[Federal Register: October 18, 2010 (Volume 75, Number 200)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 63897-64070]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr18oc10-13]
[[Page 63897]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II
Department of the Interior
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fish and Wildlife Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised Designation of
Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Coterminous United States; Final
Rule
[[Page 63898]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0085]
[MO 92210-0-0009]
RIN 1018-AW88
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised
Designation of Critical Habitat for Bull Trout in the Coterminous
United States
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, are revising critical
habitat for the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). We are designating a
total of 31,750.8 km (19,729.0 mi) of streams (which includes 1,213.2
km (754.0 mi) of marine shoreline) and are designating a total of
197,589.2 ha (488,251.7 ac) of reservoirs and lakes. The areas
designated as critical habitat are located in the States of Washington,
Oregon, Nevada, Idaho, and Montana.
DATES: This rule becomes effective on November 17, 2010.
ADDRESSES: This final rule and the associated final economic analysis,
as well as comments and materials received, and supporting
documentation we used in preparing this final rule, are available on
the internet http://www.regulations.gov (see Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-
0085; at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/; and by appointment,
during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office, 1387 S. Vinnell Way, Boise, ID 83709;
telephone 208-378-5293; facsimile 208-378-5262.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brian Kelly, State Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD),
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to
the development and designation of critical habitat for the bull trout
in this final rule. For more information on bull trout biology and
habitat, population abundance and trend, distribution, demographic
features, habitat use and conditions, threats, and conservation
measures, please refer to the Bull Trout 5-year Review Summary and
Evaluation, completed April 25, 2008, available at http://ecos.fws.gov/
docs/five --year --review/doc1907.pdf. For information on bull trout
critical habitat, and information on the associated draft economic
analysis for the proposed rule to designate revised critical habitat,
refer to the proposed rule to designate critical habitat for the bull
trout published in the Federal Register on January 14, 2010 (75 FR
2269).
Description, Distribution, Habitat and Recovery
Bull trout are members of the char subgroup of the family
Salmonidae and are native to waters of western North America. Bull
trout range throughout the Columbia River and Snake River basins,
extending east to headwater streams in Montana and Idaho, into Canada,
and in the Klamath River basin of south-central Oregon. Bull trout
historically occurred in the Sacramento River basin, and were more
widespread in general than they are now. The distribution of
populations, however, is scattered and patchy (Goetz 1989, p. 4; Ziller
1992, p. 6; Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 3; Light et al. 1996, p. 44;
Quigley and Arbelbide 1997, p. 1176).
Bull trout have more specific habitat requirements than most other
salmonids (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 4). Habitat components that
particularly influence their distribution and abundance include water
temperature, cover, channel form and stability, spawning and rearing
substrate conditions, and migratory corridors (Fraley and Shepard 1989,
p. 138; Goetz 1989, p. 19; Watson and Hillman 1997, p. 247). Large
patches of these components are necessary to support robust
populations. This rule identifies those physical or biological features
essential to bull trout conservation.
Bull trout exhibit a variety of migratory and nonmigratory life
histories. Stream-resident bull trout complete their entire life cycle
in the tributary streams where they spawn and rear. Most bull trout are
migratory, spawning in tributary streams where juvenile fish usually
rear from 1 to 4 years before migrating to either a larger river
(fluvial) or lake (adfluvial) where they spend their adult life,
returning to the tributary stream to spawn (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p.
133). Resident and migratory forms may be found together, and either
form can produce resident or migratory offspring (Rieman and McIntyre
1993, p. 2). Historically most bull trout populations may have included
a migratory component, and any resident-only forms found today may
often reflect a loss of the migratory component due to impacts such as
habitat loss or migration barriers (Muhlfeld 2010, pers.comm.).
Bull trout, coastal cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii clarkii),
Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), and other species that migrate from
saltwater to freshwater to reproduce are commonly referred to as
anadromous. However, bull trout, coastal cutthroat trout, and some
other species that enter the marine environment are more properly
termed amphidromous. Unlike strictly anadromous species, such as
Pacific salmon, amphidromous species often return seasonally to fresh
water as subadults, sometimes for several years, before returning to
spawn (Wilson 1997, p. 5; Brenkman and Corbett, 2005, p. 1075). The
amphidromous life history form of bull trout is unique to the Coastal-
Puget Sound population (64 FR 58921, November 1, 1999). For additional
information on the biology of this life form, see the June 25, 2004,
proposed critical habitat designation for the Jarbidge River, Coastal-
Puget Sound, and Saint Mary-Belly River populations of bull trout (69
FR 35767).
The decline of bull trout is primarily due to habitat degradation
and fragmentation, blockage of migratory corridors, poor water quality,
past fisheries management practices, impoundments, dams, water
diversions, and the introduction of nonnative species (63 FR 31647,
June 10, 1998; 64 FR 17112, April 8, 1999). Climate change may
exacerbate some of these impacts. The bull trout 5-year review (Service
2008, p. 45) recommended that the recovery units identified in the 2002
draft recovery plan be updated based on assemblages of bull trout core
areas (metapopulations, or interacting breeding populations) that
retain genetic and ecological integrity and are significant to the
distribution of bull trout throughout the conterminous United States.
After consulting with biologists from States, Federal agencies, and
Native American Tribes, and applying the best scientific information
available, we identified six draft recovery units for bull trout in the
conterminous United States. Please refer to the ``Critical Habitat''
section below for additional information on this topic.
Previous Federal Actions
On November 29, 2002, we proposed to designate critical habitat for
the Klamath River and Columbia River bull trout populations (67 FR
71235). On October 6, 2004, we finalized the critical habitat
designation for the Klamath
[[Page 63899]]
River and Columbia River bull trout populations (69 FR 59995). On June
25, 2004, we proposed to designate critical habitat for the Jarbidge
River, Coastal-Puget Sound, and Saint Mary-Belly River bull trout
populations (69 FR 35767). On September 26, 2005, we designated
critical habitat for the Klamath River, Columbia River, Jarbidge River,
Coastal-Puget Sound, and Saint Mary-Belly River populations of bull
trout (70 FR 56212). Please refer to the above-mentioned rules for a
detailed summary of previous Federal actions completed prior to
publication of this final rule.
On January 5, 2006, a complaint was filed in Federal district court
by the Alliance for the Wild Rockies, Inc., and Friends of the Wild
Swan, alleging the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) failed to
designate adequate critical habitat, failed to rely on the best
scientific and commercial data available, failed to consider the
relevant factors that led to listing, and failed to properly assess the
economic benefits and costs of critical habitat designation. Other
allegations included inadequate analysis and unlawful use of exclusions
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. On March 23, 2009, the Service
provided notice to the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon
that we would seek remand of the final critical habitat rule for bull
trout based on the findings of an investigative report by the
Department of the Interior's Inspector General (USDI 2008, pp. 10-38).
On July 1, 2009, the Court granted our request for a voluntary remand
of the 2005 final rule and directed a new proposed rule to be completed
by December 31, 2009, with a final rule submitted to the Federal
Register by September 30, 2010 (Alliance for the Wild Rockies v. Allen,
2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 63122 (D. Or., July 1, 2009)). On January 14,
2010, the Service published a proposed revised bull trout critical
habitat rule (75 FR 2269). The comment period on the proposed rule was
open for 60 days, ending March 15, 2010. On March 23, 2010, we reopened
the comment period on the proposed rule for an additional 14 days,
ending April 5, 2010 (75 FR 13715).
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
We requested written comments from the public on the proposed
designation of critical habitat for the bull trout during two comment
periods. The first comment period, associated with the publication of
the proposed rule and announcement of availability of draft economic
analysis (75 FR 2269, January 14, 2010), opened on January 14, 2010,
and closed on March 15, 2010. We also reopened the comment period for
an additional 15 days from March 23, 2010, to April 5, 2010 (75 FR
13715, March 23, 2010), to accommodate a request for a comment period
extension. We also contacted appropriate Federal, State, tribal, and
local agencies, scientific organizations, and other interested parties
and invited them to comment on the proposed rule and the draft economic
analysis. We held a public hearing in Boise, Idaho, on February 25,
2010, and held public meetings and open houses in Bend, Chiloquin, and
LaGrande, Oregon; Post Falls, Idaho; Missoula, Montana; Elko, Nevada;
and Wenatchee Washington. During the first comment period, we received
a request for an additional public hearing from the Native Fish
Society; however, section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), only requires that one
public hearing be held on a proposed regulation if any person files a
request for such a hearing within 45 days after the date of publication
of a proposed rule. Because of the court-ordered deadline, we were
unable to hold an additional public hearing; however, we did conduct an
additional open house and public information meeting in Vancouver,
Washington, in response to the Native Fish Society's request.
We received several hundred comment letters and e-mails from
individuals and organizations, and speaker testimony at the February
25, 2010, Boise, Idaho, public hearing. We also received comment
letters from four peer reviewers, eight State agencies, several Native
American Tribes, and seven Federal agencies, including the U.S. Navy.
We coordinated the proposed revision of critical habitat with
federally recognized Tribes on a government-to-government basis 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 relevant
provision of the Departmental Manual of the Department of the Interior
(512 DM 2). We contacted all Tribes potentially affected by the
proposed designation and met with a number of these Tribes to discuss
their ongoing or future management strategies for bull trout.
All substantive information provided during comment periods has
either been incorporated directly into this final designation or
addressed below. Comments we received were grouped into general issues
specifically relating to the proposed critical habitat designation for
the bull trout, and are addressed in the following summary and
incorporated into the final rule as appropriate.
Peer Review
In accordance with our policy published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994, (59 FR 34270), we solicited opinions from four
knowledgeable individuals with scientific expertise that included
familiarity with the species, the geographic region in which the
species occurs, and conservation biology principles. We received
responses from each of the peer reviewers we contacted. We reviewed all
comments we received for substantive issues and new information
regarding bull trout critical habitat. We have addressed peer reviewer
comments in the following summary and have incorporated them into this
final rule as appropriate.
The peer reviewers generally agreed we relied on the best
scientific information available, accurately described the species and
its habitat requirements (primary constituent elements (PCEs)), and
accurately characterized the reasons for the species' decline and the
threats to its habitat, and the peer reviewers generally concurred with
our critical habitat selection criteria. Peer reviewer comments
addressed several topics, including the importance of off-channel
habitats and information on specific waterbodies, climate change,
migratory corridors and connectivity, historical and contemporary
range, disturbance processes, primary constituent elements, and
threats.
Comments from Peer Reviewers
(1) Comment: The Service should discuss uncertainty in our
knowledge of habitat use by bull trout and what habitat features are
important to bull trout. Peer reviewers expressed concern about how new
information (e.g., regarding bull trout occupancy, and habitat
requirements and use) should be integrated into critical habitat
protections. Because we do not know what type of disturbance will occur
where, or how long those effects may last, there are uncertainties
regarding future habitat viability (i.e., what is good habitat today
might not be suitable in the future, and vice versa).
Some specific comments include the following. The term ``migratory
corridors'' implies that fish do not occupy these areas for extended
periods of time during their life history, but mainstem river habitats
are critical for rearing and overwintering. Subadults stay for months
and years in these areas
[[Page 63900]]
to grow to maturity. Bull trout depend critically on large patches of
suitably cold habitat; cold habitat is necessary, but it also has to be
very large as well. In addition to connectivity, this is a landscape
characteristic that defines the species' local occurrence. In areas
where anadromous fish are extirpated or endangered, bull trout have
been affected through the loss of abundant prey in the form of parr and
smolts, and by a severe reduction in marine-derived nutrients that
adult anadromous fish formerly annually returned to interior basins.
The PCEs do not address habitat requirements for fry-parr rearing, fry-
parr overwintering, adult staging, and adult overwintering. PCE 6 needs
to address cobble/boulder substrates with a few fines and abundant
interstitial spaces as essential for overwintering bull trout juveniles
and resident bull trout. The actual range of spawning temperature is
wider and often noted in field observations, but less frequently
published. Studies found that fish in cold water did not move outside
of cold water to other spawning areas, but there is probably more
variation than indicated in the proposed rule (75 FR 2278, January 14,
2010). The implication is that a wider range of habitats may be
important for spawning. Finally, it appeared to reviewers that there
was an arbitrary distinction drawn between foraging, migration, and
overwintering (FMO) and spawning and rearing habitat. In addition, peer
reviewers provided additional bull trout life-history information.
Our Response: The Service agrees there are many uncertainties in
the identification and protection of essential bull trout habitat.
Uncertainties include an incomplete understanding of important
features, uncertainty of future disturbance effects, a lack of data to
clearly distinguish between spawning and rearing and FMO habitats, and
a lack of information on how the absence of or a reduction in
anadromous fish abundance affects bull trout. The PCEs in this final
rule represent our best current understanding of habitat requirements
for bull trout. The PCEs were developed by working with a broad array
of local experts to identify both occupied habitat that contains
physical or biological features essential to bull trout conservation,
and unoccupied habitat that is essential to conservation. We
acknowledge that potential disturbances such as wildfire or invasive
species introductions are difficult to predict, but may affect bull
trout habitat. To address this concern, we designated critical habitat
areas we believe will be sufficient to address variability in the
habitat function of individual portions of these habitats over time,
based on the best available scientific information. Should it become
necessary, we can revise critical habitat to address more complete or
additional information (if and when such information becomes available)
relative to bull trout conservation.
We have revised the PCEs based on the peer review and other
comments, and believe they address all life-history components and
habitat needs for bull trout, including the need for large patches of
suitably cold habitat. Given the wide range of circumstances and
habitats to which PCEs may apply, they necessarily lack absolute
specificity and detail. The sections on Primary Constituent Elements,
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation, and Application of the
Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Standards, below, provide additional
context for how the PCEs will be interpreted and implemented.
We acknowledge an imprecise understanding of the distinction
between spawning and rearing habitat and FMO habitat on a general and
site-specific basis. This final rule acknowledges that bull trout
typically spawn over a narrow time window of a couple weeks during
periods of decreasing water temperatures, but clarifies that spawning
ranges from August to November depending on local conditions (Swanberg
1997, p. 735). When we discuss migratory corridors in this rule, we
generally refer to FMO habitat, which includes more than just habitat
for migration at limited times of year. We agree that there is
considerable uncertainty regarding the role FMO habitat plays in any
particular area. We anticipate the need to include spatial and temporal
considerations regarding the role of FMO habitat for particular areas
during section 7 consultation, and modify those consultations
accordingly.
We have a limited understanding of the effects that the loss of
anadromous fish had on bull trout, although bull trout appear to
continue to thrive in some areas where anadromous fish have been
eliminated. However, bull trout populations may have been more robust
where anadromous fish were historically also present, or present in
greater numbers. For the purposes of this designation, we believe
identifying essential habitats regardless of the historic or current
presence of anadromous fish provides an opportunity to protect those
essential habitats. We anticipate evaluating more closely the role
anadromous fish may play in bull trout conservation during recovery
planning.
(2) Comment: Climate change should be identified as an existing
stressor that compounds other stressors, contributing to bull trout
decline. Due to the complex interaction of climatic responses and the
high degree of uncertainty associated with climate projections, there
needs to be some type of criteria (e.g., maximum summer temperatures)
in deciding to deemphasize some habitats. One peer reviewer commented
the current analysis of climate impacts does not help in thinking about
localized climate impacts; it provides a big picture view that is
probably a lot more apocalyptic than might actually occur (for example,
air may respond a lot more strongly to climate impacts than water
temperatures). Maximum air and water temperatures are not always
correlated, and changes to air temperatures may not reliably indicate
changes to water temperature. Lower-elevation, warmer, marginal
habitats should not necessarily be excluded from critical habitat
because they still may serve as important migratory corridors during
certain times of the year that could link isolated populations. Not
including these habitats as critical habitat could result in further
habitat fragmentation, population isolation, and associated threats
(e.g., reduced genetic diversity.). The Service should address the
extent to which such habitats are valued and may be accounted for in
recovery planning.
Our Response: We are unable to predict the site-specific effects of
climate change on bull trout habitat throughout the range of the
species with certainty, but we did consider climate change as we
developed the proposed rule (75 FR 2280, January 14, 2010). For areas
that were marginal in terms of adequately providing PCEs for the bull
trout, which we believe would be further degraded as a result of
climate change, we chose not to identify those areas as critical
habitat. However, this rationale was applied only in a few instances.
We agree with the peer review comments that these warmer habitats can
be essential to bull trout conservation because they facilitate
connectivity among otherwise isolated headwater populations of bull
trout. In the Klamath Basin, we are designating a larger amount of
unoccupied habitat of this type specifically for this reason. In most
cases, these areas can serve as migratory corridors in a few cooler
months of the year with higher water flows. Also, providing cold-water
habitat during low-flow summer months may never have been an important
feature of this kind of habitat for bull trout.
(3) Comment: While the presence of nonnative invasive species is
likely
[[Page 63901]]
detrimental to bull trout in most cases, areas with nonnative species
present should not necessarily be excluded from critical habitat, as
seems to be suggested under PCE 9. Nonnative species can serve as an
important forage base where the native fish assemblage has been
fractured. The Service should address more clearly how nonnative
species impact our evaluation of whether habitats are essential.
Our Response: We agree with peer reviewer's comments and have
revised PCE 9 to reflect the concern. We considered the impact of
invasive species to evaluate areas that may have been marginal habitat
to begin with. If these areas were additionally compromised because of
robust populations of invasive species that would be difficult to
control, we are not designating the area as critical habitat if bull
trout populations were not reasonably recoverable and the area was not
needed for recovery. In some cases bull trout occur in good habitat
that is primarily impacted by invasive species. If these populations
are essential to recovery and special management actions can be
reasonably implemented to control invasive species, we are designating
the area as critical habitat. More importantly, this PCE is included
here as one key bull trout habitat protection element. So, for example,
a Federal action that would introduce an invasive species such as brook
trout in a watershed with bull trout critical habitat would be
inconsistent with the recovery needs of the species in that area.
(4) Comment: The Service should ensure that confining the lateral
extent of the critical habitat designation in streams to the bankfull
elevation addresses habitat needs. The Service should also clarify what
is meant by habitat complexity under PCE 4, and develop appropriate
metrics that relate to habitat complexity. In some basins, off-channel
habitats may be critical for providing low-velocity habitats for
rearing small fish, and the accessibility of these habitats will change
with flow. Many of the constituent elements identified for bull trout
depend on watersheds as a whole, and other contributing tributaries,
not just the reaches that bull trout use. Consequently, it may be
difficult or impossible to conserve bull trout by limiting habitat
protection and restoration only to the reaches that they use.
Peer reviewer comments related to threats included observations
that roads can increase the likelihood of poaching; herbicides and
pesticides cause additional agricultural effects; screening of
diversions may reduce the impacts of irrigation; negative impacts of
flow modifications associated with hydropower and flood control
operations, and summer augmentation, may occur in downstream areas; and
road crossings may create barriers in addition to barriers already in
place from dams.
Our Response: Activities above the ordinary high water mark can,
and often do, impact bull trout critical habitat. Off-channel habitats
may be seasonally important for bull trout, and upland management
practices such as road construction, use, and maintenance or timber
harvest can affect aquatic habitat. Actions that occur upstream in a
watershed above bull trout occurrence reaches can also adversely affect
designated habitat if not properly conducted. We will implement this
rule consistent with our understanding of these effects, and work
closely and cooperatively with Federal agencies to ensure any such
actions do not adversely modify designated critical habitat.
When we discuss bull trout habitat complexity, we refer to a
diversity of pool, riffle, and run habitats in streams, and gravel,
cobble, and boulder stream substrates with open interstitial spaces. We
also refer to stream channels and their associated riparian habitat
areas that collectively function to provide important features such as
undercut stream banks, shade, overhanging cover, and large woody debris
in streams and other waterbodies. Any Federal actions that would
adversely modify these features would be inconsistent with this rule.
Examples of these actions could include activities that introduce
sediment into streams that clog interstitial spaces, discharge dredged
or fill material into stream pool habitat, degrade stream banks, and
reduce or remove large woody debris. Because of this habitat complexity
across the range of the species, we determined and quantified the
habitat needs of the bull trout and defined the PCEs to include the
needs of the species across all types of waterbodies within the full
range of the bull trout. We have presented additional information for
Federal agencies in the sections on Primary Constituent Elements and
Section 7 Consultation, below, to help them consider their future
actions and ongoing actions where they have continuing discretionary
involvement with regard to conserving the PCEs. With regard to the
comment that it may be difficult or impossible to conserve bull trout
by limiting habitat protection and restoration only to the reaches that
they use, we do not limit the critical habitat designation to occupied
habitat. We are designating approximately 1,323.7 km (822.5 mi) of
streams and 6,758.8 ha (16,701.3 ac) of unoccupied habitat to address
bull trout conservation needs in specific geographic areas.
(5) Comment: It is unclear where occupied habitats that are not
proposed for designation are located, or where historical populations
of bull trout once occurred. It is reasonably arguable that some
critical habitat is more critical to the conservation needs of the
species than other critical habitat.
Our Response: Section 3(5)(A) of the Act defines critical habitat,
in part, as the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by
the species at the time it is listed, on which are found those physical
or biological features essential to the conservation of the species
which may require special management considerations or protection.
Based on this definition, the proposed rule identified a large majority
of habitat that was known to be occupied by bull trout at the time of
listing. It is uncertain how much habitat may have been historically
occupied but is no longer occupied. We used the best scientific
information available to include occupied habitat with the features
essential to the conservation of the species, as well as unoccupied
areas also essential to the conservation of the bull trout. All areas
designated as critical habitat in this final rule are essential to the
conservation of the species, based on the best available information.
(6) Comment: Peer reviewers questioned whether restoration
activities in areas that are not designated as critical habitat could
be counted as progress in terms of recovery, and whether all areas
designated as critical habitat would have to be recovered before
declaring overall bull trout recovery. One peer reviewer recommended
that the final rule address how bull trout will be protected in
reintroduction sites, such as the Clackamas River in Oregon, and how
these areas may or may not be linked to the persistence of populations.
Our Response: These comments will be fully considered as we engage
in the recovery planning process. Please see the Relationship of
Critical Habitat to Recovery Planning section of this rule for more
information regarding this effort.
(7) Comment: One peer reviewer stated that it wasn't clear whether
areas outside of critical habitat are essential to conservation of bull
trout, and that if not, biological consultations and
[[Page 63902]]
recovery planning and implementation should incorporate these
considerations.
Our Response: This rule designates as critical habitat areas that
we have determined to meet the definition of critical habitat under
section 3(5)(A) of the Act, except for those areas we have identified
and expressly excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. A critical
habitat designation does not signal that habitat outside the designated
area is unimportant or may not be required for recovery of the species.
Areas that support populations, but are outside the critical habitat
designation, may continue to be subject to conservation actions we
implement under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, and are subject to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard. Please see the Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
section in the rule for further information.
(8) Comment: The Service should explain what has changed from 2005
to 2010 that enabled a determination that unoccupied habitats were
essential for the conservation of bull trout in certain areas.
Our Response: As stated in the proposed rule (75 FR 2273, January
14, 2010), in the 2005 final rule we did not designate any unoccupied
critical habitat because the Secretary concluded that it was not
possible to make a determination that such lands were essential to the
conservation of the species. In the proposed rule and this rule, we
were able to identify several habitats not occupied at the time of
listing that we believe are essential for restoring functioning
migratory bull trout populations based on currently available
scientific information. These areas often include lower main stem river
environments that can provide seasonally important migration habitat
for bull trout. This type of habitat is essential in areas where bull
trout habitat and population loss over time necessitates reestablishing
bull trout in currently unoccupied habitat areas to achieve recovery.
(9) Comment: More detailed and recent literature should be reviewed
to support the habitat needs discussion. Updated citations and
references that list research and other new information obtained since
the original listing should be incorporated into the critical habitat
rule.
Our Response: We agree, and have done so in this final rule.
Comments from States
Section 4(i) of the Act states, ``the Secretary shall submit to the
State agency a written justification for his failure to adopt
regulations consistent with the agency's comments or petition.''
Comments we received from States regarding the proposal to designate
revised critical habitat for the bull trout are addressed below. We
received comments from the Nevada Division of Wildlife, Montana Fish
Wildlife and Parks, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR), Idaho Department of Lands, Idaho Office of Species
Conservation, and Idaho Department of Fish and Game related to
biological information for specific waterbodies, critical habitat
exclusions, and economics. These agencies provided additional
information and made recommendations for revisions to the final
critical habitat designation in several specific areas. Two agencies
expressed specific support for the Service's approach to designating
critical habitat.
(1) Comment: We received several comments from State resource
agencies presenting site-specific biological information on areas that
should or should not be considered essential habitat, and the
underlying rationale for those recommendations.
Our Response: The information received from our State resource
agency partners was very helpful, and enabled us to refine our
understanding of habitat essential to the conservation of the species,
and in the case of occupied habitat, habitat that contains physical or
biological features that may require special management considerations
or protections. We based the proposed rule on the best available
information at that time; we requested technical input from a variety
of partners, including the States, to help us refine the final critical
habitat designation. The final rule has been adjusted, accordingly,
including modifying boundaries of critical habitat units, based on our
partners' site-specific biological expertise with the species.
(2) Comment: We received comments from some State agencies
identifying concerns with the draft economic analysis, which included
failure to consider costs related to bull trout recovery, failure to
request economic information from the State prior to publication of the
proposed rule, and costs to forest land management.
Our Response: These comments have been addressed below in the
section of the final rule that responds to all comments we received on
the draft economic analysis.
(3) Comment: Some commenters recommended that we exclude lands
subject to State conservation planning efforts, or that we rely on
existing habitat protections, such as State forest practice rules,
rather than designating critical habitat in those areas.
Our Response: We disagree. It would be inappropriate to rely on
other protections such as state forest practice rules or similar large-
scale programs that have not been subject to review under the Act as an
alternative to critical habitat designation, based on the uncertainty
of protections that would be afforded to the physical or biological
features essential to bull trout conservation. Uncertainty regarding
future funding, and revisions and implementation of those plans is also
a concern. However, some State conservation planning efforts related to
finalized habitat conservation plans (HCPs) have resulted in our
exclusion of areas from critical habitat designation under section
4(b)(2) of the Act. Please see the Exclusions section below for
additional information.
(4) Comment: One State agency commented that the Service proposed a
vast and over-reaching critical habitat designation without first
acquiring the requisite site-specific information required by the Act.
The State agency also commented that, without future refinement, the
designation would lead to unnecessary regulation on otherwise lawful
activities. The agency also expressed concern that the Service ignored
information regarding the agency's position when forming the basis for
the revised critical habitat designation.
Our Response: As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we used
the best scientific data available in determining areas that contain
the features essential to the conservation of bull trout for the
proposed rule. Data sources included research published in peer-
reviewed journals and previous Service documents, including the final
listing determination (64 FR 58909, November 1, 1999), the bull trout
draft recovery plan (Service 2002), and the bull trout 5-year review
(Service 2008). In the proposed rule, we requested comments or
information from the public, other concerned government agencies, the
scientific community, industry, and other interested parties, which
included a specific request for information regarding areas essential
to the conservation of the species. Because of the court-ordered
deadline for delivery of a proposed rule to the Federal Register, our
strategy was to work closely with our resource management partners
after publication of the proposed rule, and use their biological
expertise to help us refine the final critical habitat designation.
This final
[[Page 63903]]
rule incorporates that information, as appropriate.
(5) Comment: One State agency commented that the designation of
critical habitat for bull trout invites the potential for additional
regulatory burdens to be placed on landowners, persons holding public
land permits, and industries. The agency also commented that while the
Service is already consulting on projects with a Federal nexus under
section 7 of the Act, the bar is now arguably raised as reinitiation of
consultation will be required to ensure permitted activities do not
adversely modify critical habitat.
Our Response: The Service believes any additional regulatory
burdens resulting from the designation of critical habitat in occupied
areas will be minimal. The rationale for this determination is that the
species was listed under the Act because of threats to habitat, and
section 7 consultations are already required to address any habitat-
related impacts associated with Federal actions. Although it is
theoretically possible, we have been unable to identify any specific
type of Federal action that could adversely modify critical habitat in
occupied areas that would not also result in a jeopardy finding for the
same action. Accordingly, we do not believe the regulatory bar has been
raised in occupied areas. Designating critical habitat adds educational
value in these areas by identifying habitats that should be prioritized
for recovery actions as opportunities arise. While critical habitat may
result in additional conservation requirements for Federal actions in
unoccupied areas, we do not believe this would be a significant impact
because these areas constitute only 4 percent of the total critical
habitat area being designated in this final rule. Federal agencies will
need to consider the adverse modification of critical habitat in future
section 7 consultations, and may need to reinitiate consultation on
existing actions where they have continued discretionary involvement or
control if the activity may affect designated critical habitat.
However, we anticipate the overall result of reinitiation will be minor
because of the similarity between measures needed to avoid the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat and measures
needed to avoid jeopardizing the species. In addition, consultation
tools such as streamlining and programmatic consultations are commonly
implemented to minimize the administrative costs associated with
consultation within the range of bull trout.
(6) Comment: Concern was expressed that if all unoccupied critical
habitat had to be recolonized and recovered before bull trout could be
delisted, the uncertainties and potential costs associated with this
requirement would be high.
Our Response: One of the greatest conservation benefits of critical
habitat is the designation of unoccupied habitat that is essential to
the conservation of a listed species. For bull trout, unoccupied
habitat plays an important role in restoring connectivity between
currently isolated headwater populations via lower mainstem river
habitats. The Service does not believe all designated unoccupied
habitat would necessarily need to be recolonized and restored to
declare recovery, and we would take into consideration the status of
adjacent populations (e.g., their robustness in relation to threats).
For example, nearby occupied habitats could currently be in an
imperiled status, but by restoring bull trout in adjacent unoccupied
habitat, the overall recovery potential in that area could be improved.
We anticipate that the bull trout recovery planning process and our
continued progress towards achieving recovery goals will provide more
precision with regard to identifying the restoration needs of specific
habitat areas.
(7) Comment: Two State agencies expressed support for the Service's
approach to designating critical habitat, stating that: (1) The
approach generally provides the breadth of habitat necessary to support
bull trout in a fully recovered state and includes significant portions
of aquatic habitat that are currently not occupied or disconnected due
to anthropogenic (i.e., human-caused) factors; and (2) the approach
contains those areas essential for the conservation of the bull trout.
Our Response: We appreciate this support from our partners, and the
helpful site-specific information they presented in response to the
request for information in the proposed rule.
(8) Comment: The Washington Department of Natural Resources
presented information supportive of excluding lands covered under the
final State HCP and the final Forest Practices HCPs. The Montana
Department of Natural Resources presented information supportive of
excluding streams and rivers intersecting forested Montana State Trust
lands that would be covered under a draft HCP from the final bull trout
critical habitat rule.
Our Response: Please refer to the discussion of the Forest
Practices HCPs in our responses to Public Comments below and in the
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section under Exclusions in
this final rule. The WDNR State lands HCP is discussed under the
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this rule.
When considering HCPs, draft land-management plans, and draft
conservation agreements, the Service can consider the certainty of
implementation or the lack thereof, especially if there are no
established procedures to ensure that the final instrument will produce
the anticipated benefits. The Service believes that, in general, it is
inappropriate exclude areas that are covered by draft conservation
programs or plans, because their proposed conservation measures are
subject to change. Without a high degree of assurance that conservation
measures will be implemented and effective for a particular species and
its habitat, we cannot complete a meaningful analysis under section
4(b)(2) of the Act.
Federal Agency Comments
Bureau of Land Management
(1) Comment: The Service should exclude Bureau of Land Management
(BLM)-administered lands from critical habitat designation.
Our Response: The Secretary of the Interior may exclude an area
from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
after taking into consideration the economic impact, the impact on
national security, and any other relevant impact if he determines the
benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area,
unless he determines the exclusion would result in the extinction of
the species concerned. The primary benefit of including an area within
critical habitat designation is the protection provided by section
7(a)(2) of the Act that directs Federal agencies to ensure that their
actions do not result in the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. The benefit of designating critical habitat is
limited if the areas under consideration occur on private lands for
which there may not be a Federal nexus to invoke the protections of
section 7(a)(2) of the Act. Federal lands by default have a Federal
nexus, and the intent of section 7 of the Act is to require Federal
agencies to consult on any action authorized, funded, or carried out by
such agency to ensure that the action will not jeopardize a listed
species or destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. In
addition, section 7(a)(1) of the Act states, in part, ``Federal
agencies shall, in consultation with and with the assistance of the
Secretary, utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of
this Act
[[Page 63904]]
by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered and
threatened species.'' Therefore, the benefits of inclusion of these
areas are greater because they are Federal lands.
We requested specific information from the BLM describing:
(1)Activities being conducted and planned that conserve bull trout or
the physical or biological features identified in the proposed critical
habitat rule; (2) the status of management plans, including the
geographic area covered, date finalized, date implementation was
initiated, timeline for future revisions, and the amount of critical
habitat affected by the plan; (3) specific management measures that
conserve the physical or biological features in the plan area; (4)
conservation benefits associated with the plan; (5) information on plan
implementation, including the level of certainty and uncertainty that
exists with regard to conservation commitments and funding assurances
continuing into the future; and (6) the plan's effectiveness related to
biological goals and objectives, implementation progress, monitoring,
adaptive management provisions, and schedule. We also requested
specific examples of completed projects that have improved the status
of bull trout within a particular plan area.
Although specific information was not presented, we did receive
some information from the BLM on Areas of Critical Environment Concern
(ACEC) Plans, the Wild and Scenic River Management (WSR) Plans for the
Deschutes and Lower Crooked Rivers in Oregon, and the Willamette Basin
Water Quality Restoration Plan (WBWQ) to support their request for the
exclusion of BLM-administered lands from critical habitat designation.
The BLM also resubmitted comments that were prepared for the Service's
consideration for the 2005 bull trout final critical habitat rule;
those comments summarize several management plans and guidance
documents, such as agency memorandums, BLM Manual chapters, Land Health
Standards, Pacific Anadromous Fish Strategy (PACFISH), Inland Fish
Strategy (INFISH), National Fire Plan, Healthy Forests Restoration Act
of 2003 (16 U.S.C. 6501 et seq.), Wilderness Study Areas, Interior
Columbia River Basin Ecosystem Management Project, Road Density and
Land Management recommendations, and Regional Executive/Line Manager
Oversight/Communication roles. We have reviewed the information that
was submitted in light of the October 3, 2008, Memorandum Opinion from
the Department of the Interior's Office of the Solicitor ``The
Secretary's Authority to Exclude Areas from a Critical Habitat
Designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Endangered Species Act'' (DOI
2008), and the best available information. We were unable to confirm
that the BLM's management plans and guidance documents provide a
conservation benefit for bull trout comparable to critical habitat
designation, or that designation of critical habitat on BLM lands would
present a disproportionate economic or other relevant impact. The
Secretary has elected not to exercise his discretion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude BLM-administered lands from this revised
critical habitat designation. However, we are committed to working
efficiently and proactively with the BLM to address their program
administration needs, in light of the conservation needs of bull trout.
(2) Comment: The BLM commented, ``The BLM does not agree and the
guidance issued in the October 3, 2008, Solicitors Opinion does not
support the conclusion that if something meets the Federal agency
obligation under section 7(a)(1) it should automatically be precluded
from exclusions under section 4(b)(2).''
Our Response: The proposed rule does not state that actions taken
to comply with section 7(a)(1) of the Act preclude consideration of
those actions for purposes of section 4(b)(2) of the Act; however, it
does state that Federal land management plans, in and of themselves,
are generally not an appropriate basis for excluding essential habitat.
Federal agencies have an independent responsibility under section
7(a)(1) of the Act to use their programs in furtherance of the Act and
to utilize their authorities to carry out programs for the conservation
of endangered and threatened species. In areas where Federal land
management agencies actively manage for bull trout and its habitat,
conduct specific conservation actions for the species at a level
comparable to critical habitat designation, provide assurances that a
plan will remain in effect for a relevant period of time, and show that
a disproportionate impact would result from the designation, exclusion
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act may be appropriately considered by the
Secretary.
(3) Comment: Conservation measures within the Northwest Forest Plan
(NWFP), Aquatic Conservation Strategy (ACS), and PACFISH/INFISH are
currently still in place and continue to be adequate to provide for the
conservation of bull trout.
Our Response: We recognize the extensive planning and development
that has been invested in these efforts, and commend the BLM's efforts
to conserve federally listed species on their lands. However, as stated
in the proposed rule (75 FR 2273), large-scale Federal land management
plans such as the NWFP and its aquatic component (the ACS), and other
plans such as PACFISH/INFISH, are in and of themselves generally not an
appropriate basis for excluding essential habitat. These plans
typically guide agency activities, and provide some level of
conservation benefit in occupied bull trout habitat areas, but are
fluid documents that may or may not be revised, based on resource
availability, management emphasis, and changes in management direction
to respond to changing agency priorities.
(4) Comment: The designation of critical habitat would not offer
any additional protections to bull trout beyond those currently
provided.
Our Response: We acknowledge in the proposed rule that since the
primary threat to bull trout is habitat loss or degradation, the
jeopardy analysis under section 7 of the Act for a project with a
Federal nexus will most likely evaluate the effects of the action on
the conservation or functionality of the habitat for bull trout. We
also stated that, in many cases, the analysis of a project to address
designated critical habitat would be comparable to the jeopardy
analysis, and for many circumstances the outcome of the consultation to
address critical habitat would not result in any significant additional
project modifications or conservation measures (75 FR 2291, January 14,
2010). A possibility exists that a section 7(a)(2) consultation on a
future BLM project would result in a determination that an action would
result in the destruction or adverse modification of bull trout
critical habitat. In accordance with our current policy, in cases where
the Secretary determines the benefits of inclusion (designation) are
equal to or outweigh the benefits of exclusion, he may not make an
exclusion (USDOI 2008, p. 24).
(5) Comment: The designation of critical habitat would impose
additional regulatory burdens that would increase the process and
administrative costs, and this money would be more appropriately
directed at implementing protection measures on the ground.
Our Response: The analyses that result from the consultation
provisions under section 7(a)(2) of the Act constitute a regulatory
benefit of critical habitat, and Federal agencies must consult with the
Service on discretionary actions that may affect listed species.
Federal agencies must
[[Page 63905]]
also analyze the effects of an action on critical habitat, which is a
separate and different analysis from that of the effects to the
species. We anticipate that, in some cases, this consultation would
translate to the implementation of on-the-ground bull trout
conservation measures. Avoiding the costs associated with the
designation of critical habitat would be the principal benefit of
excluding an area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We appreciate the
BLM's concern that the designation of critical habitat may impose
additional regulatory burdens and increase administrative costs;
however, the BLM did not present any information characterizing the
magnitude of that impact. In order to make a section 4(b)(2) exclusion
or critical habitat designation determination, the Secretary must
gather the available information about the economic and other relevant
impacts that would result from his decision (DOI 2008, p. 15). We have
no information available that would indicate that the regulatory and
administrative burden that may result from the designation of critical
habitat on BLM lands presents a disproportionate impact to the agency
that outweighs the regulatory benefit of designating critical habitat
on those lands.
(6) Comment: The conservation benefit of designating critical
habitat would only be realized when the Service determines the action
would destroy or adversely modify critical habitat and reasonable and
prudent alternatives are issued, which is rare.
Our Response: We agree that adverse modification determinations are
rare, because in the majority of section 7 consultations the Service is
able to work in partnership with Federal agencies to identify ways to
accomplish agency management objectives, comply with the Act, and
conserve species and their habitats on managed lands. However, in some
cases, we may determine a proposed Federal action would alter the
physical or biological features of critical habitat to an extent that
appreciably reduces its conservation function for bull trout. Under
these circumstances, an adverse modification finding for the proposed
action would be warranted. There may be additional conservation
benefits to consultation on adverse effects that is not limited to
adverse modification situations, because an agency may modify an action
in advance to avoid any effects to critical habitat and avoid the need
for consultation.
(7) Comment: Because any conservation benefits realized through the
section 7(a)(2) process would already be occurring in areas occupied by
bull trout, additional conservation benefit would only occur in areas
designated as critical habitat where the species is not present.
Our Response: As stated in the proposed rule, when consulting under
section 7(a)(2) of the Act, independent analyses are conducted for
jeopardy to the species and adverse modification of critical habitat
(75 FR 2291, January 14, 2010). In occupied bull trout habitat, any
adverse modification determination would likely also result in a
jeopardy determination for the same action. As such, project
modifications that may be needed to minimize impacts to the species
would coincidentally minimize impacts to critical habitat. Accordingly,
in occupied critical habitat, it is unlikely, although possible, that
an analysis would identify a difference between measures needed to
avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat from
measures needed to avoid jeopardizing the species. Alternatively, in
unoccupied critical habitat, we would not conduct a jeopardy analysis.
However, measures to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat may be necessary to ensure that the affected critical
habitat area can continue to serve its intended conservation role for
the species, or retain the physical or biological features related to
the ability of the area to periodically support the species (75 FR
2291, January 14, 2010).
U.S. Forest Service
(1) Comment: The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) believes excluding
Federal lands continues to be a valid procedure. They recommended that
we exclude from critical habitat designation all occupied bull trout
habitat on all USFS-managed lands, as well as unoccupied habitat in the
Northwest Forest Plan area, but the USFS acknowledged other factors are
used by the Service to decide which lands and waters meet the criteria
for critical habitat designation or exclusion.
Our Response: We have reviewed USFS request in light of the October
3, 2008, Memorandum Opinion from the Department of the Interior's
Office of the Solicitor ``The Secretary's Authority to Exclude Areas
from a Critical Habitat Designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Endangered Species Act'' (DOI 2008), and the best available
information. We are unable to confirm that the USFS' management
activities under the NWFP or other management plans provide a
conservation benefit for bull trout comparable to critical habitat
designation, or that designation of critical habitat on USFS lands
would present a disproportionate economic or other relevant impact. In
light of the foregoing, the Secretary has elected not to exercise his
discretion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude USFS-managed
lands from this revised critical habitat designation. However, we are
committed to working efficiently and proactively with the USFS to
address their program administration needs, in light of the
conservation needs of bull trout.
(2) Comment: The guidance issued in the 2008 Solicitor M-Opinion
does not support a conclusion that if something meets the Federal
agency obligation under section 7(a)(1), it should automatically be
precluded from exclusions under sections 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Our Response: See response to BLM comment (2) above.
(3) Comment: Conservation measures within the Northwest Forest
Plan, Aquatic Conservation Strategy, and PACFISH/INFISH are currently
still in place and continue to be adequate to provide for the
conservation of bull trout.
Our Response: See response to BLM comment (3) above.
(4) Comment: Because any conservation benefits realized through
actions that used the section 7(a)(2) process would already be
occurring in areas occupied by bull trout, The USFS believes the
additional conservation benefits of designation would occur only in
areas designated as critical habitat that are not actually occupied by
bull trout.
Our Response: See response to BLM comment (4) above.
(5) Comment: After the final rule, the USFS will need time to
reinitiate and conclude interagency cooperation on many ongoing Federal
actions involving critical habitat, and to initiate and conclude new
consultations for actions in the process of being developed in occupied
and unoccupied critical habitat areas. To facilitate this consultation
workload, the USFS requested that the effective date of the final rule
be delayed for 120 days (similar to the National Marine Fisheries
Service's (NMFS) final rule designating critical habitat for listed
anadromous fish populations).
Our Response: Although we appreciate the concern, we have no
authorization under the court's remand order to delay the effective
date of the rule. However, the Service is committed to working closely
and efficiently with our Federal agency partners to meet both their
management needs and the conservation needs of bull trout in designated
critical habitat areas affected by their actions.
[[Page 63906]]
(6) Comment: Because critical habitat, by definition, includes
those habitats essential to the conservation, and ultimately
restoration, of the species, the USFS believes streams on Federal lands
that meet critical habitat criteria should be explicitly designated by
rule, rather than relying on other planning processes to ``de-facto''
cover these essential conditions. This helps clarify priority areas,
internally and with partners, for habitat conservation and improvement-
related efforts that will support recovery planning and implementation.
The USFS expressed support for designation of critical habitat on
National Forest System lands where bull trout can logically be expected
to recover. The agency also supported the designation of critical
habitat for all areas that are known to have existing populations of
bull trout and the designation of tributaries that drain into known
spawning habitats.
Our Response: We appreciate the comment, and are designating
critical habitat on certain National Forest System lands.
(7) Comment: The six new recovery units seem too large to measure
recovery should it take place, or be a reachable goal. The old set of
27 smaller recovery units made sense because they were at a scale that
is realistic to manage and evaluate the effects of recovery actions.
Our Response: This comment is beyond the scope of the final rule.
However, there may be a need to revise the existing draft recovery plan
or consider alternative recovery unit boundaries to effectively manage
and evaluate the effects of recovery actions in each critical habitat
unit. We are conducting preliminary work to develop a revised draft
recovery plan, with the goal of developing a final bull trout recovery
plan in the future.
Bureau of Reclamation
(1) Comment: For existing dams, it is unclear how the current
condition of the habitat with the dam in place can threaten the
physical or biological features of the specific areas being designated
as those areas, if occupied, can only be designated if the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species are
found under the existing conditions (i.e., with the dams in place). The
Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) recommended the following language for
inclusion in the final rule: ``While critical habitat is designated in
streams and reservoirs where flows and volumes fluctuate due to water
management activities, these are existing conditions that were found at
the time of listing. The lateral extent described for those streams and
reservoirs influenced by water management activities is considered the
upper limit of the critical habitat designation and changes in flows
and volumes are acceptable.''
Our Response: To qualify as critical habitat, an occupied area need
not contain all PCEs; one is sufficient. We acknowledge that the
adverse modification standard would not require an action agency to
create PCEs in occupied areas where such PCEs were wholly absent at the
time the areas were designated as critical habitat. Moreover, not all
adverse effects on PCEs that are present would rise to the level of
adverse modification. We must be cautious, however, not to imply that
fluctuating conditions would never constitute an adverse modification
of designated habitat for the reason that ``these are existing
conditions that were found at the time of listing.'' This would be a
flawed approach, for two reasons:
(1) The fact that an existing Federal project is not presently
adversely modifying critical habitat does not mean that the same
operations would not result in adverse modification under future
circumstances. As the section 7 regulations make clear, analysis for
jeopardy and adverse modification is heavily dependent on context, and
relies on consideration, not only of the effects of the Federal action
itself, but also the current baseline, the effects of interrelated and
interdependent actions, and the cumulative effects of future non-
Federal activities (50 C.F.R. Sec. 402.02). Thus, a stream that has
adequate flows now, despite Federal diversions, might not have adequate
flows in the future as a result of drought or non-Federal diversions.
Even if the amount of the Federal diversion does not change, its effect
on the PCEs could be more substantial if the context changes. Context
plays a critical role in the adverse modification analysis, and it
would be improper to prejudge the outcome of future consultations.
(2)Such an approach might lead to the erroneous conclusion that, if
a designated area contains essential features, those features are
already in a condition that is ideal for bull trout, and therefore any
Federal action that maintains the status quo would not cause adverse
modification. It is possible for an area to be less than ideal for bull
trout, yet contain features that are essential to the species'
conservation, because there is no better habitat available to serve an
essential function such as migrating, spawning or rearing. An area
designated for spawning habitat, for example, might have sufficient
clean gravel to provide for some spawning, yet still be suffering some
degradation as a result of sedimentation from roads. Depending on the
context, a Federal action that causes such sedimentation to continue
could constitute adverse modification.
Specifically, the lateral extent of critical habitat in lakes and
reservoirs is defined by the perimeter of the waterbody as mapped on
standard 1:24,000 scale topographic maps, and the Service assumes in
many cases this is full pool level. Defining the lateral limits in
reservoirs and lakes in this manner is consistent with the approach
taken for streams. Within streams, the critical habitat designation
includes the stream channels within the designated stream reaches with
the lateral extent defined by the bankfull elevation on one bank to the
bankfull elevation on the opposite bank. In cases where the bankfull
elevation is not evident on either bank, the ordinary high-water line
determines the lateral extent of critical habitat. Conditions at some
lakes or reservoirs allow a range of flows to occur. However, a full
range for one reservoir may operate from full pool to run-of-river
(zero pool) annually, while another reservoir may operate from full
pool with a built-in minimum conservation pool to address specific
water quality requirements. Reservoir operational requirements related
to bull trout critical habitat would be evaluated during the section 7
consultation process on a specific lake or reservoir basis.
Accordingly, we are unable to include the statement in the final rule
that was requested by the BOR, because the section 7 consultation
process has not been concluded.
(2) Comment: Lake Cascade and Phillips Reservoir should not be
designated as either occupied or unoccupied critical habitat, because
they would at best minimally provide two or three PCEs on a seasonal
basis and the abundance and spatial arrangement of the minimal PCEs
provided would not rise to the level of providing the physical or
biological features essential for conservation.
Our Response: We are designating stream segments and lakes or
reservoirs that contain habitat seasonally to connect and to promote
bull trout migratory life-history expression. Maintaining connectivity
between bull trout local populations through the restoration and
protection of main stem
[[Page 63907]]
rivers is a major emphasis for bull trout recovery. The designation of
critical habitat in occupied habitat is based on whether lakes or
reservoir contain one or more PCEs either seasonally or year-round. We
identified two major habitat types (spawning and rearing, and FMO);
both of these reservoirs were identified as FMO habitat in the proposed
rule. We have determined that Phillips Reservoir is essential for the
conservation of the species, because it provides FMO habitat
seasonally, during the fall, winter and spring.
In a comment letter we received from the Oregon Department of Fish
and Wildlife (ODFW) (March 10, 2010), they specifically recommended
inclusion of Phillips Reservoir: ``ODFW recommends extending critical
habitat designations downstream to the confluence with the Snake River.
Specifically we recommend including the mainstem Powder River from
Phillips Reservoir downstream to the mouth including Phillips and Thief
Valley Reservoirs. This designation would provide the opportunity for
connectivity among local populations and full life history expression
and to provide consistency with application of the seven guiding
principles for bull trout conservation, as well as consistency with
other designations in the state.'' We agree with their assessment.
Inclusion of Phillips Reservoir is key to restoring connectivity
between local bull trout populations, which is essential to maintaining
a viable bull trout population in the Powder River core area.
However, based on the best available scientific information
(including new site-specific biological information provided by the
BOR), we are not designating Lake Cascade as critical habitat. We agree
with the BOR that Lake Cascade lacks several of the essential habitat
features, is not confirmed to be occupied by bull trout, and poses too
many obstacles to be useful in bull trout conservation. Habitat
connections essential for metapopulation dynamics and genetic
interchange, which are important to maintaining a viable bull trout
population, are lacking. Exotic species have also extensively colonized
Lake Cascade, further complicating bull trout recovery (BOR 2010, pers.
comm.).
(3) Comment: The BOR provided site-specific biological information
on bull trout use in the Powder River, Malheur River, and Southwest
Idaho River Basins Units, and made several recommendations for
clarifications and revisions in the final rule.
Our Response: The Service received numerous comments from various
Federal agencies including the BOR. The Service reviewed all site-
specific comments, and we have revised the final critical habitat
designation based on information contained in our files and new
information received during the comment period, as appropriate. The
final critical designation for the Powder River, Malheur River, and
Southwest Idaho River Basins fully considered the information presented
by the BOR.
Department of Energy, Bonneville Power Administration
(1) Comment: The Federal Columbia Power System (FCRPS) hydropower
dams operating under the Service's and the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) Biological Opinions for the FCRPS
and Willamette River and within congressionally authorized operating
ranges are part of the environmental baseline. Given the extensive
management of operations of the FCRPS reservoirs consistent with bull
trout and salmonid Biological Opinions, the Service should clarify that
the FCRPS reservoirs are managed in a manner that is sufficiently
protective to achieve the biological features essential to the
conservation of bull trout.
Our Response: The Service will assess whether the current
management of the FCRPS is sufficient to conserve bull trout with
regard to the action described in the biological assessment after we
participate in section 7 analyses with the appropriate action agencies
involved. The purpose of critical habitat is to identify specific
geographic areas that contain the physical or biological features
essential for the conservation of an endangered or threatened species
and that may require special management considerations or protection.
Biological opinions are not conservation plans and do not have specific
measures that address the long-term conservation needs of bull trout
with regard to PCEs, but rather, they evaluate the effects of
particular projects on listed species or its critical habitat.
Biological opinions are the formal basis for disclosing NOAA's or the
Service's opinion on whether the Federal action will result in jeopardy
of a species or adverse modification of critical habitat, and are
specific to a particular proposed Federal action. See Section 7
Consultation, below, for additional information.
(2) Comment: The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) requested
that the Service identify any likely instances where the current FCRPS
operations under the Biological Opinions might be detrimental to bull
trout critical habitat, and address any potential conflict between two
or more listed species and the requirements of two regulatory agencies.
The BPA also requested that the Service address whether the current
FCRPS or Willamette operations may have to be substantially altered
from operations that would otherwise be required under the relevant
Biological Opinions. If alterations are identified, the Service should
describe how those alterations have been considered in the economic
analysis of the impacts of designation.
Our Response: It is possible that some future operational
alterations may be undertaken as a result of bull trout critical
habitat designation, although the specific extent to which project
modification costs for the FCRPS or Willamette Project will increase as
a result of this designation is unclear. We did not receive any
specific data from BPA that would facilitate additional analysis;
however, this potential concern is particularly complex because most of
the proposed area on the Upper Willamettte River was designated as
critical habitat in 2005. The Final Economic Analysis (FEA) applied the
best available information and methods to estimate potential
incremental impacts. Although section 4 of the Act establishes
requirements for listing species and designating critical habitat, it
does not address Federal agency requirements under section 7 of the
Act, which addresses the need for Federal agencies to consult on the
effects of their actions on listed species. Potential FCRPS operations
will be analyzed for their effects on bull trout critical habitat once
section 7 consultation is reinitiated.
(3) Comment: The bankfull width for streams and perimeter of the
water as mapped on standard 1:24,000 scale topographic map definitions
for the lateral boundaries of critical habitat could imply that any
drawdown or lowering of those levels would adversely affect the
designated critical habitat. Lake and reservoir drawdown is within the
authorized range of FCRPS and other hydro projects and is required to
meet Federal project purposes such as flood control, irrigation, power
production, and at times to meet requirements under FCRPS biological
opinions. These activities do not necessarily negatively affect bull
trout, and in some circumstances, may actually benefit bull trout.
Our Response: Section 7 of Act requires that Federal agencies
confer or consult with the Service on their actions; it is during such
conference or consultation that the effects of the action on critical
habitat will be analyzed. This designation does not
[[Page 63908]]
result in modifications of current biological opinions, but may result
in the need for reinitiation of consultation in some cases. A
determination regarding the beneficial, neutral, or detrimental nature
of effects of a particular Federal action would be made during section
7 consultation for that specific activity.
U.S. Small Business Administration, Office of Advocacy
(1) Comment: The U.S. Small Business Administration's Office of
Advocacy encouraged the Service to conduct outreach to county
governments and other small municipal bodies to further examine the
economic impact of the critical habitat designation to determine
whether any reasonable alternatives exist that would accomplish
conservation goals while providing needed regulatory relief to small
entities. The Office indicated that, through these discussions, the
Service may determine to exclude particular areas from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Our Response: As noted as in the final economic analysis (FEA),
there are numerous baseline regulations in place for several fish
species whose ranges overlap bull trout, including conservation
protections for salmon and steelhead, that provide coincident
protections for bull trout and its critical habitat. These protections
apply to most of the lands currently occupied by bull trout (96
percent). Annualized incremental impacts to small entities considered
represent 51 percent of total incremental impacts estimated in the rest
of the FEA, and less than 0.6 percent of annual revenues for all
activities. Given the history of regulation and baseline protections
already in place, we do not believe county governments or small
municipal bodies will experience any appreciable incremental economic
impacts from this designation. Accordingly, no areas are being excluded
from critical habitat designation based on economic impacts. Please
refer to the section below that addresses comment responses to the
economic analysis for further information in this regard.
Department of the Navy
(1) Comment: The U.S. Department of the Navy commented that
national security impacts would occur if critical habit were to be
designated in the Dabob Bay Range Complex (DBRC), Quinault Underwater
Tracking Range (QUTR), and Crescent Harbor. The additional regulatory
requirements imposed by the designation may delay, restrict, or
prohibit the implementation of required training and testing in these
areas. The Navy requested that the Service exclude the existing
training areas and the proposed extensions of the DBRC and QUTR areas
currently being evaluated in their Environmental Impact Statement from
designation as critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
Our Response: Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we are required to
consider whether there are lands owned or managed by the Department of
Defense where a national security impact might exist if such areas are
designated as critical habitat. Please see the Application of Section
4(b)(2) of the Act section below for more information regarding the
analysis of the above Navy facilities.
National Park Service
(1) Comment: Crater Lake National Park, a unit of the National Park
Service, indicated that designation of critical habitat in Annie Creek
is appropriate based on historic records and the connectivity of Annie
Creek with other stream networks known to contain bull trout. The Park
supported returning the lower Sun Creek irrigation canal to a more
natural alignment to increase connectivity and benefit recovery of the
Sun Creek population. The Park noted that designation of critical
habitat within the irrigation system should not preclude efforts to
restore the natural Sun Creek channel.
Our Response: The Service has been working with Federal, State, and
local partners to develop a plan for reconnecting Sun Creek with its
historic (i.e., natural) connection with the Wood River. This
connection would allow movement of bull trout between Sun Creek, the
Wood River, and Annie Creek. These unoccupied areas that were
identified in the proposed rule are essential for the conservation of
bull trout in the Upper Klamath Lake critical habitat subunit, and are
being designated as critical habitat.
Comments from Native American Tribes
(1) Comment: In response to the tribal coordination identified in
the Summary of Comments and Recommendations section above, we received
comments from several Tribes, including the Confederated Tribes of the
Umatilla Indian Reservation, Puyallup Tribe of Nations, Confederated
Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe,
Quinault Indian Nation, Upper Skagit Indian Tribe, Lower Elwha Klallam
Tribe, Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of the Duck Valley Indian Reservation,
Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon,
Swinomish Indian Tribal Community, Nisqually Indian Tribe, Coeur
d'Alene Tribe, Nez Perce Tribe, Kalispel Tribe of Indians, Blackfeet
Tribe, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and Burns Paiute Tribe. We also
received a comment letter from the Northwest Indian Fisheries
Commission. Most Tribes requested exclusion from critical habitat
designation based on: (1) Secretarial Order 3206, which states, in
part, that critical habitat shall not be designated in areas that may
impact tribal trust resources, tribally-owned fee lands, or the
exercise of tribal rights unless it is determined essential to conserve
a listed species; (2) section 4(b)(2) of the Act; and (3) existing
tribal resource management plans that are protective of bull trout.
Other Tribes expressed support for the proposed critical habitat
revision and did not request exclusion of their lands. One Tribe
requested exclusion of their lands, except for the portion of tribal
land that shares a boundary with nontribal interests.
Our Response: Federal agencies are obligated to consult with Tribes
based on their unique relationship with the Federal government. We have
evaluated the Tribes' past and ongoing efforts to conserve bull trout
and have weighed the benefits of including or excluding tribal lands in
the designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We have also taken
into consideration the requirements under Secretarial Order 3206;
however, any exclusions have been considered only under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act, as that is the only statutory authority that provides the
Secretary the discretion to exclude areas from critical habitat
designation. Please see the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
section below for more information regarding this analysis.
Public Comments
(1) Comment: We received several comments comparing the 2010
proposed rule to the 2005 final rule. Most pointed out the
irregularities in the rulemaking process identified in a December 2008
Interior Department Inspector General's report, and felt that science
played a more prominent and effective role in the 2010 proposed rule.
Other commenters indicated the more restricted designation in the 2005
final rule was more appropriate.
Our Response: This final rule fully considers the findings in the
2008 Inspector General's report, the language in the court's remand
order, and comments we received from peer reviewers and others. This
final critical habitat designation for bull trout is based on the best
scientific information available, as required by section 4(b)(2) of the
Act.
[[Page 63909]]
(2) Comment: We received many comments that presented biological
information relevant to the designation of critical habitat, and site-
specific information regarding particular waterbodies. Comments also
addressed rangewide issues such as information on biological needs in
general, PCEs, and the effects of specific types of actions on bull
trout. Issues raised included the threats that contributed to listing
bull trout under the Act.
Our Response: We appreciate the information submitted and issues
raised. We will address specific issues, including information
regarding particular waterbodies and specific threats, in our responses
below. In general, past efforts to eradicate bull trout contributed to
their decline and led to their protection under the Act. Since the bull
trout is now protected under the Act, those eradication efforts can no
longer legally occur, and habitat threats are currently the most
serious threats. However, we address habitat threats in this final
rule.
(3) Comment: We received comments on the threat of fine sediment
impacts to bull trout stream habitat.
Our Response: Taking measures to limit the introduction of fine
sediment in bull trout critical habitat is important. A PCE has been
developed to address this specific concern, and there is a continuing
need to evaluate and assess site-specific information to determine the
effects of any particular Federal action on sediment delivery and bull
trout critical habitat, using the best scientific information
available.
(4) Comment: We received comments and information regarding the
cold water requirements of bull trout.
Our Response: Bull trout require among the coldest water
temperatures of any native salmonid in the Pacific Northwest, and we
have developed a PCE to address this specific need.
(5) Comment: We received comments on reservoir operations and their
effects on bull trout.
Our Response: In our proposed rule (75 FR 2291, January 14, 2010),
we did not mean to imply that reservoir operations would have to be
consistently at full pool to avoid adverse modification of critical
habitat. Project-specific analyses would be the best tool to identify
bull trout critical habitat protection needs with regard to the
relevant PCEs in a particular area. We have included clarifying
language in this rule to address the issue. See the response to Bureau
of Reclamation comment (1) and the Adverse Modification Standard
section below for additional information with regard to section 7
consultation considerations for bull trout critical habitat.
(6) Comment: We received a number of comments recommending the
designation of the upper Clark River in Montana between Flint Creek and
Warm Springs Creek, based on ongoing restoration efforts directed
toward re-establishing a migratory corridor for bull trout and
restoring adequate stream flow and temperature regimes. The restoration
is anticipated to re-establish a migratory corridor and essential
foraging and overwintering habitat for bull trout, and provide
additional genetic diversity for bull trout populations that have been
fragmented by the construction of Milltown dam for nearly a century.
Our Response: Bull trout are present in the upper reaches of Warm
Springs Creek and Flint Creek, tributaries at the upstream extent of
this section of the upper Clark Fork River. The likelihood of migratory
bull trout occupancy in the upper Clark Fork River has increased as a
result of the 2008 removal of Milltown dam. The condition of the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species has improved as a result of the dam removal and will continue
to improve with the ongoing restoration activities in the Clark Fork
River. This area provides an important migratory corridor and will
provide for increased genetic exchange between migratory bull trout
populations in the Clark Fork River, meets the definition of critical
habitat, and meets the selection criteria for inclusion in critical
habitat. Consequently, we agree with the commenters that this reach of
the Clark Fork River is essential for the conservation of bull trout.
The inclusion of this 100.8 km (62.7 mi) reach of the upper Clark Fork
River increases the critical habitat designation for the Clark Fork
River basin by less than 2 percent. We have long recognized the
importance of this reach of the upper Clark Fork River as an historical
migratory corridor for bull trout, which we have considered potentially
occupied but undocumented bull trout habitat. This area was proposed as
critical habitat in the November 29, 2002, proposed rule (67 FR 71331),
and identified as Unit 2, Clark Fork River Basin, Subunit iv - Upper
Clark Fork River. We did not include this area in the September 26,
2005, final critical habitat designation (70 FR 56212), because at that
time we did not find the PCEs present and therefore this area did not
meet our selection criteria. No unoccupied habitat was designated in
the 2005 final rule. In preparing the January 14, 2010, reproposal (75
FR 2269), we re-examined the record, including the State of Montana's
MFISH database, and found that hard documentation of bull trout
occupancy of this reach over the last 20 years was lacking. However,
the sampling was not comprehensive and we acknowledge that low levels
of undocumented bull trout occupancy likely occur in this lengthy
stream reach. The determination not to include this reach in the 2010
proposed rule was a difficult choice, based on a decision to not
propose any critical habitat in Montana where occupation by bull trout
could not be documented with fish survey records or other hard
documentation. Due to the known presence of bull trout in the upper
reaches of Warm Springs Creek at the upstream extent of this section of
the upper Clark Fork River, at least a portion of which are thought
potentially represent the migratory life history form, there is further
circumstantial evidence that migratory bull trout may temporarily or
seasonally occur in this reach of the upper Clark Fork River.
