 to 591 ft) tall clifflines, with limited exposure to human
disturbance, that contain mature fig, chopak, gago, pengua, panao,
fagot, and other tree species that are used for roosting and breeding.
Guam Micronesian kingfisher--Jenkins (1983) recorded the Guam
Micronesian kingfisher nesting and foraging in northern Guam in mature
limestone forest, secondary forests, and coastal forests dominated by
coconut trees. Kingfishers also were found historically in southern
Guam in ravine and coastal forests (Jenkins 1983). Few data exist about
specific kingfisher nest sites on Guam, but in one study nest sites in
northern Guam were found in native limestone forest, and the location
of these sites within the forest was correlated with closed canopy
cover and dense understory vegetation (Marshall 1989). Recent studies
of the Pohnpei Micronesian kingfisher (Halcyon cinnamomina
reichenbachii) have documented that this subspecies also occurs in a
wide range of forest types, however, territories of all 14 breeding
pairs studied on Pohnpei included at least several hectares of mature
native rainforest (D. Kesler, pers. comm., 2002).
Micronesian kingfishers are obligate cavity nesters, and require
specific substrates for excavating nest cavities. On Guam, Marshall
(1989) found that kingfishers excavated nest cavities in relatively
soft, decaying wood in standing dead trees, including Tristiropsis
obtusangula (faniok), Pisonia grandis (umumu), breadfruit, fig, and
coconut palm, in the mud nests of Nasutitermes spp. termites, and in
the root masses of epiphytic ferns. All nest cavities found in trees
were in large-
[[Page 63745]]
diameter trees (average dbh 42.7 +/- 12.7 cm (16.8 +/- 5.0 in)), and
these trees contained an average of 19 excavations, most of which were
incomplete (Marshall 1989). Multiple excavations in suitable nest trees
suggest both the importance of these trees as nest sites and the
importance of excavation in the kingfishers' courtship and nesting
behavior (Jenkins 1983). The links between courtship behavior,
excavation activity, and nest substrate requirements have been well
documented in the captive population of this species as well (Bahner,
et al. 1998; S. Derrickson, Conservation Research Center, in litt.
2002). Marshall (1989) concluded that the population density of
kingfishers on Guam may be limited by the availability of nest sites.
Guam Micronesian kingfishers hold year-round territories which are
aggressively defended (Jenkins 1983). Nothing is known about the
territory size requirements of Micronesian kingfishers on Guam, but
research on the Pohnpei subspecies indicates that territory sizes in
upland forest are approximately 10 ha (25 ac) (Kesler, pers. comm.,
2001).
Guam Micronesian kingfishers feed both on invertebrates and small
vertebrates, including insects, segmented worms, hermit crabs, skinks,
geckoes, and possibly other small vertebrates (Marshall 1949, Baker
1951, Jenkins 1983). This species typically forages by perching
motionless on exposed perches and swooping down to capture prey on the
ground (Jenkins 1983). Guam kingfishers also will capture prey from
foliage and have been observed gleaning insects from tree bark (Maben
1982). Marshall (1989) observed no kingfishers foraging in dead trees.
In summary, the primary constituent elements required for the Guam
Micronesian kingfisher for the biological needs of foraging,
sheltering, roosting, nesting, and rearing of young are found in areas
that support limestone, secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and
coastal forests containing native and introduced plant species. These
forest types include the primary constituent elements of:
(1) Closed canopy and well-developed understory vegetation, large
(approximately 43 cm (17 in) dbh), standing dead trees (especially
Tristiropsis obtusangula (faniok), Pisonia grandis (umumu), breadfruit,
fig, and coconut palm), mud nests of Nasutitermes spp. termites, and
root masses of epiphytic ferns for breeding;
(2) Sufficiently diverse structure to provide exposed perches and
ground surfaces, leaf litter, and other substrates that support a wide
range of vertebrate and invertebrate prey species for foraging
kingfishers; and
(3) Sufficient overall breeding and foraging area to support large
kingfisher territories (approximately 10 ha (25 ac)).
Mariana crow--Historically, the distribution of Mariana crows among
habitats was similar on Guam and Rota. Crows were known to use
secondary, coastal, ravine, and agricultural forests including coconut
plantations (Seale 1901, Stophet 1946, Marshall 1949, Baker 1951,
Jenkins 1983), but all evidence indicates they were most abundant in
native limestone forests (Michael 1987, Morton et al. 1999). Mariana
crow nests on Guam have been found in 11 tree genera, all but one of
which are native, but most nests are located high in emergent fig or
Elaeocarpus joga (yoga) trees (Morton 1996; C. Aguon, Guam Division of
Aquatic and Wildlife Resources, unpubl. data).
On Rota, crows use both mature and secondary limestone forests
(Morton et al. 1999), but not exclusively (M. Lusk and E. Taisacan
unpubl. data). Of 156 nest sites on Rota, 39 percent and 42 percent
were in mature and secondary limestone forest, respectively (Morton et
al. 1999). Between 1992 and 1994, 90 percent (n = 115) of observations
of perching crows on Rota were in native trees, primarily in middle to
low heights of the canopy (M. Lusk and E. Taisacan unpubl. data).
Mariana crows nested in 20 tree genera on Rota (Morton et al. 1999). Of
161 nest trees found during 1996-99, 63 percent were of four species:
fagot, Eugenia reinwardtiana (a'abang), Intsia bijuga (ifit), and
Premna obtusifolia (ahgao) (Morton et al. 1999). Individual nest trees
averaged 16.9 cm (6.7 in) diameter at breast height and 8.7 m (28.5 ft)
high. Canopy cover over nest sites averaged 93 percent and was never
less than 79 percent. Although 18 percent of the forested area of Rota
is tangantangan or some other species of introduced tree (Falanruw et
al. 1989), no crow nests have been found in any non-native tree
species. Nests were located at least 290 m (950 ft) from the nearest
road and 62 m (203 ft) from the nearest forest edge, in areas with
forest canopy cover that averaged 93 percent. The distances from edges
strongly suggest that nesting crows are sensitive to disturbance by
humans (Morton et al. 1999). No detailed information is available on
the historical nest site selection by crows on Guam, but the remaining
crows on Guam nest and forage only in primary or mature limestone
forest.
In Rota, Morton et al. (1999) found that breeding crows on six
study areas averaged one pair per 22 ha (50 ac) of forested habitat,
and each territory was dominated by native forest. Pair densities
ranged from one per 37 ha (91 ac) in relatively fragmented forest, to
as high as one pair per 12 ha (30 ac) in mostly intact limestone forest
along a coastal terrace. Territories were aggressively defended from
July through January, although established pairs occupied these areas
throughout the year.
In addition to habitat for breeding territories, Mariana crows also
require habitat for juvenile dispersal. When juvenile Mariana crows
leave the nest, they are typically tended by their parents until the
following breeding season, a period that ranges from 3 to 18 months
(Morton et al. 1999). After this parental attendance period, these
juveniles enter the non-breeding population of Mariana crows until they
are recruited into the adult population at approximately three years of
age (Morton et al. 1999). Little research has been done on the non-
breeding population of crows and their habitat needs, but the
territoriality of breeding adults and the time required before
juveniles enter the breeding population indicate that foraging habitat
outside established territories is needed to maintain juvenile Mariana
crows.
Mariana crows may forage at any height in the forest or on the
ground (Jenkins 1983, Tomback 1986). The crows forage in at least 18
tree genera, most of which are native (Tomback 1986; Jenkins 1983; C.
Aguon, unpubl. data). Mariana crows are omnivorous. They have been
observed to feed on a variety of native and non-native invertebrates,
reptiles, young rats, and birds' eggs, as well as on the foliage, buds,
fruits, and seeds of at least 26 plant species (Jenkins 1983; Tomback
1986; Michael 1987; C. Aguon, unpubl. data).
In summary, the primary constituent elements required by the
Mariana crow for the biological needs of foraging, sheltering,
roosting, nesting, and rearing of young are found in areas that support
limestone, secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and coastal forests
composed of native and introduced plant species. These forest types
provide the primary constituent elements of:
(1) Emergent and subcanopy trees with dense cover for breeding such
as fagot, pengua, ifit, ahgao, aabang, fig, yoga, and faniok;
(2) Sufficient area of predominantly native limestone forest to
allow nesting at least 290 m (950 ft) from the nearest road and 62 m
(203 ft) from the nearest forest edge and to support Mariana crow
breeding territories (approximately 12 to
[[Page 63746]]
37 ha (30 to 91 ac)) and foraging areas for nonbreeding juvenile crows;
and
(3) Standing dead trees and plant species such as Aglaia
mariannensis (maypunayo), breadfruit, coconut palm, fagot, Hibiscus
tiliaceus (pago), ifit, tangentangen, Ochrosia mariannensis (langiti),
kafu, ahgao, fig, and yoga for foraging.
Criteria Used To Identify Proposed Critical Habitat
We used several criteria to identify and select lands proposed for
designation as critical habitat. For the Mariana fruit bat (Guam only)
and Mariana crow, we began with all areas that are currently occupied.
The Guam subspecies of Micronesian kingfisher is currently extirpated
in the wild, so no habitat currently is occupied. We then examined
unoccupied forested lands on Guam containing the primary constituent
elements that are needed for the conservation of each species (see
explanation below). We identified which unoccupied areas on Guam were
needed for the conservation of each species using recovery habitat
identified in recovery plans and information on the historical
distribution of each species. Within the area of historical
distribution, we gave preference to lands that provided the largest
tracts of native forest and were more recently occupied by each
species. We determined the boundaries of proposed critical habitat
units by the extent of suitable forest containing the primary
constituent elements. The location of these suitable forests in many
areas coincided with the boundaries of military reservations, national
wildlife refuges, and conservation areas on Guam. We also included some
small non-forested areas interspersed with forested areas because of
their potential for reforestation. We did not include urban and
agricultural lands because they generally do not contain the primary
constituent elements, do not meet the definition of critical habitat,
and are not likely to be restored to native forest.
On Guam, we identified two units for each species using the
guidelines provided by the Mariana fruit bat recovery plan (1990a),
Guam forest bird recovery plan (1990b), and recommendations by the
Mariana crow recovery team for the draft revised recovery plan (USFWS
in prep). On Rota, we identified one unit for the Mariana crow using
guidelines from the draft revised recovery plan (USFWS in prep). For
the conservation of the Mariana crow, these recovery plans call for
established populations in northern Guam, southern Guam, and on Rota.
The establishment of two geographically separated populations on
Guam is important to decrease the risk of extinction of the species as
a result of localized, stochastic events such as typhoons and disease
outbreaks (Dobson and May 1986, NRC 1997). A long-accepted view
developed from ecological research is that the existence of more than
one population increases the long-term likelihood of species'
persistence (Raup 1991, Meffe and Carroll 1996). The specific areas
proposed as critical habitat in northern and southern Guam were
selected based upon their current status as blocks of largely forested
land containing the primary constituent elements required by each
species. These areas include the last relatively large blocks of native
forest on the island within each species' historical range.
Within the proposed critical habitat unit boundaries, only lands
containing one or more of the primary constituent elements are proposed
as critical habitat. Existing features and structures within the
boundaries of the mapped units, such as buildings, roads, aqueducts,
antennas, water tanks, agricultural fields, paved areas, lawns, and
other urban landscaped areas do not contain the primary constituent
elements and therefore are not proposed as critical habitat. Federal
actions limited to those areas, therefore, would not trigger a section
7 consultation, unless they affect the species and/or primary
constituent elements in adjacent critical habitat.
Section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the Act provides that areas outside the
geographical area currently occupied by the species may meet the
definition of critical habitat upon determination that they are
essential for conservation of the species. We included unoccupied
habitat in the proposed critical habitat for the Guam Micronesian
kingfisher and Mariana crow on Guam because, as explained below, we
believe the currently occupied habitat alone would not provide for the
conservation of the species.
Guam Micronesian kingfisher--The last wild kingfisher on Guam was
seen in 1988 and this subspecies is believed extinct in the wild (Beck
et al. 2001). The total population now consists of 63 birds in 11
captive breeding institutions (Bahner, in litt. 2002). Because the Guam
Micronesian kingfisher is extinct in the wild and all suitable habitat
presently is unoccupied, inclusion of unoccupied areas containing the
primary constituent elements is essential to the conservation of this
species. Recovery to the point where the protection afforded by listing
is no longer necessary will require restoration of the Guam Micronesian
kingfisher through release of captive birds and subsequent natural
dispersal in areas of Guam that formerly were inhabited but that are
not now occupied.
Mariana crow--The critical habitat unit proposed for the Mariana
crow on Rota reflects the recovery goal of maintaining a population of
at least 75 breeding pairs on Rota and the Recovery Team's estimation
of areas necessary to meet this goal (USFWS in prep). The lands
proposed as critical habitat for the Mariana crow on Rota support at
least 63 breeding pairs (Morton et al. 1999). We included all areas
identified in the revised recovery plan as high priority, and
incorporated lower priority areas known or believed to harbor crows to
provide additional habitat to support the non-breeding crow population
and create greater connectivity between high-priority areas.
On Guam, the distribution and abundance of Mariana crows have
declined precipitously over the last three decades (USFWS in prep.).
Currently, the population consists of 12 birds occupying 777 ha (1,920
ac) located in the munitions storage area of Andersen Air Force Base in
northern Guam. This current distribution represents an 85 percent
reduction in range from the estimated distribution in 1994 (5,112 ha,
12,633 ac) reported by Wiles et al. (1995).
Mariana crows are territorial; each pair defends an area of a size
determined by forest type and structure (Morton et al. 1999). The
maximum density or carrying capacity of crow pairs in a particular area
depends on both habitat quality (for foraging and breeding) and the
spatial arrangement of territories. On Rota, Mariana crow territories
ranged from 12 to 37 ha (30 to 91 ac) in size with an average of one
pair per 22 ha (54 ac) (Morton et al. 1999). The currently occupied
area on Guam (777 ha; 1,920 ac) could be expected to support only about
35 pairs, which is less than the 75 pairs recommended by the recovery
team and therefore too small to support a Mariana crow population large
enough to be considered safe from extinction.
Because of the territorial nature of the Mariana crow, its small
total population size, limited range, vulnerability to environmental
threats, and recovery goals set for the species, inclusion of certain
currently unoccupied areas on Guam that contain the primary constituent
elements is essential to the conservation of the species. Recovery to
the point where listing is no longer necessary will require restoration
of Mariana crows on Guam through natural
[[Page 63747]]
dispersal, translocation, and/or release of captive birds in areas that
were formerly inhabited but that are not currently occupied. Unoccupied
areas adjacent to currently occupied areas are needed for recovery to
allow expansion of the existing population and help alleviate threats
associated with small population size. Specifically, the 12 crows
currently found on Andersen Air Force Base in northern Guam do not
constitute a viable population of this species. These animals are
unlikely to increase their numbers to a self-sustaining level in the
area they presently occupy, even with human intervention. For this
population to persist in the long-term, it must expand onto adjacent
lands that now are unoccupied.