Accordingly, section 7 consultation is conducted on Federal actions
that may
affect bull trout. The likelihood of bull trout occupancy has also
increased since 2008, as a result of the removal of Milltown Dam, which
removes a barrier to bull trout migration in this reach. Because of the
removal of Milltown Dam and the ongoing and planned habitat restoration
actions, we no longer believe that the PCEs in this reach of the Clark
Fork River are limiting to occupancy by migratory bull trout, on at
least a seasonal basis. Based on comments and data we received in
response to our request for information in the January 14, 2010,
reproposal (75 FR 2269), we now find PCEs present in this area and
determine that this area does meet the selection criteria and is
essential for the conservation of the species. Therefore, we are
including it in our final designation.
(7) Comment: We received many comments from a variety of sources
suggesting we consider designating critical habitat upstream of Big
Falls on the mainstem Deschutes River in Oregon.
Our Response: Under section 3(5)(A) of the Act, specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is
listed in accordance with the provisions under section 4 of the Act can
be designated as critical habitat, if such areas are essential to the
conservation of the species. We are not designating bull trout critical
habitat in the Deschutes River basin upstream of Big Falls on the
mainstem Deschutes River. The lower Deschutes River bull trout
populations
[[Page 63910]]
are some of the healthiest and most stable populations in Oregon, and
the designation of unoccupied habitat in this area is not essential to
the conservation of the species. However, we have initiated a
feasibility assessment to evaluate the capability of the upper
Deschutes River to support bull trout, and support recovery of bull
trout populations in the upper basin to the extent practicable.
(8) Comment: We received several comments related to climate
change. Most said that it is an important issue and bull trout may be
disproportionately affected because they have the coldest water
temperature requirements of any native salmonid in the Pacific
Northwest. Some commenters deny that climate change is occurring,
question the underlying science, and reject its consideration in this
rule.
Our Response: The earth's climate has changed throughout history,
and an overwhelming proportion of climate scientists worldwide agree
change is continuing today. We acknowledge this is a complex issue, and
there may be some uncertainty over all the causes and precise
manifestations of change. Given these uncertainties, one objective of
this final rule was to identify and protect those habitats that we
believe will provide resiliency for bull trout use in the face of
climate change. We will undoubtedly have to adapt management approaches
as we learn more. We agree that bull trout management actions should
stem the impacts of climate change where opportunities to do so exist.
Bull trout may be among the species most sensitive to the effects of
climate change, and protection of bull trout cold-water habitat would
help protect the ecosystems upon which they and other species depend.
Some of the least disturbed watersheds may serve this purpose.
(9) Comment: We received two requests for an additional public
hearing near Portland, Oregon, to supplement the hearing that was
conducted in Boise, Idaho, on February 25, 2010. We also received four
requests for an extension of the comment period.
Our Response: Because of time constraints related to our court-
ordered deadline for submittal of a final rule to the Federal Register,
we were unable to conduct an additional public hearing. However, we did
hold a public meeting near Portland, Oregon, during the public comment
period, and reopened the comment period from March 23 through April 5,
2010, to provide additional opportunity for interested parties to
provide information to the Service.
(10) Comment: We received several comments regarding connectivity
of bull trout habitats to provide for migration between key habitat
types. The comments either emphasized the need for connectivity to
recover bull trout, or expressed concern that in some cases,
connectivity could harm bull trout by allowing introgression of
invasive species or disease.
Our Response: Bull trout are highly migratory, and connectivity
among patches of occupied habitat is essential to their conservation.
Accordingly, we are designating critical habitat to facilitate
connectivity in this final rule. However, connectivity may be limited
in scope and degree in areas where FMO habitat provides the necessary
PCEs for only a few months of the year, and perhaps only in higher
water flow years. Limited or sporadic historical connectivity is likely
reflected in the high degree of genetic distinctness among bull trout
populations in relatively close proximity to one another, which is
greater than expected when compared to other species, such as salmon
and steelhead. However, some degree of connectivity over time may allow
refounding of populations that are either at risk of becoming
extirpated or that have become extirpated. We agree that in some cases,
restoring connectivity might be detrimental to bull trout, if it
introduces nonnative predatory or competitive species into those
habitats. We will evaluate these areas on a case-by-case basis using
the best scientific information available, to ensure we maximize bull
trout conservation potential.
(11) Comment: We received several comments regarding the extent of
critical habitat, specific waterbodies that may or may not be
essential, or areas that may or may not have the physical or biological
features essential to bull trout conservation.
Our Response: As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we used
the best scientific data available in determining areas that contain
the features essential to the conservation of bull trout. In occupied
habitat, each of the areas we are designating either contains those
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species, which may require special management considerations or
protection, or in the case of unoccupied habitat, has been determined
to be essential for the conservation of the species. This final rule
applies the best scientific information available to identify those
areas, including the extent of critical habitat needed to conserve the
species.
(12) Comment: We received comments concerning the need for
numerical ranges or standards for PCEs, and PCE interpretation.
Our Response: Due to the range of habitat required for bull trout
across all types of waterbodies and across the range of the species, we
have not identified narrow-range, specific-to-one-area PCEs for the
bull trout, but rather have identified broader, more general PCEs that
are required for all life-history needs and stages of the bull trout,
and which apply throughout the range of the bull trout. Moreover, water
quality and quantity and other habitat needs are often influenced by
the type of habitat used by bull trout (e.g., spawning and rearing) and
season of use (e.g., May or June migratory habitat). Additionally, wet
or dry water years may significantly influence the quality of habitat
potentially available to bull trout. We have included language in the
Primary Constituent Elements section of this final rule that identifies
the physical, hydrological, and biological conditions the PCEs have
been designed to protect, to provide context for PCE interpretation and
application.
(13) Comment: We received comments related to the role of critical
habitat in recovery.
Our Response: Critical habitat designation can contribute to the
overall recovery strategy for a species. However, it does not, by
itself, achieve all recovery plan goals. In developing this final rule,
we considered the conservation relationship between critical habitat
and recovery planning. The designation of critical habitat can help
prioritize recovery tasks and focus recovery efforts in areas essential
for conservation. Habitat restoration actions may compete more
successfully for Federal funding if they occur in areas designated as
critical habitat for species listed under the Act. Please see the
section below on Relationship of Critical Habitat to Recovery Planning
for additional information.
(14) Comment: We received comments related to critical habitat and
section 7 consultation requirements.
Our Response: Please see the section below on the Effects of
Critical Habitat Designation for information related to section 7
consultation requirements.
(15) Comment: We received comments regarding the effects of
specific actions on bull trout related to stream hydrograph, stream
flow, and stream temperature requirements. There was also a concern
that maintaining a naturally functioning hydrograph conflicts with
protecting spring flows.
Our Response: PCE 7 is designed to address hydrologic functions
that
[[Page 63911]]
conserve bull trout by identifying the importance of peak, high, low,
and base flows that fall within historic and seasonal ranges, or if
controlled, minimize flow departures from a natural hydrograph.
However, we do not believe maintaining a naturally functioning
hydrograph conflicts with protecting natural spring flows. To the
contrary, the flexible and inclusive language of PCE 7 can encompass
protecting the natural hydrograph associated with these discharges.
Since some streams flood annually and others do not, different special
management prescriptions may be appropriate, depending on particular
circumstances. These special management needs would appropriately be
considered during section 7 consultation, as discussed later in this
final rule.
(16) Comment: We received several comments on the exclusion of
specific areas from this designation, with some arguing for exclusion
of specific habitats or broader categories of habitats, while others
argued against the same.
Our Response: Please refer to the Exclusions section below for a
detailed discussion of this issue.
(17) Comment: Some commenters specifically opposed the exclusion of
the lands covered by the Washington State Forest Practices Habitat
Conservation Plan (FPHCP) from critical habitat designation. One
commenter and the State of Washington supported the exclusion of the
FPHCP. Opponents of exclusion commented that the needs of anadromous
salmon and steelhead, not bull trout, largely dictated the final forest
practice rule set in the FPHCP, and that the forest practice rules are
not sufficiently protective of headwater streams and near-surface
ground waters, springs, and seeps in headwater catchments. They also
stated that Washington's forest land is being converted to other uses
at an alarming rate, and that failure to designate critical habitat on
lands currently covered by the FPHCP would deprive habitats essential
for bull trout recovery from protection. One commenter stated HCPs are
not required to provide a net benefit to the species. One commenter
stated the FPHCP does not protect bull trout from activities that cause
or contribute to global warming and global climate change, and stated
the HCP does not protect bull trout or its habitat from the widespread
application of pesticides and herbicides that occur on forestlands.
They were also concerned the implementation of the HCP is not advancing
at an adequate level, and that the lack of progress has been the focal
point of attention at the highest levels of the State agencies charged
with overseeing its implementation. One commenter stated current
economic conditions related to Washington State's budget and reduced
Federal funding have resulted in future funding of the adaptive
management plan being severely reduced or even unlikely, and that
crucial monitoring and adaptive management studies have already been
postponed or cancelled by the State.
Other commenters stated critical habitat designation does not
provide any greater protection or enhancement of bull trout habitat for
forest management activities on private and State lands in Washington
beyond what is already provided by the FPHCP, and designating critical
habitat would discourage similar partnerships and weaken stakeholder
support for the existing plan. They also stated that the Service should
concentrate resources on participation and technical support for the
FPHCP adaptive management program, rather than expending them on
administrative requirements.
Our Response: HCPs are considered one of the tools available that
can help effect recovery. In order to obtain a permit under section 10
of the Act, an applicant must meet the issuance criteria identified at
50 CFR 17.32, which include minimizing and mitigating any incidental
take of listed species to the maximum extent practicable while
conducting their covered activities. One of the commenters noted that
HCPs are not required to provide a net benefit; however many HCPs do
provide a net benefit compared to the alternative of no HCP and no
incidental take permit. The FPHCP rules and program as a whole require
the maintenance and restoration of aquatic and riparian habitat. Among
the multiple goals of the FPHCP is the goal to restore and maintain
riparian habitat on non-Federal forest lands to support a harvestable
supply of fish. The FPHCP was developed with an emphasis on salmonids,
including bull trout, and focuses on providing needed flows,
temperature, substrate, habitat, and connectivity by addressing habitat
protection and natural processes and regimes, which benefits bull trout
and other native species. The role of adaptive management in HCPs is
often poorly understood. In some cases, adaptive management may specify
the direction of change either through requiring additional measures or
reducing measures. While the Service may at times rely on adaptive
management in evaluating an HCP, in the FPHCP, we evaluated
conservation measures that were already dictated by the forest practice
rules enacted by the State of Washington and by the assurances that the
conservation measures would occur. We have reviewed the funding
budgeted by the State for adaptive management studies under the FPHCP,
and believe that it is adequate for purposes of bull trout
conservation. The Service anticipated some delays and implementation
issues as a program this large is applied over time, and we continue to
monitor the progress of this adaptive program. See the Exclusions
section in this final rule for additional discussion and evaluation of
the benefits of the FPHCP.
(18) Comment: We received several comments on the role of Federal
lands, most of which requested that we include Federal lands in this
designation rather than excluding them as was done in the 2005 final
rule. One commenter suggested that designating critical habitat on
Federal lands could empower third parties to litigate more effectively.
Our Response: Exclusion of Federal lands from the 2005 final rule
was one of the primary reasons for litigation, and one of the primary
inconsistencies found by the Inspector General in his 2008 report. As
previously discussed, the Service agrees Federal lands should not be
excluded from critical habitat designation based solely on large-scale
land management plans. In addition, the Service believes by
collectively implementing a proactive and collaborative approach to
addressing the recovery needs of bull trout, the risk of litigation
should be minimized.
(19) Comment: We received some comments expressing concern about
the effects of wildfire on bull trout and the landscape, and that this
designation may impact the ability to manage landscapes susceptible to
fire.
Our Response: The Service will continue to facilitate
implementation of ongoing or preventative fuel reduction projects
through the Act's section 7 consultation requirements, and we have been
doing so since bull trout was listed in 1998, and since critical
habitat was designated in 2005. These cooperative efforts include
annual meetings with action agencies and meetings conducted on a
project specific basis.
(20) Comment: We received several comments from individual
citizens, Native American tribes, States, environmental groups, and
groups representing interests such as ranching, logging, and
agriculture, which supported protection of bull trout habitat, and
doing so in a manner sensitive to the needs of local residents and
resource users.
Our Response: The Service agrees that protecting bull trout
critical habitat will have multiple, wide-ranging benefits,
[[Page 63912]]
and commits to working with all interested parties to protect habitat
in a way that respects the interests and needs of local residents and
resource users.
(21) Comment: We received several comments discussing the
relationship between bull trout and other species, including other
anadromous fish; the impacts of bull trout on other species; and the
impacts of other species on bull trout.
Our Response: Protecting ecosystems upon which bull trout depend
may also conserve other native species that share those ecosystems. We
believe efforts to conserve bull trout will generally be complementary
to efforts to conserve other native species that coevolved with bull
trout, including salmon, steelhead, and Klamath Basin suckers, because
each species would have developed traits and behaviors allowing them to
coexist. Anadromous fish likely provided a significant input of energy
into the ecosystems upon which bull trout depend, but we do not fully
understand how their reduction or loss affects bull trout populations.
However, we believe the restoration of ecosystem components and the
implementation of salmon recovery actions will also help recover bull
trout populations.
(22) Comment: We received comments on threats posed by invasive
species and concerns that further spread of invasive species may affect
some bull trout populations. Commenters also stated that restoring each
of the habitat components that favor bull trout may reduce the
competitive effects in bull trout habitat where invasive species are
already present.
Our Response: Invasive species include potential competitors such
as brook trout and brown trout, which represent a threat to bull trout
populations. In some cases, currently isolated populations could be
threatened if restoring connectivity allows invasive species to access
currently isolated habitats. The Service will consider and encourage
management of bull trout populations to address this concern, and is
working with Federal partners to better understand why bull trout and
invasive competitors are able to coexist in certain areas and not in
others. The results of this research will help to inform recovery
actions with respect to the removal of nonnative species and bull trout
recovery.
(23) Comment: Some commenters stated that the effects of livestock
grazing can negatively impact bull trout habitat quality.
Alternatively, other commenters believe grazing and habitat
conservation can co-occur.
Our Response: The bull trout listing rule for the Klamath River and
Columbia River Distinct Population Segment (63 FR 31647, June 10,
1998), and the Jarbidge River Distinct Population Segment (64 FR 17110,
April 8, 1999) acknowledge that livestock grazing contributed to the
decline in bull trout abundance and distribution. Depending on how it
is managed, grazing in riparian areas can reduce cover, reduce
streambank stability, increase stream temperatures, reduce fish prey,
and change stream geometry by making channels wider and shallower. We
do not believe livestock grazing and fish and fish habitat conservation
are mutually exclusive in all cases, provided appropriate special
management needs for particular areas are implemented.
(24) Comment: We received comments expressing concern about the
potential effects of timber harvest and mining on bull trout habitat,
and effects of critical habitat designation on those activities.
Our Response: The Service agrees that forestry and mining practices
can impact bull trout habitat. We will continue to work cooperatively
with land managers and operators to implement bull trout conservation
measures in a manner consistent with the operators' needs to the
maximum extent practicable.
(25) Comment: We received several comments regarding the public
participation process for this rule. Some commenters expressed concern
over the opportunity to comment, some expressed concern with the
quality of maps provided in the proposed rule, some expressed
frustration with having to navigate the Federal website to submit their
comments, and others stated that compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) was required.
Our Response: Service outreach efforts began in late 2009 and
continued in early 2010. We issued press releases, published legal
notices in local newspapers, contacted and coordinated with Native
American Tribes, met with State officials, and communicated through a
variety of means to individuals with interest in commenting on the
rule. The initial comment period was extended to accommodate further
input from interested private individuals, State and Federal agencies,
or others. One public hearing was conducted in Boise, Idaho, and
several public meetings were conducted at centralized locations within
areas affected by the critical habitat designation. With regard to
NEPA, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Tenth Circuit, we do not prepare environmental analyses as defined by
NEPA in connection with designating critical habitat under the Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was
upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas
County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (Ninth Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516
U.S. 1042 (1966)). As suggested by commenters, the Service has
published simplified maps in the Federal Register with this final rule,
and has made more detailed maps available on its web site, http://
www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/, or by request from the Oregon Fish and
Wildlife Field Office, 2600 S.E. 98th Ave, Suite 100, Portland, OR
97266, telephone 503-231-6179.
(26) Comment: We received several specific comments on road impacts
to bull trout habitat.
Our Response: Roads and other activities above the ordinary high
water mark or bankfull elevation of streams, and upstream in watersheds
can directly or indirectly impact bull trout habitat in streams. The
construction, use, and maintenance of roads may impact bull trout
habitat in several ways; for example, roads can act as vectors for
introducing sediment to streams and road culverts can block fish
passage. To protect bull trout habitat, the Service will continue to
evaluate impacts on a site-specific basis and develop appropriate
avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures during section 7
consultation on Federal actions.
(27) Comment: We received comments supporting the more prominent
role science played in this designation when compared to the 2005
designation, and comments expressing concern over how science was used
to identify essential habitat and PCEs. Concerns were also expressed
regarding the differences between the 2005 designation and this
designation, and the amount of critical habitat proposed in some areas.
Our Response: We believe the information we relied on to develop
this final rule is consistent with accepted scientific standards. The
rationale behind the differences between the 2005 final rule and the
2010 proposed rule are explained in the Summary of Changes from the
Previously Designated Critical Habitat of the proposed rule (75 FR
2273, January 14, 2010), and are primarily associated with fewer
section 4(b)(2) exclusions in this rule compared to the 2005 rule.
Additional scientific information from peer reviewers, State
[[Page 63913]]
fish and wildlife agencies, and Federal agency biologists was used to
identify areas with the physical or biological features essential to
the conservation of bull trout and additional unoccupied areas
essential to the conservation of bull trout in each of the critical
habitat units.
(28) Comment: We received several comments regarding special
management needs for bull trout, most of which addressed concerns over
what may be required and how we would regulate management activities to
conserve bull trout. We also received comments related to the impact of
critical habitat designation on private lands.
Our Response: In occupied critical habitat areas, special
management considerations or protection are required. In some cases,
(e.g., Congressionally-designated Wilderness Areas), continued
implementation of wilderness designation management measures may be
necessary to ensure adequate protection of key spawning and rearing
streams, but in other cases avoiding creation of fish passage
impediments may be required. Broad prohibitions of any specific actions
across the range of bull trout would be inappropriate because the
effects of actions can vary widely throughout the range of the species,
and the special management needs in those areas may vary accordingly.
Although special management considerations and protections are not
implicitly required in unoccupied critical habitat areas, we will work
collaboratively with Federal agencies to identify ways to ensure
unoccupied critical habitat can continue to serve its intended
conservation purposes, in light of agency actions that may be proposed
in those areas.
Designating critical habitat will help inform private landowners
more specifically of the needs and opportunities for bull trout
conservation. Private landowners can protect fish and wildlife habitat
quickly and efficiently, and they often choose to do so, sometimes in
cooperation with and with support from the Service and other government
agencies. We agree with the need to work cooperatively with landowners
to conserve bull trout.
(29) Comment: We received several comments advocating for and
against designating unoccupied critical habitat, and comments
questioning the regulatory effects of unoccupied habitat designation on
Federal agency actions.
Our Response: The Service believes it is essential to designate
unoccupied habitat in order to achieve bull trout recovery. In most
cases, this includes lower elevation main stem river FMO habitats
important for seasonal connectivity among existing upstream
populations. We anticipate that many of these FMO habitats may only be
important during certain times of year to support bull trout migration.
With regard to the regulatory effect of designating unoccupied habitat,
when consulting under section 7(a)(2) of the Act in designated critical
habitat, independent analyses are conducted for jeopardy to the species
and adverse modification of critical habitat (75 FR 2291, January 14,
2010). In unoccupied critical habitat, Federal agencies may need to
implement measures to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat to ensure the affected critical habitat area can
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species. Any
management needs would be addressed on a case-by-case basis, relative
to the specific Federal action under consultation.
(30) Comment: We received several comments suggesting that rather
than designating critical habitat, we should rely on other protective
measures to meet the need for bull trout conservation. Examples
included measures that protect critical habitat designated for salmon
and steelhead species, State forest practice rules, Federal land
management protections, and other commitments to conserve fish habitat
within the range of bull trout.
Our Response: The Service is aware that several other regulatory
protections are currently in place in many parts of the range of bull
trout, and we appreciate those efforts. We evaluated many of the
protective measures suggested by commenters within the context of
section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and do not believe any significant new
regulatory requirements will result from designating bull trout
critical habitat. Nonetheless, under section 7(a)(2) of the Act,
Federal agencies are required to ensure that actions they fund,
authorize, or carry out are not likely to destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat. There may also be educational benefits associated
with informing the public of those areas that are most important to
bull trout conservation.
(31) Comment: We received several comments on the effects of water
use on bull trout, and the regulatory effect the designation of
critical habitat could have on water use. Most commenters were
concerned that their ability to use water for irrigated agriculture
might be impacted by this designation, and recommended that we
carefully evaluate effects of water use on a site-specific basis, and
work closely with irrigators and State agencies.
Our Response: Any water use effects to designated critical habitat
from Federal actions will be addressed on a case-by-case basis through
consultation with Federal agencies under section 7 of the Act. The
Service intends to work cooperatively with Federal agencies,
irrigators, and State agencies to ensure bull trout conservation needs
are compatible with their program needs and interests to the maximum
extent practicable. In our experience, working collaboratively to
address bull trout stream flow requirements provides significant
conservation benefits to bull trout. Special management needs in bull
trout critical habitat areas would be addressed on a case-by-case
basis, but are generally expected to be similar to existing measures
that provide protection for this species.
(32) Comment: One commenter stated that, in the 2005 rule, the
Service excluded a segment of the Clark Fork River in Montana from
critical habitat because that segment was in a designated Superfund
site, subject to cleanup under the Superfund statute, but the mainstem
Coeur d'Alene River was proposed as critical habitat in this rule, even
though it, like the Clark Fork, is a listed Superfund site. The
commenter stated that the Service has never explained its inconsistent
treatment of the Clark Fork River and the Coeur d'Alene River Superfund
sites.
Our Response: We disagree that the 2005 final critical habitat rule
excluded a segment of the Clark Fork River because the segment was in a
Superfund site, subject to cleanup under the Superfund statute (42
U.S.C. 103, Sec. Sec. 9601-9628). The 2005 final critical habitat rule
states that the segment of the Clark Fork River in question was
excluded because it did not have sufficient PCEs to support at least
one of the species' essential biological activities, not because it was
a Superfund site. In contrast, the mainstem Coeur d'Alene River is
identified as a migratory corridor and provides the PCEs necessary for
seasonal use (primarily spring and late fall) by migrating bull trout.
Comments on the Draft Economic Analysis
The Service published a draft economic analysis (DEA) concurrent
with the proposed rule (75 FR 2269, January 14, 2010). Of the 1,111
public comments we received, 128 were on the DEA. We initially grouped
these comments into two main categories: comments on the economic
analysis, and comments on economic costs and benefits of critical
habitat. We then
[[Page 63914]]
performed a separate analysis of all these comments, and further broke
down subject matter into 34 separate responses. Comments from each of
the 34 economic-related categories are summarized, below, with the
Service's responses.
(1) Comment: One commenter was concerned that the baseline approach
to the economic analysis has been rejected by courts.
Our Response: As stated in Chapter 2 of the final economic analysis
(FEA), the U.S. Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals instructed the Service
in 2001 to conduct a full analysis of all of the economic impacts of
proposed critical habitat, regardless of whether those impacts are
attributable co-extensively to other causes. Since that decision,
however, courts in other cases have held that an incremental analysis
of impacts stemming solely from the critical habitat rulemaking is
proper. For example, in the March 2006 ruling that the August 2004
critical habitat rule for the Peirson's milk-vetch (Astragalus
magdalenae var. peirsonii) (69 FR 47329, August 4, 2004) was arbitrary
and capricious, the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California stated, ``That case also involved a challenge to
the Service's baseline approach and the court held that the baseline
approach was both consistent with the language and purpose of the Act
and that it was a reasonable method for assessing the actual costs of a
particular critical habitat designation. . . `To find the true cost of
a designation, the world with the designation must be compared to the
world without it.''' More recently, in Arizona Cattle Growers'
Association v. Salazar, No. 08-15810 (9th Cir. 2010) (Mexican spotted
owl 2004 critical habitat designation), the Court of Appeals upheld the
Service's use of the baseline approach in preparing the economic
analysis and making the ultimate section 4(b)(2) decision. The Ninth
Circuit disagreed with the Tenth Circuit's opinion requiring a co-
extensive analysis. The Ninth Circuit thought it was more logical to
use the impacts resulting from listing the species as a baseline and to
limit consideration of areas for exclusion to those where there were
impacts above those imposed by listing. It noted that considering costs
imposed by the listing of the species made no sense because those
listing costs would still be present if the area in question were
excluded from critical habitat. Also, on May 27, 2010, the U.S.
District Court ruling in Otay Mesa Property v. USDOI - CV 08-
383(RMC)(D.D.C.) stated in part that ``FWS has explained its preference
for the baseline method and fully explained the analyses that underlie
the critical habitat designation for the San Diego fairy shrimp. It
need do no more.''
In order to address the divergent opinions of the courts and
provide the most complete information to decision-makers, the final
economic analysis reports both (a) the baseline impacts of bull trout
conservation from protections afforded the species absent critical
habitat designation; and (b) the estimated incremental impacts
precipitated specifically by the designation of critical habitat for
the species. However, the data used in determining our regulatory
flexibility analysis reflects only the incremental costs which may be
attributable to the designation of critical habitat for the bull trout.
(2) Comment: One commenter stated that the economic analysis did
not consider the potential for the curtailment of mining production and
employment on the main stem and North Fork Coeur d'Alene River, or the
upstream tributaries. The commenter also noted the potential for
impacts to waste water treatment plants, storm water requirements,
other point and nonpoint source discharges, and potential impacts to
plans for a Superfund cleanup site located in the Coeur d'Alene basin,
which include plans for bank stabilization, channel realignment, and
dredging projects.
Our Response: The mainstem Coeur d'Alene River and North Fork Coeur
d'Alene Rivers have been designated as critical habitat for bull trout
since September 26, 2005 (70 FR 56212). This critical habitat revision
extends the designation into several tributaries of the North Fork
Coeur d'Alene and St. Joe Rivers, but does not revise existing critical
habitat on the mainstem or North Fork. The commenter did not present
any substantive economic information regarding potential impacts of
extending the designation, and we have no data indicating that
designating critical habitat in the tributaries would have any impacts
on mining or other activities beyond those attributable to listing.
(3) Comment: Several commenters stated that the economic analysis
should incorporate the recent ruling in the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals, Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004), amended by 387 F.3d 968 (9th Cir. 2004).
Specifically, commenters point out that the court decided ``the
jeopardy standard should be applied with reference to whether the
proposed action appreciably diminishes the likelihood of both the
survival and recovery of a species. By contrast, the prohibition
against destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat is
triggered at a lower threshold--when sufficient critical habitat is
lost so as to threaten a species' recovery even if there remains
sufficient critical habitat for the species' survival.'' Commenters
state much of the analysis is predicated on the idea that a project
that would likely jeopardize bull trout would also likely adversely
modify its critical habitat and vice versa. Commenters stated that
because the jeopardy standard and the adverse modification standard are
not synonymous, the DEA should not rely on the assumption that there
will be few incremental costs in occupied areas.
Our Response: As stated in Chapter 2 of the FEA, incremental
effects of critical habitat designation are determined using the
Service's December 9, 2004, interim guidance on ``Application of the
`Destruction or Adverse Modification' Standard Under section 7(a)(2) of
the Endangered Species Act'' and information from the Service regarding
what potential consultations and project modifications may be imposed
as a result of critical habitat designation over and above those
associated with the listing of bull trout (Appendix E of the final
economic analysis). Specifically, in Gifford Pinchot Task Force v.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, the Ninth Circuit invalidated
the Service's regulation defining destruction or adverse modification
of critical habitat, and the Service no longer relies on this
regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action is likely to
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. In occupied critical
habitat, it is unlikely that a section 7 consultation would identify a
difference between measures needed to avoid the destruction or adverse
modification of bull trout critical habitat from measures required to
avoid jeopardizing the species. This conclusion is based on numerous
regulatory protections and associated conservation activities that are
already occurring in those areas for listed salmon and steelhead, as
discussed in the FEA. Alternatively, in unoccupied critical habitat, a
jeopardy analysis would not be conducted during section 7 consultation.
However, measures to avoid destruction or adverse modification may be
necessary to ensure unoccupied areas can continue to serve their
intended conservation role for the species.
(4) Comment: Several Tribes submitted comments expressing concern
about the potential economic impact of the designation on tribal lands.
One Tribe requested the
[[Page 63915]]
economic analysis specifically address the economic impacts on the
Tribe, the Reservation, and tribal trust resources, taking into account
``the unique nature of Reservation economies,'' and stated ``in
particular, the analysis must fully analyze the Tribe's ability to use
its water, including potential future uses and the effective
reallocation of water rights priorities that may be caused by the
designation and the cost to the Tribe of such.''
Our Response: Under Secretarial Order 3206, we consult with
affected Indian Tribes when considering the designation of critical
habitat in an area that may impact tribal trust resources, tribally-
owned fee lands, or the exercise of tribal rights. The Secretarial
Order states that critical habitat shall not be designated in such
areas unless it is determined essential to conserve a listed species,
and that in designating critical habitat, the Services shall evaluate
and document the extent to which the conservation needs of the listed
species can be achieved by limiting the designation to other lands. To
estimate the incremental costs of conservation efforts, the economic
analysis focuses on activities in areas considered to be unoccupied by
bull trout. Incremental costs are those efforts above and beyond the
costs undertaken due to existing required or voluntary conservation
efforts being undertaken due to other Federal, State, and local
regulations or guidelines. In particular the analysis focuses on those
areas that do not overlap with salmon critical habitat, since the
primary constituent elements identified for salmon are similar to those
identified for bull trout, and additional conservation measures in
those areas would unlikely be necessary.
To the extent possible, potential impacts to tribal areas are
considered in the FEA as part of the unit in which the tribal lands are
located. For example, section 7 consultations that may have been
undertaken with tribal entities have been included in calculations of
administrative costs for applicable units. Information provided in
public comments related to particular tribal concerns has been
incorporated into Chapters 3 and 4 of the FEA.
(5) Comment: Several commenters stated the economic analysis fails
to recognize the benefits that might derive from critical habitat
designation. Other commenters state it is unclear why benefits have not
been quantified. Several comments indicated the Service should have
presented a cost-effectiveness analysis or a cost/benefit analysis. A
few comment letters also state that by analyzing only the costs
associated with the designation, the Service cannot meet the
requirements of the Act, and that without analyzing benefits it is
arbitrary for the Service to exclude areas from critical habitat
designation on the basis of economic impacts.
Our Response: There are no areas proposed as critical habitat that
are being excluded from designation on the basis of economic impacts.
Chapter 6 of the DEA discusses the types of benefits that could result
from designation of critical habitat for bull trout and explains
methods that could be used to estimate benefits and the data that would
be required to calculate such estimates. As discussed in Chapter 6 of
the DEA, data are not currently available to estimate the incremental
economic benefits that could result from designation of critical
habitat for bull trout. The primary intended benefit of critical
habitat is to support the conservation of endangered and threatened
species. Thus, attempts to develop monetary estimates of the benefits
of the bull trout critical habitat designation would focus on the
public's willingness to pay to achieve the conservation benefits to the
bull trout resulting from this designation. Quantification and
monetization of species conservation benefits requires information on
the incremental change in the probability of bull trout conservation
that is expected to result from the designation. No readily available
models or studies exist that provide such information. Even if this
information existed, the published valuation literature does not
support monetization of incremental changes in conservation probability
for this species. Similarly, none of the alternative methods suggested
(e.g., methods to evaluate losses from fish kills, the Service's
Habitat Evaluation Procedures Model, fish market or restaurant value,
and replacement cost) would overcome the fact that information is not
available to predict the extent and timing of bull trout recovery that
could result from designation of critical habitat. The Office of
Management and Budget has acknowledged that it may not be feasible to
monetize or quantify benefits because there may be a lack of credible,
relevant studies, or because the agency faces resource constraints that
would make benefit estimation infeasible (U.S. OMB, ``Circular A-4,''
September 17, 2003, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/
default/files/omb/assets/omb/circulars/a004/a-4.pdf).
(6) Comment: Several commenters suggested that economic benefits of
a restored bull trout fishery have been estimated to be $215 million,
based on an economic benefits section that was removed from the
previous draft 2004 economic analysis.
Our Response: The Service removed the benefits analysis from the
2004 DEA because of concerns from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) and the Department over the contingent valuation and benefits
transfer methods used. A contingent valuation involves asking someone
how much they would pay to continue a specific activity that is
threatened by pollution or other factors. For example, one might ask an
angler how much he or she would spend to continue fishing for bull
trout in clean rivers. Some economists doubt the accuracy of such
analyses because of their hypothetical nature and because respondents
do not have to follow up their answers with actual payments. Therefore,
they may tend to over-value the benefit. The 2004 DEA's discussion of
the value of bull trout recreational fishing was a benefits-transfer
analysis. A benefits-transfer analysis uses research conducted for one
species or purpose to extrapolate results for another species or
purpose. OMB's guidelines on the use of benefits transfer state that
although benefit-transfer can provide a quick, low-cost approach for
obtaining desired monetary values, the methods are often associated
with uncertainties and potential biases of unknown magnitude. It should
therefore be treated as a last resort option and not used without
explicit justification (OMB Circular A-4). As such, these estimates are
not included in the FEA. Chapter 6 of the DEA discusses the types of
benefits that could result from designation of critical habitat for
bull trout and explains methods that could be used to estimate benefits
and the data that would be required to calculate such estimates. As
discussed in Chapter 6 of the DEA, the Service believes that sufficient
data are not currently available to enable us to estimate the
incremental benefits that could result from designation of critical
habitat for bull trout. Specifically, information is not available to
predict the extent and timing of bull trout recovery that could result
from designation of critical habitat.
General Comments on Economic Analysis
(1) Comment: Several commenters believed the DEA failed to consider
the full extent of potential impacts that may occur as a result of the
designation of critical habitat. Some commenters stated the DEA only
addresses impacts to Federal agencies, and does not consider other
impacts to private landowners or
[[Page 63916]]
the costs of recovery. Other commenters stated that the DEA did not
consider additional impacts to activities such as flood control,
including the increased risk of catastrophic flood; and fire
management.
Our Response: Chapter 5 of the FEA estimates the costs associated
with section 7 consultation for the bull trout, while Chapter 4
discusses potential incremental impacts (i.e., impacts that are not
expected to occur absent critical habitat). The FEA quantifies
potential impacts to private landowners, including timber companies,
cattle ranchers, crop farmers, and mining companies, that may be
affected by the designation. Exhibit 4-4 of the FEA outlines potential
conservation measures, affected action agencies, and affected third
parties.
The FEA considers impacts that are probable and reasonably
foreseeable. While the FEA does not estimate impacts associated with
damage resulting from catastrophic flood or fire events, this type of
catastrophic event is largely unpredictable. Moreover, the analysis
assumes the relevant agencies actively manage to prevent these events,
and that these management actions will not be precluded by the
designation. The analysis quantifies the potential costs to these
agencies of implementing project modifications as well as undergoing
section 7 consultation.
Specifically, administrative costs associated with considering
possible impacts to fuels reduction and other fire management
activities are considered in Chapter 5 of the FEA. As noted in Exhibits
D-2 through D-4, more than 21 formal section 7 consultations, 38
informal consultations, and 12 technical assistance efforts are
forecast annually related to forest management activities. In addition,
forest management costs as quantified in Chapters 3 and 4 of the FEA
include project modifications associated with fuel reduction projects,
including biologist monitoring time for work occurring within buffer
zones.
Administrative costs associated with flood control, bank
stabilization, and other instream construction work, are included under
``other activities'' in Chapter 5 of the FEA. As noted in Appendix D,
more than 325 section 7 actions are forecast for ``other activities.''
Potential incremental project modifications associated with flood
control activities are summarized in section 4.1 of the FEA.
(2) Comment: A number of commenters noted the proposed designation
is likely to have a significant economic impact, citing a potential for
$1 billion in impacts. Given the current state of the economy, other
commenters expressed concern about impacts related to bull trout
conservation placing additional stress on already economically
vulnerable industries and areas. Several commenters stated that funds
spent on bull trout protection efforts would be better used for other
purposes.
Our Response: The Service acknowledges that the current economic
situation creates conditions in which local and regional economies may
be less able to absorb any additional regulatory burden. However, this
analysis examines a 20-year timeframe, with expected impacts
distributed across the entirety of this time period. Moreover,
incremental impacts are expected to be relatively small, at
approximately $5 to $7 million a year, distributed across 87 counties
and four States. Finally, the bulk of these incremental impacts are
likely to be borne by Federal and State agencies rather than private
landowners. While the analysis also forecasts the potential for
approximately $100 million in annualized baseline costs, these impacts
are expected to occur regardless of critical habitat designation for
bull trout.
(3) Comment: One comment suggested the DEA overstated incremental
conservation costs associated with the proposed critical habitat and
provided various examples to illustrate this. The comment states the
range of annualized incremental costs should have been narrower, and
that certain costs are inappropriately included as incremental
conservation costs. The commenter further states mitigation costs for
sediment controls should not be considered incremental since they would
be incurred due to forest management practices already in place. Also,
the comment states incremental costs above Condit Dam should not be
included since this dam is scheduled for removal.
Our Response: As described in section 4 of the FEA, the analysis of
incremental costs focuses on identifying costs that would be associated
with unoccupied critical habitat designated in areas that do not
overlap with salmon habitat. The range of incremental costs is due to
various uncertainties underlying the expected types and costs of
conservation measures. Where reliable information was available to
narrow this range it was incorporated in the analysis. However, as
discussed in the 2004 final economic analysis for the final Columbia
and Klamath DPS critical habitat designation (69 FR 59995, October 6,
2004), in the case of costs associated with potential changes to
irrigation withdrawals, the likelihood of these costs occurring is not
known, leading us to estimate a wide range of impacts. Similarly, we
estimated a range of incremental costs associated with forest
management projects because the exact scope and type of projects were
uncertain. Due to these uncertainties, the high-end scenario may
overstate incremental impacts. While there is uncertainty in the
estimates of incremental conservation costs presented in the DEA, the
Service believes these estimates to be based on the best information
currently available, and has made corrections as appropriate based on
information provided in public comments.
As discussed in Chapter 3 of the FEA, forest management
conservation costs associated with baseline regulations include the
Idaho, Washington, and Oregon Forest Practices Acts, and many other
Federal regulations. The methodology applied in the analysis was
designed to separate out as incremental those costs that would not be
incurred but for the critical habitat designation. Thus, based on
historical consultation efforts and discussions with the U.S. Forest
Service, forecast incremental forest management conservation costs are
those costs associated with section 7 consultations that would not
occur but for the designation of bull trout critical habitat in
unoccupied areas.
We agree with the commenter that once the Condit Dam has been
removed, there will not be incremental impacts associated with the area
above the dam. As discussed in the FEA (section 4.2.2), incremental
impacts in the Lower Columbia River Basin unit are expected to minimal.
Once the Condit Dam is removed, projects will need to consider impacts
to listed salmon species as well as bull trout.
(4) Comment: Several commenters indicated the DEA should not rely
on the 2004 and 2005 economic analyses because the information is out
of date and because national and regional economies have changed
drastically since these analyses were published. Another commenter
stated the DEA does not account for the drastic economic downturn in
the Northwest, and provided information regarding how the timber
industry has changed in the recent past. Also, this commenter indicates
the use of the GDP deflator is not appropriate and the DEA should use a
more up-to-date regional factor to convert costs to 2010.
Our Response: In developing the DEA, research was conducted to
ensure that the conservation costs forecast in the earlier 2004 and
2005 economic analyses were applicable. Where more
[[Page 63917]]
recent relevant information was available, this was incorporated, as
appropriate. The 2004 final economic analysis of the Columbia and
Klamath populations critical habitat designation was reviewed by three
independent technical advisors: Dr. Joel Hamilton, Emeritus Professor
of Agricultural Economics and Statistics, University of Idaho; Dr. Lon
Peters, president of Northwest Economic Research, Inc., a Portland-
based firm that provides economic consulting services to electric
utilities; and Dr. Roger Sedjo, senior fellow and the director of
Resources for the Future's forest economics and policy program.
Similarly, the 2005 economic analysis of the Coastal-Puget Sound,
Jarbidge River, and Saint Mary-Belly River populations final critical
habitat designation was peer reviewed by Dr. Peters and Dr. Hamilton,
as well as by Dr. Bruce Lippke, Professor Emeritus School of Forest
Resources, University of Washington. Feedback from these reviewers was
incorporated into the 2004 and 2005 final economic analyses as
appropriate. The information provided by the commenter regarding
changes in the timber industry consisted of articles published in 1999
and 2000, prior to 2004 and 2005 when the original research for this
FEA was conducted, and as such, we did not use this information to
update the report.
No specific information was provided regarding how the economic
downturn in the Northwest is different than the economic conditions in
the rest of the country, or how this downturn should be factored in
differently in the DEA for the bull trout. The commenter did not
provide any regional conversion factor, as suggested, which we could
evaluate. Given the large geographic scale of this designation and the
types of potential impacts, we determined that the national GDP
deflator was the most appropriate figure for use in inflating the
conservation costs. We believe we have taken the correct approach by
updating costs to current dollars since the previous reports by using
the GDP deflator, which takes into account the current state of the
national economy.
(5) Comment: Several comments indicated confusion about what
conservation costs were included as baseline costs. In particular, one
commenter is concerned that the DEA did not assess potential economic
impacts stemming from State laws that limit activities in designated
critical habitat areas. A comment indicated that the DEA did not take
into account land and resource management plans (i.e., Land and
Resource Management Plans (LRMP) and Resource Management Plans (RMP))
as part of the baseline regulatory conditions. While one commenter is
concerned that the DEA did not take into account baseline impacts that
could result from reinitiated consultation on the Washington Forest
Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (FPHCP), another commenter
indicated that costs associated with HCPs should not be included in the
analysis. Another commenter notes that it is unclear whether costs
associated with the bull trout critical habitat finalized in 2005 are
included in the baseline. Various other commenters provided details on
baseline conservation costs that were not included in the DEA. In
particular, one commenter notes that they have incurred significant
expenses providing protection to bull trout under the Idaho Forest
Practices Act since 2004, which should have been included in baseline
impacts.
Our Response: The State laws that may limit activities in
designated critical habitat are discussed in section 3 of the FEA. The
analysis considers State laws, LRMPs, and RMPs as part of the baseline
regulatory environment. LRMPs and RMPs are generally developed under
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (43 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.)
listed in Exhibit 3-4. As discussed in section 5.2.2, incremental
administrative costs quantified in the FEA include administrative costs
associated with reinitiated consultations, such as reinitiation of
consultation on the FPHCP. However, incremental conservation costs
associated with reinitiation of consultation for the FPHCP are not
anticipated, and therefore none are quantified. As discussed in section
2.3.2 of the FEA, no specific plans to prepare new HCPs in response to
this critical habitat designation were identified; therefore, no
conservation costs associated with HCPs are included in FEA.
Text has been added to section 2 of the FEA to clarify that the
analysis considers and estimates the impacts of the rule as proposed
and as if the existing 2005 critical habitat designation did not exist.
In other words, this analysis considers and estimates the impacts
associated with designating areas as critical habitat versus not
designating these areas. This analysis is intended to assist the
Secretary in determining whether the benefits of excluding particular
areas from the designation outweigh the benefits of including those
areas in the designation. These particular areas also include those
already designated as critical habitat under the 2005 designation and
which are subject to re-examination by the Secretary.
The commenter is correct that the analysis does not fully account
for nor include all baseline costs. Section 2.3 of the FEA discusses
the Service's approach to conducting the economic analysis and notes
that due to extensive overlap between the current proposed designation
and the past bull trout critical habitat proposals, and due to the
existence of two detailed economic analyses of those past proposals,
the FEA focuses on incremental impacts expected to occur after we
finalize this designation of critical habitat. Because baseline costs
are not solely attributable to the proposed designation, they are
considered in the FEA primarily for purposes of providing context,
while the incremental impacts are considered to be of primary
importance for decision-making purposes. As discussed in section 3.3.1
of the FEA, costs associated with not-before-analyzed occupied areas as
well as unoccupied habitat that overlaps with salmon habitat are
included in the baseline, but were not expressly quantified in the
current FEA. Nonetheless, where additional relevant information on
baseline costs not captured in the report was provided in the public
comments, it has been added to the FEA.
(6) Comment: Several commenters were concerned about potential
costs to property owners that could result from the uncertain nature of
future regulation. One commenter was concerned that critical habitat
designation will result in decreased property values. In particular
this commenter states that with the Act's regulation in the background
it is reasonable to expect reduced property values of $100 per acre or
more. This commenter states that a loss of $100 per acre could reduce
their property values by $80 million in Idaho. On the other hand,
another commenter states that impacts related to stigma and regulatory
uncertainty are unlikely. This commenter further suggests that critical
habitat could increase property values, for example by increasing the
likelihood of Federal or State subsidies for conservation projects, or
by increasing interest in the property for purchase for conservation
easements.
Our Response: Stigma and uncertainty impacts are discussed in
section 2.3.2 of the FEA. While there is potential for uncertainty
impacts associated with the designation of critical habitat for bull
trout, as discussed in the FEA, information is not available to
quantify these impacts. Thus, impacts related to uncertainty are not
calculated in the FEA. The FEA does not predict or
[[Page 63918]]
quantify any impacts related to stigma that could result from the
designation of critical habitat for the bull trout. As discussed in the
FEA, public attitudes about the limits or restrictions that critical
habitat may impose can cause real economic effects to property owners,
regardless of whether such limits are actually imposed. However, as the
public becomes aware of the true regulatory burden imposed by critical
habitat, the impact of the designation on property values may decrease.
The analysis considers the implications of public perceptions related
to critical habitat on private property values within the proposed
designation.
The FEA finds that the bull trout critical habitat designation is
unlikely to cause property value losses because much of the property
proposed for designation is already being managed in ways consistent
with what would be required if adjacent streams were designated bull
trout critical habitat. For example, as noted as in the FEA, there are
numerous baseline regulations in place that provide protections for
bull trout and its critical habitat including conservation protections
for salmon and steelhead. In addition, most of the lands are currently
occupied by bull trout (96 percent), and 87 percent of the proposed
critical habitat was included in previous critical habitat proposals.
Thus, given the history of regulation and baseline protections already
in place, property value impacts resulting from this critical habitat
designation are not considered reasonably foreseeable. The commenter
did not provide supporting information for the estimate that critical
habitat results in reduced property values of $100 per acre; thus the
validity of this estimate cannot be evaluated.
(7) Comment: Several commenters noted the DEA did not provide
estimates of impacts at a detailed geographic level. As a result, the
commenters could not determine how the designation may affect specific
stream segments and geographic areas (e.g., individual counties).
Our Response: The FEA presents impacts based on the 32 units
outlined by the Service in the proposed rule. Because the analysis
covered almost 37,000 river kilometers (km) (23,000 miles (mi)) and
more than 200,000 hectares (ha) (500,000 acres (ac)), and followed a
20-year time horizon, project forecasts and other data were not
available at a sufficiently specific level to project impacts by
individual stream mile. To the extent possible, the FEA identifies
costs to specific areas when information was available. Where
potentially affected projects or sites were identified, the FEA
attributes impacts associated with these projects to the relevant unit.
For example, project modifications associated with facilities that form
part of the Federal Columbia River Power System are attributed to the
relevant units. Other impacts that are expected to fall on specific
types of lands (e.g., lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service) are
distributed across the designation based on river mile.
(8) Comment: Several commenters stated the DEA failed to consider
impacts on economic activities occurring upstream or downstream of
critical habitat areas.
Our Response: The DEA considers potential impacts to activities
that may threaten the bull trout as identified by the Service. As
discussed in section 2.3.2, the analysis considers indirect impacts to
the extent it is possible to identify these types of impacts.
Additional detail has been added to Chapters 3 and 4 of the FEA
qualitatively discussing potential impacts on upstream and downstream
activities. Since 96 percent of designated habitat is occupied by bull
trout, any incremental effect of this regulation protecting bull trout
habitat would likely be small. However, given data limitations and
geographic scope, the DEA analysis does not answer the question of
whether impacts to mining or other upstream operations are likely
(i.e., the probability of such impacts), or define the expected
magnitude of these impacts in any one area.
(9) Comment: A commenter states that the numbers in the 2009 report
cannot be replicated from the results in the 2004 report.
Our Response: There are several important reasons why the results
of the previous economic analyses are not directly transferable to the
current FEA. In particular, to update conservation costs forecast in
previous reports, we had to account for three major differences between
the current and previous reports. First, the geographic distribution of
the proposed designation and unit definitions are different. Second,
the framework underlying the economic analysis has changed. Previous
reports included co-extensive costs, whereas the current FEA
distinguishes between baseline and incremental costs. Third, the
timeframe covered by the current analysis has been expanded to 20
years. In order to assist readers in understanding how the previous
results are allocated to the new critical habitat units, we have added
an appendix to the FEA providing additional information on the
connections between previous reports and the current one. With the
addition of this appendix, we believe all of the relevant assumptions
and information used to predict the baseline and incremental costs are
available in the 2010 FEA and the 2004 and the 2005 final economic
analyses of bull trout critical habitat.
(10) Comment: A commenter notes the source of the 3 and 7 percent
discount rates applied in the previous economic analyses is not
explained.
Our Response: Information has been added to Chapter 2 of the FEA to
explain the source of the 3 and 7 percent discount rates applied in the
analysis. To discount and annualize costs, guidance provided by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) specifies the use of a real rate
of 7 percent. In addition, OMB recommends conducting a sensitivity
analysis using other discount rates such as 3 percent.
Economic Benefits Comments
(1) Comment: A commenter suggested the Service should have hired a
renowned natural resource economist, such as Dr. John Loomis, to
calculate the existence values of bull trout. This commenter also
suggested the Service should have undertaken a willingness-to-pay study
to quantify the benefits of recreational fishing.
Our Response: As discussed in section 6.1 of the FEA, the existing
economics literature does not provide the data necessary to quantify
the value the public would place on actions taken to enhance the
probability of recovery of bull trout. The estimation of the existence
value of bull trout would require primary research involving formal
approval from the Office of Management and Budget under the Paperwork
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), more than a year to conduct a
survey and analyze the results, and significant resources in excess of
those allocated to the preparation of the FEA. Similar efforts would be
required to conduct a willingness-to-pay study to quantify the benefits
of recreational fishing. Such primary research is beyond the scope of
this economic analysis. Furthermore, biological models estimating the
change in the likelihood of recovery that would result from the
designation of critical habitat and information necessary for a
credible estimate of willingness to pay are also not readily available.
Thus, existing data do not allow for the quantification or monetization
of the conservation value that is incremental to the designation of
critical habitat.
(2) Comment: Commenters suggest that water originating from streams
that may be designated as bull trout critical habitat has a value of at
least $1.4 to
[[Page 63919]]
$1.5 billion based on a report by the U.S. Forest Service.
Our Response: This U.S. Forest Service report estimates the total
volume of water available for use on all Forest Service lands, and
applies marginal values for instream and offstream water uses. In order
to utilize this information for the purposes of quantifying the
benefits of the critical habitat designation for bull trout, additional
information would be necessary. Specifically, to apply a marginal value
of water to estimate benefits of critical habitat designation we would
need quantified estimates of incremental changes in the amount and
quality of clear cold water resulting from the designation. The impact
of the designated bull trout critical habitat on water quality and
quantity has not been modeled.
(3) Comment: Various commenters provided information about specific
benefits that should have been included in the DEA. In particular,
commenters suggested that the analysis should have included benefits
such as the value of bull trout as subsistence for tribal members, the
reduction in likelihood that other aquatic species will be added to the
endangered species list, benefits from closing Forest Service roads,
and benefits of mitigating for climate change impacts through efforts
to protect bull trout critical habitat. Another commenter suggests the
DEA should capture potential benefits such as lower costs to upgrade to
municipal water treatment facilities to meet water quality standards.
This commenter also indicated that the cost-savings associated with
improved productivity, less absenteeism, and reduced public and private
health care costs resulting from improved water quality should be
predicted.
Our Response: Chapter 6 of the FEA describes the categories of
economic benefit that may derive from the conservation of affected
aquatic species and habitats, and discusses the research methods that
economists employ to quantify these benefits. As noted in the FEA,
additional information would be required in order to quantify these
benefits as they relate to designation of bull trout critical habitat.
The FEA (section 6.4.3) includes discussion of the potential for
benefits related to improved water quality including benefits to other
species, lower costs of water treatment, and human health benefits.
Similarly, the report discusses the fact that managing activities in
riparian areas such as road maintenance could lead to benefits
associated with improved water quality. Finally, the FEA has been
modified to include discussion of the potential for benefits such as
improved subsistence fishing opportunities and mitigation for climate
change.
(4) Comment: Several commenters indicate the DEA should have
included estimates of benefits resulting from increased recreational
fishing opportunities. In particular, a commenter states that a
recovered bull trout fishery would result in 218,000 to 295,500 bull
trout angling days per year within the Columbia River basin and 3,000
to 4,000 days per year in the Klamath River basin. The commenter also
estimates potential recreational fishing benefits for Montana. Based on
anglers spending $44 per day fishing and fishing 11.7 days per year,
the commenter suggests benefits could total $9.8 million to $12.1
million in direct income, and $18 to $22 million after applying an
economic multiplier.
In addition, various commenters provided information on the
economic value of recreational fishing in the proposed critical habitat
area. One comment provided an estimate of $69.8 million of travel-
generated expenditures for fishing, hunting, and wildlife viewing in
Deschutes County, Oregon (2009). Another commenter supplied information
on the economic value of recreational fishing in the five States
containing proposed bull trout critical habitat, which totals $2
billion based on the Service's 2006 National Survey of Fishing,
Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation. Several commenters stated
that recreational fishing in the State of Idaho results in economic
benefits of $283 million.
Our Response: It appears that the estimates of angling days in the
Columbia and Klamath river basins that would result from a recovered
bull trout fishery cited in one comment may be based on a 2007
Defenders of Wildlife study titled, ``Conservation Pays: How Protecting
Endangered and Threatened Species Makes Good Business Sense.'' However,
the source cited does not appear to support the estimated angler days.
Therefore, we have not included information from this study in the FEA.
Further, the Service determined that data needed to reasonably estimate
the increase in the number of angling days that would result from the
critical habitat designation are not available. There is insufficient
biophysical information to support such an analysis for the areas
proposed for critical habitat designation. The timing and extent to
which the bull trout population would be expected to recover is
unknown, both in total and at the critical habitat unit level. Further,
the relationship of the designation of critical habitat to the recovery
of the species is unknown.
As discussed in Chapter 6 of the FEA, additional information would
be required to quantify benefits from increased recreational fishing
opportunities, including: (1) Detailed forecasts of the timing and
extent of expected bull trout population increases resulting from
critical habitat designation; (2) any associated expected changes in
fishing regulations, and (3) the responsiveness of anglers to a new
target species. These data are not currently readily available.
To the extent that conservation efforts lead to increased open
space, aesthetic benefits, or improved water quality, which in turn
prompt an increase in visitation to the region (e.g., for recreation
such as fishing, hiking, or wildlife-viewing), the economy and
employment may benefit from increased regional spending, as discussed
in Chapter 6 of the FEA. However, general estimates of travel-generated
expenditures for fishing, hunting, and wildlife viewing are not
applicable for estimating benefits that could result from designation
of critical habitat for bull trout. In particular, these types of
estimates are not specific to rivers or lakes included in the proposed
critical habitat, nor are they specific to fishing for bull trout. As
such, we have not incorporated these values provided by commenters into
the FEA.
(5) Comment: Two comments suggested that a study of the tailwater
fishery on the San Juan River in New Mexico could be used to estimate
benefits on the Upper Deschutes River.
Our Response: These two comments refer to potential benefits
associated with the Upper Deschutes River, which was not included in
the proposed critical habitat, and as such was not considered in the
economic analysis. Thus, we did not incorporate this information in the
FEA.
(6) Comment: A commenter stated that recreational fishing
opportunities are not dependent on changes to fishing regulations;
thus, the analysis should be able to quantify benefits associated with
recreational fishing. The commenter further noted fishing opportunities
evaluated should not be limited to lethal harvest. This commenter also
noted an error in the reported percentage of trout fishing days in
Montana in 2006.
Our Response: Potential benefits related to increased bull trout
fishing opportunities are discussed in section 6.3 of the FEA. As noted
in the FEA, increased recreational fishing opportunities would most
likely occur in the form of catch-and-release fishing, given the status
of the species; however,
[[Page 63920]]
the analysis notes that current management approaches could be altered
at some point to allow some anglers in some areas to harvest bull
trout.
Additional information would be required to quantify these
benefits, including: (1) Detailed forecasts of the timing and extent of
expected bull trout population increases resulting from critical
habitat designation; (2) any associated expected changes in fishing
regulations; and (3) the responsiveness of anglers to a new target
species. At this time, the Service is not able to forecast how critical
habitat designation may affect the future population of bull trout in
critical habitat areas. Further, specific changes, including timing, to
fishing regulations are uncertain. Given the dearth of available
information, the Service chose not to quantify the potential benefits
associated with the increased recreational fishing.
Information on how fishing regulations might change (e.g., the
likelihood that States would allow fishing for bull trout, as well as
where and when) is considered an important factor in forecasting angler
days that could result from a recovered bull trout fishery. Without
this information, it would be difficult to predict how much
recreational fishing would be allowed in critical habitat areas. For
example, if fishing regulations were very restrictive, the increase in
recreational fishing due to critical habitat could be very small.
The commenter is correct in noting that the reported percentage of
trout fishing days in Montana in 2006 was a typographical error. This
percentage has been revised in the FEA.
(7) Comment: Several commenters indicated the DEA should have
included estimates of benefits resulting from increases in jobs that
could result from implementation of restoration activities such as road
reconstruction, culvert replacement, and fence building. Commenters
state the analysis fails to recognize economic benefits that healthy
native fisheries and increased spending at local businesses by the
recreational fishing public can provide to regional economies. One
commenter suggested that Federal expenditures to protect bull trout
habitat contribute to the economy of northeastern Nevada.
Our Response: We agree some level of regional economic benefits
could result from conservation efforts resulting from bull trout
critical habitat designation, as discussed in section 6.3 of the FEA.
To the extent conservation efforts lead to increased open space,
aesthetic benefits, or improved water quality, which in turn prompt an
increase in visitation to the region (e.g., for recreation such as
fishing, hiking, or wildlife-viewing), the economy and employment may
benefit from increased regional spending. However, based on the
assessment of incremental costs related to the proposed rule, any
incremental benefits related to the rule would be expected to be
limited (i.e., with few incremental project modifications resulting
from the designation, the scale of economic benefit is expected to be
modest). As discussed in Chapter 6 of the FEA, the Service determined
the data needed to reasonably estimate benefits resulting from a
potential increase in recreational fishing that would result from the
critical habitat designation are not available.
(8) Comment: Several commenters noted that the incremental impacts
projected are relatively small in comparison to the potential benefits
of the designation. The commenters pointed to potential benefits that
may result from the designation such as improvements in water quality
and revitalized fisheries.
Our Response: The Service agrees that incremental impacts (i.e.,
impacts that would not occur absent critical habitat) are expected to
be relatively minor. As noted in Exhibit ES-2 of the FEA, potential
incremental impacts are estimated at $56.3 to $80.9 million over the
next 20 years (discounted at 7 percent). On an annualized basis,
incremental impacts are estimated at approximately $5 to $7 million.
These impacts are discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4 of the FEA.
The FEA acknowledges potential benefits may occur as the result of
the designation; Chapter 6 discusses these benefits qualitatively. As
discussed in section 2.3.3, the Service believes that the direct
benefits of the proposed rule are best expressed in biological terms
that can be weighed against the expected cost impacts of the
rulemaking. A direct comparison of incremental impacts to potential
benefits in dollar terms is not possible because of a lack of detailed
understanding of the change in the probability of bull trout recovery
likely to result from the designation.
Administrative Costs
(1) Comment: Several commenters provided additional information
related to the number of forecast section 7 consultations and
associated costs. One commenter stated the number of forecast
consultations was too high because of changes in the Northwest economy
and because regional and programmatic consultations covering multiple
projects may be used. In addition, the commenter believes forecast
consultations in unoccupied areas are ``theoretical.'' A second
commenter noted that they complete between 10 and 15 consultations a
year, and that this number would increase if unoccupied areas were
designated. Two commenters noted that costs of participating in section
7 consultation as a third party were greater than the estimates used in
the DEA, while another commenter stated that the DEA's estimated costs
of addressing adverse modification in a consultation were too high.
Our Response: The comments providing information related to the
number and costs of consultation for specific entities were
incorporated into the report in Chapter 5 of the FEA. In general, the
DEA used a range of administrative costs developed from hours estimates
based on a review of consultation records from several Service field
offices. The portion of administrative costs attributed to considering
critical habitat were based on the Service's estimate that, for every
three hours spent considering jeopardy, an additional hour is spent
considering adverse modification. This represents the best available
information on relative proportion of time spent considering adverse
modification in section 7 consultations.
To develop forecasts of future consultations, this analysis relies
on section 7 consultation records provided by the Service. This record
includes more than 4,000 section 7 consultations conducted for bull
trout over the past 7 years. In many cases, the location of future
projects, the type of section 7 consultation (i.e., programmatic,
formal, informal, or technical assistance), and the associated level of
administrative effort needed is not known. The historical rate of
consultation is assumed to be a reasonable proxy for the frequency and
type of future consultations because it is likely that similar types of
projects and entities will occur in the future as in the past. While
one commenter notes that shrinkage of the timber industry should reduce
the number of forest management consultations, the number of forest
management consultations actually increased over the last 4 years.
Forest management consultations, in fact, consider a broad suite of
activities, including recreation, road maintenance and transportation,
and fire management, among other activities.
It is unclear how critical habitat would likely increase the rate
of future programmatic consultations. Programmatic consultations are
frequently used as a tool to reduce consultation workload, and are part
of
[[Page 63921]]
the consultation records providing the basis for forecasts of future
consultation activity in this analysis.
As noted in Exhibit 5-5 of the FEA, some units in occupied areas
have estimated incremental administrative costs because of the
incremental effort associated with considering adverse modification in
consultations that would already be expected to occur. The distribution
of costs between baseline and incremental is outlined in section 5 of
the FEA.
Impacts to Small Entities
(1) Comment: One commenter expressed concerns about certain
assumptions underlying the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA). In particular, the commenter noted that some consultations may
involve more than one small entity (e.g., for consultations on grazing
activities); that administrative costs are often not passed on to small
entities by Federal and State agencies and may otherwise be subsidized;
that the Small Business Administration (SBA) thresholds used are
inflated; and that location of small entities participating in
activities such as grazing and mining may not correlate with population
as assumed in the DEA. Another commenter encouraged outreach with small
entities that submitted comments during the public comment period,
including addressing these comments in the Final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis (FRFA) prepared for the final rule.
Our Response: The Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA)
has been revised to a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA). In
addition to the information previously provided in the IRFA, the FRFA
provides a summary of comments submitted by small entities in response
to the proposed rule and DEA. The purpose of the FRFA is to assist the
Service in determining the extent to which incremental impacts
resulting from critical habitat designation may be borne by a
substantial number of small entities. As discussed in section A.1, the
FRFA developed two potential estimates of small entities that may be
affected depending on the pattern of future consultations and the
extent to which impacts are passed on to small entities. Given the
breadth of the proposed designation, the number of counties potentially
affected, and the more than 70,800 small businesses falling within
these counties, primary data collection efforts on the location of each
of these businesses and their individual revenues were not feasible and
outside the scope of this analysis.
Scenario 1 is based on the estimated number of small entities
falling within the designation. To derive this estimate, Appendix A of
the FEA uses best available data on such factors as the size and annual
sales of businesses in the area, as collected by Dun & Bradstreet.
These data are available on a county-wide basis. Because counties may
include areas that are not part of the critical habitat designation,
the number of small entities within the county is scaled by the
percentage of the county's population living within the proposed
critical habitat boundaries. The commenter correctly points out that
some industries may not correspond to population patterns. For example,
agricultural, grazing, and mining operations may be located in more
rural and less populated areas. Exhibit A-3 in the FEA provides a
summary of all small entities located in the relevant counties,
including 416 mining operations, 14,402 agricultural operations, and
1,468 grazing operations. If potential incremental impacts were
benchmarked against all of these businesses, the estimated impact per
small entity would be less than $700 per entity, representing less than
0.01 percent of revenues. Scenario 2 is based on the forecast number of
consultations, assuming one small entity per consultation except in the
case of agricultural operations. As the commenter points out, grazing
consultations also may involve more than one small entity. This comment
has been addressed in Exhibit A-1 of the FEA.
As stated in section A.1.1 and Exhibit A-1, the portion of
administrative costs expected to be borne by Federal and State agencies
is excluded from impacts considered in this section as well as any
project modification costs likely to be borne by Federal agencies. For
example, as noted in Exhibit A-1 of the FEA, impacts associated with
Federal dam projects are excluded. In total, annualized incremental
impacts to small entities considered in Appendix A are only 51 percent
of total incremental impacts estimated in the rest of the report. While
the commenter believes that the impacts are overstated, they still
represent less than 0.6 percent of annual revenues under both scenarios
and for all activities.
Finally, the small business size standards noted in Exhibit A-2 in
the FEA are taken directly from the US Small Business Administration
website (http://www.sba.gov/idc/groups/public/documents/sba_homepage/
serv_sstd_tablepdf.pdf). The size standards are used to determine the
number of businesses that may qualify as small entities under the RFA
(see, for example, the ``regulated small entities in county'' column in
Exhibit A-3 of the FEA). The Service recognizes that many small
businesses may have revenues that fall well below this size standard.
Therefore, Appendix A uses estimates based on revenue data provided by
Risk Management Association to refine its revenue estimates (see Row
[B] in Exhibit A-1 of the FEA).
Water Use
(1) Comment: Various comment letters expressed concern the
designation could result in flow management changes which could impact
agricultural operations. For example, several commenters state the DEA
fails to take into account negative impacts that could result from
changes in reservoir operations on the Boise, Payette, and Weiser
Rivers, which could affect agriculture in this section of Idaho.
Another commenter expressed concern about the economic impacts
associated with a loss of irrigation water in Adams County, Idaho. One
commenter states the DEA should analyze potential future reallocation
of water rights priorities that may be caused by the designation, and
any associated costs to the Blackfeet Tribe. On the other hand, a
commenter states reductions in instream flows are unlikely and there is
no reason to believe that this will occur on public and private lands.
Our Response: As discussed in section 4.1, the FEA forecasts
potential incremental impacts resulting from modifications to
irrigation diversions across the proposed critical habitat designation.
As discussed in the 2004 final economic analysis for the Columbia and
Klamath River DPS final critical habitat designation, the Service,
USFS, and BLM have indicated that reductions in irrigation to protect
bull trout critical habitat are unlikely. To date, there have not been
any section 7 consultations with USFS or BLM where irrigation
diversions have been altered to benefit bull trout or its critical
habitat. Because of the large degree of uncertainty as to whether
consultations regarding irrigation diversions would occur, what volume
of water might be reallocated to instream flows, and what the primary
use of the diverted water would be (e.g., crops or pasture irrigation),
the FEA estimates a range of outcomes. The low end scenario assumes the
Service would not recommend any changes to irrigation withdrawals,
while the high end scenario assumes there could be project modification
costs associated with 10 irrigation diversion projects over the 20-year
timeframe of the analysis. This estimated range recognizes such
[[Page 63922]]
consultation outcomes are unlikely, but that if a limited number were
to occur, the impacts on individual operators could be substantial.
(2) Comment: One commenter questioned the assumption that
alternative water supplies would be available to replace irrigation
water that could be reallocated as a result of bull trout critical
habitat designation. The commenter further suggested it would be better
to apply a value for lost farm income, assuming that replacement water
would not be available. The commenter suggested lost farm income should
be estimated using a value of $100 to $400 per acre depending on the
type of crops being grown. Also, storage for irrigation could be
curtailed under the worst case scenario, which could result in a direct
economic impact of $50 million at $100 per acre, based on the more than
500,000 acre feet of water stored for diversions in the Boise and
Payette river systems. Similarly, another commenter stated the DEA
should estimate the impacts of withdrawn lands taken out of
agricultural production. One commenter stated there is no extra water
to attempt any change in the customary operations of their area.
Finally, a commenter stated Idaho does not have instream flow rights
laws under their State water law administration.
Our Response: As discussed in the 2004 final economic analysis for
the Columbia and Klamath River DPS critical habitat designation, the
high end scenario forecasted potential changes to instream flows that
could result from bull trout critical habitat designation. The analysis
estimated average annual loss in irrigation withdrawals of 2,656 acre-
feet per year per consultation based on three biological opinions
completed by NOAA Fisheries where instream flows in Washington were
specified primarily to protect anadromous species. The analysis applied
an upper-end estimate of water lease values from the Washington State
Department of Ecology of $127 per acre-foot. Because of uncertainty
about timing and location, the high end scenario assumed the
consultations would all occur in the first year of the analysis and the
costs are spread over all USFS lands within the proposed critical
habitat. The portion of costs that are incremental was then calculated
based on the portion of critical habitat unit that is considered
unoccupied.
As discussed above, the $127 per acre foot is based on actual
observed sales of water rights. While these values are based in part on
purchases, they are reflective of the opportunity cost of foregone
water use (e.g., the value of crop losses) and are consistent with
other approaches to valuing water, such as a production function or
farm budget approach. Accordingly, their use in the analysis is
consistent with the case where the irrigator loses the use of the usual
source of water and is unable to purchase water elsewhere (the
irrigation-related increment to production is lost). The agriculture
irrigation-related sections of the 2004 final economic analysis were
reviewed by a technical advisor on agriculture and water resource
economics, Dr. Joel Hamilton, Emeritus Professor of Agricultural
Economics and Statistics at the University of Idaho. Dr. Hamilton
reviewed the analytical methodology and the validity of the results,
and opined that the value of $127 per acre-foot likely overestimates
the impacts. Further, we note the use of this figure is consistent with
the suggested range of $100 to $400 per acre for lost farm income,
given that in the Pacific Northwest in 2008 roughly 2 acre-feet of
water are applied to each acre irrigated based on the 2007 Census of
Agriculture.
In addition, we note that in areas within the proposed critical
habitat, water transactions to benefit endangered species have
occurred. The report titled ``Economics of Water Acquisition Projects''
referenced by one of the commenters indicates that Oregon and
Washington water trusts have recently brokered a number of annual water
leases for the purpose of augmenting instream flows, and includes
examples in the Deschutes River Basin. As discussed in this report
``Agencies, politicians and current right holders seem to concur that
if water is needed it should be purchased from willing sellers, rather
than rely on government regulatory powers or taking provisions.'' This
report also confirms that Oregon, Idaho, and Washington all allow water
rights to be changed from irrigation to instream flow use.
Forecast impacts to irrigation do not include curtailing water
storage in the Boise and Payette river systems. This is not considered
a reasonably foreseeable outcome of the critical habitat designation.
Given that there is no basis for assuming the 50,000 acre feet of
stored water would be affected by the critical habitat designation, we
determine the suggested direct economic impact of $50 million is not
applicable.
(3) Comment: Several commenters were concerned about potential loss
in tax revenues as well as ripple effects that could result from
impacts of the designation on agricultural activities. Several comment
letters suggested regional economic impacts could occur if irrigation
for agriculture is affected by the critical habitat designation. In
addition, numerous commenters provided information about the value of
irrigated agriculture. One commenter indicated any reallocation of
irrigation diversions would negatively impact the economy in Canyon
County (Boise City and Treasure Valley), Idaho, and provided
information on the value of agricultural receipts as $325 million in
Canyon County. One commenter indicates the total value of irrigated
agriculture is nearly $1 billion in Kittias, Yakima, and Benton
Counties (WA). Another commenter was concerned 1 to 10 percent of the
$1.261 billion direct income to farmers and ranchers in Yakima and
Klickitat Counties of Washington State will be affected by this
designation. Another commenter provided data on the estimated gross
crop revenue of about $12 million within the boundaries of the Middle
Valley Ditch Corp. in Idaho. One comment stated Black Canyon Irrigation
District contributed about $60 million dollars from agriculture in Gem,
Payette, and Canyon Counties in Idaho. Another commenter expressed
concern that agriculture and related industries will be affected, which
represent 30 percent of Payette County economy.
Our Response: Irrigated agriculture is an important industry in the
vicinity of some bull trout critical habitat units. Chapter 1 of the
FEA has been expanded to include some discussion of the socioeconomic
background of the critical habitat areas, including the contribution of
irrigated agriculture. As stated in section 2.3 of the FEA, the
analysis focuses on incremental impacts expected to occur after the
designation of critical habitat is finalized. The basis for assuming
the entire value of irrigated agriculture in counties that contain
critical habitat are at risk from the proposed designation of critical
habitat does not appear to be warranted given the history of bull trout
management. Similarly, commenters do not provide any justification for
assuming that 1 percent or 10 percent of these values are at risk due
to critical habitat.
Because of the large degree of uncertainty as to whether
consultations regarding irrigation diversions may occur, what volume of
water might be reallocated to instream flows, and what the primary use
of the diverted water would be (e.g., crops or pasture irrigation), the
FEA estimates a range of outcomes. The low end scenario assumes the
Service would not recommend any changes to irrigation withdrawals,
while the high end scenario assumes there could be project
[[Page 63923]]
modification costs associated with 10 irrigation diversion projects
over the 20-year timeframe of the analysis. This estimated range
recognizes that such consultation outcomes are unlikely, but that if a
limited number were to occur, the impacts on individual operators could
be substantial. Because of the large region across which these impacts
are spread, however, significant regional impacts of these
consultations are not anticipated even under the high end scenario. The
analysis does not model the potential regional economic impacts
associated with other baseline conservation efforts that may be
undertaken, which may be much larger in scale. Because baseline costs
are not solely attributable to the proposed designation, they are
considered in the FEA primarily for purposes of providing context,
while the incremental impacts are considered to be of primary
importance for decision-making purposes.
(4) Comment: A commenter stated that costs for mitigation of
projects in the Upper Willamette River Basin should not be considered
incremental as these costs would be incurred whether or not bull trout
critical habitat is designated in this area. The commenter further
disagreed with the assumption in the DEA that one-third of the costs of
project modifications undertaken by the Bonneville Power Administration
(BPA) at the Upper Willamette project are related to bull trout.
Our Response: Estimated incremental costs in the Upper Willamette
River Basin unit are dominated by project modification costs associated
with the Willamette River Basin Flood Control Project, including fish
passage (trap and haul operations and construction of a fish ladder),
temperature control projects, and bull trout studies. The FEA includes
discussion of the uncertainties underlying the estimation of
incremental impacts in the Upper Willamette River critical habitat
unit, recognizing that some or all of these actions are likely to occur
even without critical habitat designation. The specific extent to which
project modification costs for the Willamette Project will increase as
a result of this designation is unclear; this distinction is
particularly complex because most of the proposed area on the Upper
Willamettte was designated as critical habitat in 2005. It is feasible
that some of the planned future actions would not have been undertaken
but for bull trout critical habitat designation. As such, section 4 of
the analysis uses the best available information and methods to
estimate potential incremental impacts.
(5) Comment: Several comment letters expressed concern the DEA does
not appear to consider impacts to hydroelectric projects. In
particular, one commenter expressed concern about impacts to the Flint
Creek Hydroelectric project, which is in the final stages of licensing
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). This commenter
stated the DEA does not mention impacts to the Flint Creek
hydroelectric project, which the commenter maintained would be greater
than the incremental annualized costs for the entire Clark Fork CHU.
Other commenters expressed concern the critical habitat designation
could increase the costs to hydropower users and their customers. One
commenter stated the Energy Impact Analysis does not adequately address
the impacts of the rule on energy production, distribution, or
marketing.
Our Response: The FEA considers whether the proposed critical
habitat would impact hydropower projects. As stated in Chapter 4 of the
FEA, incremental conservation costs associated with hydropower projects
are estimated to be $2.12 to $2.52 million (annualized at 7 percent).
Detailed information regarding the potential impacts to these projects
are provided in section 4.2.6 of the 2004 final economic analysis of
the Columbia and Klamath DPS final critical habitat designations as
well as section 3.4.1 of the 2005 final economic analysis of the
Coastal-Puget Sound, Jarbidge River, and Saint Mary-Belly DPS final
critical habitat designation. As appropriate, these impacts have been
allocated to the new proposed critical habitat units. As noted in the
FEA, substantial impacts to hydropower production are anticipated under
the baseline for this analysis. The commenter is correct that the
economic analysis does not forecast any incremental conservation costs
associated with the Flint Creek Hydroelectric Project. In a letter
dated March 26, 2010, from the Service to FERC, the Service concurred
with the determination that the project is not likely to adversely
affect bull trout or modify its proposed critical habitat. Additional
conservation efforts are not expected to be undertaken as a result of
bull trout critical habitat. Therefore, the only incremental impacts
related to this project are administrative costs which have been
accounted for in the forecast consultation efforts discussed in Chapter
5 of the FEA. The Energy Impact Analysis has been revised to more
clearly identify incremental impacts of critical habitat designation
for bull trout on energy production, distribution, and marketing. In
addition, the Energy Impact Analysis now also recognizes the more
substantial potential impacts on hydropower production expected under
the baseline.
(6) Comment: Several comment letters expressed concern that the DEA
does not appear to consider impacts to municipal water systems and
users. In particular, a commenter expressed concern that the
designation of Buck Creek will have significant cost impacts for the
City of White Salmon municipal water system and its residents and small
businesses. Another commenter was concerned about potential negative
impacts on the potential loss of water to cities and industrial users
from changes to reservoir operations on the Boise, Payette, and Weiser
Rivers.
Our Response: In developing the DEA, we considered whether impacts
to municipal water systems are likely to result from critical habitat
designation for bull trout. Specifically, section 3.4 of the 2004 final
economic analysis for the Columbia and Klamath DPS final critical
habitat designation included discussion of the potential for
consultations for bull trout involving water system improvements. Based
on the section 7 consultation history, there have not been project
modifications or formal consultations for this type of activity. As
such, the 2004 economic analysis forecasted only informal consultations
for water treatment system improvement, and no project modifications
associated with bull trout or bull trout critical habitat were
expected. Based on the findings of this previous analysis, and current
research regarding newly proposed critical habitat areas, we determined
incremental impacts to municipal water systems were not reasonably
foreseeable; thus, conservation costs associated with this type of
activity were not forecast in the FEA.
(7) Comment: One commenter was concerned that any changes to BOR's
Klamath Project would have significant economic impacts, which was not
addressed in the DEA.
Our Response: As discussed in responses to comments on the earlier
economic analysis published in the Federal Register on September 26,
2005 (70 FR 56222), BOR staff were contacted and consulted on the
likelihood of projects requiring section 7 consultation, as described
in section 4.2.4 in the final economic analysis of the Columbia and
Klamath DPS final critical habitat designation. When contacted, BOR
staff in Klamath Falls stated no significant consultation activity
concerning bull trout was anticipated. As a result, the analysis
[[Page 63924]]
assumes impacts resulting from designation of bull trout critical
habitat are not reasonably foreseeable for a BOR project on Agency Lake
Ranch. Further, as stated in the 2010 final economic analysis, because
Unit 9 (Klamath River) is included in proposed critical habitat for the
Lost River sucker and shortnose sucker, action agencies have been
conferencing with the Service on federally funded activities in this
area for the past 15 years. In most instances we do not anticipate we
would ask for or require any modifications above or beyond those
measures already in place for the protection of the two sucker species.
We therefore do not expect any changes other than increased
administrative costs to address bull trout critical habitat in that
unit.
Other Economics-Related Comments
(1) Comment: Several commenters were concerned the critical habitat
designation may limit the availability of grazing lands. For example,
one commenter noted that, if timing restrictions were imposed on when
allotments could be grazed, it could negatively impact the viability of
their grazing lands. Other commenters stated the DEA failed to consider
the potential costs of fencing grazing allotments, noting that fencing
on permitted allotments would cost $4,000 per acre with additional
costs related to weed control, fence repairs, livestock water
installations, and maintenance costs.
Our Response: The FEA considers potential impacts to grazing
activities on lands managed by the BLM and the USFS. Specifically, it
estimates the potential costs of monitoring, fencing, and off-stream
watering requirements, and then forecasts the number of grazing
projects per year that are likely to be asked to undertake these
requirements, both under the baseline and incrementally due to critical
habitat. For BLM lands, the analysis forecasts that three grazing
projects per year will undertake these project modifications across the
designation. For USFS lands, the analysis forecasts that two grazing
projects per year will undertake project modifications. Estimated costs
per grazing consultation are based on a review of the suggested project
modifications in past bull trout section 7 consultations, and on
information obtained from BLM and USFS representatives on the
likelihood that future consultations will be similar in scope and cost.
We recognize that restricting the timing of grazing activities
would effectively reduce the allowable grazing levels on Federal lands,
and have the potential to impact associated private land values.
However, in most cases the FEA does not anticipate timing restrictions
on grazing activities or limits on allowable grazing levels as a result
of critical habitat for bull trout.
(2) Comment: One commenter stated the project modification costs
associated with the Blue Bridge pipeline project are overstated because
they assume pipeline crossings will be through streams rather than
employing directional boring to avoid conservation costs associated
with critical habitat.
Our Response: As discussed section 4.2.2 of the FEA, the Blue
Bridge pipeline is expected to cross several streams in the proposed
critical habitat; however, specific future project modifications
associated with that project are currently unknown. The FEA
incorporates assumptions from the 2005 final economic analysis for the
Coastal-Puget Sound, Jarbidge River, and Saint Mary-Belly DPS final
critical habitat designation that conservation activities associated
with pipelines include techniques to avoid or minimize impacts to water
quality, including directional drilling.
Summary of Changes from the 2005 Rule
This final rule differs from the September 26, 2005, final critical
habitat designation for bull trout (70 FR 56212) in the following ways:
(1) In the 2005 final rule, we designated approximately 6,161 km
(3,828 mi) of streams and 57,9578 ha (143,218 ac) of lakes in Idaho,
Montana, Oregon, and Washington; and 1,585 km (985 mi) of shoreline
paralleling marine habitat in Washington as critical habitat (70 FR
56212). No critical habitat was designated in the Jarbidge River basin
(70 FR 56249-56251). In this rule, we are designating 31,750.8 km
(19,729.0 mi) of streams (which includes 1,213.2 km (754.0 mi) of
marine shoreline in the Olympic Peninsula and Puget Sound, and which
includes 245.2 km (152.4 mi) of streams in the Jarbidge River basin),
and are designating a total of 197,589.2 ha (488,251.7 ac) of
reservoirs and lakes.
(2) In the 2005 final rule, we did not designate any unoccupied
critical habitat because the Secretary concluded that it was not
possible to make a determination that such lands were essential to the
conservation of the species (70 FR 56232, September 26, 2005). In this
rule, we are designating 1,323.7 km (822.5 mi) of streams and 6,758.8
ha (16,701.3 ac) of reservoirs and lakes (4.2 percent of the total
designation) that are outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it was listed that have been determined to be
essential for the conservation of the species.
(3) A small proportion of critical habitat designated in the 2005
final rule is not designated as critical habitat in this revision.
These areas include streams and lakes determined either not to include
bull trout or any of their PCEs, or not to be essential to their
conservation. For example, Sycan Marsh in the Klamath River basin no
longer holds enough water to support bull trout, so we are designating
the stream channels through the marsh as critical habitat, allowing
connectivity among populations, instead of the entire marsh. Critical
habitat included in this rule that was not designated in the 2005 final
rule include streams and lakes since determined to be occupied by bull
trout, and areas that provide one or more PCEs and are essential to
bull trout conservation. For example, the mainstem Columbia River and
the lower portions of connecting tributaries such as the John Day River
have been found to be more important for FMO habitat for bull trout
than was previously understood. All areas known to contain the most
important bull trout habitat and PCEs, or that may be unoccupied but
essential to their conservation, are designated in this rule.
(4) In the 2005 rule, a variety of areas were exempted from
critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act or
excluded from designation as critical habitat under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act (70 FR 56232). These areas included lands subject to Federal
management plans (such as PACFISH, INFISH, Northwest Forest Plan, and
Federal Columbia River Power System). Federal agencies have an
independent responsibility under section 7(a)(1) of the Act to use
their programs in furtherance of the Act and to utilize their
authorities to carry out programs for the conservation of endangered
and threatened species. We consider the development and implementation
of land management plans by Federal agencies to be consistent with this
statutory obligation under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. Owners of non-
Federal lands, by contrast, are not obliged to undertake such
conservation programs, so to the
[[Page 63925]]
extent that excluding such lands under section 4(b)(2) provides an
incentive to conserve listed species, exclusion may benefit the species
to a degree that exclusion of Federal lands would not. Therefore,
Federal land management plans, in and of themselves, are generally not
an appropriate basis for excluding essential habitat. In areas where
Federal land management agencies actively manage for bull trout and its
habitat, conduct specific conservation actions for the species at a
level comparable to critical habitat designation, provide assurances
that a plan will remain in effect for a relevant period of time, and
show that a disproportionate impact would result from the designation,
exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act may be appropriately
considered by the Secretary. In the 2010 proposed rule (75 FR 2269,
January 14, 2010), we requested comments and specific information
regarding any conservation actions that Federal land management
agencies have or are currently implementing on their lands, and we took
this information into account when conducting our exclusion analysis.
(Please see in particular Federal Agency Comments, Bureau of Land
Management and U.S. Forest Service comment 1, above.)
The primary benefit of including an area within critical habitat
designation is the protection provided by section 7(a)(2) of the Act
that directs Federal agencies to ensure that their actions do not
result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
The benefit of designating critical habitat is limited if the areas
under consideration occur on private lands for which there may not be a
Federal nexus to invoke the protections of section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
However, Federal lands, by default, have a Federal nexus, and the
intent of section 7 of the Act is to require Federal agencies to
consult on any action authorized, funded, or carried out by such agency
to ensure that the action will not jeopardize a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. In addition, section
7(a)(1) of the Act states, in part, ``Federal agencies shall, in
consultation with and with the assistance of the Secretary, utilize
their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of this Act by
carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered and threatened
species.'' Therefore, the benefits of inclusion of these areas are
greater because they are Federal lands.
We were unable to determine that the Federal management plans and
guidance documents provide a conservation benefit for bull trout
comparable to critical habitat designation, or that designation of
critical habitat on Federal lands would present a disproportionate
economic or other relevant impact. These plans typically guide agency
activities, and provide some level of conservation benefit in occupied
bull trout habitat areas, but are fluid documents that may or may not
be revised, based on resource availability, management emphasis, and
changes in management direction to respond to changing agency
priorities. The Secretary has elected not to exercise his discretion
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude Federal lands from this
revised critical habitat designation. However, we are committed to
working efficiently and proactively with our federal partners to
address their program administration needs, in light of the
conservation needs of bull trout.
(5) Two economic analyses related to previous bull trout critical
habitat proposed rules were prepared in 2004 and 2005, which followed a
co-extensive analytical approach, consistent with recent court rulings.
Those analyses considered conservation and protection activities for
bull trout, without distinguishing between impacts associated with
listing the species and those associated with the designation of
critical habitat. The economic analysis prepared for this rule does not
follow the coextensive analytical approach, and differentiates between
baseline and incremental economic impacts. Under this approach, because
of the conservation measures already in place for salmon, steelhead,
the Klamath suckers, and other protected fish species, our analysis
indicates that the incremental economic impact in areas occupied by
bull trout will be small, and the most significant incremental effect
will be in those areas not currently occupied (less than four percent
of the areas being proposed as critical habitat). The majority of
forecast incremental costs are associated with unoccupied critical
habitat in the Upper Willamette River Basin and are associated with
conservation efforts undertaken at flood control facilities. The
discussion under Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts (below) provides
additional information in this regard.
Copies of the previous proposed and final bull trout critical
habitat rules and a map showing the relationship of the 2005 final rule
and this final rule are available on the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office
web site at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule
We are designating a total of 31,750.8 km (19,729.0 mi) of streams
(which includes 1,213.2 km (754.0 mi) of marine shoreline. We are also
designating a total of 197,589.2 ha (488,251.7 ac) of reservoirs and
lakes. We received many site-specific comments related to essential
habitat areas, completed our analysis of habitats to be excluded under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act, applied our criteria for identifying
critical habitat across the range of the bull trout to refine the
designation in this final rule, and completed the final economic
analysis (FEA). These changes from the proposed rule are identified
below:
(1) We refined our understanding of which areas contain the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of the
species based on comments from peer reviewers, States, Tribes, Federal
agencies, and the public. This improved information is reflected in
this final designation, and is characterized as many small adjustments
to waterbody segments based on site-specific information received
during the public comment period. In some cases, proposed critical
habitat areas were expanded and in other cases, proposed critical
habitat areas were reduced, based on comments and information received
in response to the proposed rule, and our evaluation of this new
information, which led us to refine our designation. In some cases we
extended the designation upstream into some tributary streams that we
determined were essential for the conservation of the bull trout,
because they contained the PCEs and meet our selection criteria for
inclusion in critical habitat. Each of the areas affected by a critical
habitat boundary expansion is essential to the conservation of the
species and consistent with the criteria outlined in the Critical
Habitat Methods section below. In other cases, we did not designate
some streams that were proposed as critical habitat, based on site
specific biological information that
[[Page 63926]]
these areas did not contain the PCEs and did not meet the selection
criteria for inclusion in critical habitat. Our response to Public
Comment (6) provides an example of one such area. Documentation
reflecting the outcome of that analysis for each area is available at
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/.
(2) We finalized our exclusion analysis under section 4(b)(2) of
the Act. Approximately 3,094.9 km (1,923.1 mi) of streams, which
includes 348 km (216.3 mi) of marine shoreline, and 7,849.3 ha
(19,395.8 ac) of reservoirs and lakes were excluded from the final
critical habitat designation based on this analysis. This represents
approximately 13 percent of streams and 8.5 percent of reservoirs and
lakes that are being excluded from what was proposed. See the
Exclusions section, below, for more information.
(3) We revised certain language, including the PCEs, to respond to
peer review comments and to clarify our intent.
(4) We updated the references cited in light of new information
received in response to the proposed rule.
(5) We finalized our economic analysis based on comments received
in response to the proposed rule. The Secretary did not exert his
discretion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude any particular
areas from the designation on the basis of economic impacts.
(6) During the mapping process, there was an inadvertent error made
in Unit 20 (Powder River), in which one of the GIS layers was omitted
from the map for that unit. As a result, Phillips Reservoir was not
shown on the map published in the proposed revision to bull trout
critical habitat (75 FR 2270, January 14, 2010). However, the impounded
streams within the reservoir boundary were shown, and the proposed rule
stated that ``the lateral extent of critical habitat in lakes is
defined by the perimeter of the waterbody as mapped on standard
1:24,000 scale topographic maps'' (75 FR 2283). We also received
several comment letters recommending that the reservoir be either
excluded or designated as critical habitat, including comments from the
Bureau of Reclamation that requested a better definition of the ``bank
of Phillips Reservoir''. These comments drew our attention to the
mapping error, but affirm the assumption that commenters understood the
reservoir was intended to be proposed as critical habitat. We are
correcting this mapping error and omission in this final rule, and
designating Phillips Reservoir as critical habitat.
Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which
are found those physical or biological features
(a) Essential to the conservation of the species, and
(b) Which may require special management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination such areas are
essential for the conservation of the species.
Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means to use
and the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods and
procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated
with scientific resources management such as research, census, law
enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live
trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where
population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise
relieved, may include regulated taking.
Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding,
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat. In this rule, critical habitat is defined as the bed and banks
of waterbodies, but actions that may destroy critical habitat could
occur on lands adjacent to waterbodies, and, therefore, would be
subject to regulation under this rule. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act
requires consultation on Federal actions that may affect critical
habitat. The designation of critical habitat does not affect land
ownership or establish a refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or
other conservation area. Such designation does not allow the government
or public to access private lands. Such designation does not require
implementation of restoration, recovery, or enhancement measures by
non-Federal landowners. Where a landowner seeks or requests Federal
agency funding or authorization for an action that may affect a listed
species or critical habitat, the consultation requirements of section
7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, but even in the event of a destruction
or adverse modification finding, the Federal action agency's and the
applicant's obligation is not to restore or recover the species, but to
implement reasonable and prudent alternatives to avoid destruction or
adverse modification of critical habitat.
For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat within
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was listed
must contain the physical and biological features essential to the
conservation of the species, and be included only if those features may
require special management considerations or protection. 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 (areas on which are found the
physical or biological features laid out in the appropriate quantity
and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species). Under the
Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate critical habitat
in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the
time it is listed only when we determine those areas are essential for
the conservation of the species and that designation limited to those
areas occupied at the time of listing would be inadequate to ensure the
conservation of the species. When the best available scientific data do
not demonstrate that the conservation needs of the species require such
additional areas, we will not designate critical habitat in areas
outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing. An area currently occupied by the species but that was not
occupied at the time of listing may, however, be essential to the
conservation of the species and may be included in the critical habitat
designation.
Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat on
the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available.
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and
General Government Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L.
106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated Information Quality Guidelines
provide criteria, establish procedures, and provide guidance to ensure
that our decisions are based on the best scientific data available.
They require our biologists, to the extent consistent with the Act and
with the use of the best scientific data available, to use primary and
original
[[Page 63927]]
sources of information as the basis for recommendations to designate
critical habitat.
When we are determining which areas should be designated as
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the
information developed during the listing process for the species.
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and
studies, biological assessments, or other unpublished materials and
expert opinion or personal knowledge. Substantive comments received in
response to proposed critical habitat designations are also considered.
Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to
another over time. Furthermore, we recognize that critical habitat
designated at a particular point in time may not include all of the
habitat areas that we may later determine are necessary for the
recovery of the species. For these reasons, a critical habitat
designation does not signal habitat outside the designated area is
unimportant or may not be required for recovery of the species.
Relationship of Critical Habitat to Recovery Planning
Areas that are important to the conservation of the species, but
are outside the critical habitat designation, will continue to be
subject to conservation actions we implement under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act. Areas that support populations are also subject to the
regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy
standard, as determined on the basis of the best available scientific
information at the time of the agency action. Federally funded or
permitted projects affecting listed species outside their designated
critical habitat areas may still result in jeopardy findings in some
cases. Similarly, critical habitat designations made on the basis of
the best available information at the time of designation will not
control the direction and substance of future recovery plans, HCPs, or
other species conservation planning efforts if new information
available at the time of these planning efforts calls for a different
outcome.
In developing this final rule, we considered the conservation
relationship between critical habitat and recovery planning. Although
recovery plans formulate the recovery strategy for a species, they are
not regulatory documents, and there are no specific protections,
prohibitions, or requirements afforded a species based solely on a
recovery plan. Furthermore, although critical habitat designation can
contribute to the overall recovery strategy for a species, it does not,
by itself, achieve recovery plan goals.
In its 5-year review (Service 2008, p. 45), the Service
recommended, in part, that recovery units from the 2002 draft recovery
plan be updated for bull trout throughout their range (Service 2002),
based on assemblages of bull trout core areas (metapopulations or
interacting breeding populations) that retain genetic and ecological
integrity and are significant to the distribution of bull trout
throughout the coterminous United States. To complete the recovery unit
update, we consulted with biologists from States, Federal agencies, and
Native American Tribes, using the best scientific information
available. Factors considered in determining the geographic arrangement
of the updated recovery units included ensuring (1) resiliency of the
species by protecting large areas of high quality habitat; (2)
redundancy by protecting multiple populations; and (3) representation
by protecting diverse genetic and life-history aspects of bull trout
populations distributed throughout the range of the listed entity (Tear
et al. 2005, p. 841).
Bull trout are listed under the Act as threatened throughout the
coterminous United States, primarily due to habitat threats. The
Service concluded in its 5-year review (Service 2008, p. 9) that the
number of distinct population segments (DPSs) should be reevaluated,
and that consideration should be given to reclassifying bull trout into
separate DPSs. Six draft recovery units (RUs) were subsequently
identified. Each of the six RUs was evaluated, and confirmed to be
needed to ensure a resilient, redundant, and representative
distribution of bull trout populations throughout the range of the
listed entity. To accomplish these goals, protection of large areas of
high-quality habitat, multiple populations, and diverse genetic and
life-history aspects will be required.
The six draft RUs identified for bull trout in the coterminous
United States include: Mid-Columbia recovery unit; Saint Mary recovery
unit; Columbia Headwaters recovery unit; Coastal recovery unit; Klamath
recovery unit; and Upper Snake recovery unit (Figure 1). Conserving
each RU is essential to conserving the listed entity as a whole. These
six new biologically based RUs will be proposed to replace the 27
recovery units previously identified in the bull trout draft recovery
plan (Service 2002, Chapter 1, p. 3), and comments will be solicited
once the draft recovery plan is ready for public participation and
comment.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63928]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.000
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
Methods
As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we used the best
scientific data available in determining areas that contain the
features essential to the conservation of the bull trout. Data sources
included research published in peer-reviewed articles and previous
Service documents on the species. Additionally, we utilized regional
Geographic Information System (GIS) shape files for area calculations
and mapping.
Primary Constituent Elements
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at
50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas occupied at the time of
listing to propose as critical habitat, we consider the physical or
biological features
[[Page 63929]]
essential to the conservation of the species and that may require
special management considerations or protection. These features are the
PCEs laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement for
conservation of the species. These include, but are not limited to:
(1) Space for individual and population growth and for normal
behavior;
(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or
physiological requirements;
(3) Cover or shelter;
(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing (or development)
of offspring; and
(5) Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are
representative of the historical, geographical, and ecological
distributions of a species.
A detailed discussion of each of these five life-history needs of
the bull trout follows.
Space for Individual and Population Growth and for Normal Behavior
Bull trout exhibit a number of life-history strategies. Stream-
resident bull trout complete their entire life cycle in the tributary
streams where they spawn and rear. Migratory bull trout spawn in
tributary streams. Juvenile fish from migratory populations usually
rear from 1 to 4 years in natal streams before migrating (typically
downstream) to either a larger river (fluvial form) or lake (adfluvial
form) where they spend their adult life, returning to the tributary
stream to spawn (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 133). These migratory
forms occur in areas where conditions allow for movement from upper
watershed spawning streams to larger waters that contain greater
foraging opportunities (Dunham and Rieman 1999, p. 646). Resident and
migratory forms may be found together, and either form can produce
resident or migratory offspring (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 2). Where
ocean environments are accessible, bull trout may also migrate to and
from salt water (amphidromy).
The ability to migrate is important to the persistence of bull
trout local populations (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 2; Gilpin 1997,
p. 4; Rieman and Clayton 1997, p. 6; Rieman et al. 1997, p. 1121). Bull
trout of a variety of life stages rely on foraging, migration, and
overwintering (FMO) habitat to complete extensive and important parts
of their life cycle (Homel and Budy 2008, p. 875; Monnot et al. 2008,
pp. 235-237). Juvenile and adult resident bull trout inhabit the
spawning and rearing areas year round. Some adult migratory forms
inhabit spawning and rearing habitat after spawning into the early
winter and can arrive in early summer to hold prior to spawning
(Mulhfeld et al 2005, p. 801; Kellyringel and DeLaVergne 2010, p. 16),
and subadults or alternate year migratory spawning adults may inhabit
mid to lower river migratory corridors year round. Habitat complexity
including deep pools and cover appear to be important habitat
components in areas of both spawning and rearing and migration (Monnet
et al. 2008, pp. 235-237; Al-Chokhachy et al. 2010, pp. 469-472).
Migratory bull trout become much larger than resident fish,
benefiting from the more productive waters of larger streams, lakes,
and marine habitats, consequently leading to increased reproductive
potential. Stream-resident populations are associated with headwater
streams in mountainous regions where year-round cold water and velocity
or other movement barriers are common. Typically, these streams are
smaller and have higher gradients than those occupied by adfluvial and
fluvial populations. In these headwater streams, resident bull trout
are associated with deep pools and instream cover, and stream-resident
individuals are typically small (McPhail and Baxter 1996, p. 12; Mullan
et al. 1992, p. K-413). The use of migration habitat by bull trout can
also increase potential for dispersion, facilitating gene flow among
local populations (interbreeding groups) when individuals from
different local populations interbreed, stray, or return to nonnatal
streams. Importantly, local populations that have been extirpated by
catastrophic events may become reestablished because of movements by
bull trout through migration habitat (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 7;
MBTSG 1998, p. 45).
Lakes and reservoirs also figure prominently in meeting the life-
cycle requirements of bull trout. For adfluvial (migrating between
lakes and rivers or streams) bull trout populations, lakes and
reservoirs provide an important component of the core FMO habitat and
are integral to maintaining the adfluvial life-history strategy that is
commonly exhibited by bull trout. When juvenile bull trout emigrate to
a lake or reservoir from spawning and rearing streams, they enter a
more productive lentic (still or slow-moving water) environment that
allows them to achieve rapid growth and energy storage.
Some reservoirs may have adversely affected bull trout, while
others have provided benefits, and some may cause both benefits and
impacts. For example, the basin of Hungry Horse Reservoir has
functioned adequately for 50 years as a surrogate home for stranded
Flathead Lake bull trout trapped upstream of the dam when it was
completed. While this is an artificial impoundment, the habitat the
reservoir provides and the presence of an enhanced prey base of native
minnows, suckers, and whitefish within the reservoir sustain a large
adfluvial bull trout population. Additionally, while barriers to
migration are often viewed as a negative consequence of dams, the
connectivity barrier at Hungry Horse Dam has served an important,
albeit unintended, function in restricting the proliferation of
nonnative Salvelinus species (including brook trout (Salvelinus
fontinalis) and lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush)) upstream above the
dam. Reservoir fluctuations may or may not harm bull trout populations
at Hungry Horse Reservoir; site-specific information would best inform
a determination of such effects. Instream flow analyses downstream of
Hungry Horse Reservoir, which have used site-specific habitat
suitability criteria, have shown that amount and duration of important
bull trout habitats were greatly reduced following the installation of
Hungry Horse Dam in 1952 (Miller et al. 2003, p. 60; Muhlfeld et al.
2010, p. 40).
Marine nearshore habitats have similar importance for the
amphidromous (migrating between marine waters and river or streams)
bull trout populations. These marine habitats and the associated
nonnatal river systems used by amphidromous bull trout are integral to
maintaining this life-history strategy. Similar to lakes and
reservoirs, these areas provide highly productive foraging habitat as
well as stable overwintering habitat.
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Nutritional or
Physiological Requirements
Bull trout are opportunistic feeders that prey upon other
organisms. Prey selection is primarily a function of size and life-
history strategy. Resident and juvenile migratory bull trout prey on
terrestrial and aquatic insects, macro-zooplankton, and small fish
(Donald and Alger 1993, p. 244; McPhail and Baxter 1996, p. 15). Adult
migratory bull trout feed almost exclusively on other fish (Rieman and
McIntyre 1993, p. 3). Habitat must provide the necessary aquatic and
adjacent terrestrial conditions to harbor and maintain prey species in
sufficient quantity and diversity to meet the physiological
requirements necessary to maintain bull trout populations. Therefore,
an abundant food base, including a broad array of terrestrial organisms
of riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and/
[[Page 63930]]
or forage fish, supports individual and population growth and allows
for normal bull trout behavior.
Cover or Shelter
At all life stages, bull trout require complex forms of cover,
including large woody debris, undercut banks, boulders, and pools
(Fraley and Shepard 1989, pp. 137-138; Watson and Hillman 1997, p.
249). Many of these habitat features are dependent on watershed
conditions as a whole (Howell 2010, pers.com). Juveniles and adults
frequently inhabit side channels, stream margins, and pools with
suitable cover (Sexauer and James 1997, p. 368). McPhail and Baxter
(1996, p. 11) reported newly emerged fry are secretive and hide in
gravel along stream edges and side channels. They also reported
juveniles are found mainly in pools but also in riffles and runs,
maintain focal sites near the bottom, and are strongly associated with
instream cover, particularly overhead cover such as woody debris or
riparian vegetation. Undercut banks and coarse substrates provide cover
and overwinter habitat for juvenile bull trout (peer review comments,
R. Thurow 2010, p. 1). All life-history stages of bull trout have been
observed overwintering in deep beaver ponds or pools containing large
woody debris (Jakober 1995, p. 90). Adult bull trout migrating to
spawning areas have been recorded as staying 2 to 4 weeks at the mouths
of spawning tributaries in deeper holes or near logs or cover debris
(Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 137). Bull trout may also use lotic
(swift-flowing water) and in some cases saltwater environments
seasonally for reasons that include use as cover. In conclusion,
riparian vegetation; large wood; variable stream channel morphology
including deep pools, side-channels, undercut banks and substrates; and
in some cases access to downstream environments provide cover and
shelter, which support individual and population growth and allow for
normal bull trout behavior.
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or Rearing (or Development) of
Offspring
Bull trout have more specific habitat requirements than most other
salmonids (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 4). Habitat components that
particularly influence their distribution and abundance include water
temperature, cover, channel form, spawning and rearing substrate
conditions, and migration habitat (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 138;
Goetz 1989, p. 19; Watson and Hillman 1997, p. 247).
Relatively cold water temperatures are characteristic of bull trout
habitat. Water temperatures above 15 [deg]Celsius (C) (59
[deg]Fahrenheit (F)), while not lethal, are believed to limit bull
trout juvenile distribution (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 138). Although
adults have been observed in large rivers throughout the Columbia River
basin in water temperatures up to 20 [deg]C (68 [deg]F), steady and
substantial declines in abundance have been documented in stream
reaches where water temperature ranged from 15 to 20 [deg]C (59 to 68
[deg]F) Gamett (2002, pp. 30-32) .
Watson and Hillman (1997, p. 248) concluded watersheds must have
specific physical characteristics to provide the necessary habitat
requirements for bull trout spawning and rearing, and that these
characteristics are not ubiquitous throughout the watersheds in which
bull trout occur. The preferred spawning habitat of bull trout consists
of low-gradient stream reaches with loose, clean gravel (Fraley and
Shepard 1989, p. 133). Bull trout typically spawn in a narrow time
window of a couple weeks during periods of decreasing water
temperatures, but spawning ranges from August to November depending on
local conditions (Swanberg 1997, p. 735). However, migratory forms are
known to begin spawning migrations as early as April and to move
upstream as much as 250 km (155 mi) to spawning areas (Fraley and
Shepard 1989 p. 138; Swanberg 1997, p. 735).
Fraley and Shepard (1989, p. 137) reported the initiation of
spawning by bull trout in the Flathead River system appeared to be
related to water temperature, with spawning generally initiated when
water temperatures dropped below 10 [deg]C (50 [deg]F). Goetz (1989,
pp. 22-32) reported a spawning temperature range from 4 to 10 [deg]C
(39 to 50 [deg]F), but the range could be wider in some areas (Howell
et al. 2010, p. 102). Selection of spawning habitat by bull trout is
also influenced across multiple spatial scales by hyporheic flow
(Baxter and Hauer 2000, p. 1476), defined as a mixing of shallow
groundwater and surface water beneath and lateral to a stream bed.
Hyporheic flow is influenced by geomorphic complexity of the streambed
and recognized to be important for surface water/groundwater
interaction. Spawning areas are often associated with cold-water
springs, glacial and snow melt, or groundwater upwelling (Rieman et al.
1997, p. 1121; Baxter et al. 1999, p. 137). Fraley and Shepard (1989,
p. 137) also found groundwater influence and proximity to cover are
important factors influencing spawning site selection. They reported
the combination of relatively specific requirements resulted in a
restricted spawning distribution in relation to available stream
habitat. While bull trout are critically dependent on large, cold-water
habitats, individuals can range widely through stream networks and use
habitat that may have limited amounts of cold-water refuge (Dunham
2010, pers.com).
Depending on water temperature, egg incubation is normally 100 to
145 days (Pratt 1992, p. 5). Water temperatures of 1.2 to 5.4 [deg]C
(34.2 to 41.7 [deg]F) have been reported for incubation, with an
optimum (best embryo survivorship) temperature reported to be from 2 to
4 [deg]C (36 to 39 [deg]F) (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 138; McPhail
and Baxter 1996, p. 10). Juveniles remain in the substrate after
hatching. The time from egg deposition to emergence of fry can exceed
200 days. During the relatively long incubation period in the gravel,
bull trout eggs and embryos are especially vulnerable to fine sediments
(i.e., fine silt to coarse sand) and water quality degradation (Fraley
and Shepard 1989, p. 141). Increases in fine sediment appear to reduce
egg survival and emergence (Pratt 1992, p. 6) by restricting
intragravel circulation and/or causing entombment of newly hatched
alevins (young salmon that have the yolk sac still attached). Juveniles
are likely also affected by reduced interstitial habitat and cover.
High juvenile densities have been reported in areas characterized by a
diverse cobble substrate and a low percentage of fine sediments
(Shepard et al. 1984, p. 6). Habitats with cold water temperature and
appropriately-sized stream substrate with a low level of fine sediments
are necessary factors for successful egg incubation and juvenile
rearing that supports individual and population growth (Watson and
Hillman 1997, pp. 238-246; WFPB 1997, pp. 98, F-25). Because the size
and amounts of fines acceptable to bull trout will likely vary from
system to system, providing specific examples of local criteria as we
did in the proposed rule may be misleading; therefore, for this final
rule we have removed the examples we provided in the proposed rule.
Habitats Protected from Disturbance or Representative of the
Historical, Geographical, and Ecological Distributions of the Species
Other threats to water quality in bull trout critical habitat
include suspended sediment and environmental contaminants. Suspended
sediment, made up of the smallest fine materials, may vary in size
depending on stream flow and channel type (MacDonald and
[[Page 63931]]
Wissmar 1991, pp. 98-99). Suspended sediments and the resulting
turbidity of the water can impact salmonids (including bull trout) and
their prey (e.g., macro invertebrates or other fish). High levels of
suspended sediments can affect swimming, feeding, or gill function by
reducing visibility and ability to pursue prey, and by interrupting
proper physiological gill function.
Water diversion and reservoir development can reduce stream flow,
reduce the amount of water available in a stream channel, change water
quality, and alter groundwater regimes. These changes may collectively
impact habitat and passage for bull trout, and can cause increases in
water temperatures.
Alterations to natural habitat conditions may also increase
nonnative species predation and competition, which can significantly
affect bull trout populations. Nonnative species have been introduced
in many watersheds currently occupied by bull trout. Depending on local
conditions, bull trout recovery may be either reduced or precluded by
the presence of nonnative (and competitive) species. Some nonnative
fish species that prey on bull trout include lake trout, walleye
(Sander vitreum), northern pike (Esox lucius), smallmouth bass
(Micropterus dolomieu), and brown trout (Salmo trutta). Brown trout or
other introduced salmonids, such as rainbow trout (Onchorynchus
mykiss), as well as smallmouth bass, northern pike, walleye, and other
species, also compete with bull trout for limited resources. Brook
trout commonly hybridize with bull trout and are better adapted to
compete with bull trout when they occur together, particularly in
degraded habitat (Ratliff and Howell 1992, p. 16; Leary et al. 1993, p.
857). Brook trout and bull trout hybrids are not uncommon where they
are sympatric, and it usually is a cross of a female bull trout and a
male brook trout, which is more costly, genetically speaking, to the
bull trout population (DeHaan et al. 2009, p. 6; Kanda et al. 2002, p.
776). Presence of brook trout and lake trout frequently lead to
declines in abundance and distribution of bull trout (MBTSG 1998,
pp.46-47; Donald and Alger 1993, p. 245; Fredenberg 2002, p. 150).
The stability of stream channels and stream flows may be important
habitat characteristics for bull trout (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p.
5). Bull trout may select spawning locations to reduce risk of scour
especially in rain dominated areas with higher probability of peak
flows during incubation. Complex channel types including presence of
side channels, stream margins, and cover near spawning sites, including
pools are important to maintain in these types of spawning reaches
(Shellberg 2002, p. 80). Side channels, stream margins, and pools with
suitable cover for bull trout are sensitive to activities that directly
or indirectly affect stream channel stability and alter natural flow
patterns. For example, altered stream flow in the fall may disrupt bull
trout during the spawning period, and channel instability may decrease
survival of eggs and young juveniles in the gravel during winter
through spring (Fraley and Shepard 1989, p. 141; Pratt 1992, p. 6;
Pratt and Huston 1993, p. 70). In areas west of the Cascade Range, it
is common to have peak flows from rainstorms during the incubation
period in the fall (Shellberg 2002, p. 36). East of the Cascade Range,
it is not as common to have peak flows until spring snows melt. Also,
bull trout use all parts of a waterbody at various times, including
foraging in shallow water areas at night; unstable stream flows from
impoundments, for example, may impact these behaviors (peer review
comments, C. Muhlfeld 2010, attachment p. 22). Streams with a natural
hydrograph (those with normal discharge variations over time as a
response to seasonal precipitation), permanent water, and an absence of
nonnative species are representative of the highest quality habitat of
the species.
We are designating bull trout critical habitat of two primary use
types: (1) Spawning and rearing, and (2) foraging, migration, and
overwintering (FMO). Each area being designated as occupied critical
habitat contains one or more of those physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species, which may require special
management considerations or protection, which are the PCEs for the
bull trout. Each area being designated as unoccupied habitat has been
determined to be essential for the conservation of the species. The
justification document developed to support the proposed rule
identifies all waterbody segments as either SR or FMO habitat. This
document is available at our website at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout, or upon request from the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES above). Due to a lack of sufficiently detailed data and
uncertainty over precise dividing lines between these two habitat
types, we do not identify the specific PCEs present for each waterbody
segment. Factors such as time of year, seasonal precipitation, drought
conditions, and other phenomena can influence the essential physical or
biological features present at any particular location at any
particular time given the variability of habitats used by bull trout.
In addition, attributes such as stream flow and substrate size and
composition are influenced by stream order and gradient. Accordingly,
we are unable to define a conclusive upper and lower range of
conditions for specific PCEs, given this complexity. However, future
section 7(a)(2) consultations on specific Federal actions will help
identify the PCEs relevant to a specific waterbody, and provide
information to Federal agencies regarding special management
considerations or protections that may be appropriate at that location.
Based on the above biological needs of the species, and keeping in
mind the need to identify PCEs with sufficient generality to apply to
the wide range of bull trout and diversity of its habitat, we derived
nine specific PCEs required for bull trout from the biological needs of
the species as described or referred to in the Background section of
this final rule and the following information. The nine PCEs relate to:
(1) Water quality; (2) migration habitat; (3) food availability; (4)
instream habitat; (5) water temperature; (6) substrate characteristics;
(7) stream flow; (8) water quantity; and (9) nonnative species.
Primary Constituent Elements for Bull Trout
Based on the needs described above and our current knowledge of the
life history, biology, and ecology of the species and the
characteristics of the habitat necessary to sustain the essential bull
trout life-history functions, we have determined that the following
PCEs are essential for the conservation of bull trout and may require
special management considerations or protection.
(1) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water
connectivity (hyporheic flows) to contribute to water quality and
quantity and provide thermal refugia.
(2) Migration habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water
quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and
freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to
permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers.
(3) An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of
riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish.
(4) Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline
aquatic environments, and processes that
[[Page 63932]]
establish and maintain these aquatic environments, with features such
as large wood, side channels, pools, undercut banks and unembedded
substrates, to provide a variety of depths, gradients, velocities, and
structure.
(5) Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 [deg]C (36 to 59
[deg]F), with adequate thermal refugia available for temperatures that
exceed the upper end of this range. Specific temperatures within this
range will depend on bull trout life-history stage and form; geography;
elevation; diurnal and seasonal variation; shading, such as that
provided by riparian habitat; streamflow; and local groundwater
influence.
(6) In spawning and rearing areas, substrate of sufficient amount,
size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter
survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A
minimal amount of fine sediment, generally ranging in size from silt to
coarse sand, embedded in larger substrates, is characteristic of these
conditions. The size and amounts of fine sediment suitable to bull
trout will likely vary from system to system.
(7) A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base flows
within historic and seasonal ranges or, if flows are controlled,
minimal flow departure from a natural hydrograph.
(8) Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal
reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited.
(9) Sufficiently low levels of occurrence of nonnnative predatory
(e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass);
interbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competing (e.g., brown trout)
species that, if present, are adequately temporally and spatially
isolated from bull trout.
Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat
As required by section 4(b) of the Act, we used the best scientific
and commercial data available in determining areas that contain the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of bull
trout that may require special management considerations or protection,
and areas outside of the geographical area occupied at the time of
listing that are essential for bull trout conservation (see Previous
Federal Actions section). The steps we followed in identifying critical
habitat were:
(1) We determined in accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act
and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, the physical or biological habitat
features essential to the conservation of the species, as explained in
the previous section. We reviewed the best available scientific
information pertaining to the habitat requirements of this species,
including consulting with biologists from partner agencies and entities
including Federal, State, tribal, and private biologists, as well as
experts from other scientific disciplines such as hydrology and
forestry, resource users, and other stakeholders with an interest in
bull trout and the habitats they depend on for survival. We also
reviewed available information concerning bull trout habitat use and
preferences; habitat conditions; threats; limiting factors; population
demographics; and known locations, distribution, and abundance of bull
trout.
(2) We then identified the geographical areas occupied by bull
trout at the time of listing and areas not occupied that may be
essential for the conservation of bull trout. We used information
gathered during the bull trout recovery planning process and the bull
trout draft recovery plan (Service 2002), and supplemented that
information with recent information developed by State agencies,
Tribes, the USFS, and other entities. This information was used to
update bull trout status and distribution information for purposes of
the proposed critical habitat designation. For areas where we had data
gaps, we solicited expert opinions from knowledgeable fisheries
biologists in the local area. Material reviewed included data in
reports submitted during section 7 consultations, reports from
biologists holding section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery permits, research
published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, academic theses, State
and Federal government agency reports, and regional GIS overlays.
(3) We identified specific areas within each of the six new draft
recovery units described above that contain the physical or biological
features essential to bull trout conservation, considering
distribution, abundance, trend, and connectivity needs. The objective
was to ensure the areas proposed for designation as critical habitat
would effectively achieve the principles we believe are important for
recovery: (a) Conserve the opportunity for diverse life-history
expression; (b) conserve the opportunity for genetic diversity; (c)
ensure bull trout are distributed across representative habitats; (d)
ensure sufficient connectivity among populations; (e) ensure sufficient
habitat to support population viability (e.g., abundance, trend
indices); (f) address threats (see Special Management Considerations or
Protection below), including climate change (described later in this
section); and (g) ensure sufficient redundancy in conserving population
units. These recovery principles take into account the threats and
physical or biological needs of the species throughout its range, and
focus on the rangewide recovery needs.
Some areas that contained the physical or biological features did
not meet one or more of the seven recovery principles because they did
not contain the physical or biological features in an appropriate
quantity and spatial arrangement. Accordingly, the areas with such
features were determined not to be essential to bull trout
conservation. For example, some areas may have contained spawning
habitat (PCEs 5 and 6), but were disconnected from known populations
and were not known to support viable bull trout populations. A few
areas (e.g., the entire Lucky Peak core area in the lower Boise River
drainage in southwest Idaho) were not included because of limited
habitat quantity, marginal habitat quality, low bull trout density, or
only sporadic presence of bull trout recorded.
Global climate change threatens bull trout throughout its range in
the coterminous United States. Downscaled regional climate models for
the Columbia River basin predict a general air temperature warming of
1.0 to 2.5 [deg]C (1.8 to 4.5 [deg]F) or more by 2050 (Reiman et al.
2007, p. 1552). This predicted temperature trend may have important
effects on the regional distribution and local extent of habitats
available to salmonids (Rieman et al. 2007, p. 1552), although the
relationship between changes in air temperature and water temperature
are not well understood. The optimal temperatures for bull trout appear
to be substantially lower than those for other salmonids (Selong and
McMahon 2001), p. 1031; Rieman et al. 2007, p. 1553). Coldwater fish do
not physically adapt well to thermal increases (McCullough et al. 2009,
pp. 96-101). Instead, they are more likely to change their behavior,
alter the timing of certain behaviors, experience increased physical
and biochemical stress, and exhibit reduced growth and survival
(McCullough et al. 2009, pp. 98-100). Bull trout spawning and initial
rearing areas are currently largely constrained by low fall and winter
water temperatures, and define the spatial structuring of local
populations or habitat patches across larger river basins; habitat
patches represent networks of thermally suitable habitat that may lie
in adjacent watersheds and are disconnected (or fragmented) by
intervening stream segments of
[[Page 63933]]
seasonally unsuitable habitat or by actual physical barriers (Rieman et
al. 2007, p. 1553). With a warming climate, thermally suitable bull
trout spawning and rearing areas are predicted to shrink during warm
seasons, in some cases very dramatically, becoming even more isolated
from one another under moderate climate change scenarios (Rieman et al.
2007, pp. 1558-1562; Porter and Nelitz 2009, pp. 5-7).
Climate change will likely interact with other stressors, such as
habitat loss and fragmentation (Rieman et al. 2007, pp. 1558-1560;
Porter and Nelitz 2009, p. 3); invasions of nonnative fish (Rahel et
al. 2008, pp. 552-553); diseases and parasites (McCullough et al. 2009,
p. 104); predators and competitors (McMahon et al. 2007, pp. 1313-1323;
Rahel et al. 2008, pp. 552-553); and flow alteration (McCullough et al.
2009, pp. 106-108), rendering some current spawning, rearing, and
migratory habitats marginal or wholly unsuitable. For example,
introduced congeneric populations of brook trout are widely distributed
throughout the range of bull trout. McMahon et al. (2007, p. 1320)
demonstrated the presence of brook trout has a marked negative effect
on bull trout, an effect that is magnified at higher water temperatures
(16-20 [deg]C (60-68 [deg]F)). Changes and complex interactions are
difficult to predict at a spatial scale relevant to bull trout
conservation efforts, and key gaps exist in our understanding of
whether bull trout (and other coldwater fishes) can behaviorally adapt
to climate change.
We considered effects of climate change on bull trout by first
applying best professional judgment to screen core areas to assess
those that might be most vulnerable to climate change effects. These
were highlighted in our 2008 update of status and threats information
in the core area template documents (Service 2008, p. 15). For example,
in many locations we prioritized cold water spring habitats for
conservation because they may be among the most resistant habitats to
climate change effects. In other locations we deemphasized protection
of some already low-elevation, warmer, marginal bull trout habitats,
anticipating that they would become even less valuable for the future
conservation of bull trout. Over a period of decades, climate change
may directly threaten the integrity of the essential physical or
biological features described in PCEs 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 and 9.
Protecting bull trout strongholds and cold water refugia from
disturbance and ensuring connectivity among populations were important
considerations in addressing this potential impact.
Over 30 years of research into wildlife population sizes required
for long-term viability (avoiding extinction) suggests that a minimum
number of 5,000 individuals (rather than 50 or 500) may be needed in
light of rapidly changing environmental conditions, such as accelerated
climate change (Traill et al. 2009, p. 3). Although the minimum number
of individuals may vary depending on the species involved, for bull
trout, we have included additional unoccupied habitats in those areas
where occupied habitats currently support far less than this number of
individuals, so there are adequate PCEs for those small populations to
recover.
Each of the areas being designated as occupied critical habitat (a)
satisfies the above recovery principles; (b) is within the geographic
range occupied by the species at the time of listing, or was unoccupied
at the time of listing, but we have determined to be essential to the
conservation of the species; and (c) contains the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species that
may require special management considerations or protection.
(4) In selecting areas to designate as critical habitat, we
considered factors specific to each river system, such as size (i.e.,
stream order), gradient, channel morphology, connectivity to other
aquatic habitats, and habitat complexity and diversity, as well as
rangewide recovery considerations. We took into account the fact that
bull trout habitat preference ranges from small headwater streams used
largely for spawning and rearing, to downstream mainstem portions of
river networks used for rearing, foraging, migration, or overwintering.
To help determine which specific areas contained the physical or
biological features essential to bull trout conservation, we considered
the species' status in each recovery unit by evaluating whether: (a)
Bull trout are rare and exposed to threats, such that recovery needs
include removing threats from essentially all existing occurrences and
restoring bull trout to portions of their historic range; or (b) bull
trout are declining and exposed to threats, such that recovery needs
include stopping the decline and eliminating threats across key
portions of their range, such as currently occupied strongholds.
NatureServe is a nonprofit conservation organization whose mission
is to provide science-based recommendations for conservation actions.
NatureServe has identified a suite of factors related to rarity,
trends, and threats to assess the extinction or extirpation risk of
species and ecosystems, and has developed a computer spread-sheet tool
that allows 10 conservation status factors to be entered and then
ranked for different populations. The protocol for assigning a
conservation status rank is based on scoring an element against these
10 conservation status factors, which are grouped into three categories
based on the characteristic of the factor: rarity (six factors), trends
(two factors), and threats (two factors) (Master et al. 2007, pp. 6-
11). We have concluded that the NatureServe protocol provides a
rational framework for assessing bull trout status and threats. By
applying the NatureServe status assessment ranking tool, which
considers factors such as population size, amount of habitat, and type
and degree of threat using data through 2007, we were able to estimate
the relative status and threats within each of the 118 bull trout core
areas or watersheds and each of the 6 draft recovery units.
This critical habitat designation focuses on areas containing the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of local
populations and spawning and rearing streams of highest conservation
value. Factors taken into account at the smaller, local population
scale included the largest areas or populations, most highly connected
populations, and areas with the highest conservation potential (i.e.,
the quantity and quality of physical or biological features present).
At the larger core area scale, the designation also focuses on areas
having the highest conservation value by applying the factors that were
applied at the local population scale. At both the local population and
core area scales, the designation emphasizes essential FMO habitats of
highest conservation value, such as habitats that connect local
populations and core areas and provide required space for life-history
functions. In some areas, we have determined that specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied by bull trout at the time of
listing are essential for the conservation of the species, and we are
designating them as critical habitat. In those areas, bull trout
habitat and population loss over time necessitates reestablishing bull
trout in currently unoccupied habitat areas to achieve recovery.
Based on the considerations described above, we designate a greater
proportion of occupied habitat, as well as additional unoccupied
habitat, for protection in areas where bull trout demonstrate less
resiliency, redundancy, and representation, and less critical habitat
elsewhere. For example, in the Klamath Basin Recovery Unit where
threats to bull trout are
[[Page 63934]]
greatest, we are designating all habitat known to be occupied at the
time of listing that contains the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the species and that may require
special management considerations or protection, and we are also
designating a substantial proportion of unoccupied habitat outside of
the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing
that has been determined to be essential for bull trout conservation.
Our primary consideration for designating critical habitat for occupied
areas was to protect species strongholds for spawning and rearing and
FMO habitats. Our primary consideration for designating most of
unoccupied areas we are including in this designation was to restore
connectivity among populations by protecting FMO habitats.
We are designating habitat in 32 critical habitat units (CHUs)
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of
listing. These units have an appropriate quantity and spatial
arrangement of physical or biological features present that supports
bull trout metapopulations, life processes, and overall species
conservation. Twenty-nine of the units contain all of the physical or
biological features identified in this final rule and support multiple
life-history requirements. Three of the mainstem river units in the
Columbia and Snake River basins contain most of the physical or
biological features necessary to support the bull trout's particular
use of that habitat, other than those associated with PCEs 5 and 6,
which relate to breeding habitat. Lakes and reservoirs within these
units also contain most of the physical or biological features
necessary to support bull trout, other than those associated with PCEs
1, 4, and 6. Marine nearshore habitats within the Olympic Peninsula and
Puget Sound critical habitat units contain only a subset of the
identified physical or biological features for bull trout (PCEs 2, 3,
5, and 8). However, these habitats are important to conserving a
diverse life-history expression and representative habitats.