Mariana fruit bat--Although the current population of Mariana fruit
bats on Guam is small and most bats roost in a limited area, the
foraging behavior and diverse diet of the fruit bats cause them to use
most of the island for foraging, as documented by Wiles et al. (1995).
Thus, all of the proposed critical habitat for this species is used for
foraging and/or roosting and is considered to be occupied.
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation
Lands proposed as critical habitat for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow occur in two units for each
species on Guam, one in northern Guam and one in southern Guam (see
justification above), and in one unit for the Mariana crow on Rota.
Because the primary constituent elements for each of the three species
occur predominantly in the remaining tracts of native forest on Guam
and Rota, the size, shape, and locations of the proposed critical
habitat units largely represent these tracts of forest. The proposed
northern unit on Guam is the same for the fruit bat and kingfisher, and
the proposed southern unit on Guam is the same for all three species.
The northern unit proposed for the Mariana crow is slightly smaller
than for the Mariana fruit bat or Guam Micronesian kingfisher because
of differences in the conservation goals set for each species in the
recovery plans (USFWS 1990a, 1990b, in prep). The smaller extent of the
proposed critical habitat for the Mariana crow on Guam reflects the
lower target population size for Guam indicated in the revised recovery
plan and the proposed critical habitat unit for the crow on Rota
(USFWS, in prep.).
The proposed critical habitat units provide the full range of
primary constituent elements needed by these three species, including a
variety of undeveloped, forested areas that are used for foraging,
roosting, shelter, nesting, and raising offspring. The approximate area
and land ownership within each unit are shown in Table 1. Proposed
critical habitat includes land under Federal, Territorial,
Commonwealth, and private ownership, with Federal lands being managed
by the Department of Defense and the Department of the Interior. All of
the proposed critical habitat on Guam currently is occupied by the
Mariana fruit bat. Approximately 8 percent of proposed critical habitat
on Guam currently is occupied by the Mariana crow, but 52 percent was
occupied as recently as 1994. None of the proposed lands on Guam are
currently occupied by the Guam Micronesian kingfisher, but all were
occupied historically. On Rota, all of the proposed critical habitat is
occupied by the Mariana crow. A brief description of each unit for each
species and reasons for proposing it as critical habitat are presented
below.
Table 1.--Approximate Area (Hectares, Acres) of Proposed Critical Habitat Units by Land Ownership
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit Federal\*\ GovGuam Private Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unit A. Northern Guam:.............
Mariana fruit bat & Guam 5,149 ha.................... 591 ha...................... 63 ha....................... 5,803 ha
Micronesian kingfisher. (12,724 ac)................. (1,461 ac).................. (153 ac).................... (14,338 ac)
Mariana crow................... 4,997 ha.................... 39 ha....................... 39 ha....................... 5,075 ha
(12,346 ac)................. (97 ac)..................... (97 ac)..................... (12,540 ac)
Unit B. Southern Guam: All species. 2,880 ha.................... 551 ha...................... 803 ha...................... 4,234 ha
(7,116 ac).................. (1,363 ac).................. (1,985 ac).................. (10,464 ac)
CNMI gov't
Unit C. Rota: Mariana crow......... ............................ 2,258 ha.................... 204 ha...................... 2,462 ha
............................ (5,581 ac).................. (503 ac).................... (6,084 ac)
Total:
Mariana fruit bat & Guam 8,029 ha.................... 1,142 ha.................... 866 ha...................... 10,037 ha
Micronesian kingfisher. (19,840 ac)................. (2,825 ac).................. (2,138 ac).................. (24,803 ac)
GovGuam + CNMI
Mariana crow................... 7,877 ha.................... 2,848 ha.................... 1,046 ha.................... 11,771 ha
(19,463 ac)................. (7,041 ac).................. (2,585 ac).................. (29,089 ac)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Federal lands are under the ownership or jurisdiction of the Department of Defense or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Mariana Fruit Bat
Proposed Unit A: Northern Guam
Proposed Unit A consists of approximately 5,803 ha (14,338 ac)
encompassing much of the undeveloped areas on the northern end of Guam.
This proposed area includes both units of the Commander U.S. Naval
Forces Marianas (COMNAVMARIANAS) Communications Annex and former
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) land currently administered by
the Pacific Division of Base Realignment and Closure (PACDIV BRAC). The
proposed unit also includes Andersen Air Force Base, the Guam National
Wildlife Refuge, private property located near Uruno Basin and Jinapsen
Beach, the Anao Conservation Area, private property at Janum Point, and
Government of Guam lands located between the cliffline and coastline
from Janum Point to Campanaya Point. The vegetation in proposed Unit A
consists of coastal, limestone, agricultural, and secondary forests
composed of native and introduced plant species and contains the full
range of primary constituent elements needed for the conservation of
the Mariana fruit bat. This proposed unit is important because it
contains the only known Mariana fruit bat colony on Guam and large
areas of current foraging and roosting habitat. This area also contains
all the known historical roost sites along the northern coast of Guam
and many of the reported foraging sites used by bats in northern
[[Page 63748]]
Guam since 1981 (see Wiles et al. 1995 for details). Unit A also
encompasses all the essential conservation areas identified in the
Mariana fruit bat recovery plan (USFWS 1990a).
The proposed areas in Unit A are divided into three sections. The
first section consists of a thin projection of forested land between
the coastline and approximately 1.0 km (0.6 mi) inland that extends
from the boundary between the Communications Annex and former Air Force
Harmon Annex and the boundary of Andersen Air Force Base. This section
does not include the housing and other developed areas on the
Communications Annex and former FAA land. The second section consists
of most of the forested land between the southern boundary of Andersen
Air Force Base and the coastline from Ritidian to Pati Points but does
not include the housing, airfields, and other developed areas on
Andersen Air Force Base, the recently cleared cargo drop zone in
Northwest Field on Andersen Air Force Base, private land in the Uruno
Basin below the cliffline (elevation: 122 m, 400 ft), and private land
along Jinapsan Beach below the 12-meter (40-ft) elevation contour. The
third section consists of the thin projection of forested land between
the coastline and approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) inland that extends from
Campanaya Point to the border of Andersen Air Force Base at Anao Point.
Proposed Unit B: Southern Guam
Unit B consists of approximately 4,234 ha (10,464 ac) encompassing
much of the forested areas in central southern Guam. This proposed unit
includes lands in the Bolanos Conservation Area, much of the
COMNAVMARIANAS Ordnance Annex, and private property at Sinaje, Mapao,
and Bubulao. This unit consists of limestone, agricultural, secondary,
swamp, and ravine forests composed of native and introduced species and
contains the full range of primary constituent elements needed for
recovery of the Mariana fruit bat. Unit B contains the area occupied by
the only known population of fruit bats in southern Guam, including
large areas of foraging and roosting habitat in areas like the Fena
Lake Watershed. Unit B also encompasses essential conservation areas
identified in the Mariana fruit bat recovery plan (USFWS 1990a).
The critical habitat proposed in Unit B consists of three sections.
The main section includes most of the forested areas within the
Ordnance Annex and forested area above the 244-m (800-ft) elevation
contour in the Sinaje region near Mount Lamlam. The second section
consists of the forested areas at the headwaters of the Bubulao and
Ugum Rivers and the forested areas along and between both rivers until
their confluence approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) above Talofofo Falls. The
third section consists of the forested areas outside Ordnance Annex
that occur along and between the Maagas and Mahlac Rivers near where
they converge and become the Talofofo River.
Guam Micronesian Kingfisher
Proposed Unit A: Northern Guam
Proposed Unit A consists of approximately 5,803 ha (14,338 ac)
encompassing much of the undeveloped areas on the northern end of Guam.
This section includes both units of the COMNAVMARIANAS Communications
Annex, former FAA land currently administered by PACDIV BRAC, Andersen
Air Force Base, the Guam National Wildlife Refuge, private property
located in the Uruno Basin and along Jinapsan Beach, the Anao
Conservation Area, private property at Janum Point, and Government of
Guam lands located between the cliffline and coastline from Janum Point
to Campanaya Point. The vegetation in proposed Unit A consists of
coastal, limestone, agricultural, and secondary forests composed of
native and introduced species that contain the full range of primary
constituent elements required for the recovery of the Guam Micronesian
kingfisher on northern Guam. Unit A includes forested areas along the
northwest and northeast coasts of the island that were occupied by Guam
Micronesian kingfishers in the 1970s and early 1980s (Drahos 1977,
Maben and Aguon 1980, 1981) as well as other forested areas in northern
Guam that supported high densities of Guam Micronesian kingfishers in
1981 (Engbring and Ramsey 1984). Unit A also encompasses essential
conservation areas in the northern Guam forest bird recovery plan
(USFWS 1990b).
The proposed areas in Unit A are divided into three sections. The
first section consists of a thin projection of forested land between
the coastline and approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) inland that extends from
the boundary between the Communications Annex and former Air Force
Harmon Annex and the boundary of Andersen Air Force Base. This section
does not include the housing and other developed areas on the
Communications Annex and former FAA land. The second section consists
of most of the forested land between the southern boundary of Andersen
Air Force Base and the coastline from Ritidian to Pati Points. This
section does not include the housing, airfields, and other developed
areas on Andersen Air Force Base; the recently cleared cargo drop zone
in Northwest Field on Andersen Air Force Base; private land in the
Uruno Basin below the cliffline (elevation: 122 m, 400 ft); and private
land along Jinapsan Beach below the 12-m (40-ft) elevation contour. The
third section consists of the thin projection of forested land between
the coastline and approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) inland that extends from
Campanaya Point to the border of Andersen Air Force Base at Anao Point.
Proposed Unit B: Southern Guam
Proposed Unit B consists of approximately 4,234 ha (10,464 ac)
encompassing much of the forested areas in central southern Guam. This
unit contains part of the Bolanos Conservation Area, much of the
COMNAVMARIANAS Ordnance Annex, and private property at Sinaje, Mapao,
and Bubulao. This proposed unit consists of limestone, secondary,
agricultural, swamp, and ravine forests composed of native and
introduced species and contains the full range of primary constituent
elements required for the recovery of the kingfisher in southern Guam.
This unit is important because it includes the location of the last
known observations (Fena Lake region 1963-1964) of Guam Micronesian
kingfishers in southern Guam (Drahos 1977). Unit B also contains some
of the largest tracts of forest remaining in southern Guam and is
believed to be essential for the conservation of the Guam Micronesian
kingfisher.
The critical habitat proposed in Unit B consists of three sections.
The main section includes most of the forested areas within the
Ordnance Annex and forested area above the 244-m (800-ft) elevation
contour in the Sinaje region near Mount Lamlam. The second section
consists of the forested areas at the headwaters of the Bubulao and
Ugum Rivers and the forested areas along and between both rivers until
their confluence approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) above Talofofo Falls. The
third section consists of the forested areas outside Ordnance Annex
that occur along and between the Maagas and Mahlac Rivers near where
they converge and become the Talofofo River.
Mariana Crow
Proposed Unit A: Northern Guam
Proposed Unit A consists of approximately 5,075 ha (12,540 ac) of
forested land encompassing the northern end of Guam. This proposed unit
includes forested areas on
[[Page 63749]]
Andersen Air Force Base, Guam National Wildlife Refuge, COMNAVMARIANAS
Communications Annex, and private property at Uruno Basin and Jinapsan
Beach. Unit A includes limestone, secondary, agricultural, and coastal
forests composed of native and non-native plants and contains the full
range of primary constituent elements needed for recovery of the
Mariana crow on Guam. This unit includes the area occupied by the last
12 Mariana crows in the munitions storage area on Andersen Air Force
Base, much of the 1994 historical distribution of Mariana crows in
northern Guam (Wiles et al. 1995), and the areas that contained the
highest densities of crows in northern Guam in 1981 (Engbring and
Ramsey 1984). Approximately 15 percent of the unit currently is
occupied by the Mariana crow. Unit A also contains some of the largest
tracts of mature limestone forest remaining on Guam and is identified
as important recovery habitat in the draft revised Mariana crow
recovery plan (USFWS in prep.).
The proposed areas in Unit A can be divided into two sections. The
first section consists of the forested land (Federal, Territory, and
private) between the southern boundary of Andersen Air Force Base and
the coastline between Ritidian and Pati Point, not including the
housing, airfields, and other developed areas on Andersen Air Force
Base, the recently cleared cargo drop zone in Northwest Field on
Andersen Air Force Base, private land in the Uruno Basin below the
cliffline (elevation: 122 m, 400 ft), and private land along Jinapsan
Beach below the 12-m (40-ft) elevation contour. The second section
consists of forested areas on the Communications Annex between the
coastline near Haputo Beach and Route 3, including forested areas on
the northern part of the base near the antennae fields.
Proposed Unit B: Southern Guam
Proposed Unit B consists of approximately 4,234 ha (10,464 ac) of
forested land encompassing much of central southern Guam. This proposed
unit contains sections of the Bolanos Conservation Area, COMNAVMARIANAS
Ordnance Annex, and private property at Sinaje, Mapao, and Bubulao.
Unit B is composed of limestone, secondary, swamp, agricultural, and
ravine forests consisting of native and non-native plants and contains
the full range of primary constituent elements needed for recovery of
the species on southern Guam. This unit includes sites of some of the
last known observations of Mariana crows in southern Guam.
Specifically, Mariana crows were observed in the forests around Fena
Lake and Alamagosa Springs on the Ordnance Annex between 1963 and 1965
(Drahos 1977). This unit also encompasses some of the last remaining
large tracts of native forest on southern Guam and is identified as
important recovery habitat in the draft revised Mariana crow recovery
plan (USFWS in prep.).
The critical habitat proposed in Unit B consists of three sections.
The main section includes most of the forested areas within the
Ordnance Annex and forested area above the 244-m (800-ft) elevation
contour in the Sinaje region near Mount Lamlam. The second section
consists of the forested areas at the headwaters of the Bubulao and
Ugum Rivers and the forested areas along and between both rivers until
their confluence approximately 1 km (0.6 mi) above Talofofo Falls. The
third section consists of the forested areas outside Ordnance Annex
that occur along and between the Maagas and Mahlac Rivers near where
they converge and become the Talofofo River.
Proposed Unit C: Rota
Proposed Unit C consists of approximately 2,462 ha (6,084 ac) of
forested land encompassing much of the undeveloped areas on Rota. This
proposed unit contains the Afatung Wildlife Management Area, I Chenchon
Bird Sanctuary, and forested areas on public and private lands around
the Sabana and Sinapalu plateaus. Unit C is composed of limestone,
secondary, agricultural, coastal, and ravine forests consisting of
native and non-native plants and contains the full range of primary
constituent elements needed for recovery of the Mariana crow on Rota.
This unit includes the known breeding territories of at least 63
Mariana crow pairs and possibly those of an additional 25 crow pairs on
Rota (Morton et al. 1999). This unit also includes all the areas
identified as important conservation areas in the draft revised Mariana
crow recovery plan (USFWS in prep.).
The critical habitat proposal in Unit C consists of five sections.
The first section includes the Afatung Wildlife Management Area in the
Palii region and the forested areas in the Finata, Alaguan, and I
Koridot regions. The second section includes the I Chenchon Bird
Sanctuary and the forested areas in the I Chiugai and As Dudo regions
of eastern Rota. The third unit consists of much of the forested areas
in the As Matmos, Mochong, Lalayak, Pekngasu, and I Batko regions as
well as the forested areas adjacent to the Rota Resort. The fourth
section includes much of the forested areas in the Mananana, Uyulan
Hulo, Sailgai Hulo, Gayauga, Lempanai, and Lupok regions. The fifth
section includes much of the forested areas, as well as some of the
grassland areas, in the Talakhaya and Gaonan regions of southern Rota.
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 are
not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat by
appreciably diminishing the value of the critical habitat for the
survival and recovery of the species. Individuals, organizations,
states, local governments, and other non-Federal 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 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 only advisory. We may adopt the formal conference
report as the biological opinion when critical habitat is designated,
if no significant new information or changes in the action alter the
content of the opinion (see 50 CFR 402.10(d)).
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) of the Act 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 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.
[[Page 63750]]
If 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 with us on actions for which formal consultation has been
completed if those actions may affect designated critical habitat.
Actions on Federal lands that may affect critical habitat on Guam
for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow
would require section 7 consultation. Activities that may affect these
species on private, Government of Guam, or CNMI lands but require a
permit from a Federal agency, such as a permit from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or Federal
funding (e.g., from the Federal Highway Administration, FAA, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, or Natural Resources Conservation Service)
also will continue to be subject to the section 7 consultation process.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to evaluate briefly in any
proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat those
Federal actions that may adversely modify such habitat or that may be
affected by such designation. Activities that may result in the
destruction or adverse modification of 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 Mariana
fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow is appreciably
reduced. Activities that may directly or indirectly adversely affect
the proposed critical habitat would include, but are not limited to:
(1) Removing, thinning, or destroying Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow forest habitat by burning,
mechanical, chemical, or other means (e.g., woodcutting, grading,
overgrazing, construction, road building, mining, herbicide
application, etc.).
(2) Appreciably decreasing habitat value or quality through
introduction or promotion of potential nest predators, disease or
disease vectors, vertebrate or invertebrate food competitors, invasive
plant species, forest fragmentation, overgrazing, augmentation of feral
ungulate populations, water diversion or impoundment, groundwater
pumping or other activities that alter water quality or quantity to an
extent that affects vegetation structure, or activities that increase
the risk of fire.
To portray the Federal actions that might be affected by a critical
habitat designation, we 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 both the survival and
recovery of a listed species. Actions likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat are those that
would appreciably reduce the value of critical habitat for both the
survival and recovery of the listed species.
Federal agencies already consult with us on activities in areas
currently occupied by these species to ensure that their actions are
not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of these species.
These actions include, but are not limited to:
(1) Regulation of 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) Development on private, Government of Guam, or CNMI lands
involving Federal permits or funding such as Housing and Urban
Development projects;
(4) Military training or similar activities of the U.S. Air Force
or Navy on lands under their jurisdiction at Andersen Air Force Base or
COMNAVMARIANAS Communications and Ordnance Annex;
(5) Construction of communication sites licensed by the Federal
Communications Commission;
(6) Road construction or maintenance, funded or approved by the
Federal Highway Administration; or
(7) Disaster relief activities funded by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
If you have questions regarding whether specific activities would
constitute adverse modification of critical habitat, please contact the
Field Supervisor, Pacific Islands Ecological Services Field Office (see
ADDRESSES section). Requests for copies of the regulations on listed
wildlife and plants and inquiries about prohibitions and permits should
be directed to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Conservation
Planning and Permit Program at the same address.
Critical Habitat Definition Exclusions
Some areas providing habitat essential to the species may not
require special management or protection and therefore would not fall
within the ESA definition of critical habitat (16 U.S.C.
1532(5)(A)(i)). Adequate special management or protection is provided
by a legally operative plan or agreement that addresses the maintenance
and improvement of the primary constituent elements important to the
species and manages for the long-term conservation of the species. If
any areas containing the primary constituent elements are currently
being managed to address the conservation needs of the Mariana fruit
bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow and do not require
special management or protection, we may exclude such areas from the
proposed rule because they would not meet the definition of critical
habitat in section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act.
We use the following three criteria to determine if a plan provides
adequate management or protection: (1) A current plan specifying the
management actions must be complete and provide sufficient conservation
benefit to these species, (2) the plan must provide assurances that the
conservation management strategies will be implemented, and (3) the
plan must provide assurances that the conservation management
strategies will be effective. In determining if management strategies
are likely to be implemented, we consider whether: (a) A management
plan or agreement exists that specifies the management actions
[[Page 63751]]
being implemented or to be implemented; (b) there is a timely schedule
for implementation; (c) there is a high probability that the funding
source(s) or other resources necessary to implement the actions will be
available; and (d) the party(ies) have the authority and long-term
commitment to the agreement or plan to implement the management
actions, as demonstrated, for example, by a legal instrument providing
enduring protection and management of the lands. In determining whether
an action is likely to be effective, we consider whether: (a) The plan
specifically addresses the management needs, including reduction of
threats to these species; (b) such actions have been successful in the
past; (c) there are provisions for monitoring and assessment of the
effectiveness of the management actions; (d) and adaptive management
principles have been incorporated into the plan.
Based on information provided to us by landowners and managers to
date, we have been unable to identify any areas on Guam or Rota that
are adequately managed and protected to address the threats to the
Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow so as
to qualify for exclusion under the Act's definition of critical
habitat. Several areas are covered under current management plans and
are being managed in a manner that meets some of the conservation needs
of the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow,
but the management does not adequately reduce the primary threats to
these species.
The Sikes Act Improvements Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) requires each
military installation that includes land or water suitable for the
conservation and management of natural resources to have completed, by
November 17, 2001, an Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan
(INRMP). An INRMP integrates implementation of the military mission of
the installation with stewardship of the natural resources found there.
Each INRMP includes an assessment of the ecological needs on the
installation, including needs to provide for the conservation of listed
species; a statement of goals and priorities; a detailed description of
management actions to be implemented to provide for these ecological
needs; and a monitoring and adaptive management plan. We consult with
the military on the development and implementation of INRMPs for
installations with listed species. We believe that bases that have
completed and approved INRMPs that address the needs of the species
generally do not meet the definition of critical habitat discussed
above, because they require no additional special management or
protection. Therefore, we do not include these areas in critical
habitat designations if they meet the following three criteria: (1) A
current INRMP must be complete and provide sufficient conservation
benefit to the species; (2) the plan must provide assurances that the
conservation management strategies will be implemented; and (3) the
plan must provide assurances that the conservation management
strategies will be effective, by providing for periodic monitoring and
revisions as necessary. If all of these criteria are met, then the
lands covered under the plan would not meet the definition of critical
habitat. To date, no military installation on Guam has completed a
final INRMP that provides sufficient management and protection for the
Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow,
although many of the projects described in these documents are
generally beneficial to Guam's natural environment and recovery of
listed species.
Economic Exclusions
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires that we designate critical
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial information
available, and that we consider the economic and other relevant impacts
of designating a particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude
areas from critical habitat designation if the benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of designation, provided the exclusion will not
result in the extinction of the species. We are conducting an analysis
of the economic impacts of designating the proposed areas as critical
habitat and will use this information in our final determination. A
notice of availability of the draft economic analysis will be published
in the Federal Register.
In most instances the benefits of excluding Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP) areas from critical habitat designations have outweighed the
benefits of including them. Currently, there are no HCPs on Guam that
include the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana
crow as a covered species. However, the Service is working with the
CNMI to develop an HCP to address impacts to the Mariana crow
associated with the development of agricultural homesteads on Rota. The
proposed agricultural homesteads are not included in the proposed
critical habitat, but the anticipated conservation areas are. In the
event that future HCPs are developed within the boundaries of
designated critical habitat, assistance will be available to applicants
to promote protection and management of habitat areas essential for the
conservation of these species. Opportunities may exist to locate
development and habitat modification activities in nonessential areas,
or to mitigate activities within essential habitat areas so that such
activities will not adversely modify the critical habitat. The Service
will provide technical assistance and work closely with applicants
throughout the development of any future HCPs to identify lands
essential for the long-term conservation of the Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow as well as conservation
measures for those lands.
Public Comments Solicited
We intend that any final action resulting from this proposal 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. We are particularly interested in
comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why any area should or should not be determined to
be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act and 50 CFR
424.12(a)(1), including whether the benefits of designation will
outweigh any threats to these species due to designation;
(2) Specific information on the current or former numbers and
distribution of Mariana fruit bats, Guam Micronesian kingfishers, and
Mariana crows, and what habitat is essential to the conservation of
these species and why;
(3) Whether lands within proposed critical habitat are currently
being managed to address conservation needs of the Mariana fruit bat,
Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow;
(4) Land use practices and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
(5) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on
small entities or families;
(6) Whether future development and approval of conservation
measures (e.g., Conservation Agreements, Safe Harbor Agreements, etc.)
should be excluded from critical habitat and, if so, by what mechanism;
(7) Whether military lands covered under an approved INRMP should
be excluded from critical habitat;
[[Page 63752]]
(8) Economic and other values associated with designating critical
habitat for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and
Mariana crow, 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); and
(9) Whether our approach to critical habitat designation could be
improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public
participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating
public concern and comments.
If we receive information that any of the areas proposed as
critical habitat are currently being managed and protected to
adequately address the conservation needs of the Mariana fruit bat,
Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow, we may exclude such areas
from any final designation as not meeting the definition of critical
habitat in section 3(5)(A) of the Act.
In anticipation of public interest, public hearings have been
scheduled on Rota for November 6, 2002, and on Guam for November 7,
2002, (see ADDRESSES section). Prior to each public hearing, the
Service will be available to provide information and to answer
questions. We also will be available for questions after each of the
hearings. Anyone wishing to make oral comments for the record at the
public hearing is encouraged to provide a written copy of their
statement and present it to us at the hearing. In the event there is a
large attendance, the time allotted for oral statements may be limited.
Oral and written statements receive equal consideration.
Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to attend and
participate in the public hearing should contact Patti Carroll at 503/
231-2080 as soon as possible. In order to allow sufficient time to
process requests, please call no later than one week before the hearing
date.
If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials
concerning this proposal by any one of several methods (see ADDRESSES
section). If submitting comments by electronic format, please submit
them in ASCII file format and avoid the use of special characters and
encryption. Please include ``Attn: RIN 1018-AI25'' and your name and
return address in your e-mail message. Please note that the e-mail
address Mariana_CritHab@r1.fws.gov will be closed at the termination
of the public comment period.
Our practice is to make comments, including names and addresses of
respondents, available for public review during regular business hours.
Respondents may request that we withhold their home address, which we
will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be
circumstances in which we would withhold a respondent's identity, as
allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address,
you must state this request prominently at the beginning of your
comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. To the
extent consistent with applicable law, 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. Comments
and materials received will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at the Pacific Islands Fish
and Wildlife Office in Honolulu.
Peer Review
Our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), directs us to
seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate and independent
specialists regarding this proposed rule. We plan to expand this review
to increase the number of reviewers. The purpose of such review is to
ensure listing and critical habitat decisions are based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send
copies of this proposed rule to these peer reviewers immediately
following publication in the Federal Register. We will invite the peer
reviewers to comment, during the public comment period, on the proposed
designations 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 decision on the proposed critical
habitat. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this proposal.
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
proposed rule 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) Is
the background information useful and is the amount appropriate? (6)
What else could we do to make the proposed rule easier to understand?
Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this
rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, Department
of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, DC 20240.
You may e-mail your comments to this address: Execsec@ios.doi.gov.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
In accordance with Executive Order 12866, this proposal is a
significant rule reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
We have prepared a draft economic analysis of this proposed action. We
will use this analysis to meet the requirement of section 4(b)(2) of
the ESA to consider the economic and other consequences of designating
the proposed areas as critical habitat and may exclude an area from
critical habitat if it is determined that the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of designating it, unless failure to
designate such area as critical habitat would lead to the extinction of
the Mariana fruit bat, Guam Micronesian kingfisher, or Mariana crow.
This draft analysis will be available for public comment before any
final decision on the proposed designation. The availability of the
draft economic analysis will be announced in the Federal Register.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
The following discussion of the potential economic impacts of this
proposed rule reflects the views of the Service, only. This discussion
is based upon the information regarding potential economic impact that
is available to the Service at this time. This assessment of economic
effect may be modified prior to final rulemaking based upon development
and review of the economic analysis being prepared pursuant to section
4(b)(2) of the ESA and E.O. 12866. This analysis is for the purposes of
compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act and does not reflect the
position of the Service on the type of economic analysis required by
the judicial decision in New Mexico Cattle Growers Assn. v. U.S. Fish &
Wildlife Service, 248 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2001).
[[Page 63753]]
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as
amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996), whenever an agency is required to publish a notice
of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare and make
available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effects of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
the agency certifies the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. A ``substantial
number'' of small entities is more than 20 percent of those small
entities affected by the regulation, out of the total universe of small
entities in the industry or, if appropriate, industry segment. SBREFA
amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying
that the rule will not have a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities. SBREFA also amended the RFA to
require a certification statement. Based on current information, the
Service proposes to certify that this proposed rule will not have a
significant effect on a substantial number of small entities.
We must determine whether the proposed rulemaking will affect a
substantial number of small entities. According to the Small Business
Administration, small entities include small organizations, such as
independent non-profit organizations, and small governmental
jurisdictions, including school boards and city and town governments
that serve fewer than 50,000 residents, as well as small businesses (13
CFR 121.201). Small businesses include manufacturing and mining
concerns with fewer than 500 employees, wholesale trade entities with
fewer than 100 employees, retail and service businesses with less than
$5 million in annual sales, general and heavy construction businesses
with less than $27.5 million in annual business, special trade
contractors doing less than $11.5 million in annual business, and
agricultural businesses with annual sales less than $750,000. To
determine if potential economic impacts to these small entities are
significant, we consider the types of activities that might trigger
regulatory impacts under this rule as well as the types of project
modifications that may result. In general, the term significant
economic impact is meant to apply to a typical small business firm's
business operations.
To determine if the rule would affect a substantial number of small
entities, we consider the number of small entities affected within
particular types of economic activities (e.g., housing development,
grazing, oil and gas production, timber harvesting, etc.). We apply the
``substantial number'' test individually to each industry to determine
if certification is appropriate. In estimating the numbers of small
entities potentially affected, we also consider whether their
activities have any Federal involvement; some kinds of activities are
unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not be affected by
critical habitat designation.
Designation of critical habitat only affects activities conducted,
funded, or permitted by Federal agencies; non-Federal activities are
not affected by the designation. In areas where the species are
present, Federal agencies are already required to consult with us under
section 7 of the Act on activities that they fund, permit, or implement
that may affect Mariana fruit bats, Mariana crows, and Guam Micronesian
kingfishers. If these critical habitat designations are finalized,
Federal agencies must also consult with us if their activities may
affect designated critical habitat. However, in areas where the species
are present, we do not believe this will result in any additional
regulatory burden on Federal agencies or their applicants because
consultation would already be required because of the presence of the
listed species, and the duty to avoid adverse modification of critical
habitat would not trigger additional regulatory impacts beyond the duty
to avoid jeopardizing the species.