When determining critical habitat boundaries within this final
rule, we made every effort to avoid including developed areas such as
lands covered by buildings, pavement, and other structures because such
lands lack physical or biological features for bull trout. The scale of
the maps we prepared under the parameters for publication within the
Code of Federal Regulations may not reflect the exclusion of such
developed lands. Any such lands inadvertently left inside critical
habitat boundaries shown on the maps of this final rule have been
excluded by text in the rule and are not designated as critical
habitat. Therefore, a Federal action involving these lands would not
trigger section 7 consultation with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification unless the specific action would
affect the physical and biological features in the adjacent critical
habitat.
Special Management Considerations or Protection
When designating critical habitat, we assess whether the specific
areas within the geographic area occupied by the species at the time of
listing contain the features that are essential to the conservation of
the species and may require special management needs or protection.
Accordingly, in identifying critical habitat in occupied areas, we
assess whether the PCEs within the areas determined to be occupied at
the time of listing may require any special management considerations
or protection. Although the determination that special management may
be required is not a prerequisite to designating critical habitat in
areas essential to the conservation of the species that were unoccupied
at the time of listing, all areas we are designating as critical
habitat require some level of management to address current and future
threats to bull trout, to maintain or enhance the physical or
biological features essential to its conservation, and to ensure the
recovery of the species.
The primary land and water management activities impacting the
physical or biological features essential to the conservation of bull
trout that may require special management considerations within the
critical habitat units include timber harvest and road building (forest
management practices), agriculture and agricultural diversions,
livestock grazing, dams, mining, and nonnative species (Beschta et al.
1987, p. 194; Chamberlin et al. 1991, p. 194; Furniss et al. 1991, p.
297; Meehan 1991, pp. 6-10; Nehlsen et al. 1991, p. 4; Sedell and
Everest 1991, p. 6; Craig and Wissmar 1993, p. 18; Frissell 1993, p.
350; Henjum et al. 1994, p. 6; McIntosh et al. 1994, p. 37; Wissmar et
al. 1994, p. 28; MBTSG 1995a, p. i; MBTSG 1994b, p. i; MBTSG 1995c, p.
i; MBTSG 1995d, p. 1; MBTSG 1995e, p. 1; USDA and USDI 1995, p. 8;
1997, pp. 132-144; Light et al. 1996, p. 6; MBTSG 1996a, p. ii; MBTSG
1996b, p. 1; MBTSG 1996c, p. i; MBTSG 1996d, p. i; MBTSG 1996e, p. i;
MBTSG 1996f, p. 1; MBTSG 1996g, p. 7; MBTSG 1996h, p. 7). Urbanization
and residential development may also impact the physical or biological
features and require special management considerations or protection.
Timber harvest and road building in or close to riparian areas can
immediately reduce stream shading and cover, channel stability, and
large woody debris recruitment and increase sedimentation and peak
stream flows (Chamberlin et al. 1991, p. 180; Ripley et al. 2005, p.
2436). These activities can, in turn, lead to increased stream
temperatures, bank erosion, and decreased long-term stream
productivity. The effects of road construction and associated
maintenance account for a majority of sediment loads to streams in
forested areas; in addition, stream crossings also can impede fish
passage (Shepard et al. 1984, p. 1; Cederholm and Reid 1987, p. 392;
Furniss et al. 1991, p. 301). Sedimentation affects streams by reducing
pool depth, altering substrate composition, reducing interstitial
space, and causing braiding of channels (Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p.
6), which reduce carrying capacity. Sedimentation negatively affects
bull trout embryo survival and juvenile bull trout rearing densities
(Shepard et al. 1984, p. 6; Pratt 1992, p. 6). An assessment of the
interior Columbia Basin ecosystem revealed that increasing road
densities were associated with declines in four nonanadromous salmonid
species (bull trout, Yellowstone cutthroat trout (Oncorhyncus clarkii
bouvieri), westslope cutthroat trout (O. c. lewisi), and redband trout
(O. mykiss spp.)) within the Columbia River basin, likely through a
variety of factors associated with roads. Bull trout were less likely
to use highly roaded basins for spawning and rearing and, if present in
such areas, were likely to be at lower population levels (Quigley and
Arbelbide 1997, p. 1183). These activities can directly and immediately
threaten the integrity of the essential physical or biological features
described in PCEs 1 through 6. Special management considerations or
protection that may be needed include the implementation of best
management practices specifically designed to reduce these impacts in
streams with bull trout, particularly in spawning and rearing habitat.
Such best management practices could require measures to ensure that
road stream crossings do not impede fish migration or occur in or near
spawning/rearing areas, or increase road surface drainage into streams.
Agricultural practices and associated activities adjacent to
streams and in upland portions of watersheds also can
[[Page 63935]]
affect the physical or biological features essential to bull trout
conservation. Irrigation withdrawals, including diversions, can dewater
spawning and rearing streams, impede fish passage and migration, and
cause entrainment. Discharging pollutants such as nutrients,
agricultural chemicals, animal waste, and sediment into spawning and
rearing waters is also detrimental (Spence et al. 1996, p. 128).
Agricultural practices regularly include stream channelization and
diking, large woody debris and riparian vegetation removal, and bank
armoring (Spence et al. 1996, p. 127). Improper livestock grazing can
promote streambank erosion and sedimentation and limit the growth of
riparian vegetation important for temperature control, streambank
stability, fish cover, and detrital input (Platts 1991, pp. 397-399).
In addition, grazing often results in increased organic nutrient input
in streams (Platts 1991, p. 423). These activities can directly and
immediately threaten the integrity of the essential physical or
biological features described in PCEs 1 through 8. Special management
could include best management practices specifically designed to reduce
these types of impacts in streams with bull trout, such as fencing
livestock from stream sides, moving animal feeding operations away from
surface waters, using riparian buffer strips near crop fields,
minimizing water withdrawal from streams, avoiding stream channel and
spring head alteration, and avoiding stream dewatering.
Dams constructed without fish passage or with poorly designed fish
passage features create barriers to migratory bull trout, precluding
access to suitable spawning, rearing, and migration habitats. Dams
disrupt the connectivity within and between watersheds essential for
maintaining aquatic ecosystem function (Naiman et al. 1992, p. 127;
Spence et al. 1996, p. 141) and bull trout subpopulation interaction
(Rieman and McIntyre 1993, p. 15). Natural recolonization of
historically occupied sites can be precluded by migration barriers
(e.g., McCloud Dam in California, or impassable culverts under roads).
Also, fluctuation of reservoir levels may affect bull trout
populations, although these effects are best determined on a case-
specific basis. These activities can directly and immediately threaten
the integrity of the essential physical or biological features
described in PCEs 2 through 7 and 9. Special management considerations
that may be needed include the implementation of best management
practices, such as providing fish passage, specifically designed to
reduce these impacts in streams with bull trout.
Mining can degrade aquatic systems by generating sediment and heavy
metals pollution, altering water pH levels, and changing stream
channels and flow (Martin and Platts 1981, p. 2). These activities can
directly and immediately threaten the integrity of the essential
physical or biological features described in PCEs 1, 6, 7, and 8, even
if they occur some distance upstream from critical habitat. Special
management could require best management practices specifically
designed to reduce these impacts in streams with bull trout, such as
avoiding surface water impacts from mining activities and neutralizing
toxic materials.
Introductions of nonnative invasive species by the Federal
government, State fish and game departments, and unauthorized private
parties across the range of bull trout have resulted in predation,
declines in abundance, local extirpations, and hybridization of bull
trout (Bond 1992, p. 3; Howell and Buchanan 1992, p. viii; Donald and
Alger 1993, p. 245; Leary et al. 1993, p. 857; Pratt and Huston 1993,
p. 75; MBTSG 1995b, p. 10; MBTSG 1995d, p. 21; Platts et al. 1995, p.
9; MBTSG 1996g, p. 7; Palmisano and Kaczynski, in litt.1997, p. 29).
Nonnative species may exacerbate stresses on bull trout from habitat
degradation, fragmentation, isolation, and species interactions (Rieman
and McIntyre 1993, p. 3). These activities can over time directly
threaten the integrity of the essential physical or biological features
described in PCE 9. Special management needs and considerations could
require the implementation of best management practices specifically
designed to reduce these impacts in streams with bull trout, such as
avoiding future introductions, eradicating or controlling introduced
species, and managing habitat to favor bull trout over other species.
Urbanization and residential development in watersheds has led to
decreased habitat complexity (uniform stream channels and simple
nonfunctional riparian areas); impediments and blockages to fish
passage; increased surface runoff (more frequent and severe flooding);
and decreased water quality and quantity (Spence et al. 1996, pp. 130-
134). In nearshore marine areas, urbanization and residential
development has led to significant loss or physical alteration of
intertidal and shoreline habitats, as well as to the contamination of
many estuarine and nearshore areas (PSWQAT 2000, p. 47; BMSL et al.
2001, ch. 10, pp. 1-27 ; Fresh et al. 2004, p. 1). Activities
associated with urbanization and residential development can
incrementally threaten the integrity of the essential physical or
biological features described in PCEs 1 through 5, 7, and 8. Special
management could require best management practices specifically
designed to reduce these impacts in streams with bull trout, such as
setting back developments from riparian areas; minimizing water runoff
from urban areas directly to streams; minimizing hard surfaces such as
pavement; and minimizing impacts related to fertilizer application.
Final Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating 32 critical habitat units (CHUs) in 6 recovery
units as critical habitat for bull trout. Each CHU is comprised of a
number of specific streams or reservoir/lake areas, which are
identified as subunits in this final rule.
In freshwater areas, critical habitat includes the stream channels
within the designated stream reaches and a lateral extent as defined by
the bankfull elevation on one bank to the bankfull elevation on the
opposite bank. If bankfull elevation is not evident on either bank, the
ordinary high-water line determines the lateral extent of critical
habitat. The lateral extent of critical habitat in lakes may initially
be defined by the perimeter of the waterbody as mapped on standard
1:24,000 scale topographic maps. In marine nearshore areas, the inshore
extent of critical habitat is the mean higher high-water (MHHW) line,
including the uppermost reach of the saltwater wedge within tidally
influenced, freshwater heads of estuaries. Critical habitat extends
offshore to the depth of 10 meters (m) (33 feet (ft)) relative to the
mean low low-water (MLLW) line. The Service expects the effects of this
rule designating bull trout critical habitat to also extend to any
action that may adversely affect the habitat, potentially including
activities on lands adjacent to or upstream of designated stream bed
and banks, as discussed elsewhere in this rule.
The critical habitat areas we describe below constitute our best
assessment at this time of areas that meet the definition of critical
habitat for bull trout.
The 32 units we designate as critical habitat are:
A. Coastal Recovery Unit
(1) Olympic Peninsula
(2) Puget Sound
(3) Lower Columbia River Basins
(4) Upper Willamette River
(5) Hood River
[[Page 63936]]
(6) Lower Deschutes River
(7) Odell Lake
(8) Mainstem Lower Columbia River
B. Klamath Recovery Unit
(9) Klamath River Basin
C. Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit
(10) Upper Columbia River Basins
(11) Yakima River
(12) John Day River
(13) Umatilla River
(14) Walla Walla River Basin
(15) Lower Snake River Basins
(16) Grande Ronde River
(17) Imnaha River
(18) Sheep and Granite Creeks
(19) Hells Canyon Complex
(20) Powder River Basin
(21) Clearwater River
(22) Mainstem Upper Columbia River
(23) Mainstem Snake River
D. Upper Snake Recovery Unit
(24) Malheur River Basin
(25) Jarbidge River
(26) Southwest Idaho River Basins
(27) Salmon River Basin
(28) Little Lost River
E. Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit
(29) Coeur d'Alene River Basin
(30) Kootenai River Basin
(31) Clark Fork River Basin
F. Saint Mary Recovery Unit
(32) Saint Mary River Basin
A total of 31,750.8 km (19,729.0 mi) of stream (including 1,213.2
km (754.0 mi) of marine shoreline) (Table 1), and 197,589.3 ha
(488,251.7 ac) of reservoirs and lakes (Table 2) are designated as bull
trout critical habitat. A total of 1,323.7 km (822.5 mi; 4.2 percent)
of streams, reservoirs, and lakes were unoccupied at the time of
listing, with the remainder occupied. A total of 15,281.1 4 km (9,495.2
mi; 48.1 percent) of stream and marine shoreline habitat is used for
spawning and rearing (all in streams), with the remainder--plus all
reservoirs and lakes--used for FMO. Tables 3 and 4 present total stream
shoreline length and reservoirs and lakes designated in each State.
Table 5 presents the ownership for all stream shoreline designated as
critical habitat.
Table 1.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Designated as Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Critical Habitat Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Olympic Peninsula.............. 748.7 465.2
1. Olympic Peninsula (Marine)..... 529.2 328.8
2. Puget Sound.................... 1,840.2 1,143.5
2. Puget Sound (Marine)........... 684.0 425.0
3. Lower Columbia River Basins.... 119.3 74.2
4. Upper Willamette River......... 312.4 194.1
5. Hood River..................... 128.1 79.6
6. Lower Deschutes River.......... 232.8 144.7
7. Odell Lake..................... 27.4 17.0
8. Mainstem Lower Columbia River.. 340.4 211.5
9. Klamath River Basin............ 445.2 276.6
10. Upper Columbia River Basins... 931.8 579.0
11. Yakima River.................. 896.9 557.3
12. John Day River................ 1,089.6 677.0
13. Umatilla River................ 163.0 101.3
14. Walla Walla River Basin....... 383.7 238.4
15. Lower Snake River Basins...... 270.8 168.3
16. Grande Ronde River............ 1,057.9 657.4
17. Imnaha River.................. 285.7 177.5
18. Sheep and Granite Creeks...... 47.9 29.7
19. Hells Canyon Complex.......... 377.5 234.6
20. Powder River Basin............ 296.5 184.2
21. Clearwater River.............. 2,702.1 1,679.0
22. Mainstem Upper Columbia River. 520.1 323.2
23. Mainstem Snake River.......... 451.7 280.6
24. Malheur River Basin........... 272.3 169.2
25. Jarbidge River................ 245.2 152.4
26. Southwest Idaho River Basins.. 2,150.0 1,335.9
27. Salmon River Basin............ 7,376.5 4,583.5
28. Little Lost River............. 89.2 55.4
29. Coeur d'Alene River Basin..... 821.5 510.5
30. Kootenai River Basin.......... 522.5 324.7
31. Clark Fork River Basin........ 5,356.0 3,328.1
32. Saint Mary River Basin........ 34.7 21.6
Total..................... 31,750 19,729
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 2.--Area of Reservoirs or Lakes Designated as Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Critical Habitat Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit Hectares Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Olympic Peninsula.............. 3,064.2 7,571.8
2. Puget Sound.................... 16,260.9 40,181.5
3. Lower Columbia River Basins.... 0.0 0.0
4. Upper Willamette River......... 3,601.5 8,899.5
5. Hood River..................... 36.9 91.1
6. Lower Deschutes River.......... 1,224.9 3,026.8
7. Odell Lake..................... 1,387.1 3,427.6
9. Klamath River Basin............ 3,775.5 9,329.4
10. Upper Columbia River Basins... 1,033.2 2,553.1
11. Yakima River.................. 6,285.2 15,530.9
16. Grande Ronde River............ 605.2 1,495.5
[[Page 63937]]
20. Power River Basin............. 897.0 2,216.5
21. Clearwater River.............. 6,721.9 16,610.1
24. Malheur River Basin........... 715.9 1,768.9
26. Southwest Idaho River Basins.. 4,310.5 10,651.5
27. Salmon River Basin............ 1,683.8 4,160.6
29. Coeur d'Alene River Basin..... 12,606.9 31,152.1
30. Kootenai River Basin.......... 12,089.2 29,873.0
31. Clark Fork River Basin........ 119,620.1 295,586.6
32. Saint Mary River Basin 1,669.3 4,125.0
Total..................... 197,589.2 488,251.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 3.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Designated as Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho............................. 14,116.5 8,771.6
Montana........................... 4,918.9 3,056.5
Nevada............................ 115.6 71.8
Oregon............................ 4,563.9 2,835.9
Oregon/Idaho...................... 173.3 107.7
Washington........................ 6,104.8 3,793.3
Washington Marine................. 1,213.2 753.8
Washington/Idaho.................. 59.9 37.2
Washington/Oregon................. 484.8 301.3
Total..................... 31,750.8 19,729.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 4.--Area of Reservoirs or Lakes Designated as Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Hectares Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Idaho............................. 68,884.9 170,217.5
Montana........................... 89,626.4 221,470.7
Oregon............................ 12,244.0 30,255.5
Washington........................ 26,834.0 66,308.1
Total..................... 197,589.2 488,251.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 5.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Designated as Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Ownership
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ownership Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal........................... 20,217.3 12,562.4
Federal/Private................... 176.0 109.4
Federal/State..................... 4.4 2.8
State............................. 556.5 345.8
State/Private..................... 0.4 0.2
Tribal............................ 226.0 140.4
Tribal/Private.................... 28.1 17.4
Private........................... 10,542.1 6,550.5
Total..................... 31,750.8 19,729.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
We present a description of all critical habitat designated in each
of 32 units below, organized by recovery unit. The areas being
designated as critical habitat satisfy each of the above Criteria Used
to Identify Critical Habitat considerations, and will conserve the
opportunity for diverse life-history expression and genetic diversity;
ensure that bull trout are distributed across representative habitats;
ensure sufficient connectivity among populations; ensure sufficient
habitat to support population viability; address threats; and ensure
sufficient redundancy in conserving population units. The
characteristics of each critical habitat unit, subunit, and, in some
cases, waterbody segment that establish why a specific area is
essential to the conservation of bull trout are identified in the
justification document (Service 2010). Examples of attributes that were
considered include habitat use (FMO, spawning and rearing), occupancy
data, geographic limits, accessibility, PCE presence, presence or
absence of barriers, genetic analysis (used in metapopulation context),
population data, habitat condition, and presence of other anadromous
salmonids. Maps depicting the units and subunits appear in the
Regulation Promulgation section below. For a more detailed textual and
graphic description of all units and subunits, please see our website
at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout, or contact the Idaho Fish and
Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES above).
[[Page 63938]]
Coastal Recovery Unit
Unit 1: Olympic Peninsula Unit
The Olympic Peninsula CHU is located in northwestern Washington.
Bull trout populations inhabiting the Olympic Peninsula comprise the
coastal component of the Coastal-Puget Sound population. The unit
includes approximately 748.7 km (465.2 mi) of stream, 3,064.2 ha
(7,571.8 ac) of lake surface area, and 529.2 km (328.8 mi) of marine
shoreline designated as critical habitat. This CHU is bordered by Hood
Canal to the east, Strait of Juan de Fuca to the north, the Pacific
Ocean to the west, and the Lower Columbia River Basins and Puget Sound
CHUs to the south. It extends across portions of Grays Harbor, Clallam,
Mason, Pacific, and Jefferson Counties. All of the major river basins
initiate from the Olympic Mountains. The Olympic Peninsula CHU is
divided into 10 critical habitat subunits. Although delta areas and
small islands are difficult to map and may not be specifically
identified by name, included within the critical habitat proposal are
delta areas where streams form sloughs and braids and the nearshore of
small islands found within the designated marine areas. The State of
Washington has assigned most streams a stream catalog number.
Typically, if an unnamed stream or stream with no official U.S.
Geological Survey name is designated as critical habitat, the stream
catalog number is provided for reference. In those cases where
tributary streams do not have a catalog number, they are referred to as
``unnamed'' or a locally accepted name is used. The subunits within
this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and
subunits, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some
cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and
for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 2: Puget Sound Unit
The Puget Sound CHU includes approximately 1,840.2 km (1,143.5 mi)
of streams; 16,260.9 ha (40,181.5 ac) of lake surface area; and 684.0
km (442.5 mi) of marine shoreline designated as critical habitat. The
CHU is bordered by the Cascade Range to the east, Puget Sound to the
west, Lower Columbia River Basins and Olympic Peninsula CHUs to the
south, and the U.S.-Canada border to the north. The CHU extends across
Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, King, Pierce, Thurston, and Island Counties
in Washington. The major river basins initiate from the Cascade Range
and flow west, discharging into Puget Sound, with the exception of the
Chilliwack River system, which flows northwest into British Columbia,
discharging into the Fraser River. The Puget Sound CHU is divided into
13 CHSUs. The subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit and subunits, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 3: Lower Columbia River Basins Unit
The Lower Columbia River Basins CHU consists of portions of the
Lewis, White Salmon, and Klickitat Rivers and associated tributaries in
southwestern and south-central Washington. The CHU extends across
Clark, Cowlitz, Klickitat, Skamania, and Yakima Counties. Approximately
119.3 km (74.2 mi) of stream are designated as critical habitat. The
subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging,
migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed
description of this unit and subunits, for justification of why this
CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are
designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by
bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 4: Upper Willamette River Unit
The Upper Willamette River CHU includes 312.4 km (194.1 mi) of
streams and 3,601.5 ha (8,899.5 ac) of lake surface area in designated
critical habitat in the McKenzie River and Middle Fork Willamette River
subbasins of western Oregon. This unit is located primarily within Lane
County, but also extends into Linn County.
There are three known bull trout local populations in the McKenzie
River subbasin and one bull trout local population in the Middle Fork
Willamette River subbasin. With the exception of a short reach of the
mainstem Willamette River and the mainstem Middle Fork Willamette River
(including reservoirs) below Hills Creek Dam, segments designated as
critical habitat are occupied by bull trout. This unit provides
spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering
habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 5: Hood River Unit
The Hood River CHU includes the mainstem Hood River and three major
tributaries: Clear Branch Hood River, West Fork Hood River, and East
Fork Hood River. A total of 128.1 km (79.6 mi) of stream and 36.9 ha
(91.1 ac) of lake surface is designated as critical habitat. Portions
of the mainstem Columbia River utilized as FMO by Hood River bull trout
are discussed in the Lower Mainstem Columbia River section of this
document.
The Hood River CHU, located on the western slopes of the Cascades
Mountains in northwest Oregon, lies entirely within Hood River County,
Oregon. There are two local populations: (1) Clear Branch Hood River
above Clear Branch Dam, and (2) Hood River and tributaries below Clear
Branch Dam. This unit provides spawning and rearing habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit, for justification of why this CHU,
included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated
as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout,
see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 6: Lower Deschutes River Unit
The Lower Deschutes River CHU is located in Wasco, Sherman,
Jefferson, Deschutes, and Crook Counties in central Oregon. There are
five known local population in the lower Deschutes River basin: (1)
Warm Springs River; (2) Shitike Creek; (3) Whitewater River; (4)
Jefferson Creek-Candle Creek Complex; and (5) Jack Creek-Canyon Creek-
Heising Spring Complex.
Approximately 232.8 km (144.7 mi) of streams and 1,224.9 ha
(3,026.8 ac) of lake and reservoir surface area in the lower Deschutes
River basin are designated as critical habitat. A portion of the
reaches occur on the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs lands. This
unit provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
[[Page 63939]]
Unit 7: Odell Lake Unit
The Odell Lake CHU lies entirely within the Deschutes National
Forest in Deschutes and Klamath Counties, Oregon. Total critical
habitat in this unit includes 27.4 km (17.0 mi) of streams and 1,387.1
ha (3,427.6 ac) of lake surface area. The single Odell Lake bull trout
population has been isolated from the Deschutes River population by a
lava flow that impounded Odell Creek and formed Davis Lake
approximately 5,500 years ago. Odell Lake is the only remaining natural
adfluvial population of bull trout in Oregon. This unit provides
spawning and rearing habitat. For a detailed description of this unit,
for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 8: Mainstem Lower Columbia River Unit
The Mainstem Lower Columbia River CHU extends from the mouth of the
Columbia River to John Day Dam and is located in the States of Oregon
and Washington. It includes Clatsop, Columbia, Multnomah, Hood River,
Wasco, and Sherman Counties in Oregon, and Pacific, Wahkiakum, Cowlitz,
Clark, Skamania, and Klickitat Counties in Washington. A total of 340.4
km (211.5 mi) of stream are being designated as critical habitat. This
unit provides connecting habitat. For a detailed description of this
unit, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some
cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and
for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Klamath Recovery Unit
Unit 9: Klamath River Basin Unit
The Klamath River Basin CHU is located in south-central Oregon and
includes three CHSUs: (1) Upper Klamath Lake CHSU; (2) Sycan River
CHSU; and (3) Upper Sprague River CHSU. It includes portions of Klamath
and Lake Counties in Oregon. Total designated critical habitat in this
unit includes 445.2 km (276.6 mi) of streams and 3,775.5 ha (9,329.4
ac) of lake surface area. The subunits within this unit provide
spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering
habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and subunits, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Mid-Columbia Recovery Unit
Unit 10: Upper Columbia River Basins Unit
The Upper Columbia River Basins CHU includes portions of the three
CHSUs in central and north-central Washington on the east slopes of the
Cascade Range and east of the Columbia River between Wenatchee,
Washington, and the Okanogan River drainage. The CHU includes portions
of Chelan and Okanogan Counties in Washington. A total of 931.8 km
(579.0 mi) of streams and 1,033.2 ha (2,553.1 ac) of lake surface area
in this CHU are designated as critical habitat. The subunits within
this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting,
and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and
subunits, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some
cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and
for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 11: Yakima River Unit
The Yakima River CHU supports adfluvial, fluvial, and resident
life-history forms of bull trout. This CHU includes the mainstem Yakima
River and tributaries from its confluence with the Columbia River
upstream to the uppermost point of bull trout distribution. The Yakima
River CHU is located on the eastern slopes of the Cascade Range in
south-central Washington and encompasses the entire Yakima River basin
located between the Klickitat and Wenatchee basins. The Yakima River
basin is one of the largest basins in the State of Washington; it
drains southeast into the Columbia River near the town of Richland,
Washington. The basin occupies most of Yakima and Kittitas Counties,
about half of Benton County, and a small portion of Klickitat County.
This CHU does not contain any subunits because it supports one core
area. A total of 896.9 km (557.3 mi) of stream habitat and 6,285.2 ha
(15,530.9 ac) of lake and reservoir surface area in this CHU are
designated as critical habitat. One of the largest populations of bull
trout (South Fork Tieton River population) in central Washington is
located above the Tieton Dam and supports the core area. This unit
provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU is designated as critical habitat, and
for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 12: John Day River Unit
The John Day River CHU in the John Day River basin in eastern
Oregon includes portions of the mainstem John Day River, North Fork
John Day River, Middle Fork John Day River, and their tributary streams
within Wheeler, Grant, and Umatilla Counties in Oregon. A total of
1,089.6 km (677.0 mi) of streams are designated as critical habitat.
The subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging,
migratory, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of
this unit and subunits, for justification of why this CHU, included
CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated as
critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see
Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 13: Umatilla River Unit
The Umatilla River CHU is located in northeastern Oregon in
Umatilla and Union Counties. There are two local populations in this
unit: one in the North Fork Umatilla River and one in North Fork
Meacham Creek. Bull trout in this basin are primarily fluvial migrants
that overwinter in middle and lower sections of the mainstem Umatilla
River.
Approximately 163.0 km (101.3 mi) of stream are designated as
critical habitat for bull trout in the Umatilla River basin. This unit
provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 14: Walla Walla River Basin Unit
The Walla Walla River Basin CHU straddles the Oregon-Washington
State line in the eastern part of both States and includes two CHSUs.
The unit includes 383.7 km (238.4 mi) of stream, extending across
portions of Umatilla and Wallowa Counties in Oregon and Walla Walla and
Columbia Counties in Washington. There are five known bull trout local
populations in this unit: two in the Walla Walla River basin and three
in the Touchet River basin. The
[[Page 63940]]
subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging,
migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed
description of this unit and subunits, for justification of why this
CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are
designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by
bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 15: Lower Snake River Basins Unit
The Lower Snake River Basins CHU is located in southeast Washington
and contains two CHSUs: (1) Tucannon River basin CHSU located in
Columbia and Garfield Counties and (2) Asotin Creek basin CHSU within
Garfield and Asotin Counties. Approximately 270.8 km (168.3 mi) of
stream are designated as critical habitat for bull trout within this
unit. The subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit and subunits, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 16: Grande Ronde River Unit
The Grande Ronde River CHU is located in northeast Oregon and
southeast Washington and includes the Grande Ronde core area and the
Little Minam core area. The Grande Ronde River CHU is located in Union,
Wallowa, and Umatilla Counties in Oregon, and about one-third of Asotin
County and small portions of Columbia and Garfield Counties in
Washington.
This CHU includes 1,057.9 km (657.4 mi) of streams and 605.2 ha
(1,495.5 ac) of lakes and reservoirs designated as critical habitat.
This unit provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting,
and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 17: Imnaha River Unit
The Imnaha River CHU extends across Wallowa, Baker, and Union
Counties in northeastern Oregon. The CHU contains approximately 285.7
km (177.5 mi) of river designated as critical habitat and four local
populations: (1) Mainstem Imnaha River; (2) Big Sheep Creek and
tributary streams (Big Sheep Creek is considered to be one local
population above and below the Wallowa Valley Irrigation Canal); (3)
Little Sheep Creek and tributary streams; and (4) McCully Creek, which
could be considered one or two local populations depending on whether
Big Sheep Creek above and below the diversion are separated. This unit
provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 18: Sheep and Granite Creeks Unit
This CHU is located within Adams and Idaho Counties in Idaho,
approximately 21.0 km (13.0 mi) east of Riggins, Idaho. In the Sheep
and Granite Creeks CHU, 47.9 km (29.7 mi) of streams are designated as
critical habitat. This unit provides spawning, rearing, foraging,
migratory, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of
this unit, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in
some cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat,
and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010),
or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 19: Hells Canyon Complex Unit
The Hells Canyon Complex is located in Adams County, Idaho, and
Baker County, Oregon. This CHU contains 377.5 km (234.6 mi) of streams
designated as critical habitat. The subunits within this unit provide
spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering
habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and subunits, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 20: Powder River Basin Unit
The Powder River Basin CHU includes approximately 296.5 km (184.2
mi) of stream designated as critical habitat and 897.0 ha (2,216.5 ac)
of reservoir, and is located within Baker, Union, and Wallowa Counties
in northeastern Oregon. This unit is thought to contain 10 local
populations of bull trout and 1 potential local population. Several
unoccupied sections of the Powder River mainstem have been included to
provide connectivity and recovery opportunities for local populations.
This unit provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting,
and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 21: Clearwater River Unit
The Clearwater River CHU is located east of Lewiston, Idaho, and
extends from the Snake River confluence at Lewiston on the west to
headwaters in the Bitterroot Mountains along the Idaho-Montana border
on the east in Nez Perce, Latah, Lewis, Clearwater, Idaho, and Shoshone
Counties. In the Clearwater River CHU, 2,702.1 km (1,679.0 mi) of
streams and 6,721.9 ha (16,610.1 ac) of lake and reservoir surface area
are designated as critical habitat. The subunits within this unit
provide spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and
subunits, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some
cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and
for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or
http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 22: Mainstem Upper Columbia River Unit
The Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU includes the Columbia River
from John Day Dam upstream 520.1 km (323.2 mi) to Chief Joseph Dam. The
Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU supports FMO habitat for fluvial bull
trout; several accounts exist of bull trout in the Columbia River
between the Yakima and John Day rivers. The Mainstem Upper Columbia
River CHU provides connectivity to the Mainstem Lower Columbia River
CHU and 13 additional CHUs (Clearwater River, Powder River Basin,
Imnaha River, Grande Ronde River, Walla Walla River Basin, Umatilla
River, John Day River, Yakima River, Mainstem Snake River, Lower Snake
River Basins, Hells Canyon Complex, Sheep and Granite Creeks, and Upper
Columbia River Basins). The Mainstem Upper Columbia River CHU is
located in north-central, central, and south-central Washington and
north-central and northeast Oregon. This CHU is within Klickitat,
Franklin, Benton, Grant, Yakima, Kittitas, Chelan, Douglas, and
Okanogan Counties in Washington and Sherman, Gilliam,
[[Page 63941]]
Morrow, and Umatilla Counties in Oregon. For a detailed description of
this unit and subunits, justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs
or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical
habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service
(2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 23: Mainstem Snake River Unit
The Mainstem Snake River CHU is located from the confluence with
the Columbia River upstream to the head of Brownlee Reservoir. The
Snake River is the largest tributary to the Columbia River and forms
the border between Washington and Idaho from Clarkston/Lewiston
upstream to Oregon. The Snake River also forms the boundary between
Idaho and Oregon, and at that point upstream to the upper limit of
Brownlee Reservoir forms this CHU. The Snake River is within Franklin,
Walla Walla, Columbia, Whitman, and Asotin Counties in Washington;
Wallowa, Whitman, Baker, and Malheur Counties in Oregon; and Nez Perce,
Idaho, Adams, and Washington Counties in Idaho.
The Mainstem Snake River CHU includes 451.7 km (280.6 mi) of
streams designated as critical habitat. This unit provides foraging,
migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed
description of this unit, for justification of why this CHU, included
CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated as
critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see
Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Upper Snake Recovery Unit
Unit 24: Malheur River Basin Unit
The Malheur River Basin CHU is in eastern Oregon within Grant,
Baker, Harney, and Malheur Counties. A total of 272.3 km (169.2 mi) of
streams and 715.9 ha (1,768.9 ac) of reservoir surface area are
designated as critical habitat. This unit provides spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit, for justification of why this CHU,
included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated
as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout,
see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 25: Jarbidge River Unit
The Jarbidge River CHU encompasses the Jarbidge and Bruneau River
basins, which drain into the Snake River within C.J. Strike Reservoir
upstream of Grand View, Idaho. The Jarbidge River CHU is located
approximately 70 miles north of Elko within Owyhee County in
southwestern Idaho and Elko County in northeastern Nevada.
The Jarbidge River CHU includes 245.2 km (152.4 mi) of streams
designated as critical habitat. The Jarbidge River CHU contains six
local populations of resident and migratory bull trout and provides
spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering
habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 26: Southwest Idaho River Basins Unit
The Southwest Idaho River Basins CHU is located in southwest Idaho
in the following counties: Adams, Boise, Camas, Canyon, Elmore, Gem,
Valley, and Washington. This unit includes eight CHSUs: Anderson Ranch,
Arrowrock Reservoir, South Fork Payette River, Deadwood River, Middle
Fork Payette River, North Fork Payette River, Squaw Creek, and Weiser
River. The Southwest Idaho River Basins CHU includes approximately
2,150.0 km (1,335.9 mi) of streams and 4,310.5 ha (10,651.5 ac) of lake
and reservoir surface area designated as critical habitat. The subunits
within this unit provide spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory,
connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of
this unit and subunits, for justification of why this CHU, included
CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies are designated as
critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see
Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Unit 27: Salmon River Basin Unit
The Salmon River basin extends across central Idaho from the Snake
River to the Montana-Idaho border. The Salmon River Basin CHU extends
across portions of Adams, Blaine, Custer, Idaho, Lemhi, Nez Perce, and
Valley Counties in Idaho. There are 10 CHSUs: Little-Lower Salmon
River, Opal Lake, Lake Creek, South Fork Salmon River, Middle Salmon-
Panther River, Middle Fork Salmon River, Middle Salmon Chamberlain
River, Upper Salmon River, Lemhi River, and Pahsimeroi River. The
Salmon River Basin CHU includes 7,376.5 km (4,583.5 mi) of streams and
1,683.8 ha (4,160.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs designated as critical
habitat. The subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit and subunits, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 28: Little Lost River Unit
Located within Butte, Custer, and Lemhi Counties in east-central
Idaho, near the town of Arco, Idaho, designated critical habitat in the
Little Lost River CHU includes 89.2 km (55.4 mi) of streams. This unit
provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and
overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of this unit, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Columbia Headwaters Recovery Unit
Unit 29: Coeur d'Alene River Basin Unit
Located in Kootenai, Shoshone, Benewah, Bonner, and Latah Counties
in Idaho, the Coeur d'Alene River Basin CHU includes the entire Coeur
d'Alene Lake basin in northern Idaho. A total of 821.5 km (510.5 mi) of
streams and 12,606.9 ha (31,152.1 ac) of lake surface area are
designated as critical habitat. There are no subunits within the Coeur
d'Alene River Basin CHU. This unit provides spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit, for justification of why this CHU is
designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy by
bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 30: Kootenai River Basin Unit
The Kootenai River Basin CHU is located in the northwestern corner
of Montana and the northeastern tip of the Idaho panhandle and includes
the Kootenai River watershed upstream and downstream of Libby Dam. The
Kootenai River flows in a horseshoe configuration, entering the United
States from British Columbia, Canada, and then traversing across
northwest Montana and the northern Idaho panhandle before returning to
British Columbia from Idaho where it eventually joins the upper
Columbia River drainage. The Kootenai River
[[Page 63942]]
Basin CHU includes two CHSUs: the downstream Kootenai River CHSU in
Boundary County, Idaho, and Lincoln County, Montana, and the upstream
Lake Koocanusa CHSU in Lincoln County, Montana. The entire Kootenai
River Basin CHU includes 522.5 km (324.7 mi) of streams and 12,089.2 ha
(29,873.0 ac) of lake and reservoir surface area designated as critical
habitat. The subunits within this unit provide spawning, rearing,
foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a
detailed description of this unit and subunits, for justification of
why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases individual waterbodies
are designated as critical habitat, and for documentation of occupancy
by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout.
Unit 31: Clark Fork River Basin Unit
The Clark Fork River Basin CHU includes the northeastern corner of
Washington (Pend Oreille County), the panhandle portion of northern
Idaho (Boundary, Bonner, and Kootenai Counties), and most of western
Montana (Lincoln, Flathead, Sanders, Lake, Mineral, Missoula, Powell,
Lewis and Clark, Ravalli, Granite, and Deer Lodge Counties). This unit
includes 12 CHSUs, organized primarily on the basis of major
watersheds: Lake Pend Oreille, Pend Oreille River, and lower Priest
River (Lake Pend Oreille); Priest Lakes and Upper Priest River (Priest
Lakes); Lower Clark Fork River; Middle Clark Fork River; Upper Clark
Fork River; Flathead Lake, Flathead River, and Headwater Lakes
(Flathead); Swan River and Lakes (Swan); Hungry Horse Reservoir, South
Fork Flathead River, and Headwater Lakes (South Fork Flathead);
Bitterroot River; Blackfoot River; Clearwater River and Lakes; and Rock
Creek. The Clark Fork River Basin CHU includes 5,356.0 km (3,328.1 mi)
of streams and 119,620.1 ha (295,586.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs
designated as critical habitat. The subunits within this unit provide
spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory, connecting, and overwintering
habitat. For a detailed description of this unit and subunits, for
justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in some cases
individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat, and for
documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010), or http:/
/www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Saint Mary Recovery Unit
Unit 32: Saint Mary River Basin Unit
The entire U.S. portion of the Saint Mary River drainage, which
forms the Saint Mary River Basin CHU, is located in Glacier County,
Montana. The total stream distance designated as critical habitat is
34.7 km (21.6 mi), and the lakes have a surface area of 1,669.3 ha
(4,125 ac).
This unit provides spawning, rearing, foraging, migratory,
connecting, and overwintering habitat. For a detailed description of
this unit, for justification of why this CHU, included CHSUs, or in
some cases individual waterbodies are designated as critical habitat,
and for documentation of occupancy by bull trout, see Service (2010),
or http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) 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. Decisions
by the court of appeals for the Fifth and Ninth Circuits have
invalidated our definition of destruction or adverse modification (50
CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do
not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action
is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain
functional (or retain those physical or biological features that relate
to the ability of the area to periodically support the species) to
serve its intended conservation role for the species.
If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of the species or to destroy or adversely modify
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency)
must enter into consultation with us. As a result of this consultation,
we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through
our issuance of:
(1) A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat;
or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat. As
described below in the Application of the Jeopardy and Adverse
Modification Standards section, ``likely to adversely effect'' does not
have the same meaning as ``adverse modification.''
When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we also provide
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable. We define reasonable and prudent alternatives at 50 CFR
402.02 as alternative actions identified during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended
purpose of the action;
(2) Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction;
(3) Are economically and technologically feasible; and
(4) Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid jeopardizing the
continued existence of the listed species or destroying or adversely
modifying 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 we have
listed a new species or subsequently designated critical habitat that
may be affected and the Federal agency has retained discretionary
involvement or control over the action (or the agency's discretionary
involvement or control is authorized by law). Consequently, Federal
agencies may sometimes need to request reinitiation of consultation
with us on actions for which formal consultation has been completed, if
those actions with discretionary involvement or control may affect
subsequently listed species or designated critical habitat.
Federal activities that may affect the bull trout or its designated
critical habitat require section 7 consultation under the Act.
Activities on State, tribal, local, or private lands requiring a
Federal permit (such as a permit from
[[Page 63943]]
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water
Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from us under section 10 of
the Act) or involving some other Federal action (such as funding from
the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or
the Federal Emergency Management Agency) are subject to the section 7
consultation process. Federal actions not affecting listed species or
critical habitat, and actions on State, tribal, local, or private lands
that are not federally funded, authorized, or permitted, do not require
section 7 consultations.
Application of the Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Standards
Jeopardy Standard
Currently, the Service applies an analytical framework for bull
trout jeopardy analyses that relies heavily on the importance of known
core area populations to the species' survival and recovery. The
analysis required by section 7(a)(2) of the Act is focused not only on
these populations, but also on the habitat conditions necessary to
support them.
The jeopardy analysis usually expresses the survival and recovery
needs of the bull trout in a qualitative fashion without making
distinctions between what is necessary for survival and what is
necessary for recovery. Generally, the jeopardy analysis focuses on the
rangewide status of the bull trout, the factors responsible for that
condition, and what is necessary for this species to survive and
recover. An emphasis is also placed on characterizing the condition of
the bull trout in the area affected by the proposed Federal action and
the role of affected populations in the survival and recovery of the
bull trout. That context is then used to determine the significance of
adverse and beneficial effects of the proposed Federal action and any
cumulative effects for purposes of making the jeopardy determination.
Core areas form the building blocks that provide for conservation of
the bull trout's evolutionary legacy as represented by major genetic
groups. The jeopardy analysis also considers any conservation measures
that may be proposed by a Federal action agency to minimize or
compensate for adverse project effects to the bull trout or to promote
its recovery. If a proposed Federal action is incompatible with the
viability of the affected core area population(s), inclusive of
associated habitat conditions, a jeopardy finding may be warranted,
because of the relationship of each core area population to the
survival and recovery of the species as a whole.
Adverse Modification Standard
The analytical framework described in the Director's December 9,
2004, memorandum is used to complete section 7(a)(2) analysis for
Federal actions affecting bull trout critical habitat. The key factor
related to the adverse modification determination is whether, with
implementation of the proposed Federal action, the affected critical
habitat would continue to serve its intended conservation role for the
species, or retain those PCEs that relate to the ability of the area to
periodically support the species. Activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat are those that alter the PCEs to an
extent that appreciably reduces the conservation value of critical
habitat for bull trout. As discussed above, the role of critical
habitat is to support the life-history needs of the species and provide
for its conservation. Generally, the conservation role of bull trout
critical habitat units is to support viable core area populations.
Since the primary threat to bull trout is habitat loss or
degradation, the jeopardy analysis under section 7 of the Act for a
project with a Federal nexus will most likely evaluate the effects of
the action on the conservation or functionality of the habitat for the
bull trout. Because of this, we believe that in many cases the analysis
of the project to address designated critical habitat will be
comparable. As such, we do not anticipate, for many circumstances, that
the outcome of the consultation to address critical habitat will result
in any significant additional project modifications or measures.
When consulting under section 7(a)(2) in designated critical
habitat, independent analyses are conducted for jeopardy to the species
and adverse modification of critical habitat. In occupied bull trout
habitat, any adverse modification determination would likely also
result in a jeopardy determination for the same action. As such,
project modifications that may be needed to minimize impacts to the
species would coincidentally minimize impacts to critical habitat.
Accordingly, in occupied critical habitat it is unlikely that an
analysis would identify a difference between measures needed to avoid
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat from
measures needed to avoid jeopardizing the species. Alternatively, in
unoccupied critical habitat, we would not conduct a jeopardy analysis;
however, measures to avoid the destruction or adverse modification may
be necessary to ensure that the affected critical habitat area can
continue to serve its intended conservation role for the species, or
retain the physical and biological features related to the ability of
the area to support the species.
The adverse modification analysis focuses on the rangewide status
of critical habitat, the factors responsible for that condition, and
what is necessary for critical habitat to provide the necessary
conservation value to the bull trout. An emphasis is placed on
characterizing the functional condition of critical habitat PCEs in the
area affected by the proposed Federal action. This analysis then
addresses how the critical habitat PCEs will be affected, and in turn,
how this will influence the conservation role of critical habitat units
in support of viable core area populations. That context is then used
to determine the significance of adverse and beneficial effects of the
proposed Federal action and any cumulative effects for purposes of
making the adverse modification determination at the rangewide scale.
If a proposed Federal action would alter the physical or biological
features of critical habitat to an extent that appreciably reduces the
conservation function of one or more critical habitat units for the
bull trout, a finding of adverse modification of the entire designated
critical habitat for the proposed action may be warranted. The intended
purpose of critical habitat to support viable core areas establishes a
sensitive scale for relating effects of an action on CHUs or subunits
to the conservation function of the entire designated critical habitat.
Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation. Activities that, when carried out, funded, or authorized
by a Federal agency, may affect critical habitat PCEs and therefore
result in consultation for the bull trout include, but are not limited
to:
(1) Detrimental alteration of the minimum flow or the natural flow
regime of any of the designated stream segments and water bodies.
Possible actions would include construction, operations, and
maintenance of groundwater pumping, water impoundment, water diversion,
hydropower generation facilities and structures, and operational
changes in flow and reservoir pool elevation that increase water
temperature, reduce flow, increase predation, or alter migration
habitat. We note that such
[[Page 63944]]
flow alterations resulting from actions affecting tributaries of the
designated stream reaches or water bodies may also destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat.
(2) Alterations to the designated stream segments and water bodies,
as well as alterations to non-designated areas that could directly or
indirectly cause significant and detrimental effects to bull trout
critical habitat. Possible actions include vegetation manipulation,
timber harvest, road construction and maintenance, construction and
operations of impoundments, prescribed fire, livestock grazing, off-
road vehicle use, power line or pipeline construction and repair,
mining, and development. Riparian vegetation profoundly influences
instream habitat conditions by providing shade, organic matter, root
strength, bank stability, and large woody debris inputs to streams.
These characteristics influence water temperature, structure and
physical attributes (useable habitat space, depth, width, channel
roughness, cover complexity), migration habitat, and food supply.
(3) Detrimental altering of the channel morphology of any of the
designated stream segments. Possible actions would include
channelization, impoundment, road and bridge construction and
maintenance, deprivation of substrate source, destruction and
alteration of aquatic or riparian vegetation, reduction of available
floodplain, removal of gravel or floodplain terrace materials,
excessive sedimentation from mining, livestock grazing, road
construction, timber harvest, off-road vehicle use, and other watershed
and floodplain disturbances. We note that such actions in the upper
watershed (beyond the riparian area) may also destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat. For example, timber harvest activities and
associated road construction in upland areas can lead to changes in
channel morphology by altering sediment production, debris loading, and
peak flows.
(4) Detrimental alterations to the water chemistry in any of the
designated stream segments. Possible actions would include release of
chemical or biological pollutants into the surface water or connected
groundwater at a point source or by dispersed release (nonpoint).
(5) Proposed activities that are likely to result in the
introduction, spread, or augmentation of nonnative species in any of
the designated stream segments. Possible actions would include fish
stocking, use of live bait fish, aquaculture, improper construction and
operation of canals, inter-basin water transfers, and dam and reservoir
management that favors nonnative fish.
(6) Proposed activities that are likely to create significant
instream barriers to bull trout movement. Possible actions would
include water diversions, water impoundments, and hydropower generation
where effective fish passage facilities, mechanisms, or procedures are
not provided.
We consider all 32 CHUs to contain features or areas essential to
the conservation of the bull trout. All units are within the geographic
range of the species, and portions of all units were occupied by the
species at the time of listing (based on observations made within the
last 20 years), and are likely to be used by the bull trout for
foraging, migrating, overwintering, spawning, or rearing. Federal
agencies (such as USFS, BLM, and BOR) already consult with us on
activities in areas currently occupied by the bull trout, if the
species may be affected by the action, to ensure their actions do not
jeopardize the continued existence of the bull trout. These agencies
may need to request reinitiation on some of their ongoing or previously
planned activities if the agency has continued discretionary
involvement or control over any part of the activity, and if the
activity may affect designated critical habitat. The need to reinitiate
consultation will be determined by the action agency, informed by the
criteria outlined in 50 CFR 402.16. This determination will be made by
the action agency, in cooperation with the Service, on a unit-by-unit
basis. The process to reinitiate consultation is described in
``Consultation Handbook: Procedures for Conducting Consultation and
Conference Activities under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.''
(Service, 1998). However, we anticipate the burden of reinitiation, if
needed, will be minor because of the aforementioned similarity between
measures needed to avoid the destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat and measures needed to avoid jeopardizing the species.
Further, we do not anticipate the action agencies will often need to
amend their ongoing or previously planned projects or plans for
projects because of the similarity between the measures taken to avoid
adverse modification of critical habitat and the measures taken to
avoid jeopardizing the species. If substantive changes are determined
to be needed, the action agencies will amend their projects or existing
plans for projects. However, after consultation is reinitiated, per
section 7(d) of the Act, the action agencies will not make any
irreversible or irretrievable commitment of resources that would have
the effect of foreclosing the formulation or implementation of any
reasonable and prudent alternative measures that would not violate
section 7(a)(2). New plans and major revisions to existing plans will
reflect the new critical habitat designations contained within this
rule. In addition, consultation streamlining tools such as programmatic
consultations are commonly implemented to minimize the administrative
costs associated with consultation within the range of the bull trout.
We expect these tools will continue be used for any reinitiations of
consultation for bull trout critical habitat, thereby minimizing any
additional administrative costs associated with designating the
critical habitat.
Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that includes land and water
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to
complete an integrated natural resources management plan (INRMP) by
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation,
including the need 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.
Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement,
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub.
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ``The Secretary shall not
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas
owned or
[[Page 63945]]
controlled by the Department of Defense, or designated for its use,
that are subject to an integrated natural resources management plan
prepared under section 101 of the Sikes Act (16 U.S.C. 670a), if the
Secretary determines in writing that such plan provides a benefit to
the species for which critical habitat is proposed for designation.''
We consult with the military on the development and implementation
of INRMPs for installations with federally listed species. INRMPs
developed by military installations located within the proposed
critical habitat areas were analyzed for exemption under the authority
of section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. Each of the Department of Defense
(DOD) installations identified below has been conducting surveys and
habitat management to benefit the bull trout, and reporting the results
of their efforts to the Service. Cooperation between the DOD
installations and the Service on specific conservation measures is
ongoing.
Approved Integrated Natural Resources Management Plans
We have examined the INRMPs for each of these military
installations to determine whether they provide benefits to bull trout.
Bayview Acoustic Research Detachment Naval Surface Warfare Center
The Bayview Acoustic Research Detachment (ARD) Naval Surface
Warfare Center, Bayview, Idaho, has an approved INRMP. This property
includes approximately 9.0 ha (22.0 ac) of developed land on the shore
of Lake Pend Oreille and 7.0 ha (17.3 ac) of lake area. There are no
tributary streams within this area utilized by bull trout for spawning
or early life rearing, but the lake area does contain important FMO
habitat for bull trout.
Bayview ARD's INRMP outlines protection and management strategies
for natural resources on the center, including fish species and their
habitats. The plan benefits bull trout through the protection of
spawning habitat for kokanee salmon, a primary food source for bull
trout. The Bayview ARD property in Scenic Bay hosts from 40 to 70
percent of the kokanee spawning activity in Lake Pend Oreille,
depending on the year. The INRMP includes measures to minimize impacts
to kokanee habitat by limiting facility boat traffic during spawning
periods (November and December) and implementing sediment control
measures. Furthermore, interpretive signs have been placed throughout
the property to educate employees and the public regarding various
aspects of the regions natural resources, endangered or threatened
species (including bull trout), and geological history. The INRMP
requires the natural resources manager to provide ARD INRMP awareness
training to facilitate INRMP implementation.
Based on the above considerations and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the approved Bayview ARD INRMP and that conservation
efforts identified in the INRMP will provide a benefit to bull trout
occurring in habitats within or adjacent to Bayview ARD. Therefore,
lands within this installation are exempt from critical habitat
designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not including
approximately 7.0 ha (17.3 ac) of habitat in this final critical
habitat designation because of this exemption.
Naval Radio Station Jim Creek
Naval Radio Station Jim Creek in western Washington has an approved
INRMP. The Naval Radio Station Jim Creek occurs in the Jim Creek
watershed. This installation includes approximately 1 km (0.7 mi) of
stream habitat. The lower reaches of Jim Creek provide foraging habitat
for subadult and adult bull trout. The Naval Radio Station Jim Creek
INRMP provides benefits to bull trout through the (1) restoration of
riparian buffers along Jim Creek, (2) protection of Jim Creek from
erosion and sedimentation, and (3) protection of Jim Creek from entry
of contaminants and herbicides during antenna field vegetation
management. We will continue to work cooperatively with the Department
of the Navy to assist Naval Radio Station Jim Creek in implementing and
refining the programmatic recommendations contained in this plan that
provide benefits to bull trout.
Based on the above considerations and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the Naval Radio Station Jim Creek INRMP and that
conservation efforts identified in the INRMP will provide a benefit to
bull trout occurring in habitats within or adjacent to Naval Radio
Station Jim Creek. Therefore, lands within this installation are exempt
from critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We
are not including approximately 1 km (0.7 mi) of habitat in this final
critical habitat designation because of this exemption.
Naval Station Everett
Naval Station Everett in western Washington has an approved INRMP.
The Naval Station Everett property includes land on or near the shores
of Puget Sound that contain important foraging and migration habitat
for amphidromous bull trout. This installation includes approximately 8
km (5 mi) of marine nearshore habitat. The Naval Station Everett's
INRMP benefits bull trout by providing (1) protection of nearshore
marine waters adjacent to the station from oil spills around the
berthing naval vessels; (2) bioswales to prevent the release of toxins,
contaminants, and oils generated on station from reaching the water
column through storm drains; and (3) timing restrictions on all
proposed routine construction or repair activities that will take place
below the mean higher high water line; and (4) the restoration of
riparian habitat on Navy lands located along the Middle Fork Quilceda
Creek.
Based on the above considerations and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the Naval Station Everett INRMP and that conservation
efforts identified in the INRMP will provide a benefit to bull trout
occurring in habitats within or adjacent to Naval Station Everett.
Therefore, lands within this installation are exempt from critical
habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not
including approximately 8 km (5 mi) of habitat in this final critical
habitat designation because of this exemption.
Naval Air Station Whidbey Island
Naval Air Station Whidbey Island in western Washington has an
approved INRMP. The Naval Station Whidbey Island property includes land
on or near the shores of Puget Sound that contain important foraging
and migration habitat for amphidromous bull trout. This installation
includes approximately 16 km (10 mi) of marine nearshore habitat. Naval
Aviation Station Whidbey Island's INRMP benefits bull trout through (1)
monitoring and managing livestock grazing to avoid or minimize impacts
to nearshore habitat used by bull trout, (2) managing road building and
maintenance to prevent erosion and sedimentation of nearshore habitat
used by bull trout , (3) assuring proper disposal of hazardous
materials, and (4) implementation of its Integrated Pest Management
Plan's best management practices to protect aquatic habitats used by
bull trout.
Based on the above considerations and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are
[[Page 63946]]
subject to the Naval Air Station Whidbey Island INRMP and that
conservation efforts identified in the INRMP will provide a benefit to
bull trout occurring in habitats within or adjacent to Naval Air
Station Whidbey Island. Therefore, lands within this installation are
exempt from critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the
Act. We are not including approximately 16 km (10 mi) of habitat in
this final critical habitat designation because of this exemption.
U.S. Army Fort Lewis Installation
The U.S. Army Fort Lewis Installation (Fort Lewis) located in
western Washington has an approved INRMP. Fort Lewis borders the
Nisqually River and Puget Sound, where the mainstem Nisqually River and
Puget Sound nearshore bordering this property contain important
foraging and migration habitat for amphidromous bull trout. This
installation includes approximately 24 km (15 mi) of stream and 3.5 km
(2 mi) of marine nearshore habitat. The INRMP for Fort Lewis identifies
two key objectives for bull trout and salmon: (1) Protect key habitat
characteristics, and (2) Enhance riparian and in-stream habitat.
Strategies to achieve these benefits to bull trout include (1)
protecting and enhancing wetlands and other aquatic habitats-all
wetlands are protected with 90 meter (300 foot) wide riparian buffers
to maintain cold water temperatures, to prevent sediment from entering
the streams, and to provide for woody debris which creates habitat
complexity; (2) controlling invasive plant species that often diminish
water quality and impact native plants and animals; (3) restoring
riparian habitat in-stream habitats and controlling non-native and
invasive vegetation to improve bull trout foraging habitat; (4)
reconnecting side channels and floodplains to maintain areas for
refugia and juvenile rearing and to supplement adult holding capacity;
and (5) decommissioning roads to minimize erosion and sediment delivery
and replacing undersized culverts to eliminate fish passage barriers.
Based on the above considerations and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the Fort Lewis INRMP and that conservation efforts
identified in the INRMP will provide a benefit to bull trout occurring
in habitats within or adjacent to Fort Lewis. Therefore, lands within
this installation are exempt from critical habitat designation under
section 4(a)(3) of the Act. We are not including approximately 27.5 km
(17 mi) of habitat in this final critical habitat designation because
of this exemption.
Summary
Habitat features essential to bull trout conservation are present
within or immediately adjacent to each of these DOD installations, and
each installation has an approved INRMP. Activities occurring on these
installations are being conducted in a manner that provides a benefit
to bull trout.
Based on the above considerations, and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have determined that the identified lands
are subject to the Bayview Acoustic Research Detachment Naval Surface
Warfare Center, Naval Radio Station Jim Creek, Naval Air Station
Whidbey Island, Naval Station Everett, and Fort Lewis INRMPs, and that
conservation efforts identified in the INRMPs will provide a benefit to
bull trout occurring in habitats within or adjacent to these
facilities. Therefore, lands within these installations are exempt from
critical habitat designation under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. As a
result, we are not including a total of approximately 7.0 ha (17.3 ac)
and 52.5 km (32.7 mi) of habitat in these DOD installations in this
final critical habitat designation because of these exemptions.
Exclusions
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must designate
and revise critical habitat on the basis of the best available
scientific data after taking into consideration the economic impact,
national security impact, and any other relevant impact of specifying
any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may exclude an
area from critical habitat if he determines the benefits of such
exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat, unless he determines, based on the best scientific
data available, that the failure to designate such area as critical
habitat will result in the extinction of the species. In making that
determination, the legislative history is clear that the Secretary has
broad discretion regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight
to give to any factor.
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, impacts on
national security, or any other relevant impacts. In considering
whether to exclude a particular area from the designation, we must
identify the benefits of including the area in the designation,
identify the benefits of excluding the area from the designation, and
determine whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. If based on this analysis, the Secretary makes this
determination, then he can exercise his discretion to exclude the area
only if such exclusion would not result in the extinction of the
species.
When considering the benefits of inclusion for an area, we consider
the additional regulatory benefits under section 7 of the Act that area
would receive from the protection from adverse modification or
destruction as a result of actions with a Federal nexus, the
educational benefits of mapping essential habitat for recovery of the
listed species, and any benefits that may result from a designation due
to State or Federal laws that may apply to critical habitat.
When considering the benefits of exclusion, we consider, among
other things, whether exclusion of a specific area is likely to result
in conservation; the continuation, strengthening, or encouragement of
partnerships; or implementation of a management plan that provides
equal to or more conservation that a critical habitat designation would
provide.
In the case of bull trout, the benefits of critical habitat include
public awareness of bull trout presence and the importance of habitat
protection, and in cases where a Federal nexus exists, increased
habitat protection for bull trout due to the protection from adverse
modification or destruction of critical habitat.
In evaluating the existence of a conservation plan when considering
the benefits of exclusion, we consider a variety of factors, including
but not limited to, whether the plan is finalized; how it provides for
the conservation of the essential physical and biological features;
whether there is a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions contained in a management plan will
be implemented into the future; whether the conservation strategies in
the plan are likely to be effective; and whether the plan contains a
monitoring program or adaptive management to ensure that the
conservation measures are effective and can be adapted in the future in
response to new information.
After evaluating the benefits of inclusion and the benefits of
exclusion, the two sides are carefully weighed to determine whether the
benefits of exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. If they do, we then
determine whether exclusion of the particular area would result in
extinction of the species. If
[[Page 63947]]
exclusion of an area from critical habitat will result in extinction,
it will not be excluded from the designation.
Based on the information provided by entities seeking exclusion, as
well as any additional public comments we received, we evaluated
whether certain lands in the proposed critical habitat were appropriate
for exclusion from this final designation. We considered the areas
discussed below for exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and
present our detailed analysis below. For those areas in which the
Secretary has exercised his discretion to exclude, we believe that:
(1) Their value for conservation will be preserved for the
foreseeable future by existing protective actions, or
(2) The benefits of excluding the particular area outweigh the
benefits of their inclusion, based on the ``other relevant factor''
provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
A total of 3,094.9 km (1,923.1 mi) of streams and marine shoreline
(8.5 percent of the area proposed as critical habitat) and 7,849.3 ha
(19,395.8 ac) of reservoirs and lakes (3.6 percent of the area proposed
as critical habitat) have been excluded from designation as critical
habitat. Of the total length of stream habitat excluded, 348 km (216.3
mi) is marine shoreline. Tables 8 and 9 reflect the total stream
shoreline and reservoir and lake surface areas excluded in each State,
and Tables 10 and 11 presents the ownership or other plan information
for these areas. Maps showing excluded habitats are available upon
request by contacting the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office; see the
ADDRESSES section.
Table 6.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Critical Habitat Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Olympic Peninsula.............. 553.5 343.9
1. Olympic Peninsula (Marine)..... 144.6 89.9
2. Puget Sound.................... 876.9 544.9
2. Puget Sound (Marine)........... 203.4 126.4
3. Lower Columbia River Basins.... 155.6 96.7
6. Lower Deschutes River.......... 230.4 143.2
8. Mainstem Lower Columbia River.. 1.7 1.1
10. Upper Columbia River Basins... 119.7 74.4
11. Yakima River.................. 288.7 179.4
12. John Day River................ 28.5 17.7
13. Umatilla River................ 48.7 30.3
14. Walla Walla River Basin....... 69.0 42.9
15. Lower Snake River Basins...... 13.4 8.3
16. Grande Ronde River............ 1.0 0.6
22. Mainstem Upper Columbia River. 2.5 1.6
30. Kootenai River Basin.......... 66.2 41.1
31. Clark Fork River Basin........ 209.0 129.9
32. Saint Mary River Basin........ 82.1 51.0
Total.................... 3,094.9 1,923.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 7.--Area of Reservoirs or Lakes Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Critical Habitat Unit
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical habitat unit Hectares Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Puget Sound.................... 1,629.5 4,026.6
3. Lower Columbia River Basins.... 4,856.1 11,999.7
6. Lower Deschutes River.......... 445.3 1,100.4
31. Clark Fork River Basin........ 32.2 79.7
32. Saint Mary River Basin........ 886.1 2,189.5
Total.................... 7,849.3 19,395.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 8.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montana........................... 271.4 168.6
Oregon............................ 307.6 191.1
Washington........................ 2,163.7 1,344.5
Washington Marine................. 348.0 216.2
Washington/Oregon................. 4.2 2.6
Total..................... 3,094.9 1,923.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 9.--Area of Reservoirs or Lakes Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by State
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Hectares Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Montana........................... 918.3 2,269.2
Oregon............................ 445.3 1,100.4
Washington........................ 6,485.6 16,026.3
Total..................... 7,849.3 19,395.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63948]]
Table 10.--Stream/Shoreline Distance Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat based on tribal ownership or other plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ownership Kilometers Miles
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lewis River Hydro Conservation 7.0 4.3
Easements........................
DOD - Dabob Bay Naval............. 23.9 14.8
HCP - Cedar River (City of 25.8 16.0
Seattle).........................
HCP - WA Forest Practices Lands... 1,608.3 999.4
HCP - Green Diamond (Simpson)..... 104.2 64.7
HCP - Plum Creek Central Cascades 15.8 9.8
(WA).............................