Even if the duty to avoid adverse modification does not trigger
additional regulatory impacts in areas where the species is present,
designation of critical habitat could result in an additional economic
burden on small entities due to the requirement to reinitiate
consultation for ongoing Federal activities. We have reviewed 209
informal consultations and 37 formal consultations conducted on the
Mariana fruit bat, Mariana crow, and Guam Micronesian kingfisher on
Guam since these species were listed in 1984. In addition, we reviewed
nine informal consultations conducted on the island of Rota, CNMI,
since 1984. No formal consultations have been conducted on Rota since
the Mariana crow was listed. Consultations on Federal grants to State
wildlife programs, which do not affect small entities, were not
reviewed for this proposed rule. Seventy-seven of the 209 informal
consultations on Guam and three of the five informal consultations on
Rota were conducted in response to requests for technical assistance or
species lists for different locations on Guam and Rota. The majority of
these requests were made by Federal agencies, some on their behalf by
private consultants or contractors. Of the 246 total consultations on
Guam, 57 informal and 20 formal consultations involved at least one of
the species involved in this proposed rule. Of the nine consultations
on Rota, six involved the Mariana crow.
Of the 20 formal consultations on Guam, two may have involved a
small entity. Both of these concerned proposals by the Urunau Resort
Corporation to have contractors conduct topographic survey work on
private and Federal lands for a potential access road through Navy
property to private lands. The Mariana fruit bat and Mariana crow were
reported from the action areas. The biological opinions (Pacific
Islands Fish and Wildlife Office log numbers 1-2-90-F-027 and 1-2-91-F-
08) concluded that the proposed action would not result in jeopardy to
either species. The reasonable and prudent measures required in the
biological opinions to avoid or minimize incidental take of these
species did not include major modifications to the proposed action that
placed a significant economic burden on Urunau Resort Corporation. We
do not believe this constitutes a substantial number of small entities
(see earlier discussion on substantial number). Of the remaining 18
formal consultations on Guam involving the Mariana fruit bat, Mariana
crow, and/or Guam Micronesian kingfisher, ten were conducted on behalf
of the Air Force and eight were conducted on behalf of the Navy. In all
of these consultations, the Service concluded that the proposed actions
would not result in jeopardy to these three listed species.
Of the 57 informal consultations on Guam, one may have concerned a
small entity (private individuals, consulting firms, or non-profit
organizations). The proposed action in this case, the gathering of a
large Chamorro family on the Guam National Wildlife Refuge, was
determined not likely to adversely affect listed species, and was
subject only to minor restrictions under a special use permit for the
refuge. We do not believe this instance constitutes a substantial
number of small entities (see earlier discussion on substantial
number). Four informal consultations were conducted on behalf of
Government of Guam agencies. One action was determined not likely to
adversely affect listed species, and the other was determined
[[Page 63754]]
to have no effect on listed species. A third was determined not likely
to adversely modify the critical habitat proposed in 1991. The fourth
consultation on behalf of the Government of Guam concerned technical
assistance from the Service, and resulted in no regulatory action by
the Service or economic burden on the Government of Guam. We conclude,
however, that the Government of Guam is not a small entity.
Of the six informal consultations on Rota that concerned the
Mariana crow, none concerned a small entity and all consultations were
conducted on behalf of the Government of the CNMI. Four of these
consultations were requests for technical assistance or species lists
and resulted in no regulatory action by the Service or economic burden
on the Government of the CNMI. The remaining two actions were
determined not likely to adversely affect the Mariana crow. We
concluded, however, that the Government of the CNMI is not a small
entity.
The remaining 52 informal consultations on Guam exclusively
involved the following Federal agencies: U.S. Air Force (27
consultations), U.S. Department of the Navy (14 consultations), U.S.
Department of Agriculture (four consultations), U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (3 consultations), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (2
consultations), U.S. Department of the Army (one consultation), and
Natural Resources Conservation Service (formally the Soil Conservation
Service) (one consultation). None of these agencies is a small entity.
Of these consultations, seven included critical habitat proposed in
1991, and these proposed actions were determined not likely to
adversely modify proposed critical habitat. Of the remaining 45
consultations, 38 concluded with our concurrence that the proposed
action either would have no effect on, or was not likely to adversely
affect, listed species; five consultations were responses to requests
for either species lists or technical assistance and did not conclude
with a regulatory determination; one concluded with a request by the
Service for more information; and one concluded with a determination
that the proposed action, Navy training maneuvers, was likely to
adversely affect the Mariana crow.
In areas where the species clearly are not present, designation of
critical habitat could trigger additional review of Federal activities
under section 7 of the Act that otherwise would not be required. The
majority of activities in the proposed critical habitat areas for the
Mariana fruit bat, Mariana crow, and Guam Micronesian kingfisher that
have Federal involvement likely will concern the U.S. Navy or Air
Force. As mentioned above, however, only 77 of 246 informal
consultations on Guam completed under section 7 of the Act involved any
of the species for which critical habitat is being proposed. As a
result, we cannot easily identify future consultations that may result
from the listed status of the species or the increment of additional
consultations that may be required by this critical habitat
designation. Furthermore, a large proportion of the proposed
designation on Guam is currently unoccupied by these species.
Therefore, for the purposes of this review and certification under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, we are assuming that any future
consultations in the area proposed as critical habitat on Guam likely
will result from the critical habitat designations.
Of the total land area proposed as critical habitat on Guam for the
Mariana fruit bat, Mariana crow, and Guam Micronesian kingfisher,
approximately 9 percent is private land, 11 percent is Government of
Guam land, and 80 percent is Federal land. Of the total land area
proposed as critical habitat for the Mariana crow on Rota,
approximately 8 percent is private land and 92 percent is Government of
the CNMI land. Much of the land within the proposed critical habitat
units has limited potential for development because of the remote
locations, lack of access, and rugged terrain of these lands. On non-
Federal lands, activities that lack Federal involvement would not be
affected by the proposed critical habitat designations. Activities of
an economic nature that are likely to occur on non-Federal lands in the
area encompassed by these proposed designations consist of improvements
to and construction of roads, communications and tracking facilities,
and other infrastructure; residential and tourist-related development;
ranching and farming; and recreational use such as camping, picnicking,
game hunting, and fishing. With the exception of communications and
tracking facilities improvements by the FAA or the Federal
Communications Commission, road building or improvement by the Federal
Highways Authority, and water or sewer system development by the Corps
of Engineers, these activities are unlikely to have Federal
involvement. On lands that are or may be in agricultural production,
the types of activities that might trigger a consultation include
irrigation ditch system projects that may require section 404
authorizations from the Corps of Engineers, and watershed management
and restoration projects sponsored by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS). However the NRCS restoration projects
typically are voluntary, and the irrigation ditch system projects
within lands that are in agricultural production are rare and may
affect only a small percentage of the small entities within these
proposed critical habitat designations. Therefore, analysis of
currently available information indicates that the proposed rule would
not affect a substantial number of small entities. We are not aware of
any commercial activities on the Federal lands included in these
proposed critical habitat designations.
In general, two different mechanisms in section 7 consultations
could lead to additional regulatory requirements. First, if we
conclude, in a biological opinion, that a proposed action is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a species or adversely modify its
critical habitat, we can offer ``reasonable and prudent alternatives.''
Reasonable and prudent alternatives are alternative actions that can be
implemented in a manner consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction, that are economically and
technologically feasible, and that would avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of listed species or would result in adverse
modification of critical habitat. A Federal agency and an applicant may
elect to implement a reasonable and prudent alternative associated with
a biological opinion that has found jeopardy or adverse modification of
critical habitat. An agency or applicant could alternatively choose to
seek an exemption from the requirements of the Act or proceed without
implementing the reasonable and prudent alternative. However, unless an
exemption were obtained, the Federal agency or applicant would be at
risk of violating section 7(a)(2) of the Act if it chose to proceed
without implementing the reasonable and prudent alternatives.
Secondly, if we find that a proposed action is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a listed animal species, we may
identify reasonable and prudent measures designed to minimize the
amount or extent of take and require the Federal agency or applicant to
implement such measures through non-discretionary terms and conditions.
However, the Act does not prohibit the take of listed plant species or
require terms and conditions to minimize adverse effect to critical
habitat. We may also identify discretionary conservation
recommendations designed to minimize
[[Page 63755]]
or avoid the adverse effects of a proposed action on listed species or
critical habitat, help implement recovery plans, or to gather
information that could contribute to the recovery of the species.
Based on our experience with section 7 consultations for all listed
species, virtually all projects--including those that, in their initial
proposed form, would result in jeopardy or adverse modification
determinations in section 7 consultations--can be implemented
successfully with, at most, the adoption of reasonable and prudent
alternatives. Furthermore, these measures must be economically
feasible, consistent with the intended purpose of the action, and
within the scope of authority of the Federal agency involved in the
consultation (see 50 CFR. 404.2, definition of reasonable and prudent
alternative). Based on our consultation history, we can describe the
general kinds of actions that may be identified in future reasonable
and prudent alternatives. These are based on our understanding of the
needs of the species and the threats they face, especially as described
in the final listing rule and in this proposed critical habitat
designation, as well as our experience with the listed species in Guam
and Rota. The kinds of actions that may be included in future
reasonable and prudent alternatives include, but are not limited to,
management of competing non-native species and predators, restoration
of degraded habitat, construction of protective fencing, and regular
monitoring. Therefore, such measures are not likely to result in a
significant economic impact to a substantial number of small entities.
As required under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are conducting an
analysis of the potential economic and other impacts of this proposed
critical habitat designation, and we will make that analysis available
for public review and comment before finalizing these designations.
In summary, we are considering whether this proposed rule would
result in a significant economic effect on a substantial number of
small entities. Currently available information indicates it would not
affect a substantial number of small entities. Approximately 11 percent
of the lands proposed as critical habitat on Guam are on Government of
Guam lands. In addition, approximately 92 percent of the lands proposed
as critical habitat on Rota are on Government of the CNMI lands. The
Territory of Guam and CNMI are not small entities. Approximately nine
percent of the lands proposed as critical habitat on Guam and eight
percent of lands proposed as critical habitat on Rota are on private
lands. As discussed earlier, many of the actions likely to occur on the
private land parcels included in this proposal are not likely to
require any Federal authorization. In the remaining areas, section 7
application, the only trigger for regulatory impact under this rule,
largely would be limited to a subset of the area proposed. The most
likely future section 7 consultations resulting from this rule would be
for informal consultations on actions proposed by the military,
federally funded land and water conservation projects, species-specific
surveys and research projects, and watershed management and restoration
projects sponsored by NRCS. These consultations likely would occur on
only a subset of the total number of parcels and, therefore, are not
likely to affect a substantial number of small entities. This rule
would result in project modifications only when proposed Federal
activities would destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. While
this may occur, it is not expected frequently enough to affect a
substantial number of small entities. Even if it did occur, we would
not expect it to result in a significant economic impact, as the
measures included in reasonable and prudent alternatives must be
economically feasible and consistent with the proposed action. Thus,
currently available information indicates that the proposed designation
of critical habitat for the Mariana fruit bat, Mariana crow, and Guam
Micronesian kingfisher will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities, and an initial regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required. However, should the economic
analysis of this rule indicate otherwise, we will revisit this
determination.
Executive Order 13211
On May 18, 2001, the President issued Executive Order 13211, on
regulations that significantly affect energy supply, distribution, and
use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to prepare Statements of
Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. Though current
information indicates this proposed rule would be a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order 12866, it is not expected to
significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore,
this action is not a significant energy action and no Statement of
Energy Effects is required.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501
August 25, 2000 et seq.):
(a) This rule, as proposed, will not ``significantly or uniquely''
affect small governments. A Small Government Agency Plan does not
appear to be required. Small governments would be affected only to the
extent that any programs having Federal funds, permits, or other
authorized activities would have to ensure that their actions will not
adversely affect the critical habitat. However, as discussed above,
these actions are currently subject to similar restrictions through the
listing protections of the species, and further restrictions are not
anticipated to result from critical habitat designation of occupied
areas. In our economic analysis, we will evaluate the impact of
designating unoccupied areas where section 7 consultations would not
have occurred but for the critical habitat designation.
(b) This rule, as proposed, will not produce on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector a Federal mandate of $100
million or greater in any year, so it would not meet the criteria for a
``significant regulatory action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act.
Takings
In accordance with Executive Order 12630 (``Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally Protected Private Property
Rights''), we have preliminarily analyzed the potential takings
implications of the proposed critical habitat designation in a
preliminary takings implication assessment, which indicates that this
proposed rule would not pose significant takings implications.
Federalism
In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the proposed rule does
not have significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. As discussed above, the designation of critical habitat in
areas currently occupied by the Mariana fruit bat and Mariana crow
would have little incremental impact on the Government of Guam or the
CNMI and their activities. The designations may have some benefit to
the Government of Guam and the CNMI in that the areas essential to the
conservation of these species are more clearly defined, and the primary
constituent elements of the habitat necessary to the survival of these
species are identified. While this
[[Page 63756]]
definition and identification does not alter where and what federally
sponsored activities may occur, it may assist the Government of Guam
and the CNMI in long-range planning rather than waiting for case-by-
case section 7 consultation to occur.
Civil Justice Reform
In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Department of the
Interior's Office of the Solicitor has determined that this rule does
not unduly burden the judicial system and does meet the requirements of
sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are proposing to designate
critical habitat in accordance with the provisions of the Act. The
proposed 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 Mariana fruit bat,
Guam Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This proposed rule does not contain any information collection
requirements for which Office of Management and Budget approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act is required. An agency may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that we do not have to prepare an Environmental
Assessment and/or an Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 in connection with
regulations adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act, as amended. We
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
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), Executive Order 13175, and the Department
of the Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with federally recognized
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. The proposed designation of
critical habitat on Guam and Rota for the Mariana fruit bat, Guam
Micronesian kingfisher, and Mariana crow does not contain any Tribal
lands or lands that we have identified as impacting Tribal trust
resources.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available upon request from the Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife
Office (see ADDRESSES section).
Author
The primary authors of this document are Frederick A. Amidon and
Holly B. Freifeld, Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office (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, it is hereby proposed 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 would continue 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 entries for ``Bat, Mariana fruit''
under ``MAMMALS'', ``Kingfisher, Guam Micronesian'' under ``BIRDS,''
and ``Crow, Mariana'' under ``BIRDS'' to read as follows:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate population
-------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical habitat Special
Common name Scientific name threatened rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals
* * * * * * *
Bat, Mariana fruit (=Mariana Pteropus Western Pacific Guam.................... E 156 17.95(a)........ NA
flying fox). mariannus Ocean: USA
mariannus. (Guam,
Commonwealth of
the Northern
Mariana Islands).
* * * * * * *
Birds
* * * * * * *
Crow, Mariana................. Corvus kubaryi... Western Pacific Entire Range............ E 156 17.95(b)........ NA
Ocean: (Guam and
Rota).
* * * * * * *
Kingfisher, Guam Micronesian.. Halcyon Western Pacific Entire Range............ E 156 17.95(b)........ NA
cinnamomina Ocean: (Guam).
cinnamomina.
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63757]]
3. Amend Sec. 17.95 by adding the same order as the species appear
in Sec. 17.11:
a. In paragraph (a), critical habitat for the Mariana fruit bat
(Pteropus mariannus mariannus); and
b. In paragraph (b), critical habitat for the Mariana crow (Corvus
kubaryi) and Guam Micronesian kingfisher (Halcyon cinnamomina
cinnamomina), as set forth below.
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.
(a) Mammals.
* * * * *
Mariana Fruit Bat (Pteropus mariannus mariannus)
(1) Critical habitat units for the Mariana fruit bat are depicted
for the Territory of Guam.
(2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements required
by the Mariana fruit bat for the biological needs of foraging,
sheltering, roosting, and rearing of young are found in areas
supporting limestone, secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and
coastal forests composed of native or introduced plant species. These
forest types provide the primary constituent elements of:
(i) Plant species used for foraging such as Artocarpus sp.
(breadfruit), Carica papaya (papaya), Cycas circinalis (fadang), Ficus
spp. (fig), Pandanus tectorius (kafu), Cocos nucifera (coconut palm),
and Terminalia catappa (talisai).
(ii) Remote locations, often within 100 m (328 ft) of 80 to 100 m
(262 to 591 ft) tall clifflines, with limited exposure to human
disturbance, that contain mature fig, Mammea odorata (chopak),
Casuarina equisetifolia (gago), Macaranga thompsonii (pengua),
Guettarda speciosa (panao), and Neisosperma oppositifolia (fagot), and
other tree species that are used for roosting and breeding.
(3) Critical habitat does not include existing features and
structures within the boundaries of the mapped units, such as
buildings, roads, aqueducts, antennas, water tanks, agricultural
fields, paved areas, lawns, and other urban landscaped areas not
containing one or more of the primary constituent elements.
(4) Note: Map 1--General Locations of Units for Mariana Fruit Bat--
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.000
(5) Northern Guam, Unit A, Mariana fruit bat (5,803 ha; 14,338 ac).
(i) Unit A consists of 106 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 269645, 1491989; 269464, 1492175; 269501,
1492206; 269493, 1492433; 269892, 1492587; 270039, 1492791; 270215,
1492895; 270407, 1492769; 270592, 1492782; 270860, 1493156; 271182,
1493403; 271268, 1493585; 271268, 1493643; 271436, 1493753; 271559,
1494014; 271607, 1494236; 271813, 1494415; 272043, 1494477; 272129,
1494724; 272413, 1495015; 272655, 1495146; 272822, 1495101; 272918,
1495177; 273101, 1495192; 273263, 1495136; 273431, 1495202; 274161,
1496022; 274173, 1496089; 274601, 1496017; 274599, 1496283; 274931,
1496366; 275216, 1496545; 275446, 1497148; 275593, 1498173; 275675,
1498164; 276008, 1498280; 276052, 1498688; 276156, 1498965; 276437,
1499560; 276381, 1499660; 276493, 1500036; 276358, 1500432; 276358,
1500432; 276358, 1500435; 276374, 1500948; 277097, 1501696; 277216,
1501626; 277395,
[[Page 63758]]
1501709; 277565, 1501788; 277367, 1502247; 277556, 1502519; 277738,
1502614; 278104, 1503226; 277931, 1503680; 277528, 1504079; 276540,
1503998; 275541, 1503775; 275456, 1503878; 274960, 1503661; 275017,
1503428; 275017, 1503428; 274919, 1503336; 274350, 1503193; 273846,
1502898; 273696, 1502636; 273683, 1502394; 274082, 1501289; 272625,
1502266; 271544, 1502611; 270399, 1502902; 270276, 1502896; 269976,
1502855; 269819, 1502894; 269127, 1503348; 268873, 1503326; 268324,
1502996; 267317, 1501835; 267067, 1502058; 267891, 1503624; 267799,
1504039; 267471, 1504118; 267162, 1503935; 266993, 1503750; 266419,
1503365; 266115, 1503073; 265990, 1503021; 265865, 1503010; 265532,
1502708; 265443, 1502458; 265558, 1502239; 265719, 1502249; 265928,
1502401; 266157, 1502406; 265972, 1502034; 265720, 1501528; 265451,
1501304; 265451, 1501304; 265035, 1500959; 264833, 1501228; 264547,
1501077; 264338, 1500650; 264260, 1500311; 264547, 1500113; 264060,
1499171; 263865, 1499073; 263276, 1499383.
(ii) Excluding three areas:
(A) Bounded by the following four points (133 ha, 328 ac): 268056,
1507791; 269417, 1508433; 269771, 1507647; 268377, 1506972.
(B) Bounded by the following 15 points (17 ha, 43 ac): 272711,
1503822; 272730, 1503928; 272767, 1503961; 272872, 1503975; 272859,
1504070; 272879, 1504214; 272949, 1504372; 273070, 1504396; 273184,
1504331; 273199, 1503977; 273041, 1503917; 272949, 1503912; 272884,
1503703; 272828, 1503710; 272818, 1503785.
(C) Bounded by the following 12 points (20 ha, 48 ac): 273808,
1504727; 274234, 1504592; 274579, 1504430; 274572, 1504328; 274444,
1504247; 274295, 1504355; 274146, 1504389; 273930, 1504484; 273795,
1504464; 273686, 1504470; 273659, 1504585; 273707, 1504687.
(iii) Note: Map 2 of Unit A for Mariana fruit bat follows:
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.001
(6) Southern Guam, Unit B, Mariana fruit bat (4,234 ha; 10,464 ac):
(i) Unit B consists of 184 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 248002, 1474589; 247650, 1474901; 247495,
1475129; 247271,
[[Page 63759]]
1475466; 247014, 1476083; 246950, 1476271; 247074, 1476899; 247118,
1477285; 247235, 1477541; 247293, 1477723; 247508, 1477876; 247522,
1479447; 247658, 1479766; 247629, 1480138; 247571, 1480291; 247586,
1480324; 247611, 1480465; 247782, 1480608; 248018, 1480694; 248088,
1480673; 248307, 1480797; 248380, 1480844; 248434, 1480948; 248420,
1481047; 248423, 1481115; 248490, 1481114; 248732, 1481047; 248758,
1481043; 248787, 1481048; 248930, 1481119; 249268, 1481028; 249316,
1481047; 249377, 1481077; 249428, 1481064; 249874, 1480811; 250243,
1479980; 250246, 1479973; 250253, 1479957; 250272, 1479915; 250316,
1479645; 250511, 1479330; 250724, 1479237; 250997, 1479153; 251074,
1479008; 251187, 1478955; 251318, 1478939; 251419, 1478655; 251585,
1478663; 251706, 1478676; 251746, 1478741; 251615, 1479003; 251516,
1479035; 251486, 1479196; 251428, 1479358; 251344, 1479561; 251122,
1479654; 250863, 1479589; 250640, 1479700; 250614, 1479911; 250605,
1480129; 250652, 1480853; 250673, 1480921; 250741, 1480941; 250877,
1480941; 251212, 1480936; 251338, 1480936; 251405, 1480904; 251819,
1480706; 251886, 1480568; 252757, 1480381; 253342, 1479736; 253298,
1478854; 253597, 1478723; 253904, 1478475; 254210, 1478183; 254510,
1477855; 254526, 1477750; 254207, 1477835; 253963, 1477494; 253962,
1477494; 253743, 1477502; 253641, 1477652; 253589, 1477649; 253472,
1477667; 253389, 1477739; 253204, 1477694; 252993, 1477709; 252793,
1477566; 252561, 1477440; 252476, 1477486; 252472, 1477520; 252536,
1477618; 252532, 1477670; 252476, 1477716; 252416, 1477705; 252353,
1477501; 252322, 1477517; 252329, 1477634; 252265, 1477716; 252009,
1477683; 251888, 1477724; 251820, 1477781; 251730, 1477811; 251726,
1477875; 251748, 1477931; 251601, 1477871; 251583, 1477373; 251458,
1477343; 251258, 1477204; 251360, 1477030; 251349, 1476842; 251168,
1476619; 251428, 1476423; 251583, 1476231; 251816, 1476080; 251835,
1475891; 251563, 1475479; 251560, 1475465; 251484, 1475137; 251262,
1474361; 250994, 1473369; 251024, 1473358; 251092, 1473456; 251221,
1473456; 251262, 1473576; 251239, 1473655; 251292, 1473686; 251405,
1473531; 251496, 1473591; 251605, 1473546; 251767, 1473633; 252137,
1473874; 252125, 1473916; 252231, 1474142; 252318, 1474183; 252540,
1474161; 252992, 1474119; 253446, 1474105; 253722, 1474068; 253867,
1473973; 254079, 1473688; 254181, 1473477; 254247, 1473316; 254203,
1473017; 254064, 1472805; 253882, 1472586; 253306, 1472273; 253101,
1472258; 252919, 1472185; 252722, 1472141; 252533, 1472181; 252306,
1472229; 252175, 1472171; 251883, 1471842; 251657, 1471580; 251233,
1471383; 251000, 1471200; 250803, 1471003; 250701, 1470864; 250511,
1470624; 250241, 1470470; 250081, 1470478; 249913, 1470602; 249687,
1470704; 249672, 1470799; 249614, 1470981; 249599, 1471171; 249570,
1471390; 249519, 1471485; 249584, 1471645; 249584, 1471864; 249482,
1471966; 249468, 1472163; 249497, 1472258; 249460, 1472338; 249519,
1472543; 249535, 1472652; 249511, 1472820; 249358, 1473032; 249365,
1473229; 249322, 1473280; 249151, 1473567; 248928, 1473703; 248650,
1474031.
(ii) Excluding one area: Bounded by the following 114 points (4,346
ha; 45,338 ac): 250684, 1476986; 250614, 1477069; 250531, 1477232;
250595, 1477315; 250614, 1477358; 250718, 1477387; 250815, 1477358;
250855, 1477510; 250916, 1477596; 250868, 1477671; 250823, 1477681;
250823, 1477622; 250769, 1477609; 250713, 1477695; 250753, 1477791;
250742, 1477869; 250793, 1477893; 250951, 1477890; 250924, 1478061;
250940, 1478131; 251018, 1478286; 251114, 1478310; 251310, 1478543;
251425, 1478535; 251534, 1478484; 251596, 1478433; 251690, 1478460;
251802, 1478366; 251874, 1478058; 251656, 1477976; 251620, 1477975;
251516, 1477920; 251482, 1477886; 251330, 1477839; 251270, 1477914;
251189, 1477957; 251173, 1477906; 251248, 1477802; 251256, 1477663;
251245, 1477534; 251216, 1477505; 251141, 1477526; 250989, 1477400;
251011, 1477327; 250959, 1477224; 250890, 1477189; 250804, 1477184;
250737, 1477208; 250713, 1477192; 250841, 1477148; 250874, 1477111;
250978, 1477178; 251055, 1477177; 251090, 1477109; 251090, 1477036;
251072, 1476975; 250986, 1476921; 250981, 1476892; 251002, 1476879;
251029, 1476900; 251045, 1476871; 251013, 1476849; 251061, 1476784;
250945, 1476680; 251055, 1476498; 251121, 1476501; 251120, 1476456;
251090, 1476418; 250994, 1476413; 250970, 1476370; 250844, 1476314;
250858, 1476242; 250922, 1476162; 250970, 1476119; 250991, 1476089;
250973, 1476068; 250943, 1476100; 250887, 1476111; 250879, 1476065;
250924, 1476025; 250887, 1475948; 250866, 1475867; 250817, 1475886;
250815, 1475966; 250836, 1476020; 250817, 1476057; 250812, 1476113;
250817, 1476140; 250801, 1476162; 250775, 1476180; 250767, 1476279;
250783, 1476373; 250863, 1476421; 250740, 1476472; 250702, 1476542;
250721, 1476616; 250780, 1476619; 250903, 1476536; 250906, 1476552;
250855, 1476627; 250823, 1476638; 250796, 1476710; 250769, 1476731;
250745, 1476683; 250681, 1476665; 250625, 1476702; 250627, 1476721;
250710, 1476718; 250721, 1476780; 250772, 1476798; 250868, 1476756;
250906, 1476801; 250775, 1477023; 250780, 1477039.
(iii) Note: Map 3 of Unit B for Mariana fruit bat follows:
[[Page 63760]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.002
* * * * *
(b) Birds.
* * * * *
Mariana crow (Corvus kubaryi)
(1) Critical habitat units for the Mariana crow are depicted for
the Territory of Guam and the island of Rota, Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands.
(2) The primary constituent elements required by the Mariana crow
for the biological needs of foraging, sheltering, roosting, nesting,
and rearing of young are found in areas that support limestone,
secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and coastal forests composed of
native and introduced plant species. These forest types provide the
primary constituent elements of:
(i) Emergent trees and subcanopy trees with dense cover for
breeding such as Neisosperma oppositifolia (fagot), Macaranga
thompsonii (pengua), Intsia bijuga (ifit), Premna obtusifolia (ahgao),
Eugenia reinwardtiana (aabang), Ficus spp. (fig), Elaeocarpus joga
(yoga), and Tristiropsis obtusangula (faniok);
(ii) Sufficient area under predominantly native forest to allow
nesting at least 290 m (950 ft) from the nearest road and 62 m (203 ft)
from the nearest forest edge and to support Mariana crow breeding
territories (approximately 12 to 37 ha (30 to 91 ac)) and foraging
areas for nonbreeding juvenile crows; and
(iii) Standing dead trees and plant species such as Aglaia
mariannensis (maypunayo), Artocarpus spp. (breadfruit), Cocos nucifera
(coconut palm), fagot, Hibiscus tiliaceus (pago), ifit, Leucaena spp.
(tangentangen), Ochrosia mariannensis (langiti), Pandanus tectorius
(kafu), ahgao, fig, and joga for foraging.
(3) Critical habitat does not include existing features and
structures within the boundaries of the mapped units, such as
buildings, roads, aqueducts, antennas, water tanks, agricultural
fields, paved areas, lawns, and other urban landscaped areas not
containing one or more of the primary constituent elements.
(4) Note: Map 1--General locations of units for Mariana crow
follows:
[[Page 63761]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.003
(5) Northern Guam, Unit A, Mariana crow (5,075 ha; 12,540 ac).