HCP - Plum Creek Native Fish (MT). 181.6 112.8
HCP-Stimson 7.7 4.8
HCP - WDNR Lands.................. 230.9 149.5
Tribal - Blackfeet................ 82.1 51.0
Tribal - Hoh...................... 4.0 2.5
Tribal - Jamestown S'Klallam...... 2.0 1.2
Tribal - Lower Elwha.............. 4.6 2.8
Tribal - Lummi.................... 56.7 35.3
Tribal - Muckleshoot.............. 9.3 5.8
Tribal - Nooksack................. 8.3 5.1
Tribal - Puyallup................. 33.0 20.5
Tribal - Quileute................. 4.0 2.5
Tribal - Quinault................. 153.7 95.5
Tribal - Skokomish................ 26.2 16.3
Tribal - Stillaguamish............ 1.8 1.1
Tribal - Swinomish................ 45.2 28.1
Tribal - Tulalip.................. 27.8 17.3
Tribal - Umatilla................. 62.6 38.9
Tribal - Warm Springs............. 260.5 161.9
Tribal - Yakama................... 107.9 67.1
Total..................... 3,094.9 1,923.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Table 11.--Area of Reservoirs or Lakes Excluded From Bull Trout Critical
Habitat by Tribal Ownership or other plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ownership Hectares Acres
------------------------------------------------------------------------
HCP - Cedar River (City of 796.5 1,968.2
Seattle).........................
HCP - WA Forest Practices Lands... 5,689.1 14,058.1
HCP - Plum Creek Native Fish...... 32.2 79.7
Tribal - Blackfeet................ 886.1 2,189.5
Tribal - Warm Springs............. 445.3 1,100.4
Total..................... 7,849.3 19,395.8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exclusions Based on National Security Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense where a national
security impact might exist. The Navy conducts essential open water
training and testing within the marine waters of Hood Canal fiord
within: (1) the Dabob Bay Range Complex (DBRC) (which includes (a) the
Dabob Bay Military Operating Area, (b) DBRC Connecting Waters, and (c)
DBRC Southern Extension), and (2) the marine waters of the Washington
Coast within the Quinault Underwater Tracking Range (QUTR) and its
proposed surf zone corridors. These areas encompass important marine
nearshore habitat used by amphidromous bull trout for foraging and
migration.
The DBRC and QUTR are part of the Navy's larger Keyport Range
Complex (NUWC), and are primarily used for providing test and
evaluation services critical to undersea warfare. NUWC Keyport testing
and training activities to support military readiness requires
precision underwater tracking capabilities, underwater range sites
offering diverse environments, and varied water depths to meet the
Navy's mission of test and evaluation of underwater systems. Because
these activities are conducted in open marine waters rather than on DOD
installations, they are not included in the Navy's INRMP, and thus may
not be exempted from critical habitat designation. The Navy has
requested exclusion from critical habitat designation of these areas in
the current revision of critical habitat for the bull trout.
Previously, portions of these ranges have been designated as critical
habitat for the bull trout and other species, by both NOAA Fisheries
and the Service. Biological assessments evaluating the operational
effects on endangered species have been reviewed and approved by NOAA
Fisheries and the Service. These biological assessments, and associated
environmental assessments, addressed bull trout and their interactions
with military range operations.
Of particular concern to the Service are the proposed surf zone
access corridors in the DBRC and QUTR, which lead to the open water
parts of these testing ranges, and which are areas that we proposed as
critical habitat for bull trout. Accordingly, the proposed surf zone
corridors were the focus of our section 4(b)(2) analysis in the DBRC
Southern Extension and QUTR. The analysis for these surf zone corridors
follows.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion
Habitat containing features essential to bull trout conservation
occurs within or immediately adjacent to these marine water training
and testing grounds. The primary benefit of designating critical
[[Page 63949]]
habitat in each of the areas of interest to the Navy would be that
Federal agencies would need to consult with us under section 7 of the
Act to ensure that any proposed action would not destroy or adversely
modify critical habitat. An additional benefit of including lands in
critical habitat is that designation of critical habitat serves to
educate landowners, State and local governments, and the public
regarding the potential conservation value of an area. This helps focus
and promote conservation efforts by other parties by clearly
delineating areas of high conservation value for bull trout. Because
the critical habitat process includes multiple public comment periods,
opportunities for public hearings, and announcements through local
venues, the designation of critical habitat provides numerous occasions
for public education and involvement. Through these outreach
opportunities, landowners, State agencies, and local governments can
become more aware of the plight of listed species and conservation
actions needed to aid in species recovery. Through the critical habitat
process, State agencies and local governments may become more aware of
areas that could be conserved under State law, local ordinances, or
specific management plans.
Additionally, bull trout critical habitat was designated in the
DBRC Southern Extension area in the 2005 critical habitat rule, and the
Navy has already consulted with us on their proposed actions in this
area. The anadromous life history form of bull trout is now rare in
Hood Canal, which is part of the access to this testing range and is
important in order to address potential impacts to nearshore habitat to
ensure future recovery. Shoreline areas provide subadult rearing and
adult foraging habitat. Including this area in the critical habitat
designation will ensure that proposed Federal actions by the Navy and
other entities (such as activities permitted by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers or Federally funded State park projects) would not result in
the destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. Since we
have already consulted with the Navy on the DBRC Southern Extension, we
know that designation of critical habitat has had minimal, if any,
impact to their operations in that area.
The Navy has also consulted with us on one of the three proposed
surf zone corridors associated with the QUTR, and it was determined
that effects of their actions were not likely to adversely affect bull
trout critical habitat. We would anticipate similar determinations for
the other two proposed surf zone corridors, based on the temporary
nature of surf zone operations. In addition, the Navy informed us that
although a preferred alternative has been identified, a final decision
on the selection of one of three alternative sites for the surf zone
portion of the QUTR will not be confirmed until later this year. The
Navy expressed concern regarding the possible need to conduct emergency
cable maintenance in the preferred surf zone corridor area. If the
selected area overlaps critical habitat and adverse effects may occur,
the Service can conduct emergency consultation under section 7 of the
Act.
By retaining these areas as critical habitat, the designation may
educate the public regarding their potential conservation value, and
contribute to conservation efforts by other parties. Each of the three
surf zone corridor locations in the QUTR was designated as critical
habitat for the southern distinct population segment of the North
American green sturgeon (Acipenser medirostris) on October 9, 2009 (74
FR 52300) by NOAA Fisheries. Also, the DBRC Southern Extension was
designated as critical habitat for the Hood Canal summer run chum
salmon and Chinook salmon by NOAA Fisheries (70 FR 37160, June 28,
2005). This means that the Navy would need to consult on those species
in any case, so the retention of bull trout critical habitat in the
same area should have little, if any, additional impact. If we were to
exclude this area for national security reasons, that would be
inconsistent with the NOAA Fisheries designation of critical habitat
for the green sturgeon, chum salmon, and Chinook salmon in these areas.
Critical habitat designation is needed so we can evaluate potential
impacts of all Federal actions in these nearshore areas, which are
essential for recovery. Exclusion of the area for the Navy would
preclude our ability to do so.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion
The Navy states that analysis of past and present NUWC Keyport
activities have not shown impacts to water quality, water quantity, or
food availability, but believe that designation of critical habitat for
bull trout may unnecessarily restrict or prohibit their activities.
Restrictions on the access, use, or enhancement of capabilities and
capacities of these ranges would limit or curtail both testing and
mission-critical Fleet Support functions performed by NUWC Keyport for
undersea warfare. Designating critical habitat on these open water
training and testing areas may impact their role in supporting ongoing
military exercises and operations that occur at these locations. The
military activities occurring at these sites are currently being
conducted in a manner that minimizes impacts to bull trout habitat. In
addition, nearshore areas adjacent to Navy installations and those
areas designated as marine security areas or restricted zones provide
some additional conservation benefits, as recreational and commercial
vessels are prohibited from entering, mooring, anchoring, or fishing in
these areas. The Navy already consults with us on their actions
occurring in the open water training and testing areas that may have
potential impacts to bull trout and its habitat under section 7
requirements.
(3) Determination of Whether Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the
Benefits of Inclusion
Dabob Bay Military Operating Area and Connecting Waters
The benefits of designating critical habitat in the Dabob Bay
Military Operating Area and Connecting Waters appear to be limited. In
contrast, these areas are important to Navy operations and support
national security by ensuring the Navy can maintain a high level of
military readiness. Accordingly, we have determined that the national
security benefit of excluding areas within or adjacent to the open
water training and testing areas of the Military Operating Area and
Connecting Waters of the DBRC outweighs the benefit of designating
these areas as critical habitat. In addition, because these marine
waters are occupied by bull trout, the Navy has a statutory duty under
section 7 of the Act to ensure that its activities do not jeopardize
the continued existence of the bull trout. In accordance with section
4(b)(2) of the Act, we have also determined that the exclusion of these
marine waters will not lead to the extinction of the bull trout.
Dabob Bay Range Complex Southern Extension and Quinault Underwater
Tracking Range
We have determined the benefits of exclusion do not outweigh the
benefits of inclusion of nearshore habitat within or adjacent to the
DBRC Southern Extension and QUTR surf zone corridors. Shoreline areas
provide important subadult rearing and adult foraging habitat, are
essential habitat for the anadromous life history form of bull trout,
and thus they are essential to the recovery of the bull trout. We have
already consulted with the Navy on both the DBRC Southern Extension and
the preferred action area in the QUTR surf zone, as a result of the
2005 critical
[[Page 63950]]
habitat designation for bull trout. The designation has had minimal
impact to their operations in those areas. On the other hand, there is
a benefit to retaining these areas in the critical habitat designation,
so that the Navy will continue to consult with us on proposed actions
in these areas, to ensure that such actions would not result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. The inclusion
of areas encompassing the proposed surf zone corridors will ensure
continued cooperation and consultation between the Navy and the Service
in those areas associated with the DBRC Southern Extension and the
QUTR.
In addition, there are other possible Federal actions conducted by
other entities that may occur within or adjacent to the DBRC Southern
Extension that could impact important bull trout habitat. Therefore, we
find that the benefits of excluding the DBRC Southern Extension and
QUTR surf zones do not outweigh the benefits of inclusion, and these
areas are not excluded from critical habitat designation. Critical
habitat designation is needed so we can evaluate potential impacts of
all Federal actions in these nearshore areas, which are essential for
recovery. Exclusion of these areas for the Navy would preclude our
ability to do so.
Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Factors
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider any other relevant
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts to national
security. We consider a number of factors including whether the
landowners have developed any HCPs or other management plans for the
area, or whether there are conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any tribal issues, and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United States with tribal entities. We
also consider any social impacts that might occur because of the
designation.
Habitat Conservation Plans
We consider a current plan (HCPs as well as other types) to provide
adequate management or protection for bull trout and its habitat if it
meets the following criteria:
(1) The plan is complete and provides the same or better level of
protection from adverse modification or destruction than that provided
through a consultation under section 7 of the Act;
(2) There is a reasonable expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions will be implemented for the
foreseeable future and effective, based on past practices, written
guidance, or regulations; and
(3) The plan provides adaptive management and conservation
strategies and measures consistent with currently accepted principles
of conservation biology.
Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act authorizes us to issue to non-
Federal entities a permit for the incidental take of endangered and
threatened species. This permit allows a non-Federal landowner to
proceed with an activity that is legal in all other respects, but that
results in the incidental taking of a listed species (i.e., take that
is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of an
otherwise lawful activity). The Act specifies that an application for
an incidental take permit must be accompanied by a habitat conservation
plan (HCP), and specifies the content of such a plan. The purpose of
conservation agreements is to describe and ensure that the effects of
the permitted action on covered species are adequately minimized and
mitigated, and that the action does not appreciably reduce the survival
and recovery of the species. In our assessment of conservation
agreements associated with this final rulemaking, the analysis required
for these types of exclusions involves careful consideration of the
benefits of designation versus the benefits of exclusion. The benefits
of designation typically arise from additional section 7 protections,
as well as enhanced public awareness once specific areas are identified
as critical habitat. The benefits of exclusion generally relate to
relieving regulatory burdens on existing conservation partners,
maintaining good working relationships with them, and encouraging the
development of new partnerships.
During the comment period, we received comments from five
landowners or managers with HCPs that include bull trout as covered
species. These HCPs include the Washington Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR), Green Diamond Resources Company, City of Seattle
Cedar River Watershed, Plum Creek/Stimson Lumber Company Native Fish,
Plum Creek Central Cascades, and Washington State Forest Practices
HCPs. These permittees commented that they perceive the designation of
critical habitat as imposing a regulatory burden. They also view the
exclusion from critical habitat designation as removing that burden and
strengthening the ongoing relationship with the Service. All six
permittees indicated they would consider exclusion as a benefit to our
ongoing relationship. Our summary analysis of the benefits of
designation versus the benefits of exclusion for these six HCPs is
provided below. The specific section 4(b)(2) analysis for each of the
HCPs is described in detail in the ``Compilation of HCP Exclusion
Analyses for the Designation of Bull Trout Critical Habitat (Including
Exclusion Analysis for Certain Areas Managed Under the Lewis River
Hydroelectric Projects),'' available at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout/.
The Chelan County Washington Public Utility District also requested
exclusion from bull trout critical habitat designation for their Mid-
Columbia HCP. However, since bull trout was not a covered species in
this HCP, and the actions conducted under the HCP did not address the
PCEs for bull trout, we determined that the HCP did not meet the basic
criteria for consideration for exclusion.
WDNR HCP
The WDNR HCP, was permitted under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act in
1997, and covers about 650,000 ha (1,600,000 ac) of State forest trust
lands within the range of the northern spotted owl in the State of
Washington. The majority of the HCP (approximately 530,000 ha
(1,300,000 ac)) occurs west of the Cascade Crest and includes the
Olympic Peninsula and Southwest Washington. The remainder of the HCP
occurs on the east side of the Cascade Mountains within the range of
the northern spotted owl. The HCP covers activities primarily
associated with commercial forest management. It is an ``all-species''
HCP west of the Cascade Crest, and includes bull trout and other
salmonids as covered species. The aquatic conservation strategy for the
west side planning units has two objectives: (1) To maintain or restore
salmonid freshwater habitat on WDNR managed lands; and (2) to
contribute to the conservation of other aquatic and riparian obligate
species. The HCP Implementation Procedures for the Riparian Forest
Restoration Strategy detail site-specific methods for riparian
management to address the appropriate volume and density of instream
large woody debris, a high degree of stream shading, the ability to
intercept harmful sediments, stream bank stability, reduction of
excessive windthrow, and the ability to contribute detrital nutrients.
Timber harvest is avoided that could increase the frequency or severity
of slope failure or would alter the natural input of large woody
debris, gravel, or fine sediment
[[Page 63951]]
to streams. Comprehensive road management provides for fish passage,
minimizes hydrologic disruption, and reduces delivery of fine
sediments, while allowing large woody debris to be transported
downstream.
The WDNR HCP is providing conservation benefits to bull trout that
contribute to recovery, based on its landscape conservation strategy
specifically designed for multiple species. Although the primary
benefits to bull trout occur from the riparian strategy, the other
aspects of the landscape conservation strategy provide contributions to
bull trout as well. The spotted owl and marbled murrelet strategies, in
conjunction with the range of forest types across the landscape,
contribute to bull trout habitat primarily through improved watershed
conditions. Other provisions of the HCP also contribute to recovery of
bull trout, including protecting unstable hillslopes, properly managing
forest roads, managing forests to minimize rain-on-snow floods, and
protecting wetlands.
The HCP protects surface and subsurface water connectivity through
a variety of diverse mechanisms. Mineral springs receive specific
protection to address band-tailed pigeons, but these same protections
would benefit bull trout. Other springs or seeps that result in
perennial or intermittent channels or wetlands may be addressed through
those conservation provisions. The HCP addresses wetlands and
hydrological integrity and connectivity, which includes provisions for
both forested and nonforested wetlands. Wetland prescriptions
throughout the HCP area are designed to protect water quality and
hydrologic integrity and connectivity, including hyporheic flow (flow
involving a mixing of shallow groundwater and surface water). Roads are
designed to avoid disrupting surface and ground-water flows by
minimizing ground-water interception and returning water to the forest
floor immediately through proper construction standards, thus
minimizing infrastructure impacts on basin hydrology. Road management
is designed to disconnect ditches and road intercepts from the stream
system to reduce delivery of sediment, but also to slow the delivery of
storm-related run-off and reduce the contribution to peak flows.
Standards are also in place to ensure water quality and quantity
adequate to provide for a barrier-free environment for bull trout, and
roads are managed in a manner to avoid creating migratory barriers. In
addition, any existing road barriers will be addressed through
remediation. The HCP maintains the natural hydrology and riparian
functions of large wood input, shade, bank stability, detrital inputs,
and the natural functions of flood plains and unstable slopes. The HCP
addresses the need for complex habitat by prescribing riparian buffers
along streams and wetlands that contribute to large woody debris
recruitment and maintain stream bank integrity. It addresses sediment
by ensuring that the stream system is not disrupted by the road
network, and that ditch and road run-off is disconnected from the
stream system.
Fish-bearing streams receive site-potential (100-year index)
buffers that generally average 46 to 49 m (150 to 160 ft), and non-
fish-bearing streams wider than 0.6 m (2 ft) receive 30 m (100 ft)
buffers. Small headwater streams (less than 0.6 m (2 ft) in width) are
often addressed through unstable slopes and features identification, or
alternatively through the development of a strategy focused on these
stream types. Although the stream-buffering prescriptions are based on
slightly different features within the Olympic Experimental State
Forest, they generally resemble the west side prescriptions, which are
designed to provide equivalent protection of instream habitat for bull
trout, by supporting large wood and other riparian functional
processes.
The HCP includes provisions to manage forest cover in the rain-on-
snow subbasins to reduce the frequency of major storm flows that are
capable of shifting instream habitat structure. The HCP has also been
designed to substantially reduce the amount of coarse and fine
sediments transported downstream that could further simplify and
degrade habitat conditions. The WDNR recognized stream temperature
increases can be related to and caused by interruption of hydrology,
riparian removal, increased sedimentation, and simplification of
habitat; the HCP addressed this concern. The riparian buffers on
streams and wetlands are designed to provide natural levels of shade to
avoid increasing sunlight that could result in stream warming. In
addition, road and wetland prescriptions are designed to maintain
natural hydrological regime so that streams are not abnormally dry
during periods of the year when this could exacerbate warming problems.
Stream buffers and road standards also address sediment delivery, which
will in turn avoid artificial filling of pools that could lead to
increased stream warming.
Reducing road-generated fine sediment is a major focus of the HCP,
and considerable focus is placed on road maintenance, repair, and
improved construction standards. In addition, road remediation of
existing road-related problems is a major component. The WDNR has
already decommissioned many stream-side roads and addressed a number of
road segments with a high-level of concern regarding aquatic impacts.
The HCP is designed to keep slope failures at natural levels, which
serves to reduce the delivery of fine sediments, but recognizes the
contribution of these processes to supplying gravel needed for aquatic
substrates. Once material has been delivered to the stream, large woody
debris and other channel features sort substrate by particle size.
Therefore, the HCP addresses bank stability and large wood recruitment
that should help store fine sediment and provide for suitable
substrates for bull trout spawning. The HCP is also designed to
maintain floodplains and wetlands in a manner that retains the
functions of the hyporheic zone and off-channel habitats, and protect
water quality and quantity, which should assist native fish in
maintaining a competitive advantage over nonnative species.
Green Diamond HCP
In October 2000, Simpson Timber Company (now Green Diamond)
completed an HCP (formerly referred to as the Simpson Timber HCP and
currently referred to as the Green Diamond HCP), and the Service issued
an incidental take permit for forestry operations on over 105,625 ha
(261,000 ac) of the company's Washington timberlands located on or
adjacent to the Olympic Peninsula in Mason, Thurston, and Grays Harbor
Counties. The HCP covers the land owned by Green Diamond along the
lower reaches of the North Fork and South Fork Skokomish Rivers, the
upper South Fork Skokomish River, West Fork Satsop River, and Canyon
River. The plan addresses five species listed under the Act, including
bull trout, and 46 other non-listed species.
The HCP is designed to conserve riparian forests, improve water
quality, prevent management-related hill-slope instability, and address
hydrological maturity of small sub-basins. The HCP prescriptions for
riparian and wetland areas focus on the following functions:
recruitment of woody debris to streams and the forest floor, shade and
control of stream-side air temperature, stream-bank stability, detrital
inputs, capture and storage of sediment and organic matter on the
floodplain, maintenance and augmentation of nutrient dynamics and
processing, groundwater discharge, base-flow support in streams, and
flood amelioration. HCP actions are also expected to maintain the
thermal regime
[[Page 63952]]
of streams within the range of normal variation and contribute to the
maintenance of complex stream channels, appropriate substrates, a
natural hydrologic regime, ground-water sources and subsurface
connectivity, migratory corridors, and an abundant food base.
The HCP road program is addressing legacy, current, and future
roads. Prescriptions and standards address the chronic production and
movement of fine sediment, and the catastrophic failure of road fills
and sidecast that generate and propagate hillslope and channel
failures. Unstable slope prescriptions require identification of these
areas and avoidance of management activities that could trigger mass-
wasting processes (slope failure). Road prescriptions are intended to
avoid disrupting surface and ground-water flows, and specific road
remediation is being directed at restoring wetlands. Roads are also
being managed so they do not contribute to the formation of barriers,
and existing road-related barriers are being corrected. Road management
is designed to disconnect ditches (and ground water intercepted by
roads) from the stream system to reduce delivery of sediment, and also
to slow the delivery of storm-related run-off and reduce the
contribution to peak flows. Ditch water and road run-off is delivered
in a diffuse manner to the forest floor.
In subbasins within the rain-on-snow zone, prescriptions address
the maintenance of sufficient mature forest canopy to reduce the
frequency of major storm flows that are capable of shifting instream
habitat structure. Road-related prescriptions also address diffusing
water to reduce the potential for roads to accelerate the delivery of
water and exacerbate peak flow problems.
The HCP protects surface and subsurface water connectivity through
a variety of diverse mechanisms. Springs and seeps that form perennial
or intermittent channels are addressed through conservation provisions,
and all perennial streams are protected with riparian buffers.
Intermittent streams also receive protection in a manner that optimizes
their functional needs. The HCP addresses wetlands and hydrological
integrity, and connectivity for both forested and nonforested wetlands.
In addition, all riverine unstable-slope-associated wetlands are
buffered, and protection is provided for depressional wetlands, stable-
slope wetlands, and wetlands on flat terrain. Wetland prescriptions
(and prescriptions for management of wetland complexes) throughout the
HCP area are designed to protect water quality and hydrologic integrity
and connectivity.
The Green Diamond HCP includes measures to ensure that water
quality and quantity conditions in the water column maintain a barrier-
free environment for bull trout. The HCP maintains the natural
hydrology and riparian functions of large wood input, shade, bank
stability, and detrital inputs by providing buffers along streams and
wetlands. The HCP is also designed to substantially reduce the amount
of coarse and fine sediments transported downstream that could further
simplify and degrade habitat conditions.
Stream temperature is being addressed in a number of ways,
including establishing buffers to provide shade, implementing road-
management practices that avoid sedimentation, and maintaining natural
hydrologic regimes that contribute cool water to streams. Stream and
wetland buffers are designed to provide natural levels of shade, and to
avoid increasing sunlight, which could result in stream warming. Road
and wetland prescriptions are designed to maintain natural hydrological
regime to ensure streams are not abnormally dry during periods of the
year when warming problems could be exacerbated. Stream buffers and
road standards also address sediment delivery, which in turn will avoid
artificial filling of pools, which could lead to increased stream
warming.
The HCP addresses the need for natural substrates in a wide variety
of ways. As described above, reducing road-generated, fine sediment is
a major focus, and considerable attention is placed on road
maintenance, repair, and improved construction standards. In addition,
road remediation of existing road-related problems is a major
component. The HCP addresses bank stability and large wood recruitment,
which will help store fine sediment and provide for suitable substrates
for bull trout spawning. The HCP's provisions to manage forest cover in
the rain-on-snow subbasins will reduce the frequency of major storm
flows that are capable of shifting instream habitat structure that
contributes to sorting and development of suitable substrates, and it
also is expected to substantially reduce the amount of coarse and fine
sediments transported downstream. The HCP is designed to protect the
natural hydrograph, address sediment and stream temperature, and
maintain floodplains and wetlands in a manner that retains the
functions of the hyporheic zone and off-channel habitats. HCP
prescriptions that protect the natural environment will assist native
fish in maintaining a competitive advantage over nonnative species.
Some examples of conservation actions conducted under the Green
Diamond HCP include the placement of large woody debris in streams to
increase habitat complexity, and the abandonment of 154 km (96 mi) of
legacy logging roads that do not meet current construction standards.
Road abandonment included restoring pre-construction hydrology, thereby
decreasing the opportunity for sediment delivery to adjacent streams.
Silvicultural treatments have also been applied over 486 ha (1,200 ac)
of riparian forest to improve aquatic habitat in adjacent streams.
City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed HCP
In April 2000, the Cedar River Watershed HCP was completed and an
incidental take permit was issued to the City of Seattle for water
withdrawal and water supply activities affecting flows in the lower
Cedar River and reservoir levels in Chester Morse Lake. The plan
provides for forestry restoration activities including riparian
thinning, road abandonment, and timber stand improvement on over 36,872
ha (91,000 ac) in the upper Cedar River Watershed in King County. The
HCP is designed to provide adequate flows in the lower Cedar River for
fish spawning and rearing, to manage water levels in Chester Morse Lake
and Masonry Dam Reservoir to benefit instream flows in the lower river
and maintain bull trout spawning access to lake tributaries, and to
manage the upper Cedar River as an ecological reserve.
The HCP's watershed mitigation management and conservation
strategies provide comprehensive long-term protection for the watershed
ecosystem, and include commitments not to harvest timber for commercial
purposes; placement of forest outside limited development areas in a
reserve status; measures to protect and restore stream, riparian, and
upland forest habitats; removal of a large part (approximately 40
percent) of the existing road network; protective guidelines for
watershed operations designed to minimize and mitigate impacts of those
operations; and specific measures to protect species of greatest
concern and their habitats, including bull trout. Several research
actions are directed at understanding how all life stages of bull trout
use Chester Morse Lake and Masonry Pool and how adult bull trout use
tributaries to the lake for spawning. The HCP covers 83 species of fish
and wildlife, including bull trout and six other species listed under
the Act.
[[Page 63953]]
The HCP covers over 36,872 ha (91,000 ac) of City of Seattle-owned
land in the upper Cedar River Watershed and the City's water withdrawal
activities on the lower Cedar River. Seattle owns over 99 percent of
the lands in the upper Cedar River watershed, which are managed as an
ecological reserve to protect water quality and preserve the remaining
old growth timber. Other timber lands in the watershed are actively
managed to accelerate the development of old growth characteristics,
mainly though riparian and upland thinning. Roads are being
decommissioned (removed) at the rate of approximately 16 km (10 mi) per
year to reduce erosion rates into the lake and its tributaries and to
minimize disturbance and fragmentation in the upper watershed. This
activity will maintain a natural hydrological regime so that streams
are not abnormally dry during periods of the year when this could
exacerbate warming. Twenty culverts that block fish passage are being
replaced in the upper watershed.
The HCP includes provisions to manage almost the entire watershed
as an ecological reserve, maintaining forest cover where it currently
exists and allowing for only ecological thinning to occur in selected
locations in the watershed. This ``no commercial harvest'' approach
ensures that all springs, seeps, surface waters, groundwater sources,
and subsurface waters function in a natural state that maintains water
connectivity and contributes to water quality and quantity. This
prescription is also expected to protect shade levels to avoid
increasing sunlight, which can result in stream warming. Because only
limited ecological thinning will occur, no loss of riparian shading is
expected under the HCP other than that resulting from natural causes
(wind throw, fire, etc.). All fish blockages identified on HCP lands
have been or will be corrected, ensuring migratory corridors with
minimal physical, biological, or water quality impediments between
spawning, rearing, overwintering, and foraging habitats. Removal of
fish blockages will also provide for more naturally maintained stream
characteristics, including bedload movement, sediment transport, and
passage of moderately-sized woody debris. The ecological reserve
created under the HCP maintains the natural hydrology and riparian
functions of large wood input, shade, bank stability, and detrital
inputs, as well as natural functions of flood plains and unstable
slopes.
The HCP addresses the need for complex habitat by eliminating
commercial timber harvest in the watershed; outside of selected
ecological thinning in some riparian areas and upland forest, no
harvest of trees is allowed under the HCP. Ecological thinning in some
riparian areas has the advantage of accelerating the growth of the
remaining riparian trees and increasing the amount of large woody
debris in the stream. Because only limited ecological thinning will
occur, no loss of riparian shading is expected under the HCP other than
that resulting from natural causes (wind throw, fire, etc.). Stream
temperature will be maintained through a number of measures, including
no commercial harvest in the watershed, road-management practices that
avoid sedimentation, and maintenance of natural hydrologic regimes that
contribute cool water to streams.
Reducing the influences and scope of roads in the upper Cedar River
Watershed is a major focus of the HCP, since most harmful sediments
that impact aquatic habitats are due to poor road construction and
maintenance. Logging roads in the watershed have impaired bull trout
habitat by contributing coarse and fine sediments to the stream
network, so considerable focus has been placed on road maintenance,
road repair, improved road construction standards, fish barrier
removal, and road abandonment. Twenty identified fish passage barriers
are being replaced, or are scheduled to be replaced, which will restore
fish access to additional habitat, and provide for more naturally
maintained stream characteristics, including bedload movement, sediment
transport, and passage of moderately-sized woody debris. Road
management is designed to disconnect ditches (and ground water
intercepted by roads) from the stream system to reduce delivery of
sediment, and also to slow the delivery of storm-related run-off and
reduce the contribution to peak flows. Road abandonment is designed to
put-to-bed many roads that would otherwise contribute sediment to
streams via runoff or mass failure. Approximately 378 km (236 mi) of
roads, or 38 percent of the watershed road network, will be
decommissioned at a rate of approximately 16 km (10 mi) of roads per
year. Approximately 200 km (125 mi) of road have been decommissioned
within the Cedar River Municipal Watershed since 1989 (http://
www.seattle.gov/util/About_SPU/Water_System/Habitat_Conservation_
Plan/ManagingtheWatershed/RoadImprovementsDecommissioning/Metrics/
SPU02_015774.asp).
The streams in the upper Cedar River watershed are free-flowing
water courses that currently provide high-quality habitat for bull
trout. The goal is to protect the quality and quantity of this habitat
and take steps to improve and restore other habitat. The HCP includes
provisions to manage almost the entire watershed as an ecological
reserve maintaining forest cover where it currently exists and allowing
for only ecological thinning to occur in selected locations in the
watershed. The HCP is expected to maintain floodplains and wetlands in
a manner that retains the functions of the hyporheic zone and off-
channel habitats. Conservation measures in the HCP should result in
more naturally maintained stream hydraulics, including bedload
movement, sediment transport, and passage of small and large woody
debris.
Water quality and quantity are addressed through a variety of
mechanisms. In addition to protecting the natural hydrograph and
addressing sediment and temperature, no chemical applications in the
watershed are allowed in order to maintain the quality of the public
drinking water supply. Provisions of the HCP that protect the natural
environment should assist native fish in maintaining a competitive
advantage when that is possible. The fact that this is a closed
watershed, not open to the public, and will remain so under the HCP,
will help considerably to ensure nonnative species are not introduced
into the site.
Plum Creek/Stimson Lumber Company Native Fish HCPs
Plum Creek Timber Company initiated an effort in 1997 to develop a
conservation strategy for native salmonids (including bull trout),
occurring on 647,511 ha (1.6 million ac) of Plum Creek's Timberlands in
Montana, Idaho, and Washington. The stated purpose of the Plum Creek
Native Fish Habitat Conservation Plan (NFHCP) was to help conserve
native salmonids and their ecosystems, while allowing Plum Creek to
continue to conduct commercial timber harvest within a framework of
long-term regulatory certainty and flexibility. The Stimson Lumber
NFHCP was created when the Stimson Lumber Company acquired certain
lands previously owned by Plum Creek and assumed all of the Plum Creek
NFHCP commitments. The Plum Creek NFHCP covers approximately 566,572 ha
(1.4 million ac) within the range of the Columbia River basin. The
Stimpson portion of what was originally the Plum Creek NFHCP covers
approximately 11,487 ha (28,535 ac).
[[Page 63954]]
Because of similarities in their conservation measures, the HCPs are
being analyzed together for purposes of our section 4(b)(2) analysis.
Both HCPs are designed to maintain the thermal regime of streams within
the range of normal variation, maintain a high level of water quality,
and contribute to the maintenance of complex stream channels,
appropriate substrates, a natural hydrologic regime, ground-water
sources and subsurface connectivity, migratory corridors, and an
abundant food base. The HCPs are is designed to benefit the aquatic
environment by providing a gradual improvement in the cold and clean
water as well as complex and connected habitat necessary for protection
and restoration of bull trout.
The HCPs protect surface and subsurface water connectivity through
a variety of diverse mechanisms. Springs and seeps that form perennial
or intermittent channels are addressed through conservation provisions;
all perennial streams are protected with riparian buffers, and
intermittent streams receive protection to optimize their functional
needs. The HCPs address wetlands and hydrological integrity and
connectivity, including forested and nonforested wetlands. Wetland
prescriptions (and prescriptions for management of wetland complexes)
throughout the HCP areas protect water quality and hydrologic integrity
and connectivity. Roads are designed to avoid disrupting surface and
ground-water flows, and road remediation is specifically directed at
wetlands. Reducing road-generated, fine sediment is a major focus of
the HCPs, and considerable focus is placed on road maintenance, repair,
and improved construction standards. In addition, road remediation of
existing road-related problems is a major component. Road management is
designed to disconnect ditches (and ground water intercepted by roads)
from the stream system to reduce delivery of sediment, and to slow the
delivery of storm-related run-off, thereby reducing road contributions
to peak flows.
The HCPs include measures to ensure that water quality and quantity
conditions in the water column do not present a barrier to bull trout,
and maintain the natural hydrology and riparian functions of large wood
input, shade, bank stability, detrital inputs, as well as natural
functions of flood plains and unstable slopes. They address the need
for complex habitat by providing buffers along streams and wetlands;
these buffers are expected to contribute to large woody debris
recruitment and maintain stream bank integrity. They also address
sediment, which has the potential to simplify and degrade instream
habitat conditions by focusing on addressing mass-wasting and erosional
processes. Both HCPs include provisions to manage forest cover to
reduce the frequency of major storm flows, to substantially reduce the
amount of coarse and fine sediments transported downstream that could
further simplify (remove necessary elements) and degrade habitat
conditions.
Stream temperature is addressed through a number of avenues
including buffers that provide shade, road-management practices that
avoid sedimentation, riparian and grazing management, and maintenance
of natural hydrologic regimes that contribute cool water to streams.
The buffers on streams and wetlands are expected to provide natural
levels of shade to avoid increasing sunlight, which could result in
stream warming. Further, road and wetland prescriptions are expected to
maintain the natural hydrological regime so that streams are not
abnormally dry during periods of the year when this could exacerbate
warming problems. Stream buffers and road standards also address
sediment delivery, which will in turn avoid artificial filling of
pools, which could lead to increased stream warming. The HCPs are
designed to maintain floodplains and wetlands in a manner that retains
the functions of the hyporheic zone and off-channel habitats. Water
quality and quantity are addressed through a variety of mechanisms,
including protecting the natural hydrograph and addressing sediment and
temperature. Provisions of the HCPs that protect the natural
environment should assist native fish in maintaining a competitive
advantage when that is possible.
The NFHCPs impose more stringent harvest requirements in riparian
areas than prescribed under State law. They also provides for a greater
number of drainage features on roads, particularly near stream
crossings (which reduces sediment delivery to streams), and require
increased road abandonment to offset the construction of new roads. The
Thompson River restoration project is evaluating alternatives for
removing reed canary grass and reestablishing riparian forest to
provide shade and improve water temperature. The NFHCPs include site-
specific management plans to protect native fish assemblages, and
include long-term adaptive management studies to address road best
management practices effectiveness, large woody debris recruitment,
stream temperature, and grazing. These adaptive management studies are
currently underway.
Plum Creek Timber Central Cascades HCP
In June of 1996, the Service issued an incidental take permit to
Plum Creek Timber Company in association with the Central Cascades HCP.
This HCP addressed vertebrate species on over 68,798 ha (170,000 ac) of
forest land in the Central Cascades, much of it located in what is
generally known as the I-90 corridor. The HCP spans the Cascade crest,
and covered lands occur in both King and Kittitas Counties. Currently,
the HCP addresses fewer than 36,423 ha (90,000 ac) as a result of land
exchanges and conservation sales. The HCP addresses multiple species
through a combination of landscape-level forest commitments, special-
site protections, and other conservation measures. Bull trout is one of
the covered species and is addressed through a combination of riparian
and wetland buffers; management restrictions; watershed analysis;
protection of inner gorges, springs, and seeps; avoidance of unstable
slopes; and road management. It includes lands within the Green River
Watershed as well as lands within the upper Yakima and Naches
drainages.
The HCP protects surface and subsurface water connectivity through
a variety of diverse mechanisms. Springs and seeps that form perennial
or intermittent channels are addressed through conservation provisions,
and all perennial streams are protected with riparian buffers.
Intermittent streams may also be buffered through provisions associated
with inner gorge prescriptions or as a result of watershed analysis.
The HCP addresses wetlands and hydrological integrity and connectivity,
including both forested and nonforested wetlands, and wetland, seep,
and spring prescriptions protect water quality, hydrologic integrity,
and connectivity. The HCP includes measures to ensure that water
quality and quantity conditions in the water column do not present a
barrier to bull trout. Considerable focus is placed on road
maintenance, repair, and improved construction standards, and
remediation of existing road-related problems is a major component of
the HCP. Roads are located to avoid disrupting surface and ground-water
flows, and equipment exclusions around wetlands help protect hydrology.
Road management is designed to disconnect ditches (and ground water
intercepted by roads) from the stream system to reduce delivery of
sediment, and to slow the delivery of storm-related run-off and reduce
the contribution to peak flows.
[[Page 63955]]
The HCP maintains the natural hydrology and riparian functions of
large wood input, shade, bank stability, detrital inputs, as well as
natural functions of flood plains and unstable slopes. It addresses the
need for complex habitat by providing buffers along streams and
wetlands that contribute to large woody debris recruitment and maintain
stream bank integrity. Adequate stream temperatures are addressed in a
number of ways, including the use of buffers that provide shade, road-
management practices that avoid sedimentation, and maintenance of
natural hydrologic regimes that contribute cool water to streams.
The buffers on streams and wetlands are designed to provide
adequate shade and to avoid increasing sunlight exposure, which could
result in stream warming. Stream buffers and road standards also
address sediment delivery to avoid artificial filling of pools, which
could lead to increased stream warming. The HCP addresses bank
stability and large wood recruitment which should help store fine
sediment and provide for suitable substrates for bull trout spawning.
It also includes provisions to manage forest cover in the rain-on-snow
subbasins to maintain normal storm flows, and is designed to maintain
floodplains and wetlands in a manner that retains the functions of the
hyporheic zone and off-channel habitats. Water quality and quantity are
addressed through a variety of mechanisms, including protecting the
natural hydrograph and addressing sediment and temperature needs. HCP
provisions that protect the natural environment should assist native
fish in maintaining a competitive advantage over nonnative species.
Washington Forest Practices HCP
In 2001, the Washington Forest Practices Board adopted new
permanent forest practice rules to address impacts to aquatic species,
including bull trout, on all private forest lands not covered under an
existing HCP, and WDNR State lands east of the Cascade Crest. These
rules became effective in 2001, and cover a wide variety of forest
practices, including: (1) A new, more functional, classification of
rivers and streams on non-Federal and non-tribal forestland; (2)
improved plans for properly designing, maintaining, and upgrading
existing and new forest roads; (3) additional protections for unstable
slopes; and (4) greater protections for riparian areas intended to
restore or maintain properly functioning aquatic and riparian habitat
conditions. The Washington State Legislature and U.S. Congress
supported the collaboration with significant funding for the research,
monitoring, and adaptive management needs identified in the Forests and
Fish Report (WDNR 1999). In 2006, an incidental take permit was issued
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act based on the Washington Forest
Practices Rules (Rules), which established requirements under the
Washington Forest Practices HCP.
The Rules contain prescriptions designed to improve and maintain
properly functioning aquatic and riparian habitat on non-Federal, non-
tribal forest lands throughout the State. The Rules allow for a
substitution of its prescriptions with those of another habitat
conservation plan. The 3.7 million ha (9.1 million ac) regulated by the
Washington Forest Practices HCP include a mixture of large industrial
ownerships and small nonindustrial ownerships. These lands are most
prevalent at lower elevations, while Federal forest lands are more
prevalent at higher elevations. Nonindustrial forest lands are common
along the urban-growth margin.
The Rules protect surface and subsurface water connectivity
important for bull trout habitat through the requirements to provide no
harvest buffers around sensitive sites (springs, seeps, and tributary
junctions of streams without fish), and to limit harvest in other
areas. These prescriptions contribute to maintaining surface and
subsurface water sources and connectivity important for water quality
and quantity. The requirements in the Rules to replace or upgrade all
fish-blocking culverts and sub-standard roads by 2016 are designed to
ensure that migratory corridors are accessible to bull trout. As of
December 1, 2008, approximately 44 percent of known fish passage
barriers (2,871 of 6,505) have been corrected under the HCP, opening
2,317 km (1,448 mi) of fish habitat (http://www.dnr.wa.gov/
Publications/fp_hcp_annrep09_ch09.pdf). The riparian-buffer
requirements protect the quality of these migratory corridors by
maintaining stream temperatures and other stream functions important
for bull trout foraging, migration, overwintering, and spawning
habitat.
Through the requirements for riparian management buffers,
sensitive-site protections, and road and culverts improvements, the
Rules protect the other aquatic and riparian habitats and organisms
that occur in these areas. Since the Rules are designed to benefit bull
trout, salmon, and virtually all other native fish species associated
with stream and river habitats, they will also protect the bull trout
food base.
Timber harvest is limited within the bankfull width or channel
migration zone of perennial waters, to maintain stream geomorphology,
as well as stream-adjacent large wood, side channels, pools, and
undercut banks. In addition, the riparian management strategies
mentioned above will maintain intact, complex stream channels important
for bull trout. The riparian buffers are designed to maintain cool
stream temperatures, canopy cover, recruitment of large wood, bank
stability, nutrient cycling, detritus inputs, and to provide sediment
filtering. No-harvest buffers are generally applied along fish-bearing
streams and, at a minimum, half of the non-fish-bearing, perennial
streams. Adjacent to these buffers, timber harvest is limited within
riparian areas, depending on site conditions. Sensitive sites, such as
seeps and springs, are also protected with buffers. In western
Washington, the riparian strategy is designed to move riparian areas
towards conditions equivalent to the stand conditions of mature 140
year-old riparian forests. In eastern Washington, riparian management
is intended to provide stand conditions that vary over time within a
range that meets functional conditions and maintains general forest
health.
The Rules address the need for natural substrates in a wide variety
of ways; reduced road-generated fine sediment, road maintenance, road
repair, and improved construction standards are major focus areas.
Unstable slopes are identified and harvesting and road building are
restricted on areas with a potential for mass-wasting. These
requirements protect against management-caused debris flows that would
otherwise increase sediment loading into streams. Road maintenance,
repair, and improved construction standards are designed to minimize or
divert road-induced sediment and artificial water flows away from
streams. The Rules also include provisions to minimize the negative
effects of timber harvest in rain-on-snow areas by limiting clear-cut
harvest sizes. Other protections are associated with ``green-up
requirements'' in which young stands must reach a certain size before
adjacent stands of timber can be harvested.
Water quality and quantity are addressed through a variety of
protective requirements. In addition to protecting the natural
hydrograph, stream temperatures, and other riparian and aquatic habitat
elements, the requirements for roads and culverts minimize sediment
delivery to streams, thereby minimizing effects to water
[[Page 63956]]
quality. The Rules address forestry activities over a substantial
amount of relatively contiguous ownership, and are expected to protect
the relevant bull trout PCEs in all of the streams subject to their
requirements.
Weighing and Balancing Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Based on the best available information, we have determined that
each HCP permittee is in compliance with the terms and conditions of
their respective incidental take permit issued under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Specific information on HCP implementation and
the progress made with regard to bull trout conservation is available
at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/. We have combined the section
4(b)(2) balancing analysis for the above HCPs, given the similarities
in scope of covered activities, partnerships, and benefits. More
detailed section 4(b)(2) analyses of each excluded HCP are part of the
decisional record, see the ``Compilation of HCP Exclusion Analyses for
the Designation of Bull Trout Critical Habitat (Including Exclusion
Analysis for Certain Areas Managed Under the Lewis River Hydroelectric
Projects)'', posted at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion of the WDNR, Green Diamond, City of Seattle
Cedar River Watershed, Plum Creek/Stimson Lumber Company Native Fish,
Plum Creek Central Cascades, and Washington State Forest Practices
HCPs.
Regulatory Benefits
The consultation provisions under section 7(a) (2) of the Act
constitute the regulatory benefits of critical habitat. As discussed
above, Federal agencies must consult with us on actions that may affect
critical habitat and must avoid destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat. Prior to our designation of critical habitat, Federal
agencies consult with us on actions that may affect a listed species
and must refrain from undertaking actions that are likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of the species. Thus, the analysis of effects
to critical habitat is a separate and different analysis from that of
the effects to the species. The difference in outcomes of these two
analyses represents the regulatory benefit of critical habitat. For
some species, and in some locations, the outcome of these analyses will
be similar, because effects on habitat will often result in effects on
the species. However, the regulatory standard is different: the
jeopardy analysis looks at the action's impact on survival and recovery
of the species, while the adverse modification analysis looks at the
action's effects on the designated habitat's contribution to the
species' conservation. This will, in some instances, lead to different
results and different regulatory requirements.
Once an agency determines that consultation under section 7 of the
Act is necessary, the process may conclude informally when we concur in
writing that the proposed Federal action is not likely to adversely
affect critical habitat. However, if we determine through informal
consultation that adverse effects are likely to occur, then we would
initiate formal consultation, which would conclude when we issue a
biological opinion on whether the proposed Federal action is likely to
result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat. A
biological opinion that concludes in a determination of no destruction
or adverse modification may contain discretionary conservation
recommendations to minimize adverse effects to critical habitat, but it
would not contain any mandatory reasonable and prudent measures or
terms and conditions. In addition, we suggest reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the proposed Federal action only when our biological
opinion results in a destruction or adverse modification conclusion.
In providing the framework for the consultation process, the
previous section applies to all the following discussions of benefits
of inclusion or exclusion of critical habitat. The process of
designating critical habitat as described in the Act requires, in part,
that the Service identify those lands on which are found the physical
and biological features essential to the conservation of the species
which may require special management considerations or protection. In
identifying those lands, the Service must consider the recovery needs
of the species. Furthermore, once critical habitat has been designated,
Federal agencies must consult with the Service under section 7(a)(2) of
the Act to ensure that their actions will not adversely modify
designated critical habitat or jeopardize the continued existence of
the species. As noted in the Ninth Circuit's Gifford Pinchot decision
(referenced earlier), the Court ruled that the jeopardy and adverse
modification standards are distinct, and that adverse modification
evaluations require consideration of impacts to the recovery of
species. Thus, through the section 7(a)(2) consultation process,
critical habitat designations provide recovery benefits to species by
ensuring that Federal actions will not destroy or adversely modify
designated critical habitat.
For example, if a federally-funded road project or hydroelectric
project were to be proposed for development on HCP lands that contained
designated critical habitat, a consultation would need to be conducted
to ensure the designated critical habitat was not destroyed or
adversely modified to the point of appreciably diminishing its habitat
features essential to bull trout recovery. Designation of critical
habitat may facilitate regulatory agencies taking additional protective
measures where critical habitat is designated (for example, revising
operations at hydroelectric projects). For example, Washington State
law requires consideration of additional rules and areas for protection
upon designation of critical habitat.
The identification of habitat necessary for the conservation of the
species is beneficial because it can assist in the recovery planning
for a species. However, the designation of critical habitat does not
require that any management or recovery actions take place on the lands
included in the designation. Even in cases where consultation has been
initiated under section 7(a)(2) of the Act, the end result of
consultation is to avoid jeopardy to the species and adverse
modification of its critical habitat, but not specifically to manage
remaining lands or institute recovery actions on remaining lands.
Conversely, management plans institute intentional, proactive actions
over the lands they encompass to remove or reduce known threats to a
species or its habitat and, therefore, implement recovery actions.
We believe that in some cases, the conservation benefits to a
species and its habitat that may be achieved through the designation of
critical habitat are less than those that could be achieved through the
implementation of a management plan that includes specific provisions
based on enhancement or recovery as the management standard.
Consequently, the implementation of any HCP or management plan that
considers enhancement or recovery as the management standard will often
provide as much or more benefit than a section 7(a)(2) consultation
under the Act using the standards required by the Ninth Circuit in the
Gifford Pinchot decision. There may be some regulatory benefit that
results from designating critical habitat in the areas covered by the
above HCPs because of section 7 consultation requirements, or
potentially protections under other State or local laws that may be
triggered because of the designation. However, we
[[Page 63957]]
believe the management goals of the above HCPs go beyond any
protections that would be provided through section 7 consultation or
other State or local regulatory requirements.
Educational Benefits
One benefit of including lands in critical habitat is that the
designation of critical habitat serves to educate landowners, State and
local governments, and the public regarding the potential conservation
value of an area. This helps focus and promote conservation efforts by
other parties by identifying areas of high conservation value for bull
trout. Because the rulemaking process associated with critical habitat
designation includes several opportunities for public comment, it also
provides for public education. Through these outreach opportunities,
land owners, State agencies, and local governments can become more
aware of the status of and threats to listed species, and the
conservation actions needed for recovery. Designation of critical
habitat would inform State agencies and local governments about areas
that could be conserved under State laws or local ordinances, such as
the Washington State Growth Management Act or Washington State
Shoreline Management Act, which encourage the protection of ``critical
areas'' including fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion of the WDNR, Green Diamond, City of Seattle
Cedar River Watershed, Plum Creek/Stimson Lumber Company Native Fish,
Plum Creek Central Cascades, and Washington State Forest Practices
HCPs.
Maintaining and Establishing Conservation Partnerships
Non-Federal landowners are motivated to work with the Service
collaboratively to develop voluntary HCPs because of the regulatory
certainty provided by an incidental take permit under section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, including assurances under the No Surprises
Policy (63 FR 8859; February 23, 1998). The No Surprises Policy sets
forth a clear commitment to incidental take permittees that, to the
extent consistent with the Act and other Federal laws, the government
will honor its agreements under an approved HCP where the permittee is
implementing the HCP's terms and conditions in good faith. Although the
HCP process can be complex and time-consuming, the perceived benefit to
landowners in undertaking this extensive process is the resulting
regulatory certainty, which translates into real savings for private
landowners in terms of opportunity costs, as well as direct savings and
avoided costs. A failure to exclude HCP lands where the species under
consideration for critical habitat is a covered species could be viewed
as the Service retreating from its previous position on the adequacy of
the conservation measures in the HCP, undermining the Service's
credibility in future interactions with potential partners. Designation
of critical habitat within the boundaries of already approved HCPs may
also be viewed as a disincentive by other entities currently developing
HCPs or contemplating them in the future, because it implies potential
additional regulation after agreement on conservation measures needed
for the species has been made. In discussions with the Service, HCP
permittees have indicated they view critical habitat designation as an
unnecessary additional intrusion on their property, and an erosion of
the regulatory certainty provided by their incidental take permit and
the No Surprises Policy. The No Surprises Policy sets forth a clear
commitment by the Service, that to the extent consistent with the
requirements of the Act and other Federal laws, the government will
honor its agreements under an approved HCP for which the permittee is
in good faith implementing the HCP's terms and conditions. Because the
Service would be required to reinitiate section 7 consultation with
itself if critical habitat is designated on our action of issuing a
section 10(a)(1)(B) permit, the permittees are concerned that the
Service could use this as an excuse to request new conservation
measures for the bull trout, even though we have existing agreements
already in place.
Although parties whose actions may take listed species may still
desire incidental take permits to avoid liability under section 9 of
the Act, failure to exclude HCP lands from critical habitat could
reduce the conservation value of the HCP program in several ways.
First, parties may be less willing to participate in large, regional
HCPs, preferring instead to address any possible take on a project-by-
project basis. Second, in any given HCP, applicants may reduce the
amount of protection to which they are willing to agree, in effect
holding some additional protective measures ``in reserve'' for use in
any future discussions to address critical habitat. Third, without the
incentive of exclusion from critical habitat, some potential
applicants, particularly (1) those whose actions may, but are not
certain, to take listed species, and (2) those against whom enforcement
for any take that does occur may be difficult, may decide not to seek
an incidental take permit at all. The failure to exclude qualified HCP
lands from critical habitat designations could decrease the program's
efficacy and have profound effects on our ability to establish and
maintain important conservation partnerships with stakeholders.
Excluding qualified HCP lands from critical habitat provides
permittees with the greatest possible certainty, thereby helping foster
the cooperation necessary to allow the HCP program to achieve the
greatest possible conservation benefit. Thus, excluding the lands
covered by the above HCPs improves the Service's ability to enter into
new partnerships. Permittees who trust and benefit from the HCP process
discuss the benefits with others who may become future HCP
participants, such as States, counties, local jurisdictions,
conservation organizations, and private landowners. New HCPs will
result in implementation of conservation actions that we would be
unable to accomplish otherwise.
Avoidance of Administrative Costs
To the extent designation would provide any additional protection
of bull trout habitat, the costs associated with that protection would
be avoided by exclusion. Excluding waterbodies covered under these
large-scale HCPs from the critical habitat designation relieves
landowners, communities, and counties from any additional regulatory
burden and costs associated with the preparation of section 7 documents
related to critical habitat. While the costs of providing these
additional documents to the Service is minor, there may be resulting
delays that generate perceived or very real costs to private landowners
in the form of opportunity costs, as well as direct costs.
Conservation Planning Efficiencies
Large-scale HCPs can address habitat conservation on a very broad
scale, addressing entire ecosystems and a wide variety of the species
in them, whether listed or not. In our experience, large-scale HCPs
provide more comprehensive, and therefore more effective, protection to
listed species as well as to species that might otherwise require
listing in the future. Large-scale HCPs in effect become regional
conservation plans consistent with the recovery objectives for listed
species that are covered within the plan area.
The above HCPs provide substantial measures to protect or improve
the current state of the ecosystem as a whole, which may contribute to
the
[[Page 63958]]
conservation of a number of species, including bull trout. These HCPs
also include streams and habitats outside of the critical habitat
designation that contribute to bull trout recovery, including habitats
potentially suitable for future occupancy by bull trout and other
species.
Meeting Science Needs for Recovery Purposes
HCPs can provide other important conservation benefits, including
the development of important biological information needed to guide
conservation efforts and assist in species conservation outside the HCP
planning area. Each of the above HCPs have some component of adaptive
management to address uncertainties in achieving their agreed-upon
conservation objectives for aquatic habitats, including uncertainties
that may be associated with climate change. The adaptive management
strategy helps to ensure management will continue to be consistent with
agreed-upon bull trout conservation objectives. In addition, in the
cases of the City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed HCP and the
Washington State Forest Practices HCP, there are specific research
elements directed towards bull trout and its habitat. Although the
designation will not affect this research, it is highly unlikely this
research would have been achieved through a critical habitat
designation.
(3) Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion for the
WDNR, Green Diamond, City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed, Plum Creek/
Stimson Lumber Company Native Fish, Plum Creek Central Cascades, and
Washington State Forest Practices HCPs
Based on the above considerations, and consistent with the
direction provided in section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Service and,
subsequently, the Secretary, have concluded that the benefits of
excluding streams and waterbodies associated with the WDNR, Green
Diamond, City of Seattle Cedar River Watershed, Plum Creek/Stimson
Lumber Company Native Fish, Plum Creek Central Cascades, and Washington
State Forest Practices HCPs as critical habitat for the bull trout
outweigh the benefits of including these streams and waterbodies as
critical habitat. This conclusion is based on the following:
It is probable that any Federal action that would be likely to
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat within an area covered by
the above HCPs would also jeopardize the continued existence of the
species, because of the specific way in which jeopardy and adverse
modification are analyzed for bull trout. Since the primary threat to
bull trout is habitat loss or degradation, the jeopardy analysis under
section 7 of the Act for a project with a Federal nexus will most
likely evaluate the effects of the action on the conservation or
functionality of the habitat for the bull trout. Because of this, we
believe that in many cases the analysis of the project to address
designated critical habitat will be comparable. As such, we do not
anticipate, for many circumstances, that the outcome of the
consultation to address critical habitat will result in any significant
additional project modifications or measures. Thus, potentially
detrimental actions would be avoided as a result of a jeopardy analysis
resulting from the bull trout's status as threatened under the Act, and
not solely or specifically because of critical habitat designation. The
benefit of informing the public of the importance of these areas to
bull trout conservation would for the most part be redundant with the
outreach conducted during the NEPA process for the subject HCPs.
Therefore, we assign relatively little weight to the benefits of
designating these HCP areas as critical habitat.
In contrast, the benefits of encouraging continued and future
participation in HCPs, and fostering cooperative conservation through
HCP participation are crucial to the long-term effectiveness of the
endangered species program. Therefore, for the above HCPs, we assign
greater weight to these benefits of exclusion. To the extent there are
regulatory benefits of including these areas, there would also be
associated costs that could be avoided through exclusion. However,
since we expect the regulatory benefits to be low, we are giving
greater weight to the avoidance of those associated costs.
Based on the above analysis, we have determined that the benefits
of designating critical habitat in streams and other waterbodies
covered by these HCPs are relatively small, compared to the benefits of
exclusion. The benefits of exclusion therefore outweigh the benefits of
inclusion. Because we anticipate little if any conservation benefit to
the bull trout will be foregone as a result of excluding these lands,
the exclusion of these HCPs will not result in the extinction of the
bull trout. The Secretary therefore exercises his discretion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude these areas from the designation.
The specific section 4(b)(2) analysis for each of the above HCPs is
described in further detail in the ``Compilation of HCP Exclusion
Analyses for the Designation of Bull Trout Critical Habitat (Including
Exclusion Analysis for Certain Areas Managed Under the Lewis River
Hydroelectric Projects).'' This document is available at http://
www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout/.
Other Managed Areas Considered for Exclusion
We have also determined that specific waterbodies associated with
the Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects also warrant exclusion based on
our section 4(b)(2) analysis below. These include several waterbodies
protected or managed under the Settlement Agreement for the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) relicensing of the Yale, Merwin,
Swift No. 1 and Swift No. 2 hydroelectric projects, which was signed on
November 30, 2004. This final rule provides a summary of the
information considered with regard to this section 4(b)(2) analysis. A
more detailed analysis is provided in the ``Compilation of HCP
Exclusion Analyses for the Designation of Bull Trout Critical Habitat
(Including Exclusion Analysis for Certain Areas Managed Under the Lewis
River Hydroelectric Projects)'' document, which is available on the
bull trout website at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout.
Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects Conservation Easements and Swift
Bypass Reach
There are four projects and three dams that impound over 48.3 km
(30 mi) of river habitat on the Lewis River in Washington, located in
portions of Clark, Cowlitz, and Skamania Counties. Bull trout are
present in all of the reservoirs; the upper two reservoirs have the
most significant populations and also support spawning populations. A
settlement agreement (Agreement) for the relicensing of the Yale,
Merwin, Swift No. 1, and Swift No. 2 hydroelectric projects was signed
on November 30, 2004, and FERC issued a license (License) on June 26,
2008. The Agreement and License incorporate conservation measures to
minimize or compensate for the effects of the projects on listed
species, including bull trout. Conservation measures for bull trout
include: (1) Two perpetual conservation covenants, one on lands
controlled by PacifiCorp utilities, in the Cougar/Panamaker Creek area,
and another on PacifiCorp's and Cowlitz County Public Utility
District's (PUD) lands along the Swift Creek arm of Swift Creek
Reservoir; (2) upstream and downstream fish passage improvements at all
reservoirs; (3) increased flows and
[[Page 63959]]
salmon spawning enhancements in the bypass reach; (4) limiting factors
analysis for bull trout to determine additional enhancement measures;
(5) public information program to protect bull trout; and (6)
monitoring and evaluation efforts for bull trout conservation measures.
This agreement will also restore anadromous salmon to the upper Lewis
River system, including the bypass reach, restoring a significant part
of the historic forage base for bull trout.
The Agreement protects surface and subsurface water connectivity
through a variety of diverse mechanisms. Springs and seeps that result
in perennial or intermittent channels and all perennial streams are
protected with riparian buffers. The terrestrial wildlife management
plan places special emphasis on stream side riparian zones. The goal is
to exceed the standards in the Washington State Forest Practices. The
Agreement addresses all wetlands and hydrological integrity and
connectivity within the project boundaries and provides for protection
of any wetlands that are acquired. Wetland protections (and water level
management) are designed to follow the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife Guidelines. Road prescriptions are designed to avoid
disrupting surface and ground-water flows, and there are several
specific road remediation efforts directed at existing wetlands within
the project boundaries. The Agreement contains measures to improve bull
trout access to aquatic habitat, but will not provide a barrier-free
environment without human intervention in the near term. The enhanced
flows under the license in the Swift bypass reach allow bull trout to
access important FMO habitat, and may play an important future role in
the collection and transport of adult bull trout to areas upstream of
Swift Dam. In addition, roads covered by the Settlement Agreement will
be managed in a manner that does not contribute to the formation of
barriers, while remediation will address existing barriers.
The Agreement maintains the natural hydrology and riparian
functions of large woody input, shade, bank stability, and detritus
inputs, as well as natural functions of flood plains and unstable
slopes on the streams that are tributary to the reservoirs. The
reservoirs themselves do not include riparian origin material to any
significant degree, but the development of a self-sustaining kokanee
population in the two upper reservoirs has probably increased the
available prey base for bull trout. The reintroduction of anadromous
salmonids into the basin above Merwin Dam will provide a much larger
and broader food base for bull trout, and is expected to increase the
aquatic productivity in the tributary streams by reestablishing
natural, marine-derived nutrient components. In the Swift bypass reach,
the recent construction of spawning channels for reintroduced salmon
will also increase the potential forage base for bull trout.
The Agreement and conservation easements address the need for
complex habitat by providing buffers and protecting Cougar Creek.
Annual surveys are conducted to ensure there are no negative impacts to
habitat, and to provide for habitat restoration if negative impacts are
found. The Agreement also addresses sediment introduction, which has
the potential to simplify and degrade instream habitat conditions by
closing and removing culverts, and addresses road surface erosion in
the Cougar and Panamaker Creek drainages. Stream temperature is
addressed through a number of avenues including a 300-meter (1,000-
foot) no-touch buffer along Cougar Creek and a 130-meter (400-foot) no-
touch buffer along Panamaker Creek. Higher standard buffers along other
streams and wetlands are designed to provide natural levels of shade to
avoid increasing sunlight, which could result in stream warming within
the project boundaries. Instream temperature regulation is feasible
with hydroelectric projects through the use of turbine intakes with
features that allow for water intake below the thermocline. The Merwin
project has a deep intake, and as a result, the Lewis River downstream
of the project typically runs much cooler than it would as an
unregulated stream. Yale and Swift are also fairly deep intakes,
although the water discharging from the tailrace of the Yale project
may be warmer than the receiving water, and may be a challenge with
regard to capturing bull trout to assist with their upstream and
downstream movement. This problem has not been fully analyzed, and will
be one factor addressed during testing of alternative bull trout
passage facilities at the Yale and Swift projects.
In addition, the bypass reach between Swift No.1 and the head of
Yale Reservoir will gain a permanent instream flow of up to 100 cubic
feet per second as part of the Agreement. This should decrease the
temperature of the bypass water during the summer months, but may
increase the temperature during the fall and early winter over the
background temperature.