(i) Unit A consists of 58 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 276837, 1498680; 276836, 1498679; 276161,
1498972; 276437, 1499560; 276381, 1499660; 276493, 1500036; 276358,
1500432; 276374, 1500948; 277097, 1501696; 277216, 1501626; 277565,
1501788; 277367, 1502247; 277556, 1502519; 277738, 1502614; 278104,
1503226; 277931, 1503680; 277528, 1504079; 276540, 1503998; 275541,
1503775; 275456, 1503878; 274960, 1503661; 275017, 1503428; 274919,
1503337; 274350, 1503193; 273846, 1502898; 273696, 1502636; 273683,
1502394; 274082, 1501289; 272625, 1502266; 271544, 1502611; 270399,
1502902; 270276, 1502896; 269976, 1502855; 269819, 1502894; 269127,
1503348; 268873, 1503326; 268324, 1502996; 267317, 1501835; 267067,
1502058; 267891, 1503624; 267799, 1504039; 267471, 1504118; 267162,
1503935; 266993, 1503750; 266419, 1503365; 266115, 1503073; 265990,
1503021; 265865, 1503010; 265532, 1502708; 265443, 1502458; 265558,
1502239; 265719, 1502249; 265928, 1502401; 266157, 1502406; 265720,
1501528; 265451, 1501304; 264834, 1501755; 264835, 1501755.
(ii) Excluding three areas:
(A) Bounded by the following four points (133 ha, 328 ac): 268056,
1507791; 269417, 1508433; 269771, 1507647; 268377, 1506972.
(B) Bounded by the following 15 points (17 ha, 43 ac): 272711,
1503822; 272730, 1503928; 272767, 1503961; 272872, 1503975; 272859,
1504070; 272879, 1504214; 272949, 1504372; 273070, 1504396; 273184,
1504331; 273199, 1503977; 273041, 1503917; 272949, 1503912; 272884,
1503703; 272828, 1503710; 272818, 1503785.
(C) Bounded by the following 12 points (20 ha, 48 ac): 273808,
1504727; 274234, 1504592; 274579, 1504430; 274572, 1504328; 274444,
1504247; 274295, 1504355; 274146, 1504389; 273930, 1504484; 273795,
1504464; 273686, 1504470; 273659, 1504585; 273707, 1504687.
(iii) Note: Map 2 of Unit A for Mariana crow follows:
[[Page 63762]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.004
(6) Southern Guam, Unit B, Mariana crow (4,234 ha; 10,464 ac).
(i) Unit B consists of 184 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 248002, 1474589; 247650, 1474901; 247495,
1475129; 247271, 1475466; 247014, 1476083; 246950, 1476271; 247074,
1476899; 247118, 1477285; 247235, 1477541; 247293, 1477723; 247508,
1477876; 247522, 1479447; 247658, 1479766; 247629, 1480138; 247571,
1480291; 247586, 1480324; 247611, 1480465; 247782, 1480608; 248018,
1480694; 248088, 1480673; 248307, 1480797; 248380, 1480844; 248434,
1480948; 248420, 1481047; 248423, 1481115; 248490, 1481114; 248732,
1481047; 248758, 1481043; 248787, 1481048; 248930, 1481119; 249268,
1481028; 249316, 1481047; 249377, 1481077; 249428, 1481064; 249874,
1480811; 250243, 1479980; 250246, 1479973; 250253, 1479957; 250272,
1479915; 250316, 1479645; 250511, 1479330; 250724, 1479237; 250997,
1479153; 251074, 1479008; 251187, 1478955; 251318, 1478939; 251419,
1478655; 251585, 1478663; 251706, 1478676; 251746, 1478741; 251615,
1479003; 251516, 1479035; 251486, 1479196; 251428, 1479358; 251344,
1479561; 251122, 1479654; 250863, 1479589; 250640, 1479700; 250614,
1479911; 250605, 1480129; 250652, 1480853; 250673, 1480921; 250741,
1480941; 250877, 1480941; 251212, 1480936; 251338, 1480936; 251405,
1480904; 251819, 1480706; 251886, 1480568; 252757, 1480381; 253342,
1479736; 253298, 1478854; 253597, 1478723; 253904, 1478475; 254210,
1478183; 254510, 1477855; 254526, 1477750; 254207, 1477835; 253963,
1477494; 253962, 1477494; 253743, 1477502; 253641, 1477652; 253589,
1477649; 253472, 1477667; 253389, 1477739; 253204, 1477694; 252993,
1477709; 252793, 1477566; 252561, 1477440; 252476, 1477486; 252472,
1477520; 252536, 1477618; 252532, 1477670; 252476, 1477716; 252416,
1477705; 252353, 1477501; 252322, 1477517; 252329, 1477634; 252265,
1477716; 252009, 1477683; 251888, 1477724; 251820, 1477781; 251730,
1477811; 251726, 1477875; 251748, 1477931; 251601, 1477871; 251583,
1477373; 251458, 1477343; 251258, 1477204; 251360, 1477030; 251349,
1476842; 251168, 1476619; 251428, 1476423; 251583, 1476231; 251816,
1476080; 251835, 1475891; 251563, 1475479; 251560, 1475465; 251484,
1475137; 251262, 1474361; 250994, 1473369; 251024, 1473358; 251092,
1473456; 251221, 1473456; 251262, 1473576; 251239,
[[Page 63763]]
1473655; 251292, 1473686; 251405, 1473531; 251496, 1473591; 251605,
1473546; 251767, 1473633; 252137, 1473874; 252125, 1473916; 252231,
1474142; 252318, 1474183; 252540, 1474161; 252992, 1474119; 253446,
1474105; 253722, 1474068; 253867, 1473973; 254079, 1473688; 254181,
1473477; 254247, 1473316; 254203, 1473017; 254064, 1472805; 253882,
1472586; 253306, 1472273; 253101, 1472258; 252919, 1472185; 252722,
1472141; 252533, 1472181; 252306, 1472229; 252175, 1472171; 251883,
1471842; 251657, 1471580; 251233, 1471383; 251000, 1471200; 250803,
1471003; 250701, 1470864; 250511, 1470624; 250241, 1470470; 250081,
1470478; 249913, 1470602; 249687, 1470704; 249672, 1470799; 249614,
1470981; 249599, 1471171; 249570, 1471390; 249519, 1471485; 249584,
1471645; 249584, 1471864; 249482, 1471966; 249468, 1472163; 249497,
1472258; 249460, 1472338; 249519, 1472543; 249535, 1472652; 249511,
1472820; 249358, 1473032; 249365, 1473229; 249322, 1473280; 249151,
1473567; 248928, 1473703; 248650, 1474031.
(ii) Excluding one area: Bounded by the following 114 points (99
ha, 245 ac): 250684, 1476986; 250614, 1477069; 250531, 1477232; 250595,
1477315; 250614, 1477358; 250718, 1477387; 250815, 1477358; 250855,
1477510; 250916, 1477596; 250868, 1477671; 250823, 1477681; 250823,
1477622; 250769, 1477609; 250713, 1477695; 250753, 1477791; 250742,
1477869; 250793, 1477893; 250951, 1477890; 250924, 1478061; 250940,
1478131; 251018, 1478286; 251114, 1478310; 251310, 1478543; 251425,
1478535; 251534, 1478484; 251596, 1478433; 251690, 1478460; 251802,
1478366; 251874, 1478058; 251656, 1477976; 251620, 1477975; 251516,
1477920; 251482, 1477886; 251330, 1477839; 251270, 1477914; 251189,
1477957; 251173, 1477906; 251248, 1477802; 251256, 1477663; 251245,
1477534; 251216, 1477505; 251141, 1477526; 250989, 1477400; 251011,
1477327; 250959, 1477224; 250890, 1477189; 250804, 1477184; 250737,
1477208; 250713, 1477192; 250841, 1477148; 250874, 1477111; 250978,
1477178; 251055, 1477177; 251090, 1477109; 251090, 1477036; 251072,
1476975; 250986, 1476921; 250981, 1476892; 251002, 1476879; 251029,
1476900; 251045, 1476871; 251013, 1476849; 251061, 1476784; 250945,
1476680; 251055, 1476498; 251121, 1476501; 251120, 1476456; 251090,
1476418; 250994, 1476413; 250970, 1476370; 250844, 1476314; 250858,
1476242; 250922, 1476162; 250970, 1476119; 250991, 1476089; 250973,
1476068; 250943, 1476100; 250887, 1476111; 250879, 1476065; 250924,
1476025; 250887, 1475948; 250866, 1475867; 250817, 1475886; 250815,
1475966; 250836, 1476020; 250817, 1476057; 250812, 1476113; 250817,
1476140; 250801, 1476162; 250775, 1476180; 250767, 1476279; 250783,
1476373; 250863, 1476421; 250740, 1476472; 250702, 1476542; 250721,
1476616; 250780, 1476619; 250903, 1476536; 250906, 1476552; 250855,
1476627; 250823, 1476638; 250796, 1476710; 250769, 1476731; 250745,
1476683; 250681, 1476665; 250625, 1476702; 250627, 1476721; 250710,
1476718; 250721, 1476780; 250772, 1476798; 250868, 1476756; 250906,
1476801; 250775, 1477023; 250780, 1477039.
(iii) Note: Map 3 of Unit B for Mariana crow follows:
[[Page 63764]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.005
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(7) Rota, Unit C, Mariana crow (2,462 ha; 6,084 ac).
(i) Unit C consists of 719 points with the following coordinates in
UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World Geodetic System 1984
(WGS84): 300709, 1564865; 300724, 1564935; 300733, 1564985; 300802,
1564997; 300809, 1565065; 300824, 1565186; 300889, 1565296; 300927,
1565332; 301139, 1565378; 301166, 1565499; 301310, 1565554; 301340,
1565496; 301493, 1565470; 301602, 1565455; 301726, 1565444; 301852,
1565428; 301951, 1565444; 302023, 1565520; 302279, 1565526; 302273,
1565424; 302522, 1565388; 302630, 1565372; 302914, 1565332; 303045,
1565414; 303213, 1565437; 303283, 1565463; 303299, 1565568; 303353,
1565617; 303429, 1565705; 303551, 1565855; 303589, 1565862; 303662,
1565909; 303709, 1565943; 303699, 1565972; 303790, 1566116; 303814,
1566104; 303914, 1566165; 303961, 1566093; 304048, 1566137; 304008,
1566221; 303912, 1566211; 303876, 1566200; 303784, 1566149; 303710,
1566324; 303725, 1566359; 303889, 1566367; 303933, 1566390; 303906,
1566437; 303985, 1566502; 304046, 1566507; 304164, 1566279; 304241,
1566149; 304173, 1566049; 304116, 1566004; 304118, 1565967; 304208,
1565992; 304274, 1566044; 304578, 1566092; 304532, 1566129; 304531,
1566215; 304506, 1566303; 304729, 1566316; 304773, 1566274; 304902,
1566268; 304962, 1566265; 305087, 1566248; 305070, 1566133; 305108,
1566102; 305082, 1566065; 305145, 1565958; 305177, 1565915; 305235,
1565955; 305421, 1565782; 305452, 1565756; 305596, 1565779; 305683,
1565792; 305791, 1565838; 305893, 1565886; 306023, 1565952; 306135,
1566064; 306203, 1566119; 306251, 1566060; 306555, 1566080; 306664,
1566164; 306780, 1566264; 306834, 1566273; 307071, 1566336; 307106,
1566329; 307223, 1566324; 307307, 1566290; 307304, 1566221; 307397,
1566214; 307647, 1566199; 307865, 1566154; 307896, 1566125; 307979,
1566062; 308031, 1566047; 308267, 1565952; 308267, 1565855; 308315,
1565841; 308359, 1565901; 308432, 1565806; 308535, 1565518; 308562,
1565402; 308545, 1565397; 308590, 1565223; 308676, 1565242; 308700,
1565190; 308860, 1565315; 309031, 1565486; 309093, 1565494; 309270,
1565486; 309332, 1565415; 309354, 1565337; 309367, 1565161; 309389,
1565153; 309440, 1565161; 309492, 1565131; 309497, 1565052; 309524,
1565041; 309568, 1565055; 309587, 1565096; 309570, 1565131; 309579,
1565174; 309560, 1565223; 309573, 1565261;
[[Page 63765]]
309608, 1565299; 309578, 1565369; 309820, 1565486; 310001, 1565592;
310154, 1565639; 310358, 1565685; 310369, 1565665; 310596, 1565693;
310642, 1565657; 310700, 1565655; 310795, 1565726; 310937, 1565754;
310976, 1565767; 311272, 1565802; 311282, 1565660; 311408, 1565703;
311494, 1565731; 311616, 1565734; 311782, 1565734; 311858, 1565745;
312021, 1565735; 312100, 1565743; 312203, 1565779; 312306, 1565776;
312392,
1565841; 312409, 1565811; 312398, 1565757; 312439, 1565681; 312479,
1565670; 312550, 1565678; 312596, 1565678; 312601, 1565730; 312574,
1565776; 312533, 1565838; 312950, 1565848; 312983, 1565823; 313055,
1565882; 313070, 1565943; 313113, 1566024; 313256, 1566157; 313460,
1566223; 313496, 1566305; 313555, 1566443; 313631, 1566481; 313723,
1566467; 313799, 1566489; 313878, 1566481; 313921, 1566505; 313929,
1566540; 313902, 1566559; 313864, 1566557; 313826, 1566521; 313788,
1566543; 313790, 1566603; 313783, 1566660; 313813, 1566703; 313862,
1566757; 313832, 1566768; 313788, 1566749; 313704, 1566717; 313615,
1566668; 313569, 1566627; 313498, 1566527; 313478, 1566478; 313376,
1566382; 313136, 1566223; 313101, 1566254; 313101, 1566366; 313059,
1566413; 313016, 1566416; 312962, 1566413; 312874, 1566387; 312529,
1566471; 312501, 1566632; 312565, 1566815; 312693, 1566785; 312693,
1566897; 312807, 1566917; 312813, 1566980; 312802, 1567132; 312937,
1567124; 312932, 1566925; 312996, 1566927; 313121, 1567027; 313135,
1567050; 313217, 1566988; 313282, 1566936; 313292, 1566858; 313309,
1566787; 313283, 1566731; 313320, 1566717; 313355, 1566728; 313360,
1566782; 313360, 1566833; 313368, 1566863; 313401, 1566887; 313431,
1566898; 313466, 1566955; 313562, 1566958; 313585, 1567052; 313455,
1567137; 313195, 1567213; 313129, 1567244; 313040, 1567253; 312907,
1567257; 312912, 1567448; 312909, 1567729; 313019, 1567652; 313276,
1567581; 313810, 1567411; 313916, 1567327; 313989, 1567327; 314106,
1567237; 314184, 1567248; 314220, 1567360; 314192, 1567421; 314225,
1567533; 314192, 1567611; 314198, 1567679; 314314, 1567766; 314371,
1567831; 314390, 1567888; 314428, 1568004; 314439, 1568107; 314482,