The Agreement addresses the need for natural substrates by reducing
road-generated, fine sediment on project-owned roads. Additionally, it
provides for gravel augmentation to mitigate for the blockage of
natural bedload movement by the project dams and reservoirs, and
addresses bank stability and large wood recruitment, which should help
store fine sediment and provide for suitable substrates for bull trout
spawning by providing a fund for enhancement and protection measure.
In the Swift bypass reach, flows have been significantly increased
under the licensee's 401 Certification issued by the Washington State
Department of Ecology to enhance bull trout use in this FMO habitat.
Provisions of the Agreement that protect the natural environment should
assist bull trout in maintaining a competitive advantage over nonnative
species. The reintroduction of the historic assemblage of salmon may
create competition for spawning space between bull trout and coho
salmon; however, in natural environments, the two species have been
observed spawning in the same areas, but generally tend to use habitat
with slightly different parameters such as water temperature, gradient,
substrate, and cover.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion
Designation of critical habitat for bull trout on lands managed
under Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects Conservation Easements would
provide protection from the destruction or adverse modification of
designated critical habitat under section 7 of the Act. However,
without designation, a certain amount of habitat protection would be
provided through the jeopardy standard. Based on our review of previous
section 7(a)(2) consultations for bull trout using this standard, there
is little to indicate that critical habitat designation would generate
additional habitat protections beyond those already provided. Under
section 7(b)(3) of the Act, the Secretary suggests reasonable and
prudent alternatives to proposed Federal actions only in cases where
the action would destroy or adversely modify critical habitat.
Determinations of destruction or adverse modification of critical
habitat would be rare, since they are made within the context of an
entire critical habitat designation.
Designating critical habitat can educate the public and management
agencies about the distribution of areas containing the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of a species. In
areas lacking a bull trout-specific management plan, designation can
guide projects to avoid impacts to listed species and can help focus
[[Page 63960]]
recovery efforts. However, we believe little additional informational
benefit will be gained by including Swift and Cougar Creeks and the
Swift bypass reach in designated critical habitat for bull trout.
PacifiCorp is implementing conservation recommendations that were
provided in our 2002 biological opinion, which includes posting
interpretive signs to educate anglers on identifying and conserving
native char, and techniques for catch and release to minimize
incidental hooking mortality of bull trout. Although educational
benefits associated with critical habitat designation can be an
important component for the conservation of bull trout, we believe it
is redundant with what is already being achieved through the
implementation of measures under PacifiCorp's conservation easement.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion
The complex process of negotiating relicensing for the Lewis River
hydroelectric projects has been ongoing for nine years. We have
established valuable working relationships with PacifiCorp, Cowlitz
County Public Utilities District (PUD), and the other participants
during these negotiations. By excluding lands included in the two
conservation easements from designated critical habitat, we will be
better able to: (1) Maintain and enhance our ability to work with
PacifiCorp, Cowlitz County PUD, other relicensing applicants, and FERC;
and, (2) provide encouragement to other jurisdictions, private
landowners, and other entities to continue to see the benefit of
working cooperatively with us. Negotiating conservation measures under
conditions of mutual trust can result in greater conservation benefits
to the species than would result from designating Swift and Cougar
Creeks, and the bypass reach, as critical habitat.
(3) Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh the Benefits of Inclusion
Based on the above considerations and consistent with the direction
provided in section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Service has determined that
the benefits of excluding the waterbodies adjacent to lands managed
under Lewis River Hydroelectric Projects Conservation Easements
outweigh the benefits of including them as critical habitat. This
conclusion is based on the following consideration. It is possible,
although unlikely, that a Federal action could be proposed that would
be likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat within the
area subject to the Lewis River Conservation Easement and bypass reach.
However, if such a project were to be proposed, any action that would
be likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat would likely
also jeopardize the continued existence of the species, because of the
specific way in which jeopardy and adverse modification are analyzed
for bull trout. Since the primary threat to bull trout is habitat loss
or degradation, the jeopardy analysis under section 7 of the Act for a
project with a Federal nexus will most likely evaluate the effects of
the action on the conservation or functionality of the habitat for the
bull trout. Because of this, we believe that in many cases the analysis
of the project to address designated critical habitat will be
comparable. As such, we do not anticipate, for many circumstances, that
the outcome of the consultation to address critical habitat will result
in any significant additional project modifications or measures.
Accordingly, potentially detrimental actions would be avoided as a
result of the jeopardy analysis. In addition, for the reasons discussed
above, we believe the educational benefit of informing the public of
the importance of this area to bull trout conservation would be limited
because of previous and ongoing efforts. Therefore, we assign
relatively little weight to the benefits of designating this area as
critical habitat.
In contrast, the benefits of encouraging participation in
conservation partnerships and fostering cooperative conservation are
crucial to the long-term effectiveness of the endangered species
program. Therefore, we assign greater weight to these benefits of
exclusion. To the extent that there are regulatory benefits of
designating the area as critical habitat, there would be some
associated costs that could be avoided by excluding the area from
designation. However, as we expect the regulatory benefits to be low,
we likewise give weight to avoidance of those associated costs.
Based on our analysis, we have determined that the benefits of
inclusion of the areas covered by these conservation easements are
outweighed by the benefits of exclusion. Because we anticipate that
little if any conservation benefit to the bull trout will be foregone
as a result of excluding these lands, and the exclusion will not result
in the extinction of the bull trout, the Secretary exercises his
discretion under section 4(b)(2) to exclude these areas from the
designation.
Tribal Lands-Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
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 relevant
provision of the Departmental Manual of the Department of the Interior
(512 DM 2), we coordinate with federally-recognized Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. Further, Secretarial Order 3206,
``American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities,
and the Endangered Species Act'' (1997) states that (1) critical
habitat shall not be designated in areas that may impact tribal trust
resources, may impact tribally-owned fee lands, or are used to exercise
tribal rights unless it is determined essential to conserve a listed
species; and (2) in designating critical habitat, the Service shall
evaluate and document the extent to which the conservation needs of the
listed species can be achieved by limiting the designation to other
lands. Habitat on tribal lands was determined to be essential to the
conservation of bull trout due to its location within the matrix of
habitat available for bull trout. Because the bull trout is largely a
migratory species with complex migration patterns, connectivity among
and within its habitats is essential for long-term persistence and
recovery of the species. Many stream reaches or nearshore habitat on or
adjacent to tribal lands were determined to be an important component
of migratory habitat necessary to maintain connectivity between
spawning and rearing habitats and FMO habitats. In other cases, it was
determined that streams or stream reaches themselves represent an
important component of spawning and rearing habitat for bull trout
local populations or are important in maintaining overall connectivity
within local populations or both.
The longstanding and distinctive relationship between Federal and
tribal governments is defined by treaties, statutes, executive orders,
judicial decisions, and agreements, which differentiate tribal
governments from the other entities that deal with, or are affected by,
the Federal government. This relationship has given rise to a special
Federal trust responsibility involving the legal responsibilities and
obligations of the United States toward Indian Tribes and the
application of fiduciary standards of due care with respect to Indian
lands, tribal trust resources, and the exercise of tribal rights.
Accordingly, we are obligated to consult with Tribes based on their
unique relationship with the Federal government. In addition, we
evaluate Tribes' past and ongoing efforts for species conservation and
the benefits of including or excluding tribal lands in
[[Page 63961]]
the designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. We contacted all
Tribes potentially affected by the proposed designations and met with a
number of these Tribes to discuss their ongoing or future management
strategies for bull trout. We subsequently received letters describing
ongoing tribal management, conservation plans, and conservation
efforts.
We received written responses from the Kalispell, Nez-Perce, Coeur
d'Alene, Burns-Paiute, and Shoshone-Paiute Tribes supporting the
critical habitat revision and the designation of tribal lands. Based on
these responses, the Secretary determined not to exercise his
discretion to exclude these tribal lands from the designation. In
addition, the Confederated Tribe of the Colville indicated that they
did not believe that any of the designated critical habitat affected
tribal lands, nor do they believe they have water suitable for bull
trout on their tribal lands. We received a comment from the Nisqually
Tribe requesting the exclusion of their lands; however, we determined
that critical habitat was not proposed on their lands, and therefore
consideration of exclusion was not necessary.
Although we did not hear from the Confederated Salish and Kootenai
Tribes during the comment period for the proposed rule, we are aware of
the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes' resource management plan,
which addresses bull trout conservation in the Jocko River watershed.
Given previous meetings with the Tribes, and their support of
designated critical habitat within the Jocko River watershed, we have
retained critical habitat on the Confederated Salish and Kootenai
tribal lands (Service 2002, pers.comm.). In total, 5 Tribes requested
that their lands be designated as critical habitat, which was
accommodated; 6 potentially affected Tribes were either found to not
have lands associated with designated habitat or did not respond to our
inquiries; and 17 Tribes requested exclusion of their lands based on
management plans that conserve bull trout.
We considered exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Act for those
tribal lands where a commitment exists to conserve bull trout or a
conservation program that provides aquatic resource protection and
restoration through collaborative efforts on the reservation and other
trust lands, and where the Tribes indicated that inclusion would impair
their relationship with the Service. Tribes meeting these criteria
included the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs (CTWS), Blackfeet
Nation, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR),
and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation. Because of
the relative similarities of the conservation management of these
Tribes, the weighing and balancing analysis required under section
4(b)(2) of the Act was consolidated, as summarized in the following
paragraphs.
We also considered exclusions under section 4(b)(2) of the Act for
the treaty Tribes of Western Washington, and Tribes that are members of
the Northwest Indian Fisheries Commission that have co-management
responsibility over salmon resources with Washington State. These
Tribes have also had a significant role in the development of habitat
conservation plans, local watershed plans, and other habitat plans, and
have implemented numerous habitat restoration and research projects
designed to protect or improve habitat for listed species. These Tribes
include the Swinomish Tribe, Quinault Indian Nation, Muckleshoot Tribe,
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe, Hoh Tribe, Lower Elwha-Klallam, Quileute
Tribe, Lummi Nation, Nooksack Tribe, Puyallup Tribe, Stillaguamish
Tribe, Tulalip Tribes, and Skokomish Tribe. Because of the relative
similarities of the conservation management of these Tribes, the
weighing and balancing analysis required under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act was also consolidated, as summarized in the following paragraphs.
Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation of Oregon (CTWS)
The CTWS has a long history of carrying out proactive conservation
actions and maintaining stewardship and conservation of the species and
habitats on its lands, and it is also an active co-manager of species
and habitats over extensive areas outside of the Warm Springs
Reservation. These proactive voluntary conservation efforts are
necessary to prevent bull trout extirpation and promote the recovery of
the bull trout on CTWS lands. This is especially important in areas
where the bull trout has been extirpated and its recovery requires
access and permission for reintroduction efforts. For example, bull
trout have been extirpated from some rivers within the Coastal Recovery
Unit, and repopulation is not likely without the CTWS's cooperation.
The CTWS's management plans and ordinances provide guidelines for
land uses and actions that affect the CTWS resources and serve as the
basis for tribal management decisions. Bull trout benefit from these
voluntary management actions by CTWS. The CTWS has an existing broad
regulatory framework that protects bull trout habitat through many
different mechanisms. These include their integrated resource
management plan and its implementing ordinances on forestlands, water
quality, and aquatic resources and their streamside management plan.
We believe that the CTWS' resource management strategy is largely
compatible with bull trout conservation. The CTWS has cooperated with
Federal and State agencies, and private organizations, to implement
voluntary proactive conservation activities on their lands that have
resulted in tangible conservation benefits for bull trout. These
actions include removal of the headworks dam on Shitke Creek to
facilitate movement of bull trout, changes to fishing regulations (the
establishment of size and bag limits and no fishing areas) to be more
protective of bull trout, reduced road densities, and the fencing of
kilometers (miles) of bull trout spawning and rearing habitat. In
addition, the CTWS monitors over 30 km (20 mi) of bull trout spawning
habitat annually and completes habitat restoration projects throughout
both their tribal and individual lands located within the boundaries of
the Warm Springs Indian Reservation, off-reservation lands owned in
fee, and off-reservation lands held in trust by the Tribe.
The CTWS has a record of action and commitment that will continue
regarding the conservation of bull trout and the habitats upon which
they depend. We expect this cooperation and bull trout conservation to
continue.
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation (CTUIR)
The CTUIR has a long history of carrying out proactive conservation
actions on their lands, including work towards restoring flows in the
Umatilla River. These proactive voluntary conservation efforts are
necessary to prevent bull trout extirpation and promote recovery of
bull trout on the CTUIR lands. This is especially important in the
Umatilla River basin where bull trout are at very low numbers and
recovery depends on the CTUIR's cooperation. The CTUIR approved a
Forest Management Plan in March 2010, that regulates forestry
activities on allotted trust, tribal trust, and tribal fee forest lands
on the reservation and identifies protective measures for listed
species. A management plan has also been developed by the CTUIR for the
Rainwater Wildlife Area. Both plans provide a conservation benefit to
bull trout and provide assurances that they
[[Page 63962]]
will be implemented and that the conservation effort will be effective.
The CTUIR has an existing broad regulatory framework that protects
bull trout habitat through many different mechanisms. These include the
March 2010 Forest Management Plan and statutes under the CTUIR's Fish
and Wildlife Code, Land Development Code and Water Code.
Finally, the CTUIR has a long-track record of engaging in resource
management, partnerships with resource agencies, and specific actions
benefiting bull trout and other fish species. They are actively
involved in many fish passage, instream, riparian, upland, and flow
restoration projects in the Umatilla and Walla Walla river basins. In
addition, the CTUIR conducts monitoring, evaluation, and research on
stream habitats and aquatic species. Their efforts include being a core
partnership member in the development of the Umatilla and Willow and
Walla Walla subbasin plans, restoring 27 km (17 mi) of habitat in
Meacham creek for spawning and rearing habitat, and being an
implementing partner for the Columbia River Anadromous Fish Restoration
Plan of the Umatilla, Nez Perce, Warm Springs, and Yakama Tribes. This
plan emphasizes strategies and principles that rely on natural
production and healthy river systems, subbasin-level return goals for
salmon, and the watershed restoration actions that must be undertaken
to achieve them.
Tribal lands are currently being managed on a voluntary basis in
cooperation with the Service and others to conserve bull trout and
achieve important conservation goals. CTUIR cooperation is especially
necessary because recovery of bull trout in the Umatilla and Touchet
river basins depends on the cooperation of the CTUIR. The Tribe has a
record of action and commitment that will continue regarding the
conservation of bull trout and the habitats upon which they depend. The
CTUIR, through their forest Management Plan and their Tribal Codes, and
by affirmative bull trout and watershed protection and restoration
projects, has a comprehensive scheme in place protecting and enhancing
fish habitat. We expect this cooperation and bull trout conservation to
continue. We believe that the bull trout benefits from the CTUIR's
voluntary management actions.
The Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation (Yakama Nation)
The current Yakama Nation Tribal Forest Management Plan (FMP)
describes best management practices (BMPs) including measures for road
building and riparian management intended to minimize sediment
delivery, preserve riparian shading, and maintain cool stream
temperatures. The FMP provides similar conservation benefit to
salmonids (including bull trout) through these BMPs as the Washington
State Forest Practice Rules, which are implemented as part of a
Statewide HCP (discussed earlier). Compliance with FMP measures is
enforced through technical review of proposed timber sales or other
activity by a Tribal Inter-Disciplinary Team.
Tribal Fisheries Program staff are currently working with Tribal
Wildlife staff to produce a supplement to the FMP that provides
specific additional BMPs for protection of spotted owls, bull trout,
and other listed or sensitive species. Tribal staff have committed to
ongoing coordination with the Service in the development of the final
supplements and their inclusion into final recovery planning. The
supplemental BMPs will enhance the effectiveness of protection and
conservation efforts for bull trout, in a manner similar to a species
management plan.
Lastly, the Yakama Nation is implementing fish habitat protection
and restoration actions in the Klickitat and Yakima (including Ahtanum
Creek basins), and on other nonreservation lands in the Wenatchee,
Entiat, and Methow basins. These actions, while not specific to bull
trout, will have beneficial effects for bull trout. Although
restoration actions generally do not affect bull trout habitat in
spawning and rearing areas, they could improve the migration corridor
in the mainstems of these rivers for sub-adult rearing and adult
migration.
The Yakama Nation does not support an exclusion of reservation
boundary waters that are not wholly within the management jurisdiction
and authority of the Yakama Nation. Specifically, the Tribe believes
that maintaining the bull trout critical habitat designation in lower
Ahtanum Creek and the Yakima River where it borders the reservation
would increase the likelihood that water and land use practices on the
far bank or upstream of the reservation would be compatible with bull
trout protection. Consistent with the Tribe's preferences, and because
these areas are not wholly within the management jurisdiction and
authority of the Yakama Nation, these areas have not been excluded.
The Yakama Nation, CTUIR, CTWS and the Columbia River Inter-Tribal Fish
Commission
In 2005, the Northwest Power and Conservation Council (Council)
completed one of the largest, locally-led watershed planning efforts of
its kind in the United States, an effort that resulted in separate
plans for 58 tributary watersheds or mainstem segments of the Columbia
River. These subbasin plans were developed collaboratively by State and
Federal fish and wildlife agencies, Indian Tribes (through the Columbia
River Inter-Tribal Fish Commission), local planning groups, fish
recovery boards, and Canadian entities where the plans address
transboundary rivers. The planning effort was guided by the Council and
funded by the Bonneville Power Administration. The Columbia River
Inter-Tribal Fish Commission (CRITFC) is the fishery coordinating
agency of four Columbia River treaty Tribes: the Nez Perce Tribe, the
Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, the Confederated
Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation, and the Confederated Tribes
and Bands of the Yakama Indian Nation. The four Columbia River treaty
Tribes that make up CRIFTC are co-managers of the Columbia River basin
fishery, in the States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, and have
responsibilities for conservation and management of habitat, and
harvest and hatchery decisions. As a result of their involvement, the
Tribes play a significant role in sub-basin planning and
implementation.
Sub-basin plans identify priority restoration and protection
strategies for habitat and fish and wildlife populations in U.S.
portion of the Columbia River system. Many of the subbasin plans
identify bull trout as a focal species with specific conservation
measures. The plans guide the future implementation of the Council's
Columbia River Basin Fish and Wildlife Program, which directs more than
$140 million per year of Bonneville Power Administration (BPA)
electricity revenues to protect, mitigate, and enhance fish and
wildlife affected by hydropower dams. Sub-basin plans provide this
guidance by providing the context in which proposed projects are
reviewed for funding through the Council's program.
Sub-basin plans also integrate strategies and actions funded by
others, thus ensuring that each plan serves the Council's purposes
under the Northwest Power Act and also accounts for Endangered Species
Act and Clean Water Act requirements, and other laws
[[Page 63963]]
governing natural resource management, as fully as possible. These
plans can be found at the following website: http://www.nwcouncil.org/
fw/subbasinplanning/Default.htm.
Blackfeet Nation
The Blackfeet Nation has worked closely and cooperatively with the
Service on bull trout issues with the goal of developing and
implementing the Blackfeet Nation Bull Trout Management Plan. A draft
plan was completed in November 2007, and was recently finalized and
adopted by the Blackfeet Tribal Business Council by Resolution No. 111-
2010.
Through this Bull Trout Management Plan, the Blackfeet Nation has
demonstrated a commitment to conservation, protection, and enhancement
of the fishery resource on the Blackfeet Reservation. In addition, the
Blackfeet Nation has supported and participated in Service studies to
gather data for assessing effects of the Milk River Irrigation System
on bull trout within the Saint Mary River drainage. The Nation changed
angling regulations on their Reservation to maximize bull trout
protection soon after the species was listed. The Nation gradually
eliminated permits for a tribal gill net fishery in Saint Mary Lake
that was affecting bull trout. The Blackfeet Nation has also supported
the bull trout recovery planning process. In order to further implement
recovery planning on tribal lands, they were recently awarded a Tribal
Wildlife Grant and hired their first Tribal fisheries biologist.
In addition to its cooperation with the Service, the Blackfeet
Nation has actively taken other steps to protect bull trout habitat
including enacting an Aquatic Lands Protection Ordinance in 1993, which
is intended to protect Reservation streambeds and riparian habitat. The
policy of the Blackfeet Nation as stated in Section 2 of the Aquatic
Lands Protection Ordinance is that all waters and aquatic lands on the
Reservation are to be protected and preserved, and that the degradation
of Reservation waters and aquatic lands be prevented or minimized
through the reasonable regulation of such resources. Permits are
required for any construction activities within any aquatic lands or
areas affecting aquatic or riparian lands, and such construction is
strictly regulated through such permits. The Blackfeet Nation has also
established water quality standards for all Reservation streams,
including the relevant bull trout streams, under authority of the Clean
Water Act (CWA). The Blackfeet Nation's application for status or
treatment as a State under section 518 of the CWA, which is a
prerequisite to implementation of the water quality standards, is
currently pending before the Environmental Protection Agency.
Blackfeet lands are being managed in cooperation with the Service
and others to conserve bull trout and achieve important conservation
goals. The Tribe has a record of action and commitment that will
continue through their Management Plan and their Tribal Codes and
Ordinances, and by affirmative bull trout and watershed protection and
restoration projects. The Blackfeet Nation has demonstrated a
commitment to conservation, protection, and enhancement of the bull
trout resource on the Blackfeet Reservation and the habitats upon which
they depend. We expect this cooperation and bull trout conservation to
continue. We believe that the bull trout benefits from the Blackfeet
Nation's management actions.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion
Habitat essential to bull trout conservation exists within the
previously identified tribal lands. The principal benefit of any
designated critical habitat is that Federal activities will require
section 7 consultations to ensure that adequate protection is provided
to avoid adverse modification or destruction of critical habitat. This
would provide an additional benefit beyond that provided under the
jeopardy standard. In evaluating project effects on critical habitat,
the Service must be satisfied that the PCEs and, therefore, the
essential features of the critical habitat likely will not be altered
or destroyed by proposed activities to the extent that the conservation
of the affected species would be appreciably reduced. If critical
habitat were designated in areas of unoccupied habitat or currently
occupied areas subsequently become unoccupied, different outcomes or
requirements are also likely because effects to unoccupied areas of
critical habitat are not likely to trigger the need for a jeopardy
analysis.
In Sierra Club v. Fish and Wildlife Service, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir.
2001), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stated that the
identification of habitat essential to the conservation of the species
can provide informational benefits to the public, State and local
governments, scientific organizations, and Federal agencies. The court
also noted that critical habitat designation may focus and heighten
public awareness of the plight of listed species and their habitats.
Designation of critical habitat may contribute to conservation efforts
by other parties by delineating areas of high conservation value for
the bull trout. While we believe this educational outcome is important
for bull trout conservation, we believe it has already been achieved to
some extent through the existing management, education, and public
outreach efforts carried out by the Tribes. A final designation of
critical habitat on the aforementioned tribal lands would simply affirm
the recognized conservation value of these lands, which is already
widely accepted by conservationists, public agencies, and most of the
public.
We believe that a critical habitat designation for the bull trout
on previously identified tribal lands would provide a relatively low
level of additional benefit. Any regulatory conservation benefits would
accrue through the benefit associated with additional section 7
consultation associated with critical habitat. Based on a review of
past consultations and consideration of the likely future activities in
this specific area, minimal Federal activity is expected to occur on
previously identified tribal lands that would trigger section 7
consultations.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion
Proactive voluntary conservation efforts are necessary to prevent
bull trout extirpation and promote the recovery of the bull trout on
lands of the CTWS, Blackfeet Nation, CTUIR, and the Yakama Nation. This
is especially important in areas where the bull trout has been
extirpated and its recovery requires access and permission for
reintroduction efforts. For example, bull trout have been extirpated
from some rivers in the Coastal Recovery Unit, and repopulation is not
likely without the CTWS' cooperation. The aforementioned Tribes have a
long history of carrying out proactive conservation actions on their
lands. Their management plans provide guidelines for land uses that
affect tribal resources and serve as the basis for tribal management
decisions. We believe that the bull trout will benefit from the Tribes'
voluntary management actions due to their long-standing and broad
application to tribal management decisions. Additional benefits of
excluding Indian lands from designation include: (1) The maintenance of
effective, long-term working relationships to promote the conservation
of bull trout while streamlining the consultation process; (2) the
allowance for continued, meaningful collaboration and cooperation in
scientific work to learn more about the life history, habitat
[[Page 63964]]
requirements, and conservation needs of the species; (3) to the extent
designation would provide any additional protection and conservation of
bull trout and its habitat that might otherwise not accrue to bull
trout that depend on tribal streams, the costs associated with that
protection would be avoided; and (4) exclusion would reduce
administrative costs of section 7 consultation (as discussed
previously, these costs are unlikely to lead to additional actual
protection for bull trout habitat). We believe that fish, wildlife, and
other natural resources on tribal lands may be better managed under
tribal authorities, policies, and programs than through Federal
regulation where tribal management addresses the conservation needs of
listed species. Based on this philosophy, we believe that, in many
cases, designation of tribal lands as critical habitat may provide
little additional benefit to bull trout. In addition, such designation
may be viewed by Tribes as unwarranted and an unwanted intrusion into
tribal self-governance, thus compromising the government-to government
relationship essential to achieving our mutual goals of managing for
healthy ecosystems upon which the viability of endangered and
threatened species populations depend.
The Tribes have cooperated with us to implement proactive
conservation measures. They have cooperated with Federal and State
agencies, and private organizations, to implement voluntary
conservation activities on their lands and in their respective river
basins, which have resulted in tangible conservation benefits. Where
consistent with the discretion provided by the Act, we believe it is
necessary to implement policies that provide positive incentives to
voluntarily conserve natural resources and that remove or reduce
disincentives to conservation. Thus, we believe it is essential for the
recovery of bull trout to build on continued conservation activities
with these Tribes, to provide positive incentives implementing
voluntary conservation activities, and to respect tribal concerns about
incurring incidental regulatory or economic impacts.
We believe that excluding these tribal lands from critical habitat
will help maintain and improve our relationship by recognizing their
positive contribution to bull trout conservation. It will also reduce
the cost and logistical burden of regulatory oversight. We believe this
recognition will provide other landowners with a positive incentive to
undertake voluntary conservation activities on their lands, especially
where there is no regulatory requirement to implement such actions. Few
additional benefits would be provided by including these tribal lands
in this critical habitat designation beyond what will be achieved
through the implementation of their existing conservation plans.
(3) Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh Benefits of Inclusion
Based on the above considerations and consistent with the direction
provided in section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Service has determined that
the benefits of excluding the above tribal lands outweigh the benefits
of including them as critical habitat. This conclusion is based on the
following factors. It is possible, although unlikely, that Federal
actions will be proposed that would be likely to destroy or adversely
modify the habitat proposed as critical within the area governed by the
above Tribes. If such a project were proposed, due to the specific way
in which jeopardy and adverse modification are analyzed for bull trout,
discussed in detail earlier in this document, it would likely also
jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Few additional
benefits are provided by including these tribal lands in this critical
habitat designation beyond what will be achieved through the
implementation of the existing tribal management or conservation plans.
In addition, we expect that the benefit of informing the public of the
importance of this area to bull trout conservation would be low.
We do not believe that inclusion of tribal lands and waters will
significantly improve habitat protections for bull trout beyond what is
already provided for in the Tribes' own protective policies and
practices, discussed below.
In response to the proposed rule (75 FR 2270; January 14, 2010),
the Tribes have provided information detailing how they are already
working to address the habitat needs of bull trout on their lands as
well as in the larger ecosystem through conservation plans and that
they are fully aware of the conservation value of their lands. There
are several benefits to excluding tribal lands. The longstanding and
distinctive relationship between the Federal and tribal governments is
defined by treaties, statutes, executive orders, judicial decisions,
and agreements, which differentiate tribal governments from the other
entities that deal with, or are affected by, the Federal government.
This relationship has given rise to a special Federal trust
responsibility involving the legal responsibilities and obligations of
the United States toward Indian Tribes and the application of fiduciary
standards of due care with respect to Indian lands, tribal trust
resources, and the exercise of tribal rights. Under these authorities,
Indian lands are recognized as unique and have been retained by Indian
Tribes or have been set aside for tribal use. These lands are managed
by Indian Tribes in accordance with tribal goals and objectives within
the framework of applicable treaties and laws.
The Tribes have stated in letters and meetings that designation of
Indian lands as critical habitat will undermine long-term working
relationships and reduce the capacity of Tribes to participate at
current levels in the many and varied forums across four States
addressing ecosystem management and conservation of fisheries
resources. The benefits of excluding Indian lands from designation
include the combination of: (1) The maintenance of effective, long-term
working relationships to promote species conservation on an ecosystem-
wide basis; (2) continued meaningful collaboration and cooperation in
scientific work to learn more about the conservation needs of the
species on an ecosystem-wide basis; and (3) recognition and
continuation of the conservation benefits to bull trout from the
Tribes' existing conservation programs.
Tribal lands are currently being managed on a voluntary basis in
cooperation with the Service and others to conserve bull trout and
achieve important conservation goals. We believe the bull trout
benefits from the Tribes' voluntary management actions due to their
long-standing and broad application to tribal management decisions.
Tribal cooperation and support is required to continue cooperative
scientific efforts, to promote the recovery of bull trout, and to
implement proactive conservation actions. This need for the tribal
cooperation is especially acute because, in some cases, populations
exist only on areas of tribal management or only on tribal lands.
Future conservation efforts in these areas require the continued
cooperation and support of the Tribes. Exclusion of tribal lands from
the critical habitat designation will help us maintain and improve our
partnership with these Tribes by formally recognizing their positive
contributions to bull trout recovery, and by streamlining or reducing
unnecessary regulatory oversight.
Given the cooperative relationship between these Tribes and the
Service, and all of the conservation benefits taken together, we
believe the additional regulatory and educational benefits of including
the tribal lands as critical habitat are relatively small. The
[[Page 63965]]
designation of critical habitat can serve to educate the public
regarding the potential conservation value of an area, but this goal is
already being accomplished through the identification of these areas in
the tribal management plans and through their outreach efforts.
Because of the ongoing relationship between the Service and the
Tribes through a variety of forums, we find the benefits of these
coordination efforts to be greater than the benefits of applying the
Act's section 7 consultations for critical habitat to Federal
activities on tribal lands. Based upon our consultations with the
Tribes identified above, we believe that designation of Indian lands as
critical habitat would adversely impact our working relationship and
the benefits resulting from this relationship.
In contrast, although the benefits of encouraging participation in
tribal management plans, and, more broadly, helping to foster
cooperative conservation are indirect, enthusiastic tribal
participation and an atmosphere of cooperation are crucial to the long-
term effectiveness of the endangered species program. Also, we have
concluded that the Tribes' voluntary conservation efforts will provide
tangible conservation benefits that will reduce the likelihood of
extinction and increase the likelihood for bull trout recovery.
Therefore, we assign great weight to these benefits of exclusion. To
the extent that there are regulatory benefits of including tribal lands
in critical habitat, there would be associated costs that could be
avoided by excluding the area from designation. As we expect the
regulatory benefits to be low, we likewise give weight to avoidance of
those associated costs, as well as the additional transaction costs
related to section 7 compliance.
Therefore, we have determined that the benefits of inclusion for
the Tribes mentioned above are small, while the benefits of exclusion
are more significant. Consequently, we conclude the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion. We have reviewed the
overall effect of the exclusion of the CTWS, Blackfeet Nation, CTUIR,
and Yakama tribal lands for bull trout and their essential habitat. We
have determined that the benefits of excluding these areas outweigh the
benefits of including them in this critical habitat designation.
Designation of critical habitat in these areas would most likely have a
negative effect on the recovery and conservation of bull trout. Because
we anticipate that little if any conservation benefit to the bull trout
will be foregone as a result of the removal of these tribal streams
from critical habitat designation, these exclusions will not lead to
the species' extinction. Therefore, on the basis of our weighing and
balancing above, the Secretary is exercising his discretion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude tribal lands (identified in Table
10) from critical habitat designation for bull trout. This decision is
also consistent with the June 5, 1997, Secretarial Order ``In
accordance with the President's Federal - Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act'' (Secretarial Order
3206), and the November 6, 2000, Executive Order ``Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments'' (Executive Order 13175).
The areas under management by the above Tribes that we are
excluding from critical habitat are those waterbodies within
reservation boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to: (1) Lands
held in trust by the United States for the benefit of any Indian Tribe;
(2) lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe or
individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation; (3) fee lands, either within or outside the reservation
boundaries, owned by the tribal government; and (4) fee lands within
the reservation boundaries owned by individual Indians. We have
determined that these exclusions, together with the other exclusions
described in this rule, will not result in extinction of the species.
Affected Treaty Tribes in Western Washington
The Treaty Tribes in Western Washington have a long-standing
commitment to the protection and restoration of the fisheries resources
throughout the Tribe's usual and accustomed fishing areas. Tribes
affected by the bull trout critical habitat designation include: the
Swinomish Tribe, Quinault Indian Nation, Muckleshoot Tribe, Jamestown
S'Klallam Tribe, Hoh Tribe, Lower Elwha-Klallam, Quileute Tribe, Lummi
Nation, Nooksack Tribe, Puyallup Tribe, Stillaguamish Tribe, Tulalip
Tribes, and Skokomish Tribe Reservations and tribal lands within the
Puget Sound-Coastal population.
The ruling in U.S. v. Washington, 384 F. Supp. 312 (W.D. Wash.
1974)), (the Boldt Decision) re-affirmed the rights reserved by the
Tribes in the original treaties and established the Tribes as co-
managers of the salmon resource with the State. Subsequent Federal
court rulings have upheld tribal shellfish harvest rights and the
tribal environmental right to protection and restoration of salmon
habitat. The identified Tribes have been involved co-managers of
salmonid fisheries prior to the Boldt decision and were recognized as
self-regulatory by Washington State in 1998. They have aggressively
pursued aquatic habitat restoration grants throughout their watersheds
and independent streams and have been a key player in developing
restoration, management and recovery plans for all salmonid species,
including the bull trout. The State relies on tribal information and
effort to keep salmonid information up to date. Most of the Tribes have
a strong marine program, as well. They are active in several State and
Federal committees regarding salmonid protection and management, as
well as water quality.
The western Washington Indian Tribes have treaty-reserved fishing
rights in the marine waters within Puget Sound and off the Washington
Coast. Tribal governments share co-management authority and
responsibility for marine resources in their usual and accustomed
fishing areas with the State of Washington or the Federal government,
depending on the specific resource and area identified. Conservation
goals and standards for fishery resources management are established
through government-to-government consultations between the co-managers
and with the other State or Federal agencies as appropriate. The salmon
and steelhead fisheries are managed cooperatively in a unique
government-to-government relationship between the State of Washington
and the Tribes. While their co-management activities do not currently
involve bull trout directly, actions undertaken on behalf of this
partnership do in fact benefit bull trout. As such, this co-management
process provides specific protection to tribal trust resources and bull
trout.
The State and Tribes in 1992 produced the Salmon Stock Inventory
(SaSI), a critical document for wild fish recovery. The SaSI
definitively identified the status of each wild stock, including bull
trout, in categories ranging from extinct to healthy, and provided a
system to monitor their status. As habitat recovery efforts by the
State, Tribes and citizen groups shift into implementation, the SaSI,
currently being updated, will help ensure restoration efforts are
working. The State and Tribes also worked collaboratively with NOAA
Fisheries and the Service to develop the Puget Sound Shared Strategy.
The Puget Sound Shared Strategy focuses on the Puget Sound basin,
including its marine waters and individual watersheds. It also focuses
on groups of Puget Sound
[[Page 63966]]
fish that have genetic, ecological, and life histories that distinguish
them from other groups within their species. Puget Sound Tribes are co-
managers of Puget Sound Basin fisheries in Washington, and share
responsibilities for habitat, harvest, and hatchery decisions with
Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, and with NOAA Fisheries for
listed species.
Puget Sound Tribes played a significant role in the development of
the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Plan for listed salmonids, including
bull trout. The development of this plan was guided by the regional
recovery strategy, called the Shared Strategy for Puget Sound.
Individual Tribes played a critical role in the development of the
individual watershed chapters of the recovery plan, and continue to
play a critical role within local watershed planning groups in the
implementation of these individual watershed plans. These plans assist
in targeting salmonid habitats in greatest need of restoration or
protection within the individual watersheds. These plans can be found
at the following website: http://www.sharedsalmonstrategy.org/plan/
index.htm.
The initial goal-setting process of the Shared Strategy focused on
Puget Sound species listed under the Act: Puget Sound Chinook salmon,
Hood Canal summer chum, and bull trout. The Shared Strategy not only
works to promote the recovery of these species, it will also promote
and protect the continued health of thriving stocks to avoid further
listings under the Act. As these examples demonstrate, co-management is
an ongoing, evolving process. Its guiding principle is that much more
can be done to strengthen, preserve, and restore salmonid and steelhead
resources by working together in a cooperative manner.
The Treaty Tribes of Western Washington have a long history of
working with their partners to carryout proactive conservation and to
maintain stewardship and conserve species. In addition, the following
discussion identifies specific types of actions and conservation
management that many of the Western Washington Treaty Tribes have
undertaken.
Swinomish Tribe
The Swinomish Tribe has a management plan that addresses surface
water resources of the Swinomish Reservation, including marine
tidelands, an artificial marine channel, estuarine wetlands, small
streams, and freshwater wetlands. The management plan is based on
existing knowledge and ongoing studies, active conservation practices,
ordinances, and current management plans. It will be updated with new
information obtained from ongoing surveys, habitat assessments, and
other planning processes. The plan consists of regulation and
implementation of updated tribal laws to protect habitat, control
development, reduce pollution within the boundaries of the Reservation,
restore habitat, and remove fish passage barriers to contribute
proactively to species recovery.
Quinalt Nation
The Quinault Indian Nation and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)
developed a forest management plan (FMP) for the entire Quinault Indian
Reservation. The FMP covers all forestland (about 70,000 ha (173,000
ac)) under tribal and BIA timber management, including individual
Indian-owned trust and tribally owned land. Included in the area of the
FMP are the lower Quinault River, the tributaries of the lower Quinault
River, the lower Queets River, the Salmon River (including the Middle
and South Fork Salmon Rivers), portions of the Raft River, and portions
of the Moclips River. The FMP is a 10-year plan covering the period
from October 2002 through September 2012. The FMP is being implemented
by the Quinault Department of Natural Resources and the BIA Taholah
Field Office. Although some adverse effects to the bull trout are
expected during implementation of the plan, it is expected to provide
for long-term bull trout conservation needs.
Skokomish Tribe
The Skokomish Tribe has provided aquatic resource protection and
restoration through a number of collaborative efforts on their
reservation and other trust lands. The Tribe has been working regularly
with landowners, local governments, and others to implement and fund
voluntary efforts that provide conservation benefits to salmonids,
including bull trout. These cooperative efforts include a variety of
investigative assessments, restoration and enhancement projects,
property acquisitions, and floodplain and river reach analysis.
Muckleshoot Tribe
The Muckleshoot Tribe has demonstrated a commitment to
conservation, protection, and enhancement of fish resources both on and
off the Muckleshoot Reservation. For example, the Tribe has designated
all areas of the White River within its reservation, from ``bluff to
bluff,'' as a conservation zone. The Tribe has also been a leading
participant in gathering data for Lake Washington and preparing a Lake
Washington Recovery Plan.
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe
The Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe has a record and reputation as a
participant and leader in the planning and implementation of salmonid
habitat protection and restoration efforts. The Tribe is dedicated to
coordinating with NOAA Fisheries, the Service, and the State of
Washington in the spirit of co-management, and is also involved in
active consultation and in multiple programs to protect listed salmonid
species.
Hoh Tribe
The Hoh Tribe has a forest management plan that demonstrates a
commitment to protect bull trout habitat on or adjacent to its
reservation. This plan designates major portions of the floodplain and
riparian zones adjacent to streams on the current reservation landscape
for conservancy, and is filed with the BIA.
(1) Benefits of Inclusion
The principal benefit of any designated critical habitat is that
Federal activities will require section 7 consultations to ensure that
adequate protection is provided to avoid adverse modification or
destruction of critical habitat. This would provide an additional
benefit beyond that provided under the jeopardy standard. In evaluating
project effects on critical habitat, the Service must be satisfied that
the PCEs and, therefore, the essential features of the critical habitat
likely will not be altered or destroyed by proposed activities to the
extent that the conservation of the affected species would be
appreciably reduced. If critical habitat were designated in areas of
unoccupied habitat or currently occupied areas subsequently become
unoccupied, different outcomes or requirements are also likely since
effects to unoccupied areas of critical habitat are not likely to
trigger the need for a jeopardy analysis.
In Sierra Club v. Fish and Wildlife Service, 245 F.3d 434 (5th Cir.
2001), the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stated that the
identification of habitat essential to the conservation of the species
can provide informational benefits to the public, State and local
governments, scientific organizations, and Federal agencies. The court
also noted that critical habitat designation may focus and heighten
public awareness of the plight of listed species and their habitats.
Designation of critical habitat may contribute to
[[Page 63967]]
conservation efforts by other parties by delineating areas of high
conservation value for the bull trout.
(2) Benefits of Exclusion
The benefits of excluding Indian lands from designation include:
(1) The maintenance of effective, long-term working relationships to
promote the conservation of bull trout while streamlining the
consultation process; (2) the allowance for continued meaningful
collaboration and cooperation in scientific work to learn more about
the life history, habitat requirements, and conservation needs of the
species; (3) to the extent designation would provide any additional
protection and conservation of bull trout and its habitat that might
otherwise not accrue to bull trout that depend on tribal streams, the
costs associated with that protection would be avoided; and (4)
exclusion would reduce administrative costs of section 7 consultation
(as discussed previously, these costs are unlikely to lead to
additional actual protection for bull trout habitat). We believe that
fish, wildlife, and other natural resources on tribal lands may be
better managed under tribal authorities, policies, and programs than
through Federal regulation where tribal management addresses the
conservation needs of listed species. Based on this philosophy, we
believe that, in many cases, designation of tribal lands as critical
habitat may provide little additional benefit to threatened and
endangered species. In addition, such designation may be viewed by
Tribes as unwarranted and an unwanted intrusion into tribal self-
governance, thus compromising the government-to-government relationship
essential to achieving our mutual goals of managing for healthy
ecosystems upon which the viability of endangered and threatened
species populations depend.
We believe that excluding these tribal lands from critical habitat
will help maintain and improve our partnership relationship by
recognizing the Tribes' positive contribution to bull trout
conservation. It will also reduce the cost and logistical burden of
regulatory oversight. We believe this recognition will provide other
landowners with a positive incentive to undertake voluntary
conservation activities on their lands, especially where there is no
regulatory requirement to implement such actions. Tribal cooperation
and support is required to prevent extirpations and extinction and
promote the recovery of the bull trout due to the need to implement
proactive conservation actions. Future conservation efforts will
require the cooperation of these Tribes. Exclusion of their lands from
this critical habitat designation will help us maintain and improve our
partnership with them by formally recognizing the positive
contributions these Tribes have made to bull trout recovery, and by
streamlining or reducing unnecessary regulatory oversight. The Tribes
have cooperated with us to implement proactive conservation measures.
They have cooperated with Federal and State agencies, and private
organizations, to implement voluntary conservation activities on their
lands that have resulted in tangible conservation benefits. Where
consistent with the discretion provided by the Act, we believe it is
necessary to implement policies that provide positive incentives to
voluntarily conserve natural resources and that remove or reduce
disincentives to conservation. Thus, we believe it is essential for the
recovery of bull trout to build on continued conservation activities
with these Tribes, to provide positive incentives implementing
voluntary conservation activities, and to respect tribal concerns about
incurring incidental regulatory or economic impacts.
(3) Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh benefits of Inclusion
Based on the above considerations and consistent with the direction
provided in section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Service has determined that
the benefits of excluding the above tribal lands outweigh the benefits
of including them as critical habitat. This conclusion is based on the
following factors. It is possible, although unlikely, that a Federal
action could be proposed that was likely to destroy or adversely modify
critical habitat within areas subject to tribal management. If such a
project were to be proposed, any action that would be likely to destroy
or adversely modify critical habitat would likely also jeopardize the
continued existence of the species because of the specific way in which
jeopardy and adverse modification are analyzed for bull trout. In
addition, for the reasons discussed above, we believe the educational
benefit of informing the public of the importance of this area to bull
trout conservation would be limited because of previous and ongoing
efforts. Therefore, we assign relatively little weight to the benefits
of designating this area as critical habitat.
Because of the very small size of most of the Treaty Tribes of
Western Washington reservation lands, we do not believe that inclusion
of tribal lands and waters will significantly improve habitat
protections for bull trout beyond what is already provided for in the
Tribes' own protective policies and practices, discussed below.
In response to the proposed rule (75 FR 2270; January 14, 2010),
the Tribes have demonstrated how they are already working to address
the habitat needs of the species on these lands as well as in the
larger ecosystem through conservation plans, and that they are fully
aware of the conservation value of their lands. There are several
benefits to excluding tribal lands. The longstanding and distinctive
relationship between the Federal and tribal governments is defined by
treaties, statutes, executive orders, judicial decisions, and
agreements, which differentiate tribal governments from the other
entities that deal with, or are affected by, the Federal government.
This relationship has given rise to a special Federal trust
responsibility involving the legal responsibilities and obligations of
the United States toward Indian Tribes and the application of fiduciary
standards of due care with respect to Indian lands, tribal trust
resources, and the exercise of tribal rights. Under these authorities,
Indian lands are recognized as unique and have been retained by Indian
Tribes or have been set aside for tribal use. These lands are managed
by Indian Tribes in accordance with tribal goals and objectives within
the framework of applicable treaties and laws. In addition to the
distinctive trust relationship, for the area that overlaps salmon and
steelhead in the Northwest, there is a unique partnership between the
Federal government and Indian Tribes regarding salmon management. The
Treaty Tribes of Western Washington are regarded as ``co-managers'' of
the salmon resource, along with Federal and State managers. This co-
management relationship evolved as a result of numerous court decisions
clarifying the Tribes' treaty right to take fish in their usual and
accustomed places. While their co-management activities do not
currently involve bull trout directly, actions undertaken on behalf of
this partnership do in fact benefit bull trout. As such, this co-
management process provides specific protection to tribal trust
resources and bull trout.
Tribes have played a significant role in the development of habitat
conservation plans, local watershed plans, or other habitat plans and
have conducted numerous habitat restoration and research projects
designed to protect or improve habitat for listed species.
Additionally, the Tribes have stated in letters and at meetings that
designation of Indian lands as critical habitat will undermine long-
term,
[[Page 63968]]
working relationships and reduce the capacity of Tribes to participate
at current levels in the many and varied forums across four States
addressing ecosystem management and conservation of fisheries
resources. The benefits of excluding Indian lands from designation
include the combination of: (1) The furtherance of established national
policies, our Federal trust obligations, and our deference to the
Tribes in management of natural resources on their lands; (2) the
maintenance of effective, long-term working relationships to promote
species conservation on an ecosystem-wide basis; (3) the allowance for
continued meaningful collaboration and cooperation in scientific work
to learn more about the conservation needs of the species on an
ecosystem-wide basis; (4) recognition and continuation of, the
conservation benefits to bull trout from the Tribes' existing
conservation programs; and (5) respect for tribal sovereignty over
management of natural resources on Indian lands through established
tribal natural resource programs.
We believe that the current co-manager process, along with the
individual Tribe's efforts to conserve and manage bull trout habitat,
is beneficial for the conservation of the bull trout and its critical
habitat. Because these processes provide for coordinated, ongoing,
focused action through a variety of forums, we find the benefits of
this process to be greater than the benefits of applying the Act's
section 7 consultation for critical habitat to Federal activities on
Indian lands. We also believe that maintenance of our current
relationship consistent with existing policies is an important benefit
to continuation of our tribal trust responsibilities and relationship.
Based upon our consultation with the Tribes identified above, we
believe that designation of Indian lands as critical habitat would
adversely impact our working relationship and the benefits resulting
from this relationship.
In contrast, although the benefits of encouraging participation in
tribal management plans, and, more broadly, helping to foster
cooperative conservation are indirect, enthusiastic tribal
participation and an atmosphere of cooperation are crucial to the long-
term effectiveness of the endangered species program. Also, we have
concluded that the Tribes' voluntary conservation efforts will provide
tangible conservation benefits that will reduce the likelihood of
extinction and increase the likelihood for bull trout recovery.
Therefore, we assign great weight to these benefits of exclusion. To
the extent that there are regulatory benefits of including tribal lands
in critical habitat, there would be associated costs that could be
avoided by excluding the area from designation. As we expect the
regulatory benefits to be low, we likewise give weight to avoidance of
those associated costs, as well as the additional transaction costs
related to section 7 compliance.
Therefore, we have determined that the benefits of inclusion for
the Tribes mentioned above are small, while the benefits of exclusion
are more significant. Consequently, we conclude the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of inclusion. We have reviewed the
overall effect of the exclusion of the above-mentioned tribal lands for
bull trout and their essential habitat. We have determined that the
benefits of excluding these areas outweigh the benefits of including
them in this critical habitat designation. Designation of critical
habitat in these areas would most likely have a negative effect on the
recovery and conservation of bull trout. Because we anticipate little
if any conservation benefit to the bull trout will be foregone as a
result of the removal of these tribal streams from critical habitat
designation, these exclusions will not lead to the species' extinction.
Therefore, on the basis of our weighing and balancing above, the
Secretary is exercising his discretion under section 4(b)(2) of the Act
to exclude tribal lands (identified in Table 12) from critical habitat
designation for bull trout. This decision is also consistent with the
June 5, 1997, Secretarial Order ``American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal - Tribal Trust Responsibilities and the Endangered Species
Act''(Secretarial Order 3206), and the November 6, 2000, Executive
Order ``Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments'',
(Executive Order 13175).
The areas under management by the above Tribes that we are
excluding from critical habitat are those waterbodies within
reservation boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to: (1) Lands
held in trust by the United States for the benefit of any Indian Tribe;
(2) lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe or
individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation; (3) fee lands, either within or outside the reservation
boundaries, owned by the tribal government; and (4) fee lands within
the reservation boundaries owned by individual Indians. We have
determined that these exclusions, together with the other exclusions
described in this rule, will not result in extinction of the species.
Table 12.--Tribal Nation, Critical Habitat Unit, and Stream/Waterbody
Affected by Section 4(b)(2) of the Act Exclusion
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Critical Habitat Stream/waterbody
Tribal Nation Unit name
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confederated Tribes of Warm Deschutes River Deschutes River,
Springs Basin, Lower Shitike Creek,
Mainstem Columbia Jefferson Creek,
and John Day Warm Springs
River Basin River, Whitewater
River, Metolius
River (and small
tributaries), John
Day River, portion
of Lake Billy
Chinook, Upper
Mainstem John Day
River, Middle Fork
John Day River,
Columbia River
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blackfeet Nation Saint Mary River Saint Mary River
Basin
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yakama Nation Yakama and Lower Yakima River,
Columbia River Ahtanum Creek,
Basins South Fork Ahtanum
Creek, West Fork
Klikitat River,
Little Muddy
Creek, Crawford
Creek,
Clearwater Creek,
Trappers Creek,
Fish Lake Stream,
Unnamed tributary
that meets Fish
Lake Stream, and
Two Lakes Stream
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hoh Tribe Olympic Peninsula Hoh River and
Pacific Coast
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe Olympic Peninsula Dungeness River
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63969]]
Lower Elwha Klallam Tribe Olympic Peninsula Elwha River and
Strait of Juan De
Fuca nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quileute Tribe Olympic Peninsula Pacific Coast
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skokomish Tribe Olympic Peninsula Skokomish River,
Nalley Slough,
Skobob Creek, and
Hood Canal
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lummi Nation Puget Sound Nooksack River and
Puget Sound
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Muckleshoot Tribe Puget Sound White River
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nooksack Tribe Puget Sound Nooksack River,
Fishtrap Creek,
Anderson Creek,
and Smith Creek
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Puyallup Tribe Puget Sound Puyallup River and
Puget Sound
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stillaguamish Tribe Puget Sound Stillaguamish River
and Pilchuck Creek
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Swinomish Tribe Puget Sound Swinomish Channel
and Puget Sound
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tulalip Tribes Puget Sound Puget Sound
nearshore
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quinault Tribe Olympic Peninsula Quinault River,
lower Quinault
River tributaries,
Lower Queets
River, the Salmon
River (including
the Middle and
South Fork Salmon
Rivers), portions
of the Raft River,
and portions of
the Moclips River.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla River, Umatilla River
Umatilla Walla Walla Basin, Walla Walla
Basin, Columbia Basin, Columbia
Mainstem Mainstem
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Identification of Specific Geographic Areas Excluded Under Section
4(b)(2) of the Act
Publishing the geospatial coordinates for each portion of a
particular waterbody excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the Act would be
cost-prohibitive, given the wide range of the species and the number of
waterbodies affected. However, each area excluded is described by
narrative in the Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section. We
have also correlated each applicable exclusion with its relevant
critical habitat unit map in this final rule. Information to aid in
identifying the geographic extent of each waterbody excluded under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act is available at http://www.fws.gov/pacific/
bulltrout/.
Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts
of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to
consider economic impacts, we prepared a draft economic analysis (DEA),
which we made available for public review concurrent with the proposed
rule on January 14, 2010 (75 FR 2270). We accepted comments on the DEA
until March 15, 2010. We then reopened the comments period on the
proposal from March 23, 2010, to April 5, 2010 (75 FR 13715, March 23,
2010). Following the close of the comment period, a final analysis of
the potential economic effects of the designation was developed taking
into consideration the public comments and any new information.
The intent of the final economic analysis (FEA) is to quantify the
economic impacts of all potential conservation efforts for the bull
trout. Some of these costs will likely be incurred regardless of
whether we designate critical habitat (baseline). The economic impact
of the final critical habitat designation is analyzed by comparing
scenarios both ``with critical habitat'' and ``without critical
habitat.'' The ``without critical habitat'' scenario represents the
baseline for the analysis, considering protections already in place for
the species (e.g., under the Federal listing and other Federal, State,
and local regulations). The baseline, therefore, represents the costs
incurred regardless of whether critical habitat is designated. The
``with critical habitat'' scenario describes the incremental impacts
associated specifically with the designation of critical habitat for
the species. The incremental conservation efforts and associated
impacts are those not expected to occur absent the designation of
critical habitat for the species. In other words, the incremental costs
are those attributable solely to the designation of critical habitat
above and beyond the baseline costs; these are the costs we consider in
the final designation of critical habitat. The analysis looks
retrospectively at baseline impacts incurred since the species was
listed, and forecasts both baseline and incremental impacts likely to
occur with the designation of critical habitat.
The FEA also addresses how potential economic impacts are likely to
be distributed, including an assessment of any local or regional
impacts of habitat conservation and the potential effects of
conservation activities on government agencies, private businesses, and
individuals. The FEA measures lost economic efficiency associated with
residential and commercial development and public projects and
activities, such as economic impacts on water management and
transportation projects, Federal lands, small entities, and the energy
industry. Decisionmakers can use this information to assess whether the
effects of the designation might unduly burden a particular group or
economic sector. Finally, the FEA looks retrospectively at costs that
have been incurred since 1998, when we listed the bull trout as
threatened under the Act, and considers those costs that may occur in
the 20 years following the designation of critical habitat, which was
determined to be the appropriate period for analysis because limited
planning information
[[Page 63970]]
was available for most activities to forecast activity levels for
projects beyond a 20-year timeframe. The FEA quantifies economic
impacts of bull trout conservation efforts associated with the
following categories of activity: water management, activities that
impact water quality, dredging activities and other impacts (e.g.,
bridge replacement, management plans, and natural gas pipelines). We
have considered whether this designation would result in a
disproportionate or significant economic effect to any potentially
affected entities. Based on our FEA, we have determined that the
incremental economic effects associated with the revised designation of
critical habitat for the bull trout will not have a significant effect,
and therefore, we are not excluding any areas based on economic
impacts. A copy of the FEA with supporting documents may be obtained by
contacting the Idaho Fish and Wildlife Field Office (see ADDRESSES) or
for downloading from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866
Executive Order 12866 requires Federal agencies to submit proposed
and final significant rules to the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) prior to publication in the FR. The Executive Order defines a
rule as significant if it meets one of the following four criteria:
(1) Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
(2) Whetherthe rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies' actions.
(3) Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.
If the rule meets criteria (1) above it is called an ``economically
significant'' rule and additional requirements apply. It has been
determined that this rule is ``significant'' but not ``economically
significant.'' It was submitted to OMB for review prior to
promulgation.
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an agency must
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
(small businesses, small organizations, and small government
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA
amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification
statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. In this final rule, we are certifying that the critical
habitat designation for the bull trout will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The
following discussion explains our rationale.
According to the Small Business Administration, small entities
include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000
residents; as well as small businesses. 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 revised critical habitat designation for bull
trout would significantly affect a substantial number of small
entities, we considered the number of small entities affected within
particular types of economic activities (e.g., dams, agriculture and
agricultural diversions, grazing, development, forest management,
roads, and mining). We apply the substantial number test individually
to each industry to determine if certification is appropriate. However,
the SBREFA does not explicitly define substantial number or significant
economic impact. Consequently, to assess whether a substantial number
of small entities is affected by this designation, this analysis
considers the relative number of small entities likely to be impacted
in an area. In some circumstances, especially with critical habitat
designations of limited extent, we may aggregate across all industries
and consider whether the total number of small entities affected is
substantial. In estimating the number of small entities potentially
affected, we also consider whether their activities have any Federal
involvement.
Under the Act, designation of critical habitat only affects
activities authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies. Some
kinds of activities are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so
will not be affected by critical habitat designation. In areas where
the species is present, Federal agencies already are required to
consult with us under section 7 of the Act on activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out that may affect the bull trout. Federal
agencies also must consult with us if their activities may affect
critical habitat. Designation of critical habitat, therefore, could
result in an additional economic impact on small entities due to the
requirement to reinitiate consultation for ongoing Federal activities
(see Adverse Modification Standard section).
In our final economic analysis of the critical habitat designation,
we evaluated the potential economic effects on small business entities
resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the
designation of critical habitat for the bull trout. This analysis
estimated prospective economic impacts due to the implementation of
bull trout conservation efforts in eight categories (dams, agriculture
and agricultural diversions, grazing, development, forest management,
roads, mining, and ``other''). The following is a summary of
information contained in the final economic analysis.
To estimate the number of businesses, the economic analysis
presumes business locations are distributed geographically in the same
pattern that the human population is distributed (i.e., more densely
populated areas will contain proportionally more business than less
populated areas). To derive an estimate of the number of small entities
falling within the designation, data on factors such as the size and
annual sales of businesses in the area as collected by Dun & Bradstreet
were reviewed. These data are available on a county-wide basis. Because
counties may include
[[Page 63971]]
areas that are not part of the critical habitat designation, the number
of small entities within the county was scaled by the percentage of the
county's population living within the critical habitat boundaries. Of
the potentially affected entities, 97 percent are classified as likely
to be ``small.''
The number of potentially affected small entities was considered
under two different scenarios to provide for uncertainty regarding the
number of small entities affected. Under Scenario 1, the estimated
number of small entities within areas affected by the designation
(N=23,800) assumes that incremental impacts are distributed evenly
across all entities in each affected industry. Under this scenario, a
small entity may bear costs up to $4,050, representing between <0.01
and 0.03 percent of average revenues, depending on the industry.
Scenario 2 assumed costs of each anticipated future consultation are
borne by a distinct small business within areas affected by the
designation (N=728). Under this scenario, each small entity may bear
costs of between $455 and $17,000, representing between 0.01 and 0.56
percent of average annual revenues, depending on the industry. Total
annualized impacts to small entities are estimated to be $3.6 million,
or approximately 51 percent of the total incremental impacts
anticipated as a result of this rule.
In summary, we have considered whether the designation would result
in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Based on the above reasoning and currently available
information, we concluded that this rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities.
Therefore, we are certifying that the designation of critical habitat
for the bull trout will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211
Under Executive Order 13211 (E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or
Use), Federal agencies must prepare Statements of Energy Effects when
undertaking certain actions. OMB has provided guidance for implementing
this Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may constitute a
significant adverse effect when compared to not taking the regulatory
action under consideration. The economic analysis finds that none of
these criteria are relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on
information in the economic analysis, energy-related impacts associated
with the bull trout conservation activities within critical habitat are
not expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat 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
et seq.), we make the following findings:
(1) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or tribal
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.''
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or [T]ribal governments,'' with
two exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It
also excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary
Federal program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing
Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually
to State, local, and tribal governments under entitlement authority,''
if the provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of
assistance'' or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal
Government's responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local,
or tribal governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the
time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to
Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food
Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State
Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living;
Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement.
``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would
impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a
condition of Federal assistance, or (ii) a duty arising from
participation in a voluntary Federal program.''
The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally
binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties.
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat under section 7 of the Act. While non-Federal entities that
receive Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise
require approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action,
may be indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the
legally binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to
the extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because
they receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal
aid program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor
would critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement
programs listed above onto State governments.
(2) We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely
affect small governments, because it will not produce a Federal mandate
of $100 million or greater in any year; that is, it is not a
significant regulatory action under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act.
The designation of critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or
local governments. By definition, Federal agencies are not considered
small entities, although the activities they fund or permit may be
proposed or carried out by small entities. As such, a Small Government
Agency Plan is not required.
Takings--Executive Order 12630
In accordance with E.O. 12630 (Government Actions and Interference
with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights), we have
analyzed the potential takings implications of designating revised
critical habitat for the bull trout in a takings implications
assessment. Critical habitat designation does not affect landowner
actions that do not require Federal funding or permits, nor does it
preclude development of habitat conservation programs or issuance of
incidental take permits to permit actions that do require Federal
funding or permits to go forward. The takings implications assessment
concludes that this designation of critical habitat for the bull trout
does not pose significant takings implications for lands within or
affected by the designation.
Federalism--Executive Order 13132
In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not have
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and Department of
Commerce policy, we requested information from,
[[Page 63972]]
and coordinated development of this critical habitat designation with,
appropriate State resource agencies in Oregon. We received comments
from the State of Oregon and the Oregon Department of Fish and
Wildlife, which have been addressed in the Summary of Comments and
Recommendations section of the rule. The designation of critical
habitat in areas currently occupied by the bull trout may impose
nominal additional regulatory restrictions to those currently in place
and, therefore, may have little incremental impact on State and local
governments and their activities. The designation may have some benefit
to these governments, in that the areas that contain the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the species are
more clearly defined, and the PCEs of the habitat necessary to the
conservation of the species are specifically identified. This
information does not alter where and what federally sponsored
activities may occur. However, it may assist local governments in long-
range planning (rather than having them wait for case-by-case section 7
consultations to occur).
Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988
In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the
regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in
accordance with the provisions of the Act. This final rule uses
standard property descriptions and identifies the physical or
biological features essential to the conservation of the subspecies
within the designated areas to assist the public in understanding the
habitat needs of the bull trout.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. 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 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare
environmental analyses as defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) in
connection with designating critical habitat under the Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was
upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas
County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9\th\ Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516
U.S. 1042 (1996).
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), E.O. 13175, and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997, American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act,
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
Tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to Tribes. There are tribal lands that were
occupied by the species at the time of listing, and remain occupied by
the species, that contain the features essential for the conservation
of bull trout. However, as discussed in the Tribal Lands-Exclusions
Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section, we have determined that
maintaining our important conservation partnership with the Tribes
toward the continued implementation of their tribal management and
conservation plans provides greater conservation benefit than would the
designation of critical habitat on waters within or adjacent to tribal
lands. Table 12 identifies the waters within or adjacent to tribal
lands that were excluded from critical habitat designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited is available on the
Internet at http://www.regulations.gov and upon request from the Idaho
Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES).
Authors
The primary authors of this rulemaking are the staff members of the
Idaho Fish and Wildlife Office.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17-[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.95(e) by revising critical habitat for ``Bull Trout
(Salvelinus confluentus)'' to read as follows:
Sec. 17.95 Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.
* * * * *
(e) Fishes.