1568185; 314507, 1568231; 314596, 1568270; 314697, 1568359; 314764,
1568357; 314813, 1568378; 314844, 1568493; 314973, 1568590; 314995,
1568674; 314984, 1568766; 315011, 1568915; 315022, 1569162; 314960,
1569181; 314905, 1569200; 314843, 1569278; 314840, 1569343; 314846,
1569390; 314819, 1569406; 314783, 1569398; 314759, 1569406; 314743,
1569444; 314637, 1569506; 314553, 1569541; 314539, 1569571; 314569,
1569612; 314396, 1569652; 314317, 1569655; 314081, 1569785; 313920,
1569813; 313815, 1569818; 313257, 1569826; 312876, 1569836; 312896,
1569509; 312912, 1569188; 312915, 1568976; 312795, 1569012; 312588,
1568997; 312425, 1569062; 312181, 1569041; 312012, 1569001; 311943,
1568999; 311943, 1568953; 311818, 1568948; 311731, 1568905; 311711,
1568926; 311675, 1568917; 311649, 1568994; 311602, 1569082; 311636,
1569226; 311450, 1569290; 311381, 1569290; 311312, 1569132; 311517,
1569055; 311570, 1568854; 311700, 1568716; 311662, 1568629; 311565,
1568547; 311369, 1568683; 311170, 1568731; 311065, 1568532; 310647,
1568535; 310624, 1568581; 310820, 1568660; 310795, 1568734; 311062,
1568848; 311027, 1569012; 310690, 1568967; 310551, 1568963; 310396,
1568926; 310236, 1568926; 310126, 1568927; 310120, 1568838; 310077,
1568824; 309975, 1568770; 309799, 1568773; 309579, 1568794; 309474,
1568767; 309396, 1568760; 309247, 1568909; 309213, 1568855; 309372,
1568655; 309345, 1568604; 309386, 1568509; 309416, 1568424; 309399,
1568380; 309335, 1568424; 309288, 1568401; 309243, 1568452; 309196,
1568431; 309108, 1568428; 309054, 1568428; 308968, 1568389; 308922,
1568387; 308909, 1568356; 308422, 1568364; 308410, 1567913; 308390,
1567815; 308390, 1567740; 308362, 1567720; 308244, 1567737; 308173,
1567760; 308132, 1567750; 308105, 1567693; 308088, 1567642; 308013,
1567625; 307908, 1567625; 307634, 1567679; 307580, 1567659; 307475,
1567659; 307410, 1567632; 307391, 1567599; 307208, 1567603; 307154,
1567586; 306999, 1567537; 307000, 1567462; 306988, 1567448; 306749,
1567420; 306700, 1567489; 306815, 1567568; 307027, 1567721; 307024,
1567751; 307254, 1567843; 307310, 1567846; 307444, 1568042; 307502,
1568160; 307586, 1568258; 307614, 1568414; 307732, 1568533; 307837,
1568655; 307942, 1568733; 307986, 1568682; 308071, 1568641; 308190,
1568658; 308312, 1568709; 308444, 1568763; 308559, 1568814; 308634,
1568872; 308630, 1568950; 308684, 1568980; 308810, 1568956; 308942,
1569004; 309033, 1569041; 309100, 1569049; 309301, 1569048; 309410,
1569197; 309423, 1569292; 309304, 1569302; 309319, 1569585; 309357,
1569581; 309355, 1569603; 309339, 1569952; 309301, 1569932; 309216,
1570065; 309393, 1570214; 309698, 1570373; 309955, 1570475; 310209,
1570549; 310304, 1570532; 310484, 1570542; 310684, 1570556; 310823,
1570522; 310988, 1570530; 311235, 1570509; 311484, 1570490; 311620,
1570458; 311690, 1570436; 311807, 1570430; 312089, 1570412; 312189,
1570420; 312276, 1570402; 312346, 1570422; 312447, 1570412; 312539,
1570386; 312631, 1570349; 312734, 1570290; 312853, 1570230; 312913,
1570240; 313008, 1570257; 313130, 1570243; 313360, 1570238; 313441,
1570212; 313526, 1570211; 313598, 1570186; 313620, 1570151; 313479,
1570121; 313387, 1570081; 313382, 1570051; 313488, 1570070; 313550,
1570037; 313621, 1570022; 313704, 1570035; 313805, 1570011; 313843,
1569989; 313932, 1569975; 313986, 1569956; 314024, 1569934; 314116,
1569951; 314228, 1569932; 314336, 1569901; 314417, 1569879; 314482,
1569883; 314529, 1569853; 314810, 1569769; 315250, 1569625; 315296,
1569566; 315344, 1569506; 315399, 1569417; 315448, 1569341; 315469,
1569243; 315450, 1569091; 315369, 1568959; 315274, 1568839; 315222,
1568741; 315111, 1568557; 314963, 1568264; 314881, 1568159; 314832,
1568004; 314827, 1567899; 314786, 1567817; 314751, 1567701; 314753,
1567609; 314761, 1567278; 314810, 1567191; 314816, 1567112; 314767,
1567015; 314724, 1566831; 314648, 1566774; 314637, 1566722; 314642,
1566578; 314661, 1566508; 314564, 1566294; 314407, 1566085; 314241,
1565987; 314051, 1565865; 313943, 1565830; 313816, 1565771; 313656,
1565613; 313463, 1565456; 313333, 1565386; 313214, 1565304; 313076,
1565261; 312973, 1565250; 312916, 1565275; 312799, 1565334; 312734,
1565396; 312593, 1565475; 312311, 1565540; 312184, 1565554; 312037,
1565556; 311932, 1565551; 311799, 1565524; 311560, 1565537; 311433,
1565515; 311270, 1565453; 311140, 1565372; 311018, 1565334; 310901,
1565312; 310628, 1565283; 310525, 1565285; 310408, 1565293; 310272,
1565264; 310194, 1565226; 310132, 1565158; 310058, 1565104; 309912,
1564984; 309828, 1564908; 309734, 1564821; 309609, 1564707; 309492,
1564673; 309386, 1564583; 309213, 1564399; 309101, 1564206; 308944,
1564168; 308874, 1564128; 308849, 1564068; 308855, 1564017; 308852,
1563900; 308836, 1563803; 308814, 1563662; 308779, 1563537; 308779,
1563415; 308773, 1563328; 308806,
[[Page 63766]]
1563285; 308809, 1563212; 308863, 1563087; 308866, 1563011; 308814,
1562959; 308776, 1562905; 308741, 1562843; 308730, 1562778; 308665,
1562734; 308583, 1562702; 308535, 1562705; 308229, 1562564; 308080,
1562485; 307987, 1562390; 307929, 1562325; 307947, 1562257; 307914,
1562238; 307898, 1562192; 307833, 1562054; 307765, 1561919; 307705,
1561910; 307672, 1561903; 307667, 1561864; 307725, 1561834; 307724,
1561797; 307673, 1561715; 307535, 1561609; 307391, 1561447; 307228,
1561325; 307158, 1561333; 307012, 1561277; 306779, 1561394; 306697,
1561388; 306585, 1561380; 306533, 1561376; 306416, 1561344; 306336,
1561333; 306208, 1561331; 306166, 1561355; 306071, 1561420; 305925,
1561471; 305857, 1561483; 305811, 1561478; 305774, 1561437; 305748,
1561348; 305754, 1561287; 305801, 1561286; 305891, 1561175; 305848,
1561126; 305833, 1561094; 305864, 1561050; 305810, 1561036; 305734,
1561036; 305703, 1561001; 305674, 1560993; 305643, 1561014; 305580,
1560960; 305531, 1560933; 305492, 1560945; 305476, 1560972; 305452,
1560994; 305406, 1560991; 305370, 1561022; 305325, 1561047; 305327,
1561078; 305320, 1561099; 305274, 1561148; 305244, 1561170; 305238,
1561187; 305217, 1561215; 305156, 1561235; 305084, 1561233; 305054,
1561234; 305057, 1561263; 305042, 1561436; 305031, 1561528; 305041,
1561559; 305075, 1561668; 305091, 1561734; 305109, 1561806; 304845,
1561793; 304828, 1561737; 304789, 1561680; 304730, 1561636; 304682,
1561670; 304609, 1561726; 304537, 1561729; 304543, 1561756; 304426,
1561738; 304386, 1561662; 304317, 1561706; 304215, 1561666; 304099,
1561690; 304021, 1561789; 304088, 1561845; 304062, 1561922; 304177,
1561987; 304084, 1562103; 303922, 1562290; 303891, 1562318; 303867,
1562349; 303812, 1562414; 303739, 1562556; 303701, 1562508; 303676,
1562471; 303652, 1562522; 303575, 1562516; 303540, 1562487; 303542,
1562433; 303458, 1562411; 303434, 1562393; 303422, 1562453; 303317,
1562343; 303325, 1562313; 303302, 1562284; 303276, 1562282; 303240,
1562260; 303217, 1562242; 303167, 1562149; 303138, 1562129; 303111,
1562076; 303064, 1562084; 303038, 1562069; 302998, 1562079; 302959,
1562068; 302931, 1562030; 302862, 1562031; 302847, 1562023; 302823,
1562047; 302750, 1561973; 302708, 1561934; 302622, 1561980; 302539,
1561950; 302478, 1561980; 302420, 1561942; 302396, 1561965; 302352,
1562007; 302328, 1562056; 302315, 1562081; 302288, 1562112; 302262,
1562161; 302249, 1562185; 302232, 1562243; 302240, 1562278; 302258,
1562311; 302306, 1562355; 302355, 1562379; 302388, 1562398; 302411,
1562418; 302443, 1562470; 302456, 1562496; 302448, 1562537; 302402,
1562623; 302354, 1562673; 302366, 1562698; 302357, 1562716; 302346,
1562711; 302213, 1562810; 302163, 1562866; 302066, 1562946; 302056,
1562985; 302016, 1562990; 301955, 1563034; 301936, 1563076; 301882,
1563096; 301867, 1563093; 301822, 1563158; 301764, 1563244; 301677,
1563328; 301580, 1563379; 301518, 1563346; 301482, 1563379; 301494,
1563418; 301572, 1563445; 301601, 1563552; 301514, 1563608; 301374,
1563700; 301316, 1563740; 301140, 1563860; 300871, 1563988; 300689,
1564203; 300484, 1564307; 300566, 1564450; 300389, 1564638; 300472,
1564790; 300547, 1564683; 300696, 1564797.
(ii) Excluding three areas:
(A) Bounded by the following 225 points (1,828 ha, 4,517 ac):
304379, 1562567; 304411, 1562555; 304424, 1562519; 304395, 1562481;
304302, 1562446; 304273, 1562406; 304249, 1562358; 304254, 1562282;
304261, 1562234; 304267, 1562190; 304322, 1562154; 304363, 1562125;
304393, 1562154; 304450, 1562187; 304496, 1562219; 304553, 1562195;
304591, 1562252; 304677, 1562222; 304751, 1562222; 304756, 1562184;
304707, 1562097; 304732, 1562065; 304778, 1562078; 304848, 1562116;
304883, 1562133; 304897, 1562100; 304919, 1562054; 304965, 1562055;
305014, 1562130; 305027, 1562070; 305087, 1562070; 305138, 1562106;
305178, 1562184; 305273, 1562139; 305332, 1562082; 305502, 1562089;
305578, 1562186; 305634, 1562202; 305663, 1562153; 305654, 1562055;
305625, 1562051; 305559, 1561906; 305499, 1561766; 305502, 1561677;
305536, 1561661; 305583, 1561645; 305628, 1561651; 305657, 1561733;
305750, 1562039; 305797, 1562046; 305851, 1562027; 305884, 1561946;
305962, 1561919; 306000, 1561908; 306049, 1561932; 306083, 1561909;
306124, 1561894; 306125, 1561840; 306152, 1561740; 306149, 1561664;
306171, 1561612; 306196, 1561564; 306331, 1561523; 306475, 1561523;
306637, 1561536; 306678, 1561599; 306697, 1561618; 306795, 1561601;
306862, 1561696; 306865, 1561764; 306854, 1561781; 306837, 1561785;
306821, 1561831; 306726, 1561820; 306597, 1561737; 306383, 1561737;
306312, 1561775; 306280, 1561824; 306280, 1561867; 306328, 1561986;
306326, 1562043; 306369, 1562146; 306348, 1562193; 306359, 1562248;
306396, 1562413; 306211, 1562495; 306212, 1562642; 306491, 1562590;
306893, 1562575; 307497, 1563122; 307570, 1563395; 307632, 1563500;
307765, 1563576; 307881, 1563606; 307963, 1563657; 308014, 1563772;
308065, 1564029; 308062, 1564310; 308088, 1564565; 308044, 1564754;
307833, 1564944; 307768, 1565047; 307819, 1565112; 307805, 1565168;
307749, 1565378; 307765, 1565443; 307822, 1565486; 307811, 1565570;
307779, 1565654; 307817, 1565697; 307825, 1565828; 307842, 1565852;
307741, 1565909; 307639, 1565920; 307442, 1565987; 307386, 1566039;
307223, 1566107; 307152, 1566137; 307112, 1566137; 307082, 1566183;
307047, 1566199; 306955, 1566199; 306887, 1566191; 306824, 1566142;
306643, 1566020; 306544, 1565957; 306401, 1565931; 306247, 1565886;
306225, 1565841; 306113, 1565820; 306065, 1565846; 305956, 1565740;
305864, 1565621; 305851, 1565381; 305732, 1565386; 305724, 1565275;
305583, 1565276; 305305, 1565376; 305244, 1565424; 305104, 1565593;
304938, 1565657; 304768, 1565694; 304538, 1565717; 304173, 1565710;
304059, 1565694; 303985, 1565704; 303930, 1565725; 303903, 1565726;
303881, 1565697; 303879, 1565686; 303866, 1565617; 303819, 1565548;
303760, 1565524; 303670, 1565498; 303545, 1565484; 303504, 1565453;
303445, 1565416; 303355, 1565352; 303191, 1565289; 303022, 1565141;
302927, 1565120; 302874, 1565088; 302601, 1565117; 302527, 1565140;
302218, 1565153; 302086, 1565142; 301948, 1565092; 301810, 1565044;
301728, 1565024; 301675, 1565037; 301588, 1565018; 301416, 1565032;
301326, 1565030; 301284, 1565055; 301215, 1564939; 301207, 1564880;
301178, 1564669; 301199, 1564611; 301215, 1564529; 301236, 1564468;
301284, 1564460; 301363, 1564476; 301459, 1564476; 301604, 1564444;
301705, 1564365; 301734, 1564277; 301781, 1564145; 301827, 1564059;
301898, 1564026; 301972, 1563986; 302078, 1563923; 302144, 1563891;
302215, 1563817; 302318, 1563661; 302371, 1563526; 302605, 1563264;
302705, 1563179; 302736, 1563065; 302743, 1562848; 302859, 1562481;
302916, 1562366; 302961, 1562293; 302983, 1562274; 303027, 1562300;
303093, 1562406; 303115, 1562459; 303159, 1562565; 303190, 1562612;
303214, 1562638; 303250, 1562687; 303323, 1562713; 303478, 1562733;
303626, 1562749; 303778, 1562811; 303847, 1562837; 303900, 1562902;
303986,
[[Page 63767]]
1562937; 304081, 1562943; 304196, 1562928; 304284, 1562884; 304280,
1562804; 304302, 1562749; 304315, 1562704; 304363, 1562636; 304368,
1562613.