* * * * *
Bull Trout (Salvelinus confluentus)
(1) Locations of critical habitat. Critical habitat units are
depicted in the following States and counties on the maps and as
described below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
State Counties
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(i) Idaho Adams, Benewah, Blaine, Boise,
Bonner, Boundary, Butte, Camas,
Custer, Elmore, Gem, Idaho,
Kootenai, Lemhi, Lewis, Nez
Perce, Owyhee, Shoshone, Valley,
Washington
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Montana Deer Lodge, Flathead, Glacier,
Granite, Lake, Lewis and Clark,
Lincoln, Mineral, Missoula,
Powell, Ravalli, Sanders
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Nevada Elko
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 63973]]
(iv) Oregon Baker, Clatsop, Columbia,
Deschutes, Gilliam, Grant,
Harney, Hood River, Jefferson,
Klamath, Lake, Lane, Linn,
Malheur, Morrow, Multnomah,
Sherman, Umatilla, Union,
Wallowa, Wasco, Wheeler
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(v) Washington Asotin, Benton, Chelan, Clallam,
Clark, Columbia, Cowlitz,
Garfield, Grant, Grays Harbor,
Island,
Jefferson, King, Kittitas,
Klickitat, Mason, Okanogan, Pend
Oreille, Pierce, Skagit,
Skamania, Snohomish, Stevens,
Thurston, Wahkiakum, Walla
Walla, Whatcom, Whitman, Yakima
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Topographic features included in the critical habitat
designation. Critical habitat includes the stream channels within the
designated stream reaches; designated lakes and reservoirs; and inshore
portions of marine nearshore areas, including tidally influenced
freshwater heads of estuaries indicated on the maps beginning with
paragraph (e)(7) of this entry.
(i) Critical habitat includes the stream channels within the
designated stream reaches and a lateral extent as defined by the
bankfull elevation on one bank to the bankfull elevation on the
opposite bank. Bankfull elevation is the level at which water begins to
leave the channel and move into the floodplain and is reached at a
discharge that generally has a recurrence interval of 1 to 2 years on
the annual flood series. If bankfull elevation is not evident on either
bank, the ordinary high-water line must be used to determine the
lateral extent of critical habitat. The lateral extent of designated
lakes is defined by the perimeter of the waterbody as mapped on
standard 1:24,000 scale topographic maps.
(ii) Critical habitat includes the inshore extent of critical
habitat for marine nearshore areas (the mean higher high-water (MHHW)
line), including the uppermost reach of the saltwater wedge within
tidally influenced freshwater heads of estuaries. The MHHW line refers
to the average of all the higher high-water heights of the two daily
tidal levels. Adjacent shoreline riparian areas, bluffs, and uplands
are not designated as critical habitat. However, it should be
recognized that the quality of marine habitat along shorelines is
intrinsically related to the character of these adjacent features, and
human activities that occur outside of the MHHW line can have major
effects on the physical and biological features of the marine
environment. The offshore extent of critical habitat for marine
nearshore areas is based on the extent of the photic zone, which is the
layer of water in which organisms are exposed to light. Critical
habitat extends offshore to the depth of 10 meters (m) (33 feet (ft))
relative to the mean low low-water (MLLW) line (average of all the
lower low-water heights of the two daily tidal levels). This equates to
the average depth of the photic zone and is consistent with the
offshore extent of the nearshore habitat identified by the national
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in the National Tidal Datum 1983
through 2001. This area between the MHHW line and minus 10 m MLLW line
is considered the habitat most consistently used by bull trout in
marine waters based on known use, forage fish availability, and ongoing
migration studies and captures geological and ecological processes
important to maintaining these habitats. This area contains essential
foraging habitat and migration corridors such as estuaries, bays,
inlets, shallow subtidal areas, and intertidal flats.
(3) The primary constituent elements (PCEs) of critical habitat.
Within the critical habitat, the PCEs for bull trout are those habitat
components that are essential for the primary biological needs of
foraging, reproducing, rearing of young, dispersal, genetic exchange,
or sheltering. The PCEs are as follows:
(i) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, and subsurface water
connectivity (hyporheic flows) to contribute to water quality and
quantity and provide thermal refugia.
(ii) Migration habitats with minimal physical, biological, or water
quality impediments between spawning, rearing, overwintering, and
freshwater and marine foraging habitats, including but not limited to
permanent, partial, intermittent, or seasonal barriers.
(iii) An abundant food base, including terrestrial organisms of
riparian origin, aquatic macroinvertebrates, and forage fish.
(iv) Complex river, stream, lake, reservoir, and marine shoreline
aquatic environments, and processes that establish and maintain these
aquatic environments, with features such as large wood, side channels,
pools, undercut banks and unembedded substrates, to provide a variety
of depths, gradients, velocities, and structure.
(v) Water temperatures ranging from 2 to 15 degrees Celsius
([deg]C) (36 to 59 degrees Fahrenheit ([deg]F)), with adequate thermal
refugia available for temperatures that exceed the upper end of this
range. Specific temperatures within this range will depend on bull
trout life-history stage and form; geography; elevation; diurnal and
seasonal variation; shading, such as that provided by riparian habitat;
streamflow; and local groundwater influence.
(vi) In spawning and rearing areas, substrate of sufficient amount,
size, and composition to ensure success of egg and embryo overwinter
survival, fry emergence, and young-of-the-year and juvenile survival. A
minimal amount of fine sediment, generally ranging in size from silt to
coarse sand, embedded in larger substrates, is characteristic of these
conditions. The size and amounts of fine sediment suitable to bull
trout will likely vary from system to system.
(vii) A natural hydrograph, including peak, high, low, and base
flows within historic and seasonal ranges or, if flows are controlled,
minimal flow departure from a natural hydrograph.
(viii) Sufficient water quality and quantity such that normal
reproduction, growth, and survival are not inhibited.
(ix) Sufficiently low levels of occurrence of nonnative predatory
(e.g., lake trout, walleye, northern pike, smallmouth bass);
interbreeding (e.g., brook trout); or competing (e.g., brown trout)
species that, if present, are adequately temporally and spatially
isolated from bull trout.
(4) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures
(including, but not limited to, buildings, aqueducts, docks, seawalls,
pipelines, roads, runways, or other structures or paved areas) and the
land or waterway on which they are located that exist within the legal
boundaries on the effective date of this rule.
(5) Exclusions. Each excluded area is identified in the relevant
Critical Habitat Unit text below, as identified in paragraphs (e)(8)
through (e)(41) of this entry. Critical habitat does not include:
(i) Waters adjacent to non-Federal lands covered by the following
legally operative incidental take permits for habitat conservation
plans (HCPs) issued under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act), in which bull trout is a covered species
on or before the publication of this final rule: Cedar River Watershed
HCP, Green Diamond HCP, Washington Department of Natural
[[Page 63974]]
Resources HCP, Washington Forest Practices HCP, Plum Creek Central
Cascades HCP, Plum Creek Native Fish HCP, and Stimpson Native Fish HCP;
(ii) Waters within or adjacent to lands subject to certain tribal
management plans; or
(iii) Waters where impacts to national security have been
identified.
(6) Critical habitat map units. Data layers defining map units were
created using U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Hydrologic Unit Code map
(HUCs) at a scale of 1:250,000 down to the 4th level cataloging unit.
In some cases, 5th and 6th level HUCs were also used and some finer
scale watersheds developed using USGS 10-meter Digital Elevation Model
and 1:24,000 scale hydrography layers. The marine boundaries for the
Puget Sound and Olympic Peninsula critical habitat unit were based on
Washington Department of Natural Resources 1:24,000 scale county
boundaries and HUCs.
(7) Note: Index map for critical habitat units for the bull trout
follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63975]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.001
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(8) Unit 1: Olympic Peninsula
(i) This unit consists of 748.7 km (465.2 mi) of streams, 529.2 km
(328.8 mi) of marine shoreline, and 3,064 ha (7,572 ac) of lakes and
reservoirs. The unit is located in northwestern Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63976]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alta Creek.................................................. 47.685 -123.737 47.698 -123.756
Big Creek................................................... 47.566 -123.681 47.518 -123.774
Bob Creek................................................... 47.696 -123.853 47.689 -123.856
Boulder Creek............................................... 47.979 -123.613 47.983 -123.601
Brown Creek................................................. 47.455 -123.260 47.411 -123.319
Buckinghorse Creek.......................................... 47.739 -123.485 47.746 -123.483
Cameron Creek............................................... 47.916 -123.243 47.912 -123.255
Canyon Creek................................................ 47.954 -123.247 48.025 -123.137
Cat Creek................................................... 47.946 -123.644 47.973 -123.593
Cedar Creek................................................. 47.440 -123.405 47.443 -123.403
Cedar Creek................................................. 47.717 -124.336 47.712 -124.416
Chehalis River.............................................. 46.819 -123.253 46.966 -123.547
Church Creek................................................ 47.460 -123.457 47.461 -123.451
Clearwater River............................................ 47.628 -124.276 47.628 -124.276
Clide Creek................................................. 47.888 -123.799 47.871 -123.798
Cook Creek.................................................. 47.358 -123.997 47.368 -124.032
Copalis River............................................... 47.137 -124.159 47.138 -124.154
Cougar Creek................................................ 47.862 -123.860 47.867 -123.854
Delabarre Creek............................................. 47.726 -123.529 47.735 -123.527
Dungeness River............................................. 47.941 -123.093 48.152 -123.128
East Twin Creek............................................. 47.841 -123.988 47.833 -123.991
Elk Creek................................................... 47.510 -123.345 47.515 -123.331
Elwha River................................................. 47.771 -123.582 48.147 -123.566
Ennis Creek................................................. 48.053 -123.412 48.117 -123.405
Fire Creek.................................................. 47.601 -123.523 47.598 -123.526
Fitzhenry Creek............................................. 47.964 -123.589 47.967 -123.589
Godkin Creek................................................ 47.752 -123.452 47.760 -123.465
Gold Creek.................................................. 47.941 -123.083 47.941 -123.093
Goldie River................................................ 47.760 -123.522 47.840 -123.470
Goodman Creek............................................... 47.834 -124.339 47.825 -124.513
Graves Creek................................................ 47.569 -123.563 47.574 -123.572
Gray Wolf River............................................. 47.916 -123.243 47.977 -123.112
Grays Harbor Marine......................................... 46.926 -124.180 46.906 -124.139
Griff Creek................................................. 48.016 -123.593 48.023 -123.595
Haggerty Creek.............................................. 47.952 -123.575 47.956 -123.576
Harlow Creek................................................ 47.700 -123.877 47.685 -123.889
Hayes River................................................. 47.803 -123.430 47.808 -123.454
Hee Haw Creek............................................... 47.701 -123.663 47.737 -123.691
Hee Hee Creek............................................... 47.709 -123.734 47.712 -123.739
Hoh Creek................................................... 47.883 -123.751 47.877 -123.754
Hoh River................................................... 47.737 -124.366 47.880 -123.729
Hood Canal Marine........................................... 47.434 -122.842 47.684 -122.802
Hughes Creek................................................ 48.026 -123.599 48.025 -123.595
Humptulips River............................................ 47.048 -124.046 47.231 -123.977
Hurd Creek.................................................. 48.124 -123.144 48.118 -123.143
Hurricane Creek............................................. 47.976 -123.587 47.975 -123.594
Idaho Creek................................................. 47.947 -123.538 47.945 -123.544
Ignar Creek................................................. 47.637 -123.430 47.639 -123.433
Irely Creek................................................. 47.565 -123.677 47.565 -123.680
Irely Lake.................................................. 47.565 -123.674 ...........
Joe Creek................................................... 47.217 -124.154 47.206 -124.204
Kalaloch Creek.............................................. 47.637 -124.361 47.607 -124.375
Lake Cushman................................................ 47.470 -123.255 ...........
Lebar Creek................................................. 47.427 -123.320 47.417 -123.330
Leitha Creek................................................ 47.762 -123.452 47.769 -123.460
Lillian River............................................... 47.944 -123.500 47.931 -123.528
Little River................................................ 48.061 -123.519 48.063 -123.578
Long Creek.................................................. 47.926 -123.558 47.951 -123.561
Lost River.................................................. 47.859 -123.458 47.862 -123.468
Madison Creek............................................... 48.044 -123.580 48.042 -123.591
Matheny Creek............................................... 47.543 -123.837 47.576 -124.115
Matriotti Creek............................................. 48.133 -123.161 48.136 -123.141
McCartney Creek............................................. 47.879 -123.466 47.878 -123.471
McTaggert Creek............................................. 47.409 -123.240 47.363 -123.235
Moclips River............................................... 47.260 -124.124 47.248 -124.220
Morse Creek................................................. 48.063 -123.347 48.117 -123.351
Mosquito Creek.............................................. 47.786 -124.383 47.798 -124.482
Mount Tom Creek............................................. 47.819 -123.821 47.868 -123.888
Nalley Slough............................................... 47.334 -123.132 47.328 -123.131
Nolan Creek................................................. 47.743 -124.202 47.751 -124.344
[[Page 63977]]
Noname Creek................................................ 47.629 -123.456 47.626 -123.452
North Fork Quinault River................................... 47.582 -123.645 47.638 -123.646
North Fork Skokomish River.................................. 47.355 -123.235 47.506 -123.318
OGS Creek................................................... 47.879 -123.768 47.878 -123.769
O'Neil Creek................................................ 47.610 -123.464 47.616 -123.472
Owl Creek................................................... 47.780 -124.039 47.805 -124.079
Pacific Coast Marine........................................ 48.003 -124.680 46.926 -124.180
Paradise Creek.............................................. 47.699 -123.801 47.694 -123.813
Pine Creek.................................................. 47.442 -123.430 47.446 -123.417
Prescott Creek.............................................. 47.904 -123.487 47.903 -123.491
Purdy Creek................................................. 47.302 -123.182 47.307 -123.161
Pyrites Creek............................................... 47.644 -123.436 47.639 -123.433
Queets River................................................ 47.541 -124.335 47.735 -123.696
Quinault Lake............................................... 47.475 -123.869 ...........
Quinault River.............................................. 47.391 -124.045 47.533 -123.744
Raft River.................................................. 47.449 -124.220 47.458 -124.326
Richert Spring.............................................. 47.321 -123.219 47.320 -123.225
Rustler Creek............................................... 47.629 -123.569 47.617 -123.617
Salmon River................................................ 47.524 -124.041 47.556 -124.220
Sams River.................................................. 47.604 -123.853 47.624 -124.013
Satsop River................................................ 47.015 -123.510 47.023 -123.509
Sege Creek.................................................. 47.988 -123.597 47.987 -123.604
Siebert Creek............................................... 48.049 -123.293 48.121 -123.290
Skobob Creek................................................ 47.327 -123.175 47.328 -123.132
Skokomish River............................................. 47.315 -123.238 47.315 -123.229
Slate Creek................................................. 47.529 -123.320 47.521 -123.336
Slate Creek................................................. 47.749 -123.498 47.744 -123.491
Slide Creek................................................. 47.883 -123.736 47.875 -123.748
Snider Creek................................................ 47.846 -123.971 47.842 -123.968
South Fork Hoh River........................................ 47.764 -123.786 47.777 -123.908
South Fork Skokomish River.................................. 47.315 -123.247 47.425 -123.354
Steamboat Creek............................................. 47.688 -124.350 47.678 -124.404
Stony Creek................................................. 47.871 -123.464 47.871 -123.469
Strait of Juan de Fuca Marine............................... 48.103 -122.885 48.217 -124.102
Taft Creek.................................................. 47.866 -123.967 47.858 -123.942
Tshletshy Creek............................................. 47.606 -123.741 47.666 -123.925
Twin Creek.................................................. 47.832 -123.995 47.831 -123.988
Unnamed trib. (0100)............................... 47.340 -123.246 47.335 -123.242
Unnamed trib. (0509)............................... 47.844 -123.939 47.830 -123.982
Unnamed trib. (0527)............................... 47.874 -123.821 47.868 -123.817
Unnamed trib. (0542)............................... 47.887 -123.719 47.883 -123.719
Valley Creek................................................ 48.123 -123.438 48.107 -123.452
Vance Creek................................................. 47.327 -123.299 47.327 -123.299
Vance Creek Remenant Channel................................ 47.315 -123.257 47.315 -123.238
West Fork Satsop River...................................... 47.360 -123.566 47.035 -123.526
Windfall Creek.............................................. 47.914 -123.492 47.912 -123.495
Winfield Creek.............................................. 47.783 -124.144 47.810 -124.233
Wishkah River............................................... 47.257 -123.715 47.257 -123.715
Wolf Creek.................................................. 47.974 -123.586 47.974 -123.593
Wynoochee River............................................. 47.160 -123.650 47.360 -123.637
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands,
habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or U.S. Navy training areas totaling
553.9 km (343.9 mi) of streams and 144.6 km (89.9 mi) of marine
shoreline have been excluded from critical habitat designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit:
(A) Waterbodies within or adjacent to the open water training and
testing areas of the Dabob Bay Military Operating Area and areas within
the Connecting Waters of the Dabob Bay Range Complex, including marine
habitats associated with the Hood Canal Critical Habitat Subunit
(CHSU);
(B) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP),
including portions of the Chehalis River/Grays Harbor, Dungeness River,
Elwha River, Hoh River, Queets River, Quinualt River, Skokomish River
Pacific Coast, Strait of Juan De Fuca, and Hood Canal Marine CHSUs;
(C) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the Green
Diamond HCP, including portions of the Chehalis River/Grays Harbor and
Skokomish CHSUs;
(D) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington Department of Natural Resources HCP, including portions of
Chehalis River/Grays Harbor, Dungeness River, Elwha River, Hoh River,
Queets River, Skokomish River, Pacific Coast, Strait of Juan De Fuca,
and Hood Canal Marine CHSUs; and
(E) Waterbodies within the areas under management by the Hoh Tribe,
including portions of Hoh River and Pacific Coast CHSUs; Jamestown
[[Page 63978]]
S'Klallam Tribe, including portions of Dungeness River CHSU; Lower
Elwha Tribe, including portions of Elwha River and Strait of Juan de
Fuca CHSUs; Quileute Tribe, including portions of Pacific Coast CHSU;
Quinault Tribe, including portions of Quinault River, Queets River, and
Pacific Coast CHSUs; and Skokomish Tribe, including portions of
Skokomish River and Hood Canal Marine CHSUs, within reservation
boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(1) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(2) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(3) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(4) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 1, Olympic Peninsula follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63979]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.002
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(9) Unit 2: Puget Sound
(i) This unit consists of 1,840.2 km (1,143.5 mi) of streams, 684.0
km (425.0 mi) of marine shoreline, and 16,260.9 ha (40,181.5 ac) of
lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in northwestern Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63980]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alder Creek................................................. 48.549 -121.955 48.519 -121.956
Aldrich Creek (0423)............................... 48.916 -122.042 48.921 -122.051
Alma Creek.................................................. 48.590 -121.356 48.600 -121.363
Anderson Creek.............................................. 48.797 -122.325 48.869 -122.318
Arrow Creek................................................. 48.407 -121.390 48.423 -121.396
Bacon Creek................................................. 48.681 -121.464 48.585 -121.395
Baker Lake.................................................. 48.708 -121.642 ...........
Baker River................................................. 48.548 -121.741 48.741 -121.563
Bald Eagle Creek............................................ 48.796 -121.449 48.800 -121.465
Bear Creek.................................................. 48.966 -121.383 48.965 -121.388
Bear Creek.................................................. 48.898 -122.105 48.893 -122.145
Bear Creek (0353).................................. 48.788 -122.123 48.783 -122.140
Bear Lake Outlet (0317)............................ 48.610 -121.912 48.607 -121.912
Beaver Creek................................................ 48.086 -121.516 48.077 -121.527
Beckler River............................................... 47.865 -121.311 47.715 -121.340
Bedal Creek................................................. 48.047 -121.351 48.080 -121.395
Bell Creek.................................................. 48.684 -121.899 48.681 -121.900
Bender Creek................................................ 48.063 -121.591 48.071 -121.590
Bertrand Creek.............................................. 48.999 -122.521 48.912 -122.535
Big Beaver Creek............................................ 48.841 -121.211 48.775 -121.066
Big Creek................................................... 48.343 -121.440 48.345 -121.451
Big Four Creek.............................................. 48.071 -121.524 48.070 -121.512
Bitter Creek................................................ 47.841 -121.503 47.840 -121.508
Black Creek................................................. 48.247 -121.414 48.259 -121.402
Black Oak Creek............................................. 48.185 -121.454 48.177 -121.450
Blackjack Creek............................................. 48.051 -121.626 48.062 -121.631
Boardman Creek.............................................. 48.040 -121.675 48.070 -121.681
Boulder Creek............................................... 48.512 -121.364 48.518 -121.364
Boulder Creek............................................... 47.354 -121.707 47.371 -121.688
Boulder Creek............................................... 48.937 -122.021 48.925 -122.037
Boulder River............................................... 48.245 -121.828 48.282 -121.787
Boyd Creek.................................................. 48.903 -121.863 48.897 -121.866
Brooks Creek................................................ 48.289 -121.908 48.277 -121.911
Brush Creek................................................. 48.909 -121.423 48.913 -121.424
Buck Creek.................................................. 48.353 -121.268 48.265 -121.340
Buck Creek.................................................. 48.047 -121.472 48.045 -121.481
Buck Creek.................................................. 47.023 -121.557 47.029 -121.555
Cabin Creek................................................. 47.363 -121.695 47.367 -121.684
Camp Creek.................................................. 48.150 -121.280 48.159 -121.292
Canyon Creek................................................ 48.775 -120.778 48.707 -120.918
Canyon Creek................................................ 48.220 -121.081 48.211 -121.088
Canyon Creek................................................ 48.158 -121.817 48.097 -121.970
Canyon Creek................................................ 48.932 -121.951 48.906 -121.989
Canyon Creek (Canyon Lake Creek)............................ 48.840 -122.111 48.832 -122.144
Carbon River................................................ 46.960 -121.793 47.130 -122.233
Cascade Creek............................................... 48.903 -121.839 48.904 -121.839
Cascade River............................................... 48.463 -121.164 48.524 -121.430
Cavanaugh Creek............................................. 48.645 -122.110 48.647 -122.121
Cedar River................................................. 47.313 -121.521 47.409 -121.723
Chainup Creek............................................... 48.905 -121.843 48.908 -121.840
Chenuis Creek............................................... 46.994 -121.842 46.992 -121.843
Chester Morse Lake.......................................... 47.389 -121.694 ...........
Chilliwack River............................................ 48.878 -121.487 49.000 -121.411
Chocwick Creek.............................................. 48.055 -121.384 48.074 -121.400
Cinnamon Creek.............................................. 48.867 -120.887 48.891 -120.916
Clearwater Creek............................................ 48.805 -121.989 48.771 -122.047
Clearwater River............................................ 47.079 -121.782 47.146 -121.834
Coal Creek.................................................. 48.096 -121.535 48.085 -121.541
Coal Creek.................................................. 48.892 -122.164 48.881 -122.153
Coal Creek (Upper).......................................... 48.838 -121.903 48.838 -121.906
Cook Slough................................................. 48.198 -122.218 48.198 -122.234
Corkindale Creek............................................ 48.518 -121.483 48.505 -121.486
Cornell Creek............................................... 48.886 -121.960 48.899 -121.969
Cripple Creek............................................... 47.048 -121.693 47.040 -121.701
Crystal Creek............................................... 48.183 -121.361 48.181 -121.364
Crystal Creek............................................... 48.791 -121.510 48.787 -121.503
Crystal Creek............................................... 46.925 -121.540 46.928 -121.538
Cumberland Creek............................................ 48.505 -121.985 48.518 -121.994
Dan Creek................................................... 48.265 -121.540 48.298 -121.551
Davis Creek................................................. 48.879 -121.931 48.882 -121.931
[[Page 63981]]
Day Creek................................................... 48.444 -122.007 48.519 -122.067
Deadhorse Creek............................................. 48.900 -121.836 48.904 -121.838
Deep Creek.................................................. 48.868 -121.911 48.869 -121.908
Deer Creek.................................................. 48.718 -121.116 48.721 -121.105
Deer Creek.................................................. 48.096 -121.558 48.084 -121.556
Deer Creek.................................................. 48.365 -121.795 48.268 -121.933
Deer Creek.................................................. 46.836 -121.965 46.873 -121.974
Deer Creek.................................................. 48.602 -122.093 48.610 -122.095
Deerhorn Creek.............................................. 48.906 -121.857 48.903 -121.858
Depot Creek................................................. 48.986 -121.293 48.997 -121.324
Devils Creek................................................ 48.819 -121.002 48.824 -121.032
Diablo Lake................................................. 48.708 -121.105 ...........
Diobsud Creek............................................... 48.576 -121.433 48.559 -121.412
Discovery Creek............................................. 46.900 -121.571 46.896 -121.580
Ditch Creek................................................. 48.903 -121.851 48.902 -121.849
Doe Creek................................................... 47.011 -121.547 47.028 -121.553
Downey Creek................................................ 48.330 -121.149 48.258 -121.225
Dusty Creek................................................. 48.139 -121.040 48.177 -121.019
Duwamish River.............................................. 47.474 -122.252 47.514 -122.304
Duwamish Waterway........................................... 47.514 -122.304 47.585 -122.360
East Duwamish Waterway...................................... 47.590 -122.344 47.567 -122.347
East Fork Bacon Creek....................................... 48.713 -121.417 48.661 -121.434
East Fork Foss River........................................ 47.649 -121.277 47.653 -121.294
Eastern Shoreline Guemes Island............................. 48.529 -122.573 48.589 -122.646
Eastern Shoreline Puget Sound (North)....................... 48.511 -122.606 48.561 -122.493
Eastern Shoreline Puget Sound (South)....................... 47.970 -122.232 48.449 -122.551
Eastern Shoreline Whidbey Island............................ 47.905 -122.388 48.369 -122.666
Eastern Shorline Lummi Island............................... 48.717 -122.719 48.640 -122.609
Easy Creek.................................................. 48.881 -121.456 48.889 -121.459
Ebey Slough................................................. 47.941 -122.170 48.042 -122.215
Edfro Creek................................................. 48.663 -122.117 48.661 -122.127
Elbow Creek / Lake Doreen Outlet (0331)............ 48.707 -121.915 48.685 -121.911
Elliott Creek............................................... 48.027 -121.367 48.057 -121.416
Elwell Creek................................................ 47.809 -121.849 47.838 -121.853
Excelsior Creek............................................. 47.870 -121.487 47.864 -121.492
Falls Creek................................................. 48.137 -121.432 48.148 -121.437
Falls Creek................................................. 46.992 -121.874 46.999 -121.889
Falls Creek................................................. 48.824 -121.906 48.834 -121.902
Finney Creek................................................ 48.465 -121.688 48.524 -121.847
Fire Creek.................................................. 48.154 -121.232 48.153 -121.245
Fisher Creek................................................ 48.563 -120.912 48.603 -121.050
Fishtrap Creek.............................................. 48.999 -122.411 48.912 -122.523
Fobes Creek................................................. 48.622 -122.119 48.622 -122.112
Foss River.................................................. 47.653 -121.294 47.705 -121.307
Fossil Creek................................................ 48.904 -121.850 48.908 -121.850
Fourteenmile Creek.......................................... 48.126 -121.229 48.140 -121.222
Freezeout Creek............................................. 48.950 -120.932 48.956 -120.970
French Creek................................................ 48.255 -121.783 48.282 -121.757
Fryingpan Creek............................................. 46.873 -121.623 46.895 -121.592
Galbraith Creek............................................. 48.755 -122.021 48.759 -122.019
Gallop Creek................................................ 48.882 -121.947 48.894 -121.944
Gedney Island............................................... 48.005 -122.305 48.005 -122.305
Gilligan Creek.............................................. 48.473 -122.126 48.488 -122.140
Glacier Creek............................................... 48.131 -121.168 48.130 -121.204
Glacier Creek............................................... 47.987 -121.369 47.986 -121.393
Glacier Creek............................................... 48.812 -121.890 48.892 -121.939
Goat Creek.................................................. 48.334 -121.161 48.328 -121.157
Goat Island................................................. 48.360 -122.531 48.360 -122.531
Goblin Creek................................................ 47.923 -121.312 47.919 -121.309
Goodell Creek............................................... 48.711 -121.291 48.726 -121.305
Gordon Creek................................................ 48.088 -121.657 48.071 -121.673
Gorge Lake.................................................. 48.706 -121.175 ...........
Grandy Creek................................................ 48.562 -121.811 48.518 -121.881
Granite Creek............................................... 48.648 -120.857 48.707 -120.918
Green Creek................................................. 48.732 -121.936 48.738 -121.938
Green River................................................. 47.275 -122.108 47.474 -122.252
Greenwater River............................................ 47.093 -121.458 47.158 -121.660
Hat Slough.................................................. 48.197 -122.362 48.208 -122.323
Hazzard Creek............................................... 47.081 -121.690 47.078 -121.681
Hedrick Creek............................................... 48.890 -121.981 48.899 -121.971
[[Page 63982]]
Higgins Creek............................................... 48.318 -121.755 48.362 -121.807
Hope Island................................................. 48.399 -122.561 48.399 -122.561
Horse Creek................................................. 48.322 -121.258 48.313 -121.286
Howard Creek................................................ 48.619 -121.966 48.609 -121.966
Huckleberry Creek........................................... 46.989 -121.624 47.079 -121.586
Hutchinson Creek............................................ 48.732 -122.103 48.707 -122.179
Ika Island.................................................. 48.363 -122.499 48.363 -122.499
Illabot Creek............................................... 48.389 -121.319 48.496 -121.531
Index Creek................................................. 47.760 -121.497 47.766 -121.481
Indian Creek................................................ 48.935 -121.395 48.947 -121.398
Ipsut Creek................................................. 46.972 -121.831 46.979 -121.833
Jackman Creek............................................... 48.529 -121.697 48.523 -121.722
Jim Creek................................................... 48.223 -121.950 48.185 -122.078
Jones Creek................................................. 48.542 -122.051 48.524 -122.053
Jordan Creek................................................ 48.515 -121.419 48.522 -121.422
June Creek.................................................. 46.995 -121.905 46.995 -121.917
Kapowsin Creek.............................................. 46.991 -122.195 47.032 -122.205
Kendall Creek............................................... 48.922 -122.145 48.887 -122.149
Kindy Creek................................................. 48.432 -121.208 48.463 -121.208
Klickitat Creek............................................. 46.906 -121.551 46.908 -121.550
Lake Creek.................................................. 48.769 -121.550 48.762 -121.546
Lake Shannon................................................ 48.587 -121.723 ...........
Lake Union.................................................. 47.642 -122.331 ...........
Lake Washington............................................. 47.619 -122.245 ...........
Lewis Creek................................................. 47.820 -121.509 47.824 -121.525
Lightning Creek............................................. 48.907 -120.983 48.933 -120.986
Lime Creek.................................................. 48.218 -121.278 48.252 -121.293
Lindsay Creek............................................... 47.347 -121.660 47.351 -121.661
Little Beaver Creek......................................... 48.878 -121.323 48.914 -121.075
Little Chilliwack River..................................... 48.962 -121.478 48.992 -121.409
Little Creek................................................ 48.876 -121.937 48.884 -121.934
Little Deer Creek........................................... 48.439 -121.950 48.387 -121.870
Little Fork Little Chilliwack River......................... 48.954 -121.442 48.980 -121.428
Lodi Creek.................................................. 46.948 -121.699 46.960 -121.706
Long Creek.................................................. 48.080 -121.686 48.074 -121.691
Loomis Creek................................................ 48.670 -121.827 48.661 -121.814
Mallardy Creek.............................................. 48.055 -121.656 48.070 -121.655
Maple Creek................................................. 48.926 -122.077 48.912 -122.079
Marble Creek................................................ 48.542 -121.252 48.531 -121.282
Martin Creek................................................ 48.092 -121.403 48.101 -121.396
Masonry Pool................................................ 47.410 -121.737 ...........
McAllister Creek............................................ 48.587 -121.156 48.623 -121.057
McCoy Creek................................................. 47.831 -121.827 47.848 -121.825
McDonald Creek (0435).............................. 48.911 -122.019 48.921 -122.016
McGinnis Creek.............................................. 48.613 -121.961 48.610 -121.960
McMillan Creek.............................................. 48.810 -121.212 48.815 -121.193
Merry Brook Creek........................................... 48.087 -121.388 48.089 -121.392
Middle Fork Nooksack River.................................. 48.725 -121.899 48.834 -122.155
Milk Creek.................................................. 48.178 -121.152 48.221 -121.163
Mill Creek.................................................. 48.496 -121.870 48.512 -121.888
Miller River................................................ 47.675 -121.389 47.719 -121.394
Miners Creek................................................ 48.190 -121.023 48.187 -121.031
Money Creek................................................. 47.707 -121.443 47.729 -121.426
Monument Creek (0324).............................. 48.647 -121.828 48.652 -121.835
Moose Creek................................................. 48.255 -121.710 48.277 -121.700
Mowich River................................................ 46.911 -121.996 46.925 -121.950
Newhalem Creek.............................................. 48.663 -121.253 48.671 -121.255
Niesson Creek............................................... 46.884 -122.031 46.912 -122.046
Nisqually River............................................. 46.834 -122.324 47.101 -122.692
Nookachamps Creek........................................... 48.348 -122.203 48.471 -122.297
Nooksack River.............................................. 48.778 -122.583 48.939 -122.420
Nooksack River (Slater Slough).............................. 48.784 -122.588 48.789 -122.604
North Fork Canyon Creek..................................... 48.774 -120.798 48.768 -120.793
North Fork Canyon Creek..................................... 48.165 -121.818 48.158 -121.817
North Fork Cedar River...................................... 47.316 -121.507 47.313 -121.521
North Fork Nooksack River................................... 48.835 -122.154 48.920 -122.055
North Fork Sauk River....................................... 48.096 -121.370 48.097 -121.389
North Fork Skagit River..................................... 48.387 -122.367 48.364 -122.473
North Fork Skykomish River.................................. 47.823 -121.530 47.887 -121.448
North Fork Stillaguamish River.............................. 48.279 -121.817 48.283 -121.770
[[Page 63983]]
North Fork Tolt River....................................... 47.718 -121.779 47.696 -121.821
North Mowich River.......................................... 46.916 -121.878 46.915 -121.895
North Puyallup River........................................ 46.845 -121.878 46.864 -121.951
O'Toole Creek............................................... 48.498 -121.915 48.514 -121.917
Otter Creek................................................. 48.424 -121.374 48.420 -121.374
Owl Creek................................................... 48.161 -121.288 48.163 -121.301
Palmer Creek................................................ 48.043 -121.469 48.045 -121.483
Panther Creek............................................... 48.631 -120.978 48.708 -120.976
Parallel Creek.............................................. 46.911 -121.549 46.909 -121.560
Park Creek.................................................. 48.740 -121.682 48.727 -121.659
Pass Creek.................................................. 48.815 -121.463 48.811 -121.458
Peat Bog Creek (0352).............................. 48.780 -122.118 48.790 -122.122
Perry Creek................................................. 48.075 -121.488 48.063 -121.515
Pierce Creek................................................ 48.766 -121.073 48.772 -121.066
Pilchuck Creek.............................................. 48.303 -122.158 48.208 -122.226
Pilchuck River.............................................. 47.995 -121.746 47.904 -122.091
Plumbago Creek.............................................. 48.606 -122.101 48.612 -122.097
Poch Creek.................................................. 46.987 -121.955 46.991 -121.954
Portage Island.............................................. 48.694 -122.614 48.694 -122.614
Porter Creek................................................ 48.795 -122.115 48.799 -122.127
Powerhouse Creek............................................ 48.908 -121.815 48.911 -121.818
Pressentin Creek............................................ 48.504 -121.844 48.518 -121.852
Proctor Creek............................................... 47.821 -121.648 47.835 -121.646
Pugh Creek.................................................. 48.165 -121.333 48.172 -121.339
Pumice Creek................................................ 48.141 -121.150 48.148 -121.236
Puyallup River.............................................. 46.864 -121.951 47.268 -122.426
Racehorse Creek............................................. 48.884 -122.130 48.888 -122.146
Rack Creek.................................................. 47.388 -121.731 47.392 -121.722
Ranger Creek................................................ 46.988 -121.849 46.995 -121.854
Rankin Creek................................................ 48.733 -121.908 48.733 -121.920
Rapid River................................................. 47.821 -121.233 47.803 -121.293
Rex River................................................... 47.347 -121.645 47.371 -121.688
Ridley Creek................................................ 48.720 -121.865 48.725 -121.899
Rocky Creek................................................. 48.510 -121.502 48.500 -121.495
Rocky Creek................................................. 48.819 -121.996 48.809 -121.997
Roland Creek................................................ 48.770 -120.998 48.769 -121.024
Rollins Creek............................................... 48.293 -121.852 48.281 -121.836
Ross Lake................................................... 48.869 -121.054 ...........
Ruby Creek.................................................. 48.718 -121.001 48.707 -120.918
Salmon Creek................................................ 47.911 -121.482 47.888 -121.453
Samish River................................................ 48.548 -122.457 48.548 -122.457
Sauk River.................................................. 48.095 -121.390 48.482 -121.605
Saxson Creek................................................ 48.689 -122.156 48.689 -122.163
Schweitzer Creek............................................ 48.065 -121.688 48.074 -121.699
Segelsen Creek.............................................. 48.299 -121.707 48.280 -121.715
Seventysix Gulch............................................ 47.974 -121.384 47.986 -121.393
Seymour Creek............................................... 48.755 -122.009 48.758 -122.010
Shaw Creek.................................................. 46.901 -121.568 46.893 -121.580
Ship Canal (Chittendon Locks)............................... 47.660 -122.379 ...........
Shotgun Creek............................................... 47.380 -121.708 47.384 -121.706
Sibley Creek................................................ 48.511 -121.255 48.511 -121.262
Silesia Creek............................................... 48.910 -121.485 48.999 -121.613
Silver Creek................................................ 48.981 -121.190 48.970 -121.104
Silver Creek................................................ 47.938 -121.439 47.897 -121.436
Silver Creek................................................ 47.000 -121.530 46.997 -121.524
Silver Gulch................................................ 48.075 -121.564 48.078 -121.570
Silver Springs.............................................. 46.994 -121.533 46.997 -121.533
Sister Creek................................................ 48.746 -121.974 48.755 -121.988
Skagit River................................................ 48.471 -121.608 48.712 -121.138
Skookum Creek............................................... 48.686 -122.106 48.670 -122.142
Skykomish River............................................. 47.813 -121.579 47.855 -121.954
Slate Creek................................................. 48.752 -120.786 48.756 -120.796
Small Creek................................................. 48.158 -120.978 48.162 -121.006
Smith Creek................................................. 48.841 -122.262 48.859 -122.309
Snohomish River............................................. 47.830 -122.046 48.016 -122.151
Snoqualmie River............................................ 47.541 -121.837 47.830 -122.046
Snowslide Gulch............................................. 47.858 -121.509 47.858 -121.503
Son of Gallop............................................... 48.889 -121.943 48.884 -121.940
Sonny Boy Creek............................................. 48.427 -121.172 48.462 -121.197
South Fork Canyon Creek..................................... 48.154 -121.785 48.158 -121.817
[[Page 63984]]
South Fork Cascade River.................................... 48.391 -121.109 48.463 -121.164
South Fork Cedar River...................................... 47.305 -121.513 47.313 -121.521
South Fork Nooksack River................................... 48.616 -122.103 48.809 -122.203
South Fork Salmon Creek..................................... 47.903 -121.486 47.906 -121.476
South Fork Sauk River....................................... 47.986 -121.393 48.097 -121.389
South Fork Skagit River..................................... 48.296 -122.364 48.367 -122.358
South Fork Skagit River (Brandstedt Slough)................. 48.311 -122.357 48.311 -122.357
South Fork Skagit River (Crooked Slough).................... 48.306 -122.369 48.307 -122.373
South Fork Skagit River (Deepwater Slough).................. 48.327 -122.355 48.306 -122.383
South Fork Skagit River (Freshwater Slough)................. 48.338 -122.349 48.321 -122.377
South Fork Skagit River (Old River)......................... 48.308 -122.365 48.308 -122.365
South Fork Skagit River (Steamboat Slough).................. 48.324 -122.348 48.296 -122.364
South Fork Skagit River (Tom Moore Slough).................. 48.296 -122.364 48.324 -122.348
South Fork Skagit River (Unnamed off Deepwater Slough)...... 48.317 -122.369 48.307 -122.389
South Fork Skykomish River.................................. 47.705 -121.307 47.813 -121.579
South Fork Stillaguamish River.............................. 48.030 -121.483 48.204 -122.127
South Fork Tolt River....................................... 47.693 -121.694 47.696 -121.821
South Mowich River.......................................... 46.877 -121.855 46.915 -121.895
South Pass.................................................. 48.225 -122.386 48.238 -122.378
South Prairie Creek......................................... 47.093 -121.952 47.098 -122.156
South Puyallup River........................................ 46.808 -121.892 46.864 -121.951
South Slough................................................ 48.193 -122.256 48.194 -122.254
Southeastern Shoreline Vashon Island........................ 47.331 -122.493 47.348 -122.451
Squire Creek................................................ 48.194 -121.638 48.279 -121.685
St.Andrews Creek............................................ 46.834 -121.918 46.837 -121.921
Steamboat Slough............................................ 47.984 -122.169 48.033 -122.204
Stetattle Creek............................................. 48.727 -121.155 48.717 -121.150
Stillaguamish River......................................... 48.193 -122.167 48.238 -122.378
Straight Creek.............................................. 48.254 -121.398 48.272 -121.398
Suiattle River.............................................. 48.162 -121.006 48.306 -121.428
Sulphide Creek.............................................. 48.789 -121.553 48.777 -121.533
Sulphur Creek............................................... 48.279 -121.086 48.247 -121.193
Sulphur Creek............................................... 48.659 -121.711 48.648 -121.699
Sultan River................................................ 47.870 -121.829 47.872 -121.826
Sunrise Creek............................................... 46.967 -121.540 46.971 -121.540
Swift Creek................................................. 48.747 -121.659 48.734 -121.659
Swift Creek................................................. 46.873 -121.954 46.870 -121.964
Swinomish Channel........................................... 48.440 -122.499 48.441 -122.504
Tenas Creek................................................. 48.335 -121.422 48.324 -121.440
Thompson Creek.............................................. 48.891 -121.880 48.879 -121.915
Three Fools Creek........................................... 48.897 -120.849 48.890 -120.974
Three Lakes Outlet (0319).......................... 48.626 -121.888 48.625 -121.884
Thunder Creek............................................... 48.563 -121.027 48.678 -121.078
Tolmie Creek................................................ 46.984 -121.944 46.990 -121.944
Tolt River.................................................. 47.696 -121.821 47.640 -121.927
Troublesome Creek........................................... 47.925 -121.363 47.897 -121.404
Trout Creek................................................. 47.833 -121.434 47.864 -121.488
Tye River................................................... 47.717 -121.229 47.705 -121.307
Union Slough................................................ 47.984 -122.167 48.034 -122.191
Unnamed trib. (0194)............................... 47.073 -121.693 47.072 -121.683
Unnamed trib. (0217)............................... 46.992 -121.705 46.992 -121.708
Unnamed trib. (0219)............................... 46.990 -121.706 46.987 -121.704
Unnamed trib. (0226)............................... 46.962 -121.711 46.961 -121.713
Unnamed trib. (0234)............................... 46.961 -121.711 46.965 -121.714
Unnamed trib. (0241)............................... 48.293 -121.785 48.284 -121.781
Unnamed trib. (0242)............................... 48.294 -121.772 48.286 -121.772
Unnamed trib. (0243)............................... 48.295 -121.759 48.286 -121.772
Unnamed trib. (0265)............................... 48.746 -122.094 48.743 -122.109
Unnamed trib. (0284)............................... 48.650 -122.116 48.649 -122.121
Unnamed trib. (0290)............................... 48.633 -122.121 48.635 -122.117
Unnamed trib. (0291)............................... 48.630 -122.121 48.636 -122.116
Unnamed trib. (0315)............................... 48.606 -121.953 48.608 -121.954
Unnamed trib. (0316)............................... 48.608 -121.930 48.605 -121.930
Unnamed trib. (0320)............................... 48.620 -121.861 48.625 -121.882
Unnamed trib. (0321)............................... 48.632 -121.872 48.629 -121.880
Unnamed trib. (0323)............................... 48.656 -121.862 48.655 -121.862
Unnamed trib. (0332)............................... 48.684 -121.921 48.690 -121.927
Unnamed trib. (0336)............................... 46.976 -121.547 46.976 -121.542
Unnamed trib. (0347)............................... 48.821 -122.121 48.828 -122.141
Unnamed trib. (0349)............................... 48.812 -122.125 48.815 -122.129
[[Page 63985]]
Unnamed trib. (0364)............................... 46.904 -121.567 46.904 -121.561
Unnamed trib. (0364)............................... 48.131 -121.909 48.123 -121.903
Unnamed trib. (0365)............................... 48.133 -121.884 48.124 -121.889
Unnamed trib. (0367)............................... 48.763 -122.040 48.765 -122.036
Unnamed trib. (0371)............................... 48.755 -122.017 48.757 -122.016
Unnamed trib. (0374)............................... 48.761 -121.986 48.756 -121.994
Unnamed trib. (0425)............................... 48.934 -122.036 48.927 -122.031
Unnamed trib. (0439)............................... 47.325 -121.535 47.325 -121.532
Unnamed trib. (0476)............................... 48.845 -121.896 48.844 -121.902
Unnamed trib. (0565)............................... 46.960 -121.793 46.959 -121.792
Unnamed trib. (1119)............................... 48.185 -121.433 48.181 -121.430
Unnamed trib. (LB1) upstream of Crystal Ck.................. 46.925 -121.544 46.923 -121.546
Unnamed trib. (LB2) upstream of Crystal Ck.................. 46.923 -121.543 46.921 -121.546
Unnamed trib. (RB) upstream of Crystal Creek................ 46.920 -121.543 46.918 -121.542
Unnamed trib. downstream Boulder Ck......................... 48.929 -122.040 48.926 -122.046
Unnamed trib. downstream Wanlick Ck......................... 48.641 -121.878 48.640 -121.883
Unnamed trib. upstream Chenius Ck........................... 46.992 -121.843 46.990 -121.839
Unnamed trib. upstream of (0214)................... 46.997 -121.700 46.991 -121.704
Unnamed trib. upstream Wallace Ck........................... 48.742 -121.947 48.739 -121.936
Van Horn Creek.............................................. 46.977 -121.718 46.976 -121.719
Viola Creek................................................. 47.043 -121.712 47.052 -121.695
Vista Creek................................................. 48.180 -121.057 48.194 -121.047
Wallace Creek............................................... 48.748 -121.943 48.745 -121.951
Wallace River............................................... 47.874 -121.649 47.859 -121.795
Wanlick Creek............................................... 48.644 -121.877 48.663 -121.799
Warm Creek.................................................. 48.761 -121.972 48.755 -121.979
Weden Creek................................................. 47.986 -121.444 48.003 -121.439
Wells Creek................................................. 48.890 -121.791 48.905 -121.809
West Cady Creek............................................. 47.898 -121.307 47.899 -121.319
West Cornell Creek.......................................... 48.878 -121.969 48.888 -121.961
West Fork Foss River........................................ 47.627 -121.311 47.653 -121.294
West Fork White River....................................... 46.941 -121.708 47.125 -121.619
West Pass................................................... 48.238 -122.378 48.246 -122.394
West Slide Creek (0422)............................ 48.912 -122.063 48.917 -122.067
White Chuck River........................................... 48.070 -121.151 48.181 -121.424
White Creek................................................. 48.403 -121.538 48.397 -121.553
White River................................................. 46.893 -121.601 47.274 -122.217
Wildcat Creek............................................... 48.895 -122.006 48.909 -122.001
Wiseman Creek............................................... 48.516 -122.130 48.506 -122.135
Wright Creek................................................ 46.878 -121.615 46.877 -121.615
Wrong Creek................................................. 47.024 -121.710 47.049 -121.694
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands or
habitat conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 876.9 km (544.9 mi) of
streams, 203.4 km (126.4 mi) of marine shoreline, and 1,629.5 ha
(4,026.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs have been excluded from critical
habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit:
(A) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) ,
including portions of Lower Green River, Lower Nisqually, Lower Skagit
River, Nooksack River, Puyallup River, Samish River, Snohomish &
Skykomish Rivers, Stillaguamish River, and Puget Sound Marine CHSUs;
(B) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington Department of Natural Resources HCP, including portions of
Lower Green River, Lower Skagit River, Nooksack River, Puyallup River,
Samish River, Snohomish and Skykomish Rivers, Stillaguamish River, and
Puget Sound Marine CHSUs; and
(C) Waterbodies within the areas under management by the
Muckleshoot Tribe, including portions of the Puyallup River CHSU;
Swinomish Tribe, including portions of the Puget Sound Marine CHSU;
Lummi Nation, including portions of Nooksack River and Puget Sound
Marine CHSUs; Nooksack Tribe, including portions of Nooksack River
CHSU; Tulalip Tribes, including portions of Puget Sound Marine CHSU;
Puyallup Tribe, including portions of Puyallup River and Puget Sound
Marine CHSUs; and Stillaguamish Tribe, including portions of
Stillaguamish River CHSU, within reservation boundaries, and
waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(1) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(2) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(3) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(4) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 2, Puget Sound follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63986]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.003
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(10) Unit 3: Lower Columbia River Basins
(i) This unit consists of 119.3 km (74.2 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in southwestern Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63987]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buck Creek.................................................. 45.865 -121.579 45.781 -121.515
Clearwater Creek............................................ 46.278 -121.331 46.276 -121.328
Cougar Creek................................................ 46.071 -122.268 46.055 -122.293
Drift Creek................................................. 46.023 -122.090 46.008 -122.078
Fish Lake Stream............................................ 46.341 -121.370 46.275 -121.313
Klickitat River............................................. 46.255 -121.240 45.691 -121.295
Lake Merwin................................................. 45.977 -122.466 ...........
Lewis River................................................. 45.957 -122.556 46.066 -122.020
Little Muddy Creek.......................................... 46.278 -121.353 46.276 -121.328
Muddy River................................................. 46.069 -122.007 46.168 -122.034
Phelps Creek................................................ 45.892 -121.566 45.881 -121.518
Pine Creek.................................................. 46.142 -122.096 46.071 -122.017
Rush Creek.................................................. 46.055 -121.916 46.075 -121.938
Swift Creek................................................. 46.084 -122.200 46.086 -122.204
Swift Reservoir............................................. 46.056 -122.114 ...........
Trappers Creek.............................................. 46.289 -121.363 46.276 -121.336
Two Lakes Stream............................................ 46.340 -121.385 46.341 -121.370
Unnamed trib. - off Fish Lake Stream........................ 46.323 -121.438 46.331 -121.360
Unnamed trib. ('P10')....................................... 46.123 -122.088 46.120 -122.077
Unnamed trib. ('P7')........................................ 46.099 -122.069 46.092 -122.059
Unnamed trib. ('P8')........................................ 46.104 -122.064 46.140 -122.082
West Fork Klickitat River................................... 46.276 -121.328 46.242 -121.247
White Salmon River.......................................... 45.897 -121.504 45.722 -121.523
Yale Lake................................................... 46.012 -122.312 ...........
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands and
habitat conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 155.6 km (96.7 mi) of
streams and 4,856.1 ha (11,999.7 ac) of lakes and reservoirs have been
excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this unit:
(A) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) ,
including portions of Klickitat River, Lewis River, and White Salmon
River CHSUs;
(B) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington Department of Natural Resources HCP, including portions of
Klickitat River, Lewis River, and White Salmon River CHSUs; and
(C) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
PacifiCorp Lewis River Hydropower Project Conservation Easement,
including portions of Lewis River CHSU.
(D) Waterbodies within the areas under management by the Yakama
Nation including the Klickitat River CHSU, within reservation
boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(1) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(2) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(3) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(4) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 3, Lower Columbia River Basins follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63988]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.004
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(11) Unit 4: Upper Willamette River
(i) This unit consists of 312.4 km (194.1 mi) of streams and
3,601.5 ha (8,899.5 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northwestern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63989]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anderson Creek.............................................. 44.258 -122.043 44.278 -122.022
Bear Creek.................................................. 43.554 -122.209 43.544 -122.244
Blue River.................................................. 44.172 -122.329 44.153 -122.344
Carmen-Smith Spawning Channel............................... 44.273 -122.051 44.271 -122.052
Cougar Reservoir............................................ 44.100 -122.230 ...........
Deer Creek.................................................. 44.259 -122.063 44.241 -122.058
Dexter Reservoir............................................ 43.915 -122.789 ...........
East Fork Horse Creek....................................... 44.170 -122.175 44.176 -122.179
East Fork South Fork McKenzie River......................... 44.117 -122.204 44.116 -122.195
Hills Creek Lake............................................ 43.671 -122.427 ...........
Horse Creek................................................. 44.125 -122.037 44.170 -122.175
Indigo Creek................................................ 43.497 -122.262 43.495 -122.268
Lookout Point Lake.......................................... 43.872 -122.682 ...........
Lost Creek.................................................. 44.161 -122.018 44.189 -122.067
McKenzie River.............................................. 44.190 -122.079 44.285 -122.042
Middle Fork Willamette River................................ 43.481 -122.255 44.022 -123.018
Olallie Creek............................................... 44.257 -122.042 44.269 -122.025
Roaring River............................................... 43.928 -122.066 43.955 -122.092
Smith River................................................. 44.279 -122.051 44.287 -122.049
South Fork McKenzie River................................... 43.955 -122.092 44.159 -122.296
Sweetwater Creek............................................ 44.283 -122.035 44.279 -122.046
Swift Creek................................................. 43.560 -122.163 43.502 -122.300
Trail Bridge Reservoir...................................... 44.277 -122.048 ...........
West Fork Horse Creek....................................... 44.170 -122.175 44.172 -122.207
White Branch................................................ 44.160 -122.019 44.167 -122.030
Willamette River............................................ 44.022 -123.018 44.125 -123.107
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 4, Upper Willamette River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63990]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.005
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(12) Unit 5: Hood River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 128.1 km (79.6 mi) of streams and 36.9 ha
(91.1 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in northcentral
Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63991]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bear Creek.................................................. 45.499 -121.630 45.486 -121.668
Clear Branch................................................ 45.444 -121.711 45.463 -121.646
Coe Branch.................................................. 45.413 -121.685 45.463 -121.646
Compass Creek............................................... 45.401 -121.683 45.434 -121.668
East Fork Hood River........................................ 45.575 -121.627 45.605 -121.633
Elk Creek................................................... 45.405 -121.773 45.456 -121.782
Elliot Branch............................................... 45.464 -121.640 45.453 -121.638
Hood River.................................................. 45.605 -121.633 45.720 -121.507
Jones Creek................................................. 45.462 -121.782 45.468 -121.806
Lake Branch................................................. 45.539 -121.743 45.549 -121.700
Laurance Lake............................................... 45.460 -121.665 ...........
Laurel Creek................................................ 45.513 -121.789 45.539 -121.743
McGee Creek................................................. 45.456 -121.782 45.411 -121.760
Middle Fork Hood River...................................... 45.463 -121.646 45.575 -121.627
Pinnacle Creek.............................................. 45.433 -121.687 45.458 -121.661
Red Hill Creek.............................................. 45.453 -121.735 45.483 -121.770
Tony Creek.................................................. 45.553 -121.639 45.472 -121.712
Unnamed - Off Clear Branch.................................. 45.448 -121.701 45.447 -121.702
West Fork Hood River........................................ 45.456 -121.782 45.605 -121.633
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 5, Hood River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63992]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.006
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(13) Unit 6: Lower Deschutes River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 232.8 km (139.7 mi) of streams and
1,224.9 ha (3,026.8 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northcentral Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63993]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abbot Creek................................................. 44.544 -121.671 44.570 -121.621
Blue Lake................................................... 44.413 -121.769 ...........
Brush Creek................................................. 44.543 -121.707 44.504 -121.659
Bunch Grass Creek........................................... 44.993 -121.647 44.987 -121.644
Candle Creek................................................ 44.583 -121.678 44.576 -121.619
Canyon Creek................................................ 44.502 -121.742 44.501 -121.643
Crooked River............................................... 44.393 -121.193 44.501 -121.286
Deschutes River............................................. 44.373 -121.292 45.639 -120.915
Heising Spring.............................................. 44.491 -121.652 44.493 -121.649
Jack Creek.................................................. 44.472 -121.727 44.493 -121.648
Jefferson Creek............................................. 44.625 -121.691 44.577 -121.620
Lake Billy Chinook.......................................... 44.568 -121.308 ...........
Lake Billy Chinook.......................................... 44.593 -121.370 ...........
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.426 -121.727 44.436 -121.703
Link Creek.................................................. 44.415 -121.766 44.419 -121.756
Metolius River.............................................. 44.434 -121.638 44.619 -121.469
Middle Fork Lake Creek...................................... 44.436 -121.703 44.453 -121.643
Roaring Creek............................................... 44.527 -121.709 44.508 -121.687
Shitike Creek............................................... 44.748 -121.682 44.762 -121.228
South Fork Lake Creek....................................... 44.435 -121.705 44.442 -121.662
Spring Creek................................................ 44.457 -121.644 44.451 -121.651
Street Creek................................................ 44.590 -121.506 44.599 -121.454
Suttle Lake................................................. 44.422 -121.741 ...........
Trout Creek................................................. 44.803 -121.069 44.821 -121.089
Unnamed - Off Canyon Creek.................................. 44.527 -121.679 44.504 -121.658
Unnamed - Off Jack Creek.................................... 44.476 -121.725 44.476 -121.723
Unnamed - Off Jack Creek.................................... 44.477 -121.724 44.476 -121.723
Unnamed - Off Jack Creek.................................... 44.477 -121.724 44.477 -121.724
Unnamed - Off Jefferson Creek............................... 44.634 -121.699 44.625 -121.691
Unnamed - Off Roaring Creek................................. 44.522 -121.700 44.516 -121.700
Unnamed - Off Roaring Creek................................. 44.522 -121.700 44.521 -121.700
Unnamed - Off Roaring Creek................................. 44.516 -121.712 44.516 -121.700
Warm Springs River 1........................................ 44.941 -121.431 44.941 -121.431
Warm Springs River 2........................................ 44.969 -121.585 44.969 -121.585
Whitewater River............................................ 44.704 -121.728 44.670 -121.546
Whychus Creek............................................... 44.460 -121.336 44.417 -121.389
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands
totaling 230.4 km (143.2 mi) of streams and 445.3 ha (1,100.4 ac) of
lakes and reservoirs have been excluded from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit. These are
waterbodies within the areas under management by the Confederated
Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation within reservation boundaries,
and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(A) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(B) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(C) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(D) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 6, Lower Deschutes River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63994]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.007
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(14) Unit 7: Odell Lake
(i) This unit consists of 27.4 km (17.0 mi) of streams and 1,387.1
ha (3,427.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northcentral Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63995]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Crystal Creek............................................... 43.566 -122.052 43.572 -122.022
Maklaks Creek............................................... 43.566 -121.945 43.564 -121.915
Odell Creek................................................. 43.550 -121.964 43.591 -121.855
Odell Lake.................................................. 43.572 -122.001 ...........
Trapper Creek............................................... 43.548 -122.076 43.585 -122.048
Unnamed - Off Odell Creek................................... 43.557 -121.919 43.561 -121.943
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 7, Odell Lake follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63996]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.008
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(15) Unit 8: Mainstem Lower Columbia River
(i) This unit consists of 340.4 km (211.5 mi) of streams. The unit
is located along the border between Oregon and Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63997]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Columbia River.............................................. 45.645 -121.933 45.800 -122.787
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plan (HCP) totaling 1.7 km (1.1 mi) of streams have been
excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic area
covered by the Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP).
(iv) Map of Unit 8, Mainstem Lower Columbia River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 63998]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.009
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(16) Unit 9: Klamath River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 445.2 km (276.6 mi) of streams and
3,775.5 ha (9,329.4 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
southwestern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 63999]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agency Lake................................................. 42.541 -121.964 ...........
Annie Creek................................................. 42.721 -121.990 42.817 -122.113
Boulder Creek............................................... 42.660 -120.784 42.673 -120.762
Boulder Creek............................................... 42.517 -120.952 42.494 -120.885
Brownsworth Creek........................................... 42.392 -120.914 42.469 -120.855
Calahan Creek............................................... 42.838 -121.267 42.924 -121.292
Camp Creek.................................................. 42.445 -120.795 42.471 -120.838
Cherry Creek................................................ 42.615 -122.201 42.631 -122.074
Corral Creek................................................ 42.455 -120.783 42.480 -120.819
Coyote Creek................................................ 42.862 -121.109 42.893 -121.247
Crane Creek................................................. 42.638 -122.052 42.642 -122.065
Crooked Creek............................................... 42.598 -121.946 42.686 -121.965
Dead Cow Creek.............................................. 42.590 -120.837 42.562 -120.781
Deming Creek................................................ 42.448 -120.954 42.486 -120.886
Dixon Creek................................................. 42.518 -120.938 42.532 -120.925
Fort Creek.................................................. 42.695 -121.968 42.672 -121.980
Fourmile Creek.............................................. 42.612 -122.051 42.633 -122.077
Gearhart Creek.............................................. 42.566 -120.887 42.510 -120.872
Gold Creek.................................................. 42.590 -120.819 42.606 -120.795
Hole Creek.................................................. 42.567 -120.870 42.541 -120.861
Leonard Creek............................................... 42.413 -120.868 42.465 -120.865
Long Creek.................................................. 42.726 -121.160 42.831 -121.200
North Fork Sprague River.................................... 42.497 -121.009 42.557 -120.840
Nottin Creek................................................ 42.570 -120.871 42.532 -120.851
Rifle Creek................................................. 42.694 -120.881 42.682 -120.846
School Creek................................................ 42.604 -120.847 42.618 -120.808
Sevenmile Canal............................................. 42.582 -121.971 42.646 -122.052
Sevenmile Creek............................................. 42.646 -122.052 42.690 -122.151
South Fork Sprague River.................................... 42.392 -120.914 42.481 -120.785
South Fork Sycan River...................................... 42.663 -120.794 42.633 -120.796
Sun Creek................................................... 42.734 -122.009 42.876 -122.100
Sycan River................................................. 42.647 -120.735 42.784 -121.095
Threemile Creek............................................. 42.642 -122.065 42.640 -122.139
Unnamed - Off Dixon Creek................................... 42.523 -120.931 42.521 -120.922
Unnamed - Off Long Creek.................................... 42.873 -121.299 42.870 -121.296
West Canal.................................................. 42.646 -122.052 42.531 -122.005
Wood River.................................................. 42.577 -121.941 42.747 -121.985
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 9, Klamath River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64000]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.010
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(17) Unit 10: Upper Columbia River Basins
(i) This unit consists of 931.8 km (579.0 mi) of streams and
1,033.2 ha (2,553.1 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northcentral Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64001]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alder Creek................................................. 47.845 -120.666 47.919 -120.647
Alpine Creek................................................ 48.084 -120.864 48.083 -120.866
Andrews Creek............................................... 48.782 -120.108 48.787 -120.113
Beaver Creek................................................ 48.327 -120.066 48.492 -119.993
Black Lake.................................................. 48.829 -120.208 ...........
Blue Buck Creek............................................. 48.486 -120.005 48.553 -119.963
Buck Creek.................................................. 48.104 -120.878 48.106 -120.886
Buttermilk Creek............................................ 48.363 -120.339 48.340 -120.303
Canyon Creek................................................ 47.907 -120.895 47.891 -120.965
Cedar Creek................................................. 48.589 -120.471 48.566 -120.475
Chelan River................................................ 47.803 -119.980 47.812 -119.985
Chewuch River............................................... 48.476 -120.183 48.844 -120.023
Chikamin Creek.............................................. 47.904 -120.731 47.985 -120.718
Chiwaukum Creek............................................. 47.679 -120.728 47.715 -120.839
Chiwawa River............................................... 47.788 -120.660 48.104 -120.878
Cougar Lake................................................. 48.881 -120.466 ...........
Crater Creek................................................ 48.214 -120.209 48.215 -120.270
Diamond Creek............................................... 48.849 -120.422 48.855 -120.416
Drake Creek................................................. 48.781 -120.396 48.787 -120.389
Early Winters Creek......................................... 48.601 -120.438 48.503 -120.625
East Fork Buttermilk Creek.................................. 48.340 -120.303 48.296 -120.308
Eightmile Creek............................................. 48.604 -120.163 48.804 -120.338
Entiat River................................................ 47.660 -120.218 47.920 -120.507
Eureka Creek................................................ 48.700 -120.492 48.709 -120.506
First Hidden Lake........................................... 48.899 -120.487 ...........