(B) Bounded by the following 80 points (34 ha, 84 ac): 307495,
1562490; 307624, 1562456; 307687, 1562504; 307700, 1562504; 307723,
1562493; 307768, 1562521; 307804, 1562511; 307827, 1562494; 307871,
1562552; 307897, 1562565; 307928, 1562565; 307943, 1562545; 307959,
1562519; 307976, 1562515; 308031, 1562572; 307996, 1562594; 307980,
1562618; 307978, 1562640; 307930, 1562655; 307908, 1562675; 307891,
1562697; 307891, 1562743; 307856, 1562771; 307851, 1562810; 307902,
1562852; 308068, 1562957; 308134, 1562964; 308164, 1562997; 308173,
1563049; 308204, 1563115; 308197, 1563150; 308171, 1563159; 308149,
1563172; 308158, 1563220; 308153, 1563290; 308153, 1563334; 308184,
1563347; 308234, 1563340; 308316, 1563418; 308398, 1563405; 308418,
1563437; 308367, 1563499; 308373, 1563676; 308215, 1563726; 308158,
1563576; 308126, 1563534; 308091, 1563547; 308052, 1563487; 308025,
1563486; 307965, 1563436; 307886, 1563373; 307872, 1563313; 307872,
1563199; 307896, 1563181; 307911, 1563141; 307871, 1563095; 307869,
1563073; 307904, 1563069; 307880, 1563003; 307862, 1563010; 307849,
1563025; 307803, 1563019; 307807, 1562964; 307792, 1562951; 307753,
1562946; 307713, 1562935; 307700, 1562911; 307704, 1562881; 307753,
1562828; 307768, 1562797; 307733, 1562745; 307731, 1562727; 307781,
1562683; 307729, 1562598; 307713, 1562633; 307689, 1562635; 307646,
1562613; 307495, 1562647; 307488, 1562556; 307488, 1562533.
(C) Bounded by the following 53 points (19 ha, 46 ac): 308671,
1564401; 308686, 1564398; 308762, 1564422; 308791, 1564444; 308793,
1564466; 308784, 1564497; 308797, 1564525; 308821, 1564528; 308848,
1564503; 308874, 1564514; 308905, 1564532; 308955, 1564666; 308979,
1564736; 308994, 1564814; 309056, 1564845; 309090, 1564889; 309126,
1564869; 309248, 1564976; 309277, 1565027; 309288, 1565060; 309280,
1565083; 309271, 1565117; 309213, 1565113; 309170, 1565106; 309132,
1565058; 309100, 1565068; 309047, 1565112; 308992, 1565145; 308979,
1565217; 308948, 1565228; 308887, 1565176; 308883, 1565150; 308900,
1565075; 308876, 1564990; 308839, 1564994; 308821, 1564996; 308791,
1564924; 308813, 1564898; 308839, 1564906; 308870, 1564928; 308878,
1564915; 308808, 1564760; 308756, 1564683; 308703, 1564628; 308672,
1564595; 308668, 1564571; 308677, 1564563; 308716, 1564574; 308718,
1564560; 308673, 1564489; 308647, 1564459; 308607, 1564406; 308654,
1564386.
(iii) Note: Map 4 of Unit C for Mariana crow follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 63768]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.006
* * * * *
Guam Micronesian kingfisher (Halcyon cinnamomina cinnamomina)
(1) Critical habitat units for the Guam Micronesian kingfisher are
depicted for the Territory of Guam.
(2) The primary constituent elements required by the Guam
Micronesian kingfisher for the biological needs of foraging,
sheltering, roosting, nesting, and rearing of young are found in areas
that support limestone, secondary, ravine, swamp, agricultural, and
coastal forests composed of native and introduced plant species. These
forest types include the primary constituent elements of:
(i) Closed canopy and well-developed understory vegetation, large
(approximately 43 cm (17 in) dbh), standing dead trees (especially
Tristiropsis obtusangula (faniok), Pisonia grandis (umumu), Artocarpus
spp. (breadfruit), Ficus spp. (fig), and Cocos nucifera (coconut
palm)), mud nests of Nasutitermes spp. termites, and root masses of
epiphytic ferns for breeding;
(ii) Sufficiently diverse structure to provide exposed perches and
ground surfaces, leaf litter, and other substrates that support a wide
range of vertebrate and invertebrate prey species for foraging
kingfishers; and
(iii) Sufficient overall breeding and foraging area to support
large kingfisher territories (approximately 10 ha (25 ac)).
(3) Critical habitat does not include existing features and
structures within the boundaries of the mapped units, such as
buildings, roads, aqueducts, antennas, water tanks, agricultural
fields, paved areas, lawns, and other urban landscaped areas not
containing one or more of the primary constituent elements.
(4) Note: Map 1--General locations of units for Guam Micronesian
kingfisher--follows:
[[Page 63769]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.007
(5) Northern Guam, Unit A, Guam Micronesian kingfisher (5,803 ha;
14,338 ac).
(i) Unit A consists of 106 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 269645, 1491989; 269464, 1492175; 269501,
1492206; 269493, 1492433; 269892, 1492587; 270039, 1492791; 270215,
1492895; 270407, 1492769; 270592, 1492782; 270860, 1493156; 271182,
1493403; 271268, 1493585; 271268, 1493643; 271436, 1493753; 271559,
1494014; 271607, 1494236; 271813, 1494415; 272043, 1494477; 272129,
1494724; 272413, 1495015; 272655, 1495146; 272822, 1495101; 272918,
1495177; 273101, 1495192; 273263, 1495136; 273431, 1495202; 274161,
1496022; 274173, 1496089; 274601, 1496017; 274599, 1496283; 274931,
1496366; 275216, 1496545; 275446, 1497148; 275593, 1498173; 275675,
1498164; 276008, 1498280; 276052, 1498688; 276156, 1498965; 276437,
1499560; 276381, 1499660; 276493, 1500036; 276358, 1500432; 276358,
1500432; 276358, 1500435; 276374, 1500948; 277097, 1501696; 277216,
1501626; 277395, 1501709; 277565, 1501788; 277367, 1502247; 277556,
1502519; 277738, 1502614; 278104, 1503226; 277931, 1503680; 277528,
1504079; 276540, 1503998; 275541, 1503775; 275456, 1503878; 274960,
1503661; 275017, 1503428; 275017, 1503428; 274919, 1503336; 274350,
1503193; 273846, 1502898; 273696, 1502636; 273683, 1502394; 274082,
1501289; 272625, 1502266; 271544, 1502611; 270399, 1502902; 270276,
1502896; 269976, 1502855; 269819, 1502894; 269127, 1503348; 268873,
1503326; 268324, 1502996; 267317, 1501835; 267067, 1502058; 267891,
1503624; 267799, 1504039; 267471, 1504118; 267162, 1503935; 266993,
1503750; 266419, 1503365; 266115, 1503073; 265990, 1503021; 265865,
1503010; 265532, 1502708; 265443, 1502458; 265558, 1502239; 265719,
1502249; 265928, 1502401; 266157, 1502406; 265972, 1502034; 265720,
1501528; 265451, 1501304; 265451, 1501304; 265035, 1500959; 264833,
1501228; 264547, 1501077; 264338, 1500650; 264260, 1500311; 264547,
1500113; 264060, 1499171; 263865, 1499073; 263276, 1499383.
(ii) Excluding three areas:
(A) Bounded by the following four points (133 ha, 328 ac): 268056,
1507791; 269417, 1508433; 269771, 1507647; 268377, 1506972.
(B) Bounded by the following 15 points (17 ha, 43 ac): 272711,
1503822; 272730, 1503928; 272767, 1503961; 272872, 1503975; 272859,
1504070; 272879, 1504214; 272949, 1504372; 273070, 1504396; 273184,
1504331; 273199, 1503977; 273041, 1503917; 272949, 1503912; 272884,
1503703; 272828, 1503710; 272818, 1503785.
(C) Bounded by the following 12 points (20 ha, 48 ac): 273808,
1504727; 274234, 1504592; 274579, 1504430; 274572, 1504328; 274444,
1504247; 274295, 1504355; 274146, 1504389; 273930, 1504484; 273795,
1504464; 273686, 1504470; 273659, 1504585; 273707, 1504687.
(iii) Note: Map 2 of Unit A for Guam Micronesian kingfisher
follows:
[[Page 63770]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.008
(6) Southern Guam, Unit B, Guam Micronesian kingfisher (4,234 ha;
10,464 ac).
(i) Unit B consists of 184 boundary points with the following
coordinates in UTM Zone 55 with the units in meters using World
Geodetic System 1984 (WGS84): 248002, 1474589; 247650, 1474901; 247495,
1475129; 247271, 1475466; 247014, 1476083; 246950, 1476271; 247074,
1476899; 247118, 1477285; 247235, 1477541; 247293, 1477723; 247508,
1477876; 247522, 1479447; 247658, 1479766; 247629, 1480138; 247571,
1480291; 247586, 1480324; 247611, 1480465; 247782, 1480608; 248018,
1480694; 248088, 1480673; 248307, 1480797; 248380, 1480844; 248434,
1480948; 248420, 1481047; 248423, 1481115; 248490, 1481114; 248732,
1481047; 248758, 1481043; 248787, 1481048; 248930, 1481119; 249268,
1481028; 249316, 1481047; 249377, 1481077; 249428, 1481064; 249874,
1480811; 250243, 1479980; 250246, 1479973; 250253, 1479957; 250272,
1479915; 250316, 1479645; 250511, 1479330; 250724, 1479237; 250997,
1479153; 251074, 1479008; 251187, 1478955; 251318, 1478939; 251419,
1478655; 251585, 1478663; 251706, 1478676; 251746, 1478741; 251615,
1479003; 251516, 1479035; 251486, 1479196; 251428, 1479358; 251344,
1479561; 251122, 1479654; 250863, 1479589; 250640, 1479700; 250614,
1479911; 250605, 1480129; 250652, 1480853; 250673, 1480921; 250741,
1480941; 250877, 1480941; 251212, 1480936; 251338, 1480936; 251405,
1480904; 251819, 1480706; 251886, 1480568; 252757, 1480381; 253342,
1479736; 253298, 1478854; 253597, 1478723; 253904, 1478475; 254210,
1478183; 254510, 1477855; 254526, 1477750; 254207, 1477835; 253963,
1477494; 253962, 1477494; 253743, 1477502; 253641, 1477652; 253589,
1477649; 253472, 1477667; 253389, 1477739; 253204, 1477694; 252993,
1477709; 252793, 1477566; 252561, 1477440; 252476, 1477486; 252472,
1477520; 252536, 1477618; 252532, 1477670; 252476, 1477716; 252416,
1477705; 252353, 1477501; 252322, 1477517; 252329, 1477634; 252265,
1477716; 252009, 1477683; 251888, 1477724; 251820, 1477781; 251730,
1477811; 251726, 1477875; 251748, 1477931; 251601, 1477871; 251583,
1477373; 251458, 1477343; 251258, 1477204; 251360, 1477030; 251349,
1476842; 251168, 1476619; 251428, 1476423; 251583, 1476231; 251816,
1476080; 251835, 1475891; 251563, 1475479; 251560, 1475465; 251484,
1475137; 251262, 1474361; 250994, 1473369; 251024, 1473358; 251092,
1473456; 251221, 1473456; 251262, 1473576; 251239, 1473655; 251292,
1473686; 251405, 1473531; 251496, 1473591; 251605,
[[Page 63771]]
1473546; 251767, 1473633; 252137, 1473874; 252125, 1473916; 252231,
1474142; 252318, 1474183; 252540, 1474161; 252992, 1474119; 253446,
1474105; 253722, 1474068; 253867, 1473973; 254079, 1473688; 254181,
1473477; 254247, 1473316; 254203, 1473017; 254064, 1472805; 253882,
1472586; 253306, 1472273; 253101, 1472258; 252919, 1472185; 252722,
1472141; 252533, 1472181; 252306, 1472229; 252175, 1472171; 251883,
1471842; 251657, 1471580; 251233, 1471383; 251000, 1471200; 250803,
1471003; 250701, 1470864; 250511, 1470624; 250241, 1470470; 250081,
1470478; 249913, 1470602; 249687, 1470704; 249672, 1470799; 249614,
1470981; 249599, 1471171; 249570, 1471390; 249519, 1471485; 249584,
1471645; 249584, 1471864; 249482, 1471966; 249468, 1472163; 249497,
1472258; 249460, 1472338; 249519, 1472543; 249535, 1472652; 249511,
1472820; 249358, 1473032; 249365, 1473229; 249322, 1473280; 249151,
1473567; 248928, 1473703; 248650, 1474031.
(ii) Excluding one area: Bounded by the following 114 points (99
ha, 245 ac): 250684, 1476986; 250614, 1477069; 250531, 1477232; 250595,
1477315; 250614, 1477358; 250718, 1477387; 250815, 1477358; 250855,
1477510; 250916, 1477596; 250868, 1477671; 250823, 1477681; 250823,
1477622; 250769, 1477609; 250713, 1477695; 250753, 1477791; 250742,
1477869; 250793, 1477893; 250951, 1477890; 250924, 1478061; 250940,
1478131; 251018, 1478286; 251114, 1478310; 251310, 1478543; 251425,
1478535; 251534, 1478484; 251596, 1478433; 251690, 1478460; 251802,
1478366; 251874, 1478058; 251656, 1477976; 251620, 1477975; 251516,
1477920; 251482, 1477886; 251330, 1477839; 251270, 1477914; 251189,
1477957; 251173, 1477906; 251248, 1477802; 251256, 1477663; 251245,
1477534; 251216, 1477505; 251141, 1477526; 250989, 1477400; 251011,
1477327; 250959, 1477224; 250890, 1477189; 250804, 1477184; 250737,
1477208; 250713, 1477192; 250841, 1477148; 250874, 1477111; 250978,
1477178; 251055, 1477177; 251090, 1477109; 251090, 1477036; 251072,
1476975; 250986, 1476921; 250981, 1476892; 251002, 1476879; 251029,
1476900; 251045, 1476871; 251013, 1476849; 251061, 1476784; 250945,
1476680; 251055, 1476498; 251121, 1476501; 251120, 1476456; 251090,
1476418; 250994, 1476413; 250970, 1476370; 250844, 1476314; 250858,
1476242; 250922, 1476162; 250970, 1476119; 250991, 1476089; 250973,
1476068; 250943, 1476100; 250887, 1476111; 250879, 1476065; 250924,
1476025; 250887, 1475948; 250866, 1475867; 250817, 1475886; 250815,
1475966; 250836, 1476020; 250817, 1476057; 250812, 1476113; 250817,
1476140; 250801, 1476162; 250775, 1476180; 250767, 1476279; 250783,
1476373; 250863, 1476421; 250740, 1476472; 250702, 1476542; 250721,
1476616; 250780, 1476619; 250903, 1476536; 250906, 1476552; 250855,
1476627; 250823, 1476638; 250796, 1476710; 250769, 1476731; 250745,
1476683; 250681, 1476665; 250625, 1476702; 250627, 1476721; 250710,
1476718; 250721, 1476780; 250772, 1476798; 250868, 1476756; 250906,
1476801; 250775, 1477023; 250780, 1477039.
(iii) Note: Map 3 of Unit B for Guam Micronesian kingfisher
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 63772]]
[GRAPHIC]
[TIFF OMITTED]
TP15OC02.009
* * * * *
Dated: October 1, 2002.
Paul Hoffman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 02-25649 Filed 10-11-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C