Foggy Dew Creek............................................. 48.204 -120.190 48.161 -120.297
French Creek................................................ 47.628 -120.963 47.593 -121.042
Goat Creek.................................................. 48.574 -120.379 48.730 -120.360
Gold Creek.................................................. 48.188 -120.095 48.185 -120.116
Henry Creek................................................. 47.768 -120.991 47.754 -120.996
Huckleberry Creek........................................... 48.569 -120.473 48.511 -120.450
Icicle Creek................................................ 47.550 -120.679 47.558 -120.672
Ingalls Creek............................................... 47.463 -120.661 47.448 -120.859
Jack Creek.................................................. 47.608 -120.900 47.529 -120.952
James Creek................................................. 48.077 -120.858 48.075 -120.861
Lake Creek.................................................. 48.750 -120.137 48.848 -120.239
Lake Wenatchee.............................................. 47.823 -120.778 ...........
Leland Creek................................................ 47.662 -121.041 47.612 -121.089
Lightning Creek............................................. 48.451 -119.999 48.453 -119.996
Little Bridge Creek......................................... 48.379 -120.286 48.449 -120.432
Little Wenatchee River...................................... 47.827 -120.819 47.913 -121.094
Lost River.................................................. 48.650 -120.512 48.896 -120.486
Mad River................................................... 47.736 -120.363 47.864 -120.608
Methow River................................................ 48.050 -119.894 48.651 -120.513
Middle Hidden Lake.......................................... 48.908 -120.489 ...........
Mill Creek.................................................. 47.777 -121.011 47.772 -121.021
Monument Creek.............................................. 48.732 -120.449 48.803 -120.495
Napeequa River.............................................. 47.921 -120.897 47.931 -120.879
Nason Creek................................................. 47.809 -120.716 47.784 -121.028
Negro Creek................................................. 47.444 -120.662 47.418 -120.797
North Creek................................................. 48.454 -120.563 48.462 -120.559
North Fork Gold Creek....................................... 48.185 -120.116 48.238 -120.283
North Fork Wolf Creek....................................... 48.485 -120.347 48.530 -120.424
Panther Creek............................................... 47.941 -120.929 47.938 -120.943
Peshastin Creek............................................. 47.558 -120.574 47.444 -120.662
Phelps Creek................................................ 48.070 -120.853 48.080 -120.839
Ptarmigan Creek............................................. 48.891 -120.482 48.885 -120.483
Rainy Creek................................................. 47.852 -120.955 47.816 -121.075
Rattlesnake Creek........................................... 48.648 -120.566 48.651 -120.571
Reynolds Creek.............................................. 48.406 -120.479 48.404 -120.490
Robinson Creek.............................................. 48.659 -120.538 48.673 -120.539
Rock Creek.................................................. 47.963 -120.796 48.037 -120.763
South Creek................................................. 48.438 -120.529 48.428 -120.568
Stormy Creek................................................ 47.822 -120.422 47.867 -120.360
Tillicum Creek.............................................. 47.747 -120.394 47.723 -120.439
Trout Creek................................................. 48.640 -120.599 48.664 -120.711
Twisp River................................................. 48.369 -120.119 48.464 -120.606
Unnamed stream.............................................. 47.592 -120.661 47.590 -120.663
Unnamed stream.............................................. 47.578 -120.666 47.575 -120.670
Unnamed stream.............................................. 47.834 -120.875 47.838 -120.900
[[Page 64002]]
Unnamed stream.............................................. 47.837 -120.878 47.835 -120.885
W. Fork Buttermilk Creek.................................... 48.340 -120.303 48.259 -120.437
War Creek................................................... 48.361 -120.396 48.362 -120.411
Wenatchee River............................................. 47.456 -120.317 47.808 -120.728
West Fork Methow River...................................... 48.648 -120.512 48.641 -120.609
White River................................................. 47.834 -120.816 47.953 -120.940
Wolf Creek.................................................. 48.491 -120.232 48.476 -120.441
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plan (HCP) totaling 119.7 km (74.4 mi) of streams have
been excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic
area covered by the Washington State Forest Practices Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) , including portions of Entiat River, Methow
River, and Wenatchee River CHSUs.
(iv) Map of Unit 10, Upper Columbia River Basins follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64003]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.011
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(18) Unit 11: Yakima River
(i) This unit consists of 896.9 km (557.3 mi) of streams and
6,285.2 ha (15,530.9 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located
in central Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64004]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahtanum Creek............................................... 46.529 -120.473 46.523 -120.855
American River.............................................. 46.976 -121.158 46.901 -121.416
Bear Creek.................................................. 46.538 -121.261 46.540 -121.282
Box Canyon Creek............................................ 47.360 -121.244 47.377 -121.259
Bumping Lake................................................ 46.851 -121.328 ...........
Bumping River............................................... 46.831 -121.378 46.868 -121.300
Camp Creek.................................................. 46.571 -121.243 46.579 -121.266
Cle Elum Lake............................................... 47.290 -121.103 ...........
Cle Elum River.............................................. 47.177 -120.991 47.589 -121.162
Clear Lake.................................................. 46.629 -121.281 ...........
Cold Creek.................................................. 47.368 -121.394 47.352 -121.455
Cooper Lake................................................. 47.426 -121.176 ...........
Cooper River................................................ 47.390 -121.099 47.455 -121.214
Cowiche Creek............................................... 46.628 -120.569 46.647 -120.682
Crow Creek.................................................. 47.015 -121.134 47.017 -121.318
Deep Creek.................................................. 46.844 -121.317 46.804 -121.322
DeRoux Creek................................................ 47.419 -120.941 47.442 -120.980
Dog Creek................................................... 46.787 -121.169 46.793 -121.178
Easton Lake................................................. 47.248 -121.195 ...........
Fall Creek.................................................. 46.586 -121.038 46.595 -121.060
Fortune Creek............................................... 47.477 -121.047 47.469 -120.965
Gold Creek.................................................. 47.475 -121.318 47.390 -121.384
Grey Creek.................................................. 46.591 -121.223 46.594 -121.226
Hindoo Creek................................................ 46.785 -121.164 46.781 -121.183
Hyas Lake................................................... 47.567 -121.121 ...........
Indian Creek................................................ 46.696 -121.301 46.641 -121.250
Jack Creek.................................................. 47.319 -120.856 47.334 -120.744
Jungle Creek................................................ 47.333 -120.856 47.333 -120.925
Kachess Lake................................................ 47.316 -121.228 ...........
Kachess River............................................... 47.251 -121.201 47.429 -121.223
Keechelus Lake.............................................. 47.349 -121.368 ...........
Kettle Creek................................................ 46.941 -121.328 46.916 -121.342
Little Naches River......................................... 46.989 -121.095 47.089 -121.282
Little Rattlesnake Creek.................................... 46.814 -120.949 46.801 -120.948
Little Wildcat Creek........................................ 46.731 -121.236 46.687 -121.267
Middle Fork Ahtanum Creek................................... 46.518 -121.015 46.506 -121.180
Middle Fork Teanaway River.................................. 47.257 -120.898 47.419 -120.994
Mineral Creek............................................... 47.420 -121.241 47.422 -121.246
Naches River................................................ 46.630 -120.515 46.989 -121.095
North Fork Ahtanum Creek.................................... 46.523 -120.855 46.538 -121.212
North Fork Little Naches River.............................. 47.089 -121.282 47.094 -121.392
North Fork Rattlesnake Creek................................ 46.810 -121.068 46.841 -121.170
North Fork Taneaum Creek.................................... 47.112 -120.933 47.109 -121.145
North Fork Teanaway River................................... 47.251 -120.878 47.454 -120.966
North Fork Tieton River..................................... 46.508 -121.436 46.628 -121.271
Oak Creek................................................... 46.724 -120.813 46.735 -120.924
Pileup Creek................................................ 47.045 -121.183 47.090 -121.124
Quartz Creek................................................ 47.017 -121.135 47.082 -121.109
Rattlesnake Creek........................................... 46.820 -120.930 46.759 -121.316
Reynolds Creek.............................................. 46.619 -120.882 46.601 -121.068
Rimrock Lake................................................ 46.639 -121.180 ...........
Rock Creek.................................................. 46.585 -121.025 46.588 -121.079
Shellneck Creek............................................. 46.531 -121.159 46.515 -121.188
Short And Dirty Creek....................................... 46.617 -121.150 46.616 -121.149
South Fork Ahtanum Creek.................................... 46.523 -120.855 46.454 -121.119
South Fork Cowiche Creek.................................... 46.647 -120.682 46.566 -121.124
South Fork Little Naches River.............................. 47.066 -121.227 47.020 -121.392
South Fork Taneaum Creek.................................... 47.112 -120.933 47.091 -121.030
South Fork Tieton River..................................... 46.627 -121.133 46.496 -121.315
Spruce Creek................................................ 46.590 -121.219 46.586 -121.212
Stafford Creek.............................................. 47.347 -120.849 47.398 -120.802
Swauk Creek................................................. 47.123 -120.738 47.158 -120.739
Taneaum Creek............................................... 47.092 -120.709 47.112 -120.933
Teanaway River.............................................. 47.167 -120.835 47.257 -120.898
Tieton River................................................ 46.746 -120.787 46.656 -121.130
Timber Creek................................................ 46.913 -121.386 46.907 -121.382
Union Creek................................................. 46.932 -121.358 46.937 -121.362
Unnamed stream.............................................. 46.545 -121.388 46.550 -121.403
Waptus Lake................................................. 47.503 -121.178 ...........
Waptus River................................................ 47.419 -121.088 47.540 -121.241
[[Page 64005]]
Yakima River................................................ 46.254 -119.228 47.322 -121.340
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands or
habitat conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 288.7 km (179.4 mi) of
streams have been excluded from critical habitat designation under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit:
(A) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) ,
including portions of the Yakima River Critical Habitat Unit (CHU);
(B) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the Plum
Creek Central Cascades HCP, including portions of the Yakima River CHU;
and
(C) Waterbodies within the areas under management by the Yakama
Tribe, including portions of Yakama River CHU and Klickitat River CHSU,
within reservation boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(1) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(2) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(3) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(4) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 11, Yakima River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64006]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.012
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(19) Unit 12: John Day River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 1,089.6 km (677.0 mi) of streams. The
unit is located in northcentral Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64007]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baldy Creek................................................. 44.850 -118.305 44.910 -118.318
Big Creek................................................... 44.976 -118.651 44.960 -118.683
Big Creek................................................... 44.765 -118.686 44.766 -118.874
Boulder Creek............................................... 44.840 -118.333 44.819 -118.415
Boundary Creek.............................................. 44.811 -118.343 44.787 -118.375
Bull Run Creek.............................................. 44.768 -118.291 44.808 -118.425
Butte Creek................................................. 44.585 -118.644 44.642 -118.652
Call Creek.................................................. 44.286 -118.507 44.320 -118.557
Clear Creek................................................. 44.749 -118.546 44.821 -118.450
Clear Creek................................................. 44.447 -118.431 44.593 -118.508
Crane Creek................................................. 44.868 -118.330 44.894 -118.478
Crawfish Creek.............................................. 44.931 -118.234 44.915 -118.298
Cunningham Creek............................................ 44.911 -118.267 44.920 -118.235
Deadwood Creek.............................................. 44.750 -118.719 44.768 -118.793
Deardorff Creek............................................. 44.383 -118.423 44.395 -118.577
Deep Creek.................................................. 44.815 -118.306 44.780 -118.348
Desolation Creek............................................ 44.820 -118.689 44.998 -118.936
Dry Creek................................................... 44.729 -118.531 44.750 -118.500
Granite Boulder Creek....................................... 44.726 -118.611 44.647 -118.665
Granite Creek............................................... 44.857 -118.343 44.866 -118.562
Indian Creek................................................ 44.295 -118.736 44.443 -118.800
John Day River.............................................. 44.250 -118.527 45.737 -120.652
Lightning Creek............................................. 44.718 -118.494 44.765 -118.497
Middle Fork John Day River.................................. 44.593 -118.508 44.917 -119.301
North Fork John Day River................................... 44.866 -118.239 44.755 -119.639
North Reynolds Creek........................................ 44.430 -118.425 44.423 -118.517
Onion Creek................................................. 44.889 -118.339 44.913 -118.401
Rail Creek.................................................. 44.297 -118.490 44.349 -118.575
Reynolds Creek.............................................. 44.405 -118.440 44.414 -118.596
Roberts Creek............................................... 44.276 -118.575 44.348 -118.575
Salmon Creek................................................ 44.717 -118.542 44.725 -118.503
South Fork Desolation Creek................................. 44.719 -118.623 44.820 -118.689
South Trail Creek........................................... 44.953 -118.274 44.937 -118.390
Trail Creek................................................. 44.937 -118.390 44.915 -118.406
Vinegar Creek............................................... 44.707 -118.550 44.601 -118.536
West Fork Clear Creek....................................... 44.733 -118.584 44.749 -118.546
West Fork Meadow Brook...................................... 44.969 -118.966 44.997 -118.945
Winom Creek................................................. 45.050 -118.611 44.976 -118.671
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands
totaling 28.5 km (17.7 mi) of streams have been excluded from critical
habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit.
These are waterbodies within the areas under management by the
Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs Reservation, within reservation
boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(A) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(B) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(C) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(D) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 12, John Day River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64008]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.013
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(20) Unit 13: Umatilla River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 163.0 km (101.3 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in northeastern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64009]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coyote Creek................................................ 45.745 -118.137 45.732 -118.139
Meacham Creek............................................... 45.486 -118.275 45.702 -118.360
North Fork Meacham Creek.................................... 45.584 -118.164 45.527 -118.291
North Fork Umatilla River................................... 45.705 -118.034 45.726 -118.189
Pot Creek................................................... 45.523 -118.163 45.554 -118.201
Ryan Creek.................................................. 45.694 -118.309 45.723 -118.315
Umatilla River.............................................. 45.726 -118.189 45.923 -119.357
Woodward Creek.............................................. 45.750 -118.076 45.736 -118.080
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands
totaling 48.7 km (30.3 mi) of streams have been excluded from critical
habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit.
These are waterbodies within the areas under management by the
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, and waterbodies that are adjacent
to:
(A) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(B) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(C) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(D) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 13, Umatilla River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64010]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.014
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(21) Unit 14: Walla Walla River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 383.7 km (238.4 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in southwestern Washington and northeastern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64011]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Creek.................................................. 46.061 -118.155 46.063 -118.108
Bull Creek.................................................. 46.027 -117.939 46.028 -117.948
Burnt Fork.................................................. 46.087 -117.942 46.105 -117.986
Burnt Fork Creek............................................ 46.040 -117.946 46.032 -117.953
Corral Creek................................................ 46.093 -117.847 46.090 -117.844
Couse Creek................................................. 45.910 -118.371 45.848 -118.327
Deadman Creek............................................... 46.032 -117.956 46.049 -117.951
Green Fly Canyon............................................ 46.142 -117.876 46.142 -117.872
Green Fork Creek............................................ 46.033 -117.940 46.029 -117.949
Griffin Fork................................................ 46.117 -117.965 46.121 -117.975
Henry Canyon................................................ 45.988 -118.091 45.931 -118.078
Husky Spring Creek.......................................... 45.889 -117.952 45.884 -117.978
Lewis Creek................................................. 46.156 -117.772 46.191 -117.825
Low Creek................................................... 45.973 -118.010 45.993 -118.036
Mill Creek.................................................. 46.021 -117.945 46.039 -118.479
North Fork Mill Creek....................................... 46.035 -117.994 46.021 -117.997
North Fork Touchet River.................................... 46.093 -117.865 46.301 -117.960
North Fork Walla Walla River................................ 45.889 -118.087 45.898 -118.308
Paradise Creek.............................................. 46.000 -117.991 46.004 -118.018
Reser Creek................................................. 45.887 -118.001 45.876 -117.986
Skiphorton Creek............................................ 45.874 -118.027 45.852 -118.025
South Fork Touchet River.................................... 46.105 -117.986 46.301 -117.960
South Fork Walla Walla River................................ 45.938 -117.969 45.898 -118.308
Spangler Creek.............................................. 46.099 -117.803 46.149 -117.807
Touchet River............................................... 46.301 -117.960 46.034 -118.683
Walla Walla River........................................... 45.898 -118.308 46.062 -118.940
Wolf Fork Touchet River..................................... 46.075 -117.904 46.274 -117.896
Yellowhawk Creek............................................ 46.076 -118.273 46.017 -118.401
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands or
habitat conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 69.0 km (42.0 mi) of streams
have been excluded from critical habitat designation under section
4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit:
(A) Waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) ,
including portions of Touchet River and Walla Walla River CHSUs; and
(B) Waterbodies within the areas under management by the
Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, including portions of the Touchet
River CHSU, within reservation boundaries, and waterbodies that are
adjacent to:
(1) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(2) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(3) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(4) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 14, Walla Walla River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64012]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.015
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(22) Unit 15: Lower Snake River Basins
(i) This unit consists of 270.8 km (168.3 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in southeastern Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64013]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Asotin Creek................................................ 46.345 -117.054 46.272 -117.292
Bear Creek.................................................. 46.168 -117.560 46.122 -117.546
Charley Creek............................................... 46.289 -117.279 46.279 -117.414
Cold Creek.................................................. 46.191 -117.631 46.178 -117.647
Cougar Creek................................................ 46.205 -117.509 46.180 -117.519
Cummings Creek.............................................. 46.333 -117.675 46.234 -117.594
George Creek................................................ 46.326 -117.106 46.117 -117.361
Hixon Creek................................................. 46.246 -117.684 46.239 -117.690
Little Tucannon River....................................... 46.228 -117.722 46.218 -117.759
Little Turkey Creek......................................... 46.155 -117.737 46.116 -117.750
Meadow Creek................................................ 46.176 -117.719 46.102 -117.786
North Fork Asotin Creek..................................... 46.272 -117.292 46.196 -117.569
Panjab Creek................................................ 46.205 -117.706 46.115 -117.683
Sheep Creek................................................. 46.188 -117.625 46.195 -117.624
South Fork Asotin Creek..................................... 46.272 -117.292 46.145 -117.431
Tucannon River.............................................. 46.557 -118.175 46.139 -117.521
Turkey Creek................................................ 46.161 -117.703 46.113 -117.739
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 13.4 km (8.3 mi) of streams have
been excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2)
of the Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic
area covered by the Washington State Forest Practices Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP), including portions of Asotin Creek and
Tucannon River CHSUs.
(iv) Map of Unit 15, Lower Snake River Basins follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64014]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.016
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(23) Unit 16: Grande Ronde River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 1,057.9 km (657.4 mi) of streams and
605.2 ha (1,495.5 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northeastern Oregon and southwestern Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64015]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bear Creek.................................................. 45.322 -117.481 45.584 -117.541
Beaver Creek................................................ 45.968 -117.808 45.955 -117.786
Boulder Creek............................................... 45.310 -117.625 45.312 -117.633
Butte Creek................................................. 46.064 -117.723 45.982 -117.679
Camp Creek.................................................. 45.387 -117.745 45.387 -117.758
Catherine Creek............................................. 45.120 -117.647 45.408 -117.931
Chicken Creek............................................... 45.024 -118.386 45.095 -118.395
Clear Creek................................................. 44.976 -118.327 45.063 -118.310
Collins Creek............................................... 45.097 -117.514 45.105 -117.543
Crooked Creek............................................... 46.046 -117.625 45.977 -117.552
Deer Creek.................................................. 45.423 -117.588 45.620 -117.700
Dobbin Creek................................................ 45.221 -117.640 45.259 -117.654
East Fork Butte Creek....................................... 46.064 -117.723 46.074 -117.710
East Fork Elk Creek......................................... 45.161 -117.469 45.166 -117.470
East Fork Indian Creek...................................... 45.353 -117.725 45.368 -117.749
East Fork Wallowa River..................................... 45.265 -117.210 45.274 -117.212
East Sheep Creek............................................ 45.003 -118.435 45.026 -118.475
Elk Creek................................................... 45.160 -117.476 45.178 -117.460
Fiddlers Hell Creek......................................... 45.431 -118.144 45.428 -118.160
First Creek................................................. 46.043 -117.547 46.035 -117.571
Five Points Creek........................................... 45.481 -118.144 45.346 -118.222
Fly Creek................................................... 45.121 -118.466 45.210 -118.395
Goat Creek.................................................. 45.413 -117.518 45.418 -117.538
Grande Ronde River.......................................... 44.967 -118.255 46.080 -116.979
Hurricane Creek............................................. 45.274 -117.312 45.420 -117.302
Indian Creek................................................ 45.337 -117.722 45.534 -117.920
Indiana Creek............................................... 45.000 -118.362 45.024 -118.386
Lake Creek.................................................. 45.331 -117.398 45.332 -117.410
Limber Jim Creek............................................ 45.085 -118.230 45.089 -118.344
Little Bear Creek........................................... 45.428 -117.480 45.485 -117.555
Little Fly Creek............................................ 45.109 -118.476 45.121 -118.466
Little Lookingglass Creek................................... 45.817 -117.902 45.750 -117.875
Little Minam River.......................................... 45.246 -117.600 45.401 -117.672
Lookingglass Creek.......................................... 45.779 -118.079 45.707 -117.842
Lookout Creek............................................... 45.078 -118.541 45.109 -118.476
Lostine River............................................... 45.245 -117.375 45.552 -117.490
Marion Creek................................................ 45.097 -118.229 45.105 -118.267
Menatchee Creek............................................. 46.110 -117.439 46.007 -117.365
Middle Fork Catherine Creek................................. 45.154 -117.565 45.152 -117.617
Middle Fork Five Points Creek............................... 45.492 -118.116 45.481 -118.144
Milk Creek.................................................. 45.948 -117.913 45.913 -117.883
Minam River................................................. 45.147 -117.372 45.621 -117.721
Mt Emily Creek.............................................. 45.465 -118.125 45.473 -118.147
North Fork Catherine Creek.................................. 45.225 -117.605 45.120 -117.647
North Fork Indian Creek..................................... 45.402 -117.769 45.433 -117.820
North Fork Wenaha River..................................... 46.066 -117.878 46.066 -117.878
North Minam River........................................... 45.276 -117.512 45.273 -117.537
Pole Creek.................................................. 45.131 -117.531 45.107 -117.560
Sage Creek.................................................. 45.481 -117.594 45.500 -117.607
Sand Pass Creek............................................. 45.120 -117.526 45.108 -117.552
Sheep Creek................................................. 45.019 -118.485 45.105 -118.382
Silver Creek................................................ 45.394 -117.422 45.396 -117.428
South Fork Catherine Creek.................................. 45.110 -117.533 45.120 -117.647
South Fork Wenaha River..................................... 45.890 -117.906 45.951 -117.795
Summer Creek................................................ 45.771 -117.983 45.766 -117.983
Third Creek................................................. 46.089 -117.628 46.046 -117.625
Tie Creek................................................... 45.421 -118.149 45.423 -118.159
Trout Creek................................................. 46.089 -117.628 46.116 -117.641
Unnamed - Off Clear Creek................................... 44.977 -118.314 45.013 -118.330
Wallowa Lake................................................ 45.310 -117.210 ...........
Wallowa River............................................... 45.274 -117.212 45.726 -117.785
Wenaha River................................................ 45.951 -117.795 45.945 -117.451
West Fork Butte Creek....................................... 46.063 -117.772 46.063 -117.723
West Fork Wallowa River..................................... 45.267 -117.216 45.274 -117.212
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 1.0 km (0.6 mi) of streams have been
excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic area
covered by the Washington State Forest Practices
[[Page 64016]]
Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), including portions of the Grand Ronde
River CHSU.
(iv) Map of Unit 16, Grand Ronde River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.017
[[Page 64017]]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(24) Unit 17: Imnaha River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 285.7 km (177.5 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in northeastern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bear Creek.................................................. 45.100 -117.173 45.104 -117.172
Big Sheep Creek............................................. 45.178 -117.120 45.557 -116.835
Blue Creek.................................................. 45.097 -117.194 45.101 -117.195
Cabin Creek................................................. 45.229 -117.090 45.232 -117.089
Cliff Creek................................................. 45.063 -117.269 45.102 -117.215
Imnaha River................................................ 45.113 -117.126 45.817 -116.765
Lick Creek.................................................. 45.147 -117.124 45.198 -117.025
Little Sheep Creek.......................................... 45.232 -117.094 45.520 -116.860
McCully Creek............................................... 45.211 -117.141 45.293 -117.116
Middle Fork Big Sheep Creek................................. 45.181 -117.158 45.178 -117.120
Middle Fork Imnaha River.................................... 45.139 -117.167 45.133 -117.152
North Fork Imnaha River..................................... 45.171 -117.201 45.113 -117.126
Redmont Creek............................................... 45.245 -117.104 45.256 -117.089
Salt Creek.................................................. 45.202 -117.083 45.188 -117.044
Soldier Creek............................................... 45.107 -117.155 45.109 -117.152
South Fork Imnaha River..................................... 45.111 -117.231 45.113 -117.126
Unnamed - Off Lick Creek.................................... 45.141 -117.065 45.133 -117.057
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 17, Imnaha River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64018]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.018
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(25) Unit 18: Sheep / Granite Creeks
(i) This unit consists of 47.9 km (29.7 mi) of streams. The unit is
located in west-central Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64019]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarks Fork................................................. 45.458 -116.533 45.471 -116.447
Granite Creek............................................... 45.192 -116.580 45.349 -116.655
Sheep Creek................................................. 45.405 -116.524 45.468 -116.555
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 18, Sheep/Granite Creeks follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64020]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.019
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(26) Unit 19: Hell's Canyon Complex
(i) This unit consists of 377.5 km (234.6 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in northeastern Oregon and west-central Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64021]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Aspen Creek................................................. 45.057 -117.012 45.049 -117.038
Bear Creek.................................................. 44.959 -116.725 45.136 -116.525
Big Elk Creek............................................... 45.063 -117.024 45.061 -117.065
Cabin Creek................................................. 45.061 -117.021 45.077 -117.025
Camp Creek.................................................. 45.132 -116.623 45.157 -116.621
Clear Creek................................................. 44.866 -117.030 45.043 -117.144
Crooked River............................................... 44.959 -116.725 44.817 -116.743
Duck Creek.................................................. 45.069 -116.906 45.091 -117.004
East Fork Of East Pine Creek................................ 45.021 -117.107 45.042 -117.104
East Fork Pine Creek........................................ 45.022 -117.201 45.071 -117.177
East Pine Creek............................................. 44.872 -117.021 45.046 -117.120
Elk Creek................................................... 45.009 -116.910 45.074 -117.046
Fall Creek.................................................. 44.970 -116.949 45.012 -116.986
Fish Creek.................................................. 44.908 -116.953 45.036 -117.082
Indian Creek................................................ 44.984 -116.829 45.150 -116.591
Lake Fork................................................... 45.020 -116.942 45.067 -117.105
Little Elk Creek............................................ 44.954 -116.962 45.009 -117.029
Meadow Creek................................................ 44.990 -117.143 45.017 -117.172
Mickey Creek................................................ 45.109 -116.565 45.109 -116.535
Middle Fork Pine Creek...................................... 45.039 -117.216 45.057 -117.238
North Pine Creek............................................ 44.910 -116.949 45.079 -116.898
Okanogan Creek.............................................. 44.987 -117.065 45.017 -117.063
Pine Creek.................................................. 44.973 -116.854 45.039 -117.216
Trail Creek................................................. 44.991 -117.143 45.046 -117.163
Trinity Creek............................................... 44.988 -117.072 45.026 -117.084
Unnamed - Off East Pine Creek............................... 44.993 -117.102 45.006 -117.122
Unnamed - trib To Bear Creek................................ 45.124 -116.545 45.137 -116.536
Unnamed - Trib To Bear Creek................................ 45.124 -116.554 45.136 -116.569
Wesley Creek................................................ 45.112 -116.562 45.116 -116.527
West Fork Pine Creek........................................ 45.039 -117.216 45.025 -117.247
Wildhorse River............................................. 44.851 -116.897 44.959 -116.725
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 19, Hell's Canyon Complex follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64022]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.020
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(27) Unit 20: Powder River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 296.5 km (184.2 mi) of streams and 897.0
ha (2,216.5 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northeastern Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64023]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Creek............................................... 45.013 -118.060 44.953 -118.221
Cracker Creek............................................... 44.741 -118.206 44.846 -118.205
Deer Creek.................................................. 44.684 -118.060 44.749 -118.108
Eagle Creek................................................. 44.746 -117.170 45.132 -117.339
East Fork Eagle Creek....................................... 44.983 -117.371 45.170 -117.325
Fruit Creek................................................. 44.809 -118.212 44.858 -118.248
Indian Creek................................................ 45.019 -118.155 44.975 -118.205
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.749 -118.108 44.810 -118.092
Little Cracker Creek........................................ 44.826 -118.197 44.840 -118.167
North Fork Anthony Creek.................................... 45.045 -118.131 45.042 -118.232
North Powder River.......................................... 44.878 -118.204 45.038 -117.896
Phillips Reservoir.......................................... 44.681 -118.052 ...........
Powder River (Lower)........................................ 44.743 -117.047 44.746 -117.170
Powder River (Middle)....................................... 45.044 -117.894 45.038 -117.896
Powder River (Upper)........................................ 44.684 -118.060 44.741 -118.206
Silver Creek................................................ 44.809 -118.208 44.857 -118.292
West Eagle Creek............................................ 45.019 -117.454 45.121 -117.437
Wolf Creek.................................................. 45.044 -117.894 45.067 -118.194
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 20, Powder River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64024]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.021
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(28) Unit 21: Clearwater River
(i) This unit consists of 2,702.1 km (1,679.0 mi) of streams and
6,721.9 ha (16,610.1 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located
in northcentral Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64025]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adair Creek................................................. 47.097 -115.853 47.083 -115.806
American River.............................................. 45.808 -115.475 45.945 -115.450
Baldy Creek................................................. 45.908 -115.630 45.961 -115.721
Baston Creek................................................ 45.760 -115.235 45.731 -115.223
Bear Creek.................................................. 46.019 -114.845 46.108 -114.509
Bear Creek.................................................. 46.711 -114.963 46.750 -114.922
Bear Creek.................................................. 45.863 -115.618 45.878 -115.595
Beaver Creek................................................ 46.506 -114.627 46.553 -114.504
Beaver Creek................................................ 46.842 -115.621 46.758 -115.678
Beaver Creek................................................ 45.896 -115.631 45.943 -115.569
Big Flat Creek.............................................. 46.402 -114.494 46.313 -114.441
Bill Creek.................................................. 46.631 -115.271 46.637 -115.187
Bostonian Creek............................................. 46.962 -115.114 46.996 -115.137
Boulder Creek............................................... 46.615 -114.671 46.678 -114.749
Boundary Creek.............................................. 46.972 -115.108 46.981 -115.077
Breakfast Creek............................................. 46.883 -115.940 46.875 -115.995
Bridge Creek................................................ 45.779 -115.210 45.814 -115.164
Brushy Fork................................................. 46.578 -114.612 46.616 -114.455
Brushy Fork Creek........................................... 46.002 -114.699 45.988 -114.583
Buck Creek.................................................. 47.021 -115.555 47.049 -115.543
Burnt Knob Creek............................................ 45.715 -114.899 45.697 -114.946
Burnt Strip Creek........................................... 45.826 -114.618 45.817 -114.626
Butte Creek (North Fork Clearwater)......................... 47.045 -115.720 47.031 -115.751
Canyon Creek................................................ 45.888 -114.614 45.882 -114.409
Canyon Creek................................................ 47.000 -115.651 47.017 -115.499
Cayuse Creek................................................ 45.705 -114.615 45.740 -114.608
Cayuse Creek................................................ 46.712 -115.021 46.612 -114.793
Cedar Creek................................................. 46.249 -114.709 46.330 -114.706
Chamberlain Creek........................................... 46.929 -115.143 46.924 -115.171
Clearwater River............................................ 46.428 -117.040 46.146 -115.981
Collins Creek............................................... 46.862 -115.434 46.982 -115.453
Colt Creek.................................................. 46.433 -114.540 46.419 -114.636
Colt Killed Creek........................................... 46.508 -114.682 46.428 -114.415
Cooperation Creek........................................... 46.452 -114.870 46.440 -114.817
Corral Creek................................................ 46.483 -115.241 46.534 -115.207
Crooked Fork................................................ 46.508 -114.682 46.704 -114.709
Crooked River............................................... 45.824 -115.530 45.695 -115.549
Cub Creek................................................... 46.034 -114.757 46.031 -114.618
Dawson Creek................................................ 45.730 -115.391 45.743 -115.426
Deep Creek.................................................. 45.707 -114.719 45.708 -114.516
Ditch Creek................................................. 45.747 -115.298 45.794 -115.293
Doe Creek................................................... 46.499 -114.863 46.554 -114.921
Dworshak Reservoir.......................................... 46.660 -116.120 ...........
Eagle Creek................................................. 45.908 -114.854 45.794 -114.891
East Fork American River.................................... 45.864 -115.425 45.919 -115.363
East Fork Crooked River..................................... 45.695 -115.549 45.656 -115.564
East Fork Fishing Creek..................................... 46.556 -114.855 46.561 -114.837
East Fork Legendary Bear Creek.............................. 46.562 -114.736 46.535 -114.766
East Fork Meadow Creek...................................... 45.880 -115.104 45.829 -115.028
East Fork Moose Creek....................................... 46.165 -114.898 46.270 -114.680
East Fork O'Hara Creek...................................... 45.998 -115.524 45.939 -115.541
Elk Creek................................................... 45.818 -115.459 45.841 -115.435
Fish Creek.................................................. 46.333 -115.346 46.373 -115.597
Fish Lake................................................... 46.817 -114.912 ...........
Fish Lake (Lochsa).......................................... 46.333 -115.052 ...........
Fish Lake Creek............................................. 46.331 -115.057 46.407 -115.001
Fishing Creek............................................... 46.492 -114.858 46.571 -114.860
Flat Creek.................................................. 45.722 -114.858 45.651 -114.848
Flint Creek................................................. 45.891 -115.428 45.913 -115.424
Floodwood Creek............................................. 46.888 -115.954 46.974 -115.913
Foehl Creek................................................. 46.970 -115.676 46.990 -115.743
Fourth of July Creek........................................ 46.665 -115.377 46.564 -115.260
Fox Creek................................................... 46.605 -114.755 46.630 -114.696
French Creek................................................ 45.597 -114.592 45.603 -114.572
Fro Creek................................................... 46.479 -115.222 46.467 -115.209
Frost Creek................................................. 46.918 -115.349 46.926 -115.380
Gabe Creek.................................................. 45.697 -114.671 45.710 -114.666
Gedney Creek................................................ 46.056 -115.314 46.135 -115.249
Glover Creek................................................ 46.916 -116.013 46.980 -116.095
Gold Pan Creek.............................................. 45.667 -114.722 45.665 -114.737
[[Page 64026]]
Goose Creek................................................. 46.852 -115.013 46.906 -114.953
Gospel Creek................................................ 45.703 -115.891 45.677 -115.891
Graves Creek................................................ 46.986 -115.101 47.006 -115.079
Hagen Creek................................................. 45.649 -115.818 45.630 -115.809
Haskell Creek............................................... 46.596 -114.604 46.632 -114.583
Hells Half Acre Creek....................................... 45.692 -114.718 45.689 -114.705
Hopeful Creek............................................... 46.671 -114.681 46.724 -114.654
Hungery Creek............................................... 46.356 -115.398 46.400 -115.569
Indian Creek................................................ 45.792 -114.765 45.792 -114.575
Indian Grave Creek.......................................... 46.452 -115.077 46.490 -115.143
Isabella Creek.............................................. 46.849 -115.631 46.913 -115.539
Jack Creek.................................................. 45.778 -114.692 45.788 -114.683
Johnagan Creek.............................................. 46.510 -115.367 46.543 -115.354
Johnny Creek................................................ 46.613 -115.435 46.614 -115.372
Johns Creek................................................. 45.824 -115.890 45.683 -115.755
Jungle Creek................................................ 47.076 -115.804 47.110 -115.796
Kelly Creek................................................. 46.716 -115.258 46.730 -114.861
Kid Lake Creek.............................................. 46.747 -114.806 46.768 -114.805
Kim Creek................................................... 45.679 -114.720 45.682 -114.734
Kirks Fork American River................................... 45.822 -115.411 45.829 -115.390
Lake Creek.................................................. 46.869 -115.079 46.819 -114.905
Lazy Creek.................................................. 45.679 -114.546 45.668 -114.555
Legendary Bear Creek........................................ 46.511 -114.762 46.535 -114.766
Lick Creek.................................................. 45.923 -115.469 45.969 -115.487
Little Clearwater River..................................... 45.754 -114.776 45.738 -114.946
Little Elk Creek............................................ 45.841 -115.435 45.868 -115.449
Little Lost Lake Creek...................................... 47.089 -115.893 47.073 -115.936
Little Moose Creek.......................................... 46.733 -115.078 46.783 -114.906
Little Moose Creek.......................................... 45.716 -115.368 45.709 -115.400
Little North Fork Clearwater River.......................... 46.887 -115.878 47.101 -115.963
Little Weitas Creek......................................... 46.506 -115.392 46.479 -115.389
Liz Creek................................................... 46.482 -115.290 46.436 -115.306
Lochsa River................................................ 46.140 -115.600 46.508 -114.682
Long Creek.................................................. 46.872 -115.076 46.950 -115.025
Lost Lake Creek............................................. 47.095 -115.901 47.087 -115.937
Lund Creek.................................................. 47.068 -115.884 47.050 -115.913
Lynx Creek.................................................. 45.849 -114.938 45.817 -114.952
Magruder Creek.............................................. 45.745 -114.761 45.717 -114.780
Marten Creek................................................ 46.099 -115.053 45.963 -115.046
Maud Creek.................................................. 46.497 -114.515 46.474 -114.411
Meadow Creek................................................ 46.910 -115.233 46.905 -115.117
Meadow Creek................................................ 46.046 -115.296 45.698 -115.218
Melton Creek................................................ 45.725 -115.996 45.724 -115.979
Middle Fork Clearwater River................................ 46.146 -115.981 46.140 -115.600
Middle Fork Kelly Creek..................................... 46.730 -114.861 46.747 -114.806
Middle Fork Red River....................................... 45.659 -115.413 45.631 -115.472
Mill Creek.................................................. 45.830 -115.932 45.725 -115.996
Mink Creek.................................................. 46.601 -114.895 46.628 -114.894
Mist Creek.................................................. 45.567 -114.629 45.555 -114.626
Montana Creek............................................... 47.045 -115.701 47.089 -115.676
Moores Creek................................................ 45.676 -115.838 45.614 -115.880
Moores Lake Creek........................................... 45.677 -115.891 45.659 -115.870
Moose Butte Creek........................................... 45.710 -115.353 45.692 -115.417
Moose Creek................................................. 46.122 -114.935 46.165 -114.898
Moose Creek................................................. 46.721 -115.087 46.752 -115.185
Mule Creek.................................................. 45.925 -115.635 45.932 -115.631
Newsome Creek............................................... 45.828 -115.616 46.004 -115.679
Niagra Gulch................................................ 46.967 -115.137 46.973 -115.159
North Fork Clearwater River................................. 46.503 -116.332 46.999 -115.113
North Fork Kelly Creek...................................... 46.730 -114.861 46.801 -114.874
North Fork Moose Creek...................................... 46.165 -114.898 46.274 -114.924
North Fork Spruce Creek..................................... 46.606 -114.393 46.616 -114.352
O'Hara Creek................................................ 46.086 -115.518 45.998 -115.524
Open Creek.................................................. 45.676 -115.838 45.683 -115.823
Orogrande Creek............................................. 46.631 -115.507 46.564 -115.623
Osier Creek................................................. 46.744 -115.074 46.837 -115.065
Otterson Creek.............................................. 45.776 -115.220 45.820 -115.234
Parachute Creek............................................. 46.528 -114.762 46.530 -114.757
Paradise Creek.............................................. 46.022 -114.729 46.039 -114.527
Pete Creek.................................................. 45.703 -114.580 45.715 -114.564
[[Page 64027]]
Pilot Creek................................................. 45.907 -115.630 45.944 -115.732
Placer Creek................................................ 46.938 -115.168 46.959 -115.179
Pollock Creek............................................... 46.780 -115.023 46.780 -114.990
Postoffice Creek............................................ 46.466 -114.986 46.529 -114.950
Quartz Creek................................................ 46.806 -115.456 46.846 -115.259
Rawhide Creek............................................... 46.898 -115.047 46.938 -115.056
Red Horse Creek............................................. 45.794 -115.401 45.827 -115.327
Red River................................................... 45.808 -115.475 45.803 -115.155
Relief Creek................................................ 45.748 -115.520 45.754 -115.498
Rhoda Creek................................................. 46.234 -114.961 46.239 -115.009
Roaring Creek............................................... 46.886 -115.356 46.918 -115.349
Rock Creek.................................................. 46.598 -114.609 46.612 -114.620
Rocky Run................................................... 47.069 -115.819 47.035 -115.848
Ruby Creek.................................................. 46.733 -115.079 46.745 -115.105
Running Creek............................................... 45.919 -114.832 45.916 -115.033
Rutledge Creek.............................................. 47.073 -115.755 47.108 -115.723
Saddle Gulch................................................ 45.770 -114.654 45.766 -114.641
Salamander Creek............................................ 45.711 -114.866 45.648 -114.879
Sawmill Creek............................................... 45.908 -115.635 45.904 -115.647
Schofield Creek............................................. 45.777 -114.646 45.819 -114.586
Schwar Creek................................................ 45.882 -115.117 45.905 -115.109
Selway River................................................ 46.140 -115.600 45.500 -114.698
Shoot Creek................................................. 46.606 -114.415 46.580 -114.426
Short Creek................................................. 46.886 -115.058 46.898 -115.014
Shot Creek.................................................. 46.639 -115.281 46.666 -115.207
Shotgun Creek............................................... 46.601 -114.665 46.600 -114.738
Siegel Creek................................................ 45.773 -115.388 45.787 -115.368
Silver Creek................................................ 46.607 -114.831 46.653 -114.814
Silver Creek................................................ 45.716 -115.540 45.703 -115.501
Sixmile Creek............................................... 45.764 -115.660 45.763 -115.646
Skull Creek................................................. 46.827 -115.486 46.888 -115.321
Slate Creek................................................. 46.928 -115.009 46.927 -115.019
Slow Gulch Creek............................................ 45.694 -114.561 45.679 -114.546
Soda Creek.................................................. 45.756 -115.257 45.746 -115.252
South Fork Clearwater River................................. 46.146 -115.981 45.808 -115.475
South Fork Kelly Creek...................................... 46.712 -114.863 46.707 -114.818
South Fork Red River........................................ 45.711 -115.345 45.623 -115.480
South Fork Running Creek.................................... 45.845 -114.945 45.823 -114.966
South Fork Spruce Creek..................................... 46.606 -114.393 46.565 -114.353
South Fork Surprise Creek................................... 45.527 -114.680 45.503 -114.655
Spring Creek................................................ 46.546 -114.886 46.552 -114.903
Spruce Creek................................................ 46.616 -114.455 46.606 -114.393
Stoney Creek................................................ 46.884 -115.970 46.915 -116.033
Storm Creek................................................. 46.463 -114.549 46.541 -114.403
Storm Creek................................................. 45.578 -114.641 45.611 -114.591
Stripe Creek................................................ 45.523 -114.704 45.513 -114.736
Sugar Creek................................................. 46.771 -115.035 46.820 -115.006
Surprise Creek.............................................. 45.521 -114.702 45.532 -114.667
Swamp Creek................................................. 46.745 -115.068 46.799 -115.002
Swet Creek.................................................. 45.580 -114.720 45.537 -114.795
Taylor Creek................................................ 45.659 -115.783 45.637 -115.774
Tenmile Creek............................................... 45.806 -115.684 45.639 -115.713
Three Lakes Creek........................................... 45.623 -114.709 45.618 -114.724
Tom Creek................................................... 45.862 -114.987 45.912 -114.985
Trapper Creek............................................... 45.674 -115.345 45.705 -115.248
Twin Creek.................................................. 46.582 -114.528 46.570 -114.475
Twin Lakes Creek............................................ 45.664 -115.828 45.649 -115.818
Unnamed - Off Hopeful Creek................................. 46.708 -114.625 46.699 -114.669
Unnamed - Off Long Creek.................................... 46.947 -115.036 46.939 -115.024
Unnamed - Off West Fork Crooked River....................... 45.695 -115.574 45.690 -115.563
Unnamed 1 - Off Pilot Creek................................. 45.923 -115.688 45.930 -115.677
Unnamed 2 - Off Pilot Creek................................. 45.938 -115.717 45.927 -115.723
Vance Creek................................................. 45.703 -114.580 45.683 -114.593
Vanderbilt Gulch............................................ 46.916 -115.120 46.940 -115.191
W.Fk. American River........................................ 45.913 -115.466 45.935 -115.545
W.Fk. Fishing Creek......................................... 46.537 -114.868 46.567 -114.885
W.Fk. Gedney Creek.......................................... 46.094 -115.294 46.110 -115.295
W.Fk. O'Hara Creek.......................................... 45.998 -115.524 45.949 -115.570
Walton Creek................................................ 46.508 -114.682 46.472 -114.681
Warm Springs Creek.......................................... 46.473 -114.888 46.430 -114.864
[[Page 64028]]
Weasel Creek................................................ 46.601 -114.905 46.623 -114.906
Weir Creek.................................................. 46.457 -115.035 46.534 -115.018
Weitas Creek................................................ 46.636 -115.434 46.508 -115.174
West Fork Crooked River..................................... 45.695 -115.549 45.666 -115.597
West Fork Floodwood Creek................................... 46.957 -115.928 46.973 -115.964
West Fork Legendary Bear Creek.............................. 46.535 -114.766 46.580 -114.752
West Fork Newsome Creek..................................... 45.865 -115.618 45.892 -115.695
West Fork Red River......................................... 45.653 -115.402 45.667 -115.453
White Cap Creek............................................. 45.860 -114.745 45.919 -114.431
Wilkerson Creek............................................. 45.612 -114.707 45.563 -114.615
Williams Creek.............................................. 45.731 -115.656 45.667 -115.658
Williams Lake Creek......................................... 46.644 -114.717 46.647 -114.768
Windy Creek................................................. 46.494 -115.328 46.570 -115.236
Wiseboy Creek............................................... 45.642 -115.712 45.637 -115.704
Wounded Doe Creek........................................... 46.239 -115.009 46.300 -115.080
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 21, Clearwater River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64029]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.022
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(29) Unit 22: Mainstem Upper Columbia River
(i) This unit consists of 520.1 km (323.2 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in central Washington.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64030]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Columbia River.............................................. 45.715 -120.693 47.997 -119.633
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plans (HCPs) totaling 2.5 km (1.6 mi) of streams have been
excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic area
covered by the Washington State Forest Practices Habitat Conservation
Plan (HCP).
(iv) Map of Unit 22, Mainstem Upper Columbia River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64031]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.023
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(30) Unit 23: Mainstem Snake River
(i) This unit consists of 451.7 km (280.6 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in southeastern Washington, northeastern Oregon, and west-
central Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64032]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Snake River................................................. 46.188 -119.031 44.836 -116.901
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 23, Mainstem Snake River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64033]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.024
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(31) Unit 24: Malheur River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 272.3 km (169.2 mi) of streams and 715.9
ha (1,768.9 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in eastern
Oregon.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64034]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Beulah Reservoir............................................ 43.931 -118.154 ...........
Big Creek................................................... 44.259 -118.604 44.145 -118.625
Bosonberg Creek............................................. 44.224 -118.553 44.135 -118.619
Corral Basin Creek.......................................... 44.236 -118.562 44.214 -118.618
Crane Creek................................................. 44.151 -118.387 44.162 -118.371
Crooked Creek............................................... 44.125 -118.666 44.151 -118.635
Elk Creek................................................... 44.245 -118.409 44.250 -118.392
Flat Creek.................................................. 44.305 -118.390 44.304 -118.403
Horseshoe Creek............................................. 44.320 -118.448 44.323 -118.416
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.265 -118.679 44.145 -118.625
Little Crane Creek.......................................... 44.219 -118.423 44.151 -118.387
Malheur River............................................... 44.145 -118.625 43.797 -118.350
McCoy Creek................................................. 44.248 -118.674 44.169 -118.654
Meadow Fork Big Creek....................................... 44.268 -118.644 44.227 -118.622
North Fork Elk Creek........................................ 44.266 -118.446 44.245 -118.409
North Fork Malheur River.................................... 44.360 -118.425 43.945 -118.168
Sheep Creek................................................. 44.281 -118.476 44.281 -118.397
Snowshoe Creek.............................................. 44.259 -118.581 44.242 -118.612
South Fork Elk Creek........................................ 44.241 -118.423 44.245 -118.409
Summit Creek................................................ 44.261 -118.502 44.099 -118.588
Swamp Creek................................................. 44.299 -118.471 44.291 -118.401
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 24, Malheur River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64035]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.025
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(32) Unit 25: Jarbidge River
(i) This unit consists of 245.2 km (152.4 mi) of streams. The unit
is located in northeastern Nevada and southwestern Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64036]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruneau River............................................... 42.780 -115.715 42.329 -115.652
Cougar Creek................................................ 41.840 -115.320 41.818 -115.335
Dave Creek.................................................. 41.882 -115.356 41.995 -115.353
Deer Creek.................................................. 41.848 -115.455 41.933 -115.420
East Fork Jarbidge River.................................... 41.778 -115.330 42.049 -115.391
Fall Creek.................................................. 41.856 -115.315 41.835 -115.342
Fox Creek................................................... 41.827 -115.420 41.815 -115.422
Gods Pocket Creek........................................... 41.847 -115.293 41.838 -115.298
Jack Creek.................................................. 41.887 -115.383 41.912 -115.425
Jarbidge River.............................................. 42.049 -115.391 42.329 -115.652
Jenny Creek................................................. 41.901 -115.410 41.900 -115.410
Pine Creek.................................................. 41.779 -115.464 41.833 -115.425
Sawmill Creek............................................... 41.794 -115.399 41.792 -115.404
Slide Creek................................................. 41.867 -115.312 41.850 -115.254
Unnamed E Trib Off Pine Creek............................... 41.779 -115.429 41.786 -115.455
Unnamed Headwater Trib Off E Fk Jarbidge River.............. 41.767 -115.352 41.782 -115.330
Unnamed Lower Trib Off Fall Creek........................... 41.849 -115.327 41.850 -115.331
Unnamed Lower Trib Off Slide Creek.......................... 41.839 -115.277 41.834 -115.278
Unnamed Upper Trib Off Fall Creek........................... 41.843 -115.335 41.840 -115.340
Unnamed Upper Trib Off Slide Creek.......................... 41.838 -115.264 41.834 -115.263
Unnamed W Trib Off Pine Creek............................... 41.802 -115.465 41.803 -115.447
Unnamed W Trib Off West Fork Jarbidge River................. 41.781 -115.393 41.792 -115.397
West Fork Jarbidge River.................................... 41.792 -115.395 42.049 -115.391
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 25, Jarbidge River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64037]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.026
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(33) Unit 26: Southwest Idaho Basins - East Half
(i) The entire Southwest Idaho Basins unit consists of 2,150 km
(1,335.9 mi) of streams and 4,310.5 ha (10,651.5 ac) of lakes and
reservoirs. The unit is located in southwestern Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64038]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alta Creek.................................................. 43.701 -115.248 43.701 -115.243
Anderson Creek.............................................. 44.605 -116.187 44.527 -116.243
Anderson Ranch Reservoir.................................... 43.415 -115.348 ...........
Antelope Creek.............................................. 44.400 -116.169 44.375 -116.198
Arrowrock Reservoir......................................... 43.599 -115.840 ...........
Bald Mountain Creek......................................... 43.756 -115.277 43.818 -115.267
Ballentyne Creek............................................ 43.983 -115.143 44.011 -115.233
Banner Creek................................................ 43.998 -115.543 44.037 -115.522
Baron Creek................................................. 44.093 -115.028 44.137 -115.149
Basin Creek................................................. 44.377 -115.702 44.341 -115.659
Bass Creek.................................................. 43.741 -115.003 43.791 -114.975
Bear Creek.................................................. 43.702 -115.007 43.727 -114.901
Bear Creek.................................................. 44.017 -115.406 43.938 -115.457
Bear River.................................................. 43.987 -115.341 43.892 -115.489
Beaver Creek................................................ 44.318 -115.692 44.317 -115.685
Big Peak Creek.............................................. 43.658 -114.795 43.628 -114.730
Big Silver Creek............................................ 43.989 -115.328 43.989 -115.256
Big Smoky Creek............................................. 43.792 -114.756 43.604 -114.916
Big Water Gulch............................................. 43.665 -115.043 43.604 -115.108
Bitter Creek................................................ 44.421 -115.678 44.406 -115.618
Black Warrior Creek......................................... 43.945 -115.190 43.818 -115.291
Blind Canyon................................................ 43.768 -114.724 43.769 -114.720
Bluff Creek................................................. 43.697 -114.686 43.700 -114.755
Boardman Creek.............................................. 43.525 -115.019 43.612 -114.940
Boiler Grade Creek.......................................... 43.720 -115.262 43.730 -115.263
Boise River................................................. 43.713 -115.636 43.645 -115.749
Buck Creek.................................................. 43.747 -115.326 43.803 -115.397
Bull Creek.................................................. 44.491 -115.615 44.422 -115.813
Burnt Log Creek............................................. 43.646 -115.017 43.643 -114.970
Canyon Creek................................................ 44.303 -115.231 44.172 -115.244
Carrie Creek................................................ 43.590 -114.691 43.552 -114.759
Chapman Creek............................................... 44.097 -115.290 44.136 -115.314
Clear Creek................................................. 44.228 -115.409 44.248 -115.395
Corbus Creek................................................ 43.737 -115.165 43.747 -115.190
Cow Creek................................................... 44.021 -115.296 43.991 -115.255
Crooked River............................................... 44.027 -115.338 43.853 -115.537
Cub Creek................................................... 43.979 -115.353 43.980 -115.402
Daisy Creek................................................. 44.269 -115.748 44.260 -115.694
Deadwood Creek.............................................. 43.532 -115.015 43.585 -115.008
Deadwood Reservoir.......................................... 44.309 -115.663 ...........
Deadwood River.............................................. 44.547 -115.561 44.342 -115.658
Deadwood River.............................................. 44.293 -115.646 44.079 -115.658
Decker Creek................................................ 43.718 -115.047 43.769 -115.145
Deer Creek.................................................. 44.347 -115.549 44.396 -115.616
Devils Creek................................................ 43.642 -115.564 43.685 -115.592
Dewey Creek................................................. 44.772 -116.276 44.807 -116.278
Disappointment Creek........................................ 44.830 -116.707 44.825 -116.658
Dog Creek................................................... 43.529 -115.302 43.529 -115.302
East Fork Big Peak Creek.................................... 43.628 -114.730 43.630 -114.699
East Fork Deadwood River.................................... 44.494 -115.571 44.492 -115.575
East Fork Eightmile Creek................................... 44.200 -115.355 44.133 -115.407
East Fork Elk Creek......................................... 43.742 -115.231 43.709 -115.254
East Fork Roaring River..................................... 43.687 -115.438 43.694 -115.465
East Fork Sheep Creek....................................... 43.674 -115.486 43.684 -115.548
East Fork Skeleton Creek.................................... 43.685 -115.019 43.658 -114.999
East Fork Warm Springs Creek................................ 44.317 -115.538 44.294 -115.622
East Fork Weiser River...................................... 44.729 -116.279 44.846 -116.380
East Fork Yuba River........................................ 43.747 -115.155 43.723 -115.153
Eightmile Creek............................................. 44.251 -115.400 44.118 -115.413
Elk Creek................................................... 43.751 -115.307 43.678 -115.265
Emma Creek.................................................. 43.791 -114.835 43.735 -114.906
Feather River............................................... 43.678 -115.265 43.687 -115.286
Flytrip Creek............................................... 43.928 -115.019 43.939 -114.974
French Creek................................................ 43.741 -115.627 43.741 -115.638
Garney Creek................................................ 44.091 -115.609 44.094 -115.611
Gates Creek................................................. 44.348 -115.328 44.292 -115.306
Goat Creek.................................................. 43.729 -115.007 43.715 -114.980
Goat Creek.................................................. 44.393 -115.680 44.398 -115.619
Grouse Creek................................................ 43.731 -115.079 43.710 -115.077
Grouse Creek................................................ 44.835 -116.708 44.826 -116.657
[[Page 64039]]
Habit Creek................................................. 44.349 -115.713 44.330 -115.673
Hornet Creek................................................ 44.797 -116.733 44.838 -116.635
Horseshoe Creek............................................. 44.062 -115.317 44.053 -115.317
Hungarian Creek............................................. 43.818 -115.539 43.841 -115.603
Johnson Creek............................................... 43.844 -114.971 43.774 -114.929
Johnson Creek............................................... 43.947 -115.130 43.940 -115.285
Lightning Creek............................................. 44.233 -115.766 44.193 -115.937
Little Bear Creek........................................... 43.746 -114.975 43.779 -114.936
Little Queens River......................................... 43.930 -115.144 43.843 -115.185
Little Rattlesnake Creek.................................... 43.589 -115.700 43.617 -115.607
Little Silver Creek......................................... 44.001 -115.326 43.997 -115.289
Little Smoky Creek.......................................... 43.585 -114.680 43.608 -114.872
Little Weiser River......................................... 44.637 -116.175 44.506 -116.308
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 43.888 -115.295 43.930 -115.315
Loggy Creek................................................. 43.763 -114.788 43.800 -114.790
Long Creek.................................................. 44.153 -115.533 44.129 -115.579
Long Fork Silver Creek...................................... 44.411 -115.680 44.382 -115.761
Louise Creek................................................ 43.964 -115.392 43.968 -115.425
Mattingly Creek............................................. 43.853 -115.036 43.846 -115.049
McLeod Creek................................................ 44.022 -115.163 44.057 -115.208
McPhearson Creek............................................ 44.038 -115.159 44.066 -115.199
Meadow Creek................................................ 43.764 -115.617 43.765 -115.622
Middle Fork Boise River..................................... 43.946 -115.033 43.713 -115.636
Middle Fork Payette River................................... 44.551 -115.765 44.103 -116.000
Middle Fork Roaring River................................... 43.624 -115.466 43.688 -115.452
Middle Fork Warm Springs Creek.............................. 44.351 -115.565 44.326 -115.599
No Man Creek................................................ 44.247 -115.591 44.247 -115.630
North Creek................................................. 44.818 -116.721 44.814 -116.693
North Fork Baron Creek...................................... 44.145 -115.078 44.131 -115.102
North Fork Big Smoky Creek.................................. 43.723 -114.789 43.748 -114.802
North Fork Boise River...................................... 44.094 -115.225 43.713 -115.636
North Fork Canyon Creek..................................... 44.260 -115.199 44.250 -115.215
North Fork Deer Creek....................................... 44.452 -115.545 44.408 -115.554
North Fork Gold Fork River.................................. 44.756 -115.801 44.674 -115.897
North Fork Ross Fork........................................ 43.852 -114.976 43.796 -114.989
North Fork Whitehawk Creek.................................. 44.291 -115.539 44.277 -115.585
Olive Creek................................................. 44.787 -116.694 44.836 -116.628
Onion Creek................................................. 44.234 -115.776 44.214 -115.825
Oxtail Creek................................................ 44.439 -115.639 44.459 -115.668
Packsaddle Creek............................................ 44.223 -115.698 44.224 -115.744
Parks Creek................................................. 43.629 -115.337 43.582 -115.342
Peace Creek................................................. 44.356 -115.734 44.341 -115.792
Pikes Fork.................................................. 44.048 -115.441 43.971 -115.562
Placer Creek................................................ 44.806 -116.738 44.808 -116.680
Poison Creek................................................ 44.491 -116.163 44.478 -116.186
Pole Creek.................................................. 44.494 -116.203 44.471 -116.219
Queens River................................................ 43.959 -115.119 43.821 -115.208
Rabbit Creek................................................ 43.797 -115.613 43.821 -115.690
Rainbow Creek............................................... 43.630 -115.341 43.630 -115.361
Rattlesnake Creek........................................... 43.622 -115.526 43.561 -115.740
Renwick Creek............................................... 44.397 -116.140 44.367 -116.196
Right Creek................................................. 43.855 -115.187 43.867 -115.194
Roaring River............................................... 43.647 -115.480 43.790 -115.440
Rock Creek.................................................. 43.894 -115.045 43.939 -115.081
Rockey Creek................................................ 43.969 -115.424 44.011 -115.397
Ross Fork................................................... 43.796 -114.989 43.774 -114.929
Royal Gorge................................................. 43.751 -114.725 43.750 -114.723
Russel Gulch................................................ 43.577 -115.559 43.591 -115.596
Salt Creek.................................................. 43.607 -114.872 43.539 -114.860
Sawmill Creek............................................... 43.709 -115.095 43.761 -115.121
Scenic Creek................................................ 43.901 -115.145 43.921 -115.179
Scotch Creek................................................ 43.687 -115.438 43.690 -115.432
Scott Creek................................................. 43.891 -115.153 43.883 -115.181
Scott Creek................................................. 44.191 -115.762 44.223 -115.648
Second Fork Squaw Creek..................................... 44.404 -116.192 44.367 -116.196
Sheep Creek................................................. 43.617 -115.511 43.697 -115.662
Sheep Creek................................................. 44.504 -116.175 44.542 -116.222
Silver Creek................................................ 44.408 -115.750 44.304 -115.865
Sixteen-to-one Creek........................................ 44.467 -115.755 44.470 -115.718
Skeleton Creek.............................................. 43.694 -114.987 43.589 -115.022
[[Page 64040]]
Smith Creek................................................. 44.200 -115.758 44.214 -115.710
Smokey Dome Canyon.......................................... 43.503 -114.938 43.547 -114.956
Snowslide Creek............................................. 43.738 -114.830 43.723 -114.789
South Fork Beaver Creek..................................... 44.297 -115.733 44.295 -115.686
South Fork Boise River...................................... 43.358 -115.449 43.481 -115.307
South Fork Boise River...................................... 43.335 -115.537 43.550 -115.722
South Fork Canyon Creek..................................... 44.226 -115.192 44.210 -115.170
South Fork Clear Creek...................................... 44.183 -115.484 44.232 -115.440
South Fork Cub Creek........................................ 43.968 -115.356 43.977 -115.389
South Fork Gold Fork River.................................. 44.653 -115.840 44.674 -115.897
South Fork Payette River.................................... 43.999 -115.040 44.103 -116.000
South Fork Ross Fork........................................ 43.735 -115.022 43.796 -114.989
South Fork Scott Creek...................................... 44.187 -115.703 44.222 -115.661
Squaw Creek................................................. 44.436 -116.153 44.437 -116.279
Stratton Creek.............................................. 44.446 -115.631 44.470 -115.587
Tenmile Creek............................................... 44.086 -115.237 44.119 -115.386
Third Fork Squaw Creek...................................... 44.453 -116.157 44.424 -116.211
Trail Creek................................................. 44.164 -115.093 44.158 -115.084
Trail Creek................................................. 43.912 -115.407 43.871 -115.409
Trail Creek................................................. 44.239 -115.759 44.279 -115.667
Trail Creek-Yuba............................................ 43.707 -115.118 43.763 -115.146
Trinity Creek............................................... 43.600 -115.270 43.630 -115.341
Tripod Creek................................................ 43.896 -115.155 43.895 -115.189
Ucon Creek.................................................. 44.379 -115.721 44.371 -115.767
Unnamed..................................................... 43.867 -115.194 43.877 -115.194
Unnamed..................................................... 43.781 -115.252 43.766 -115.273
Unnamed..................................................... 43.861 -115.271 43.872 -115.295
Unnamed..................................................... 43.751 -115.361 43.722 -115.368
Unnamed..................................................... 43.987 -115.418 44.005 -115.416
Unnamed..................................................... 44.201 -115.717 44.182 -115.721
Unnamed..................................................... 43.625 -115.556 43.628 -115.556
Unnamed..................................................... 43.664 -115.527 43.657 -115.526
Unnamed..................................................... 43.657 -115.526 43.653 -115.528
Unnamed..................................................... 44.026 -115.275 44.035 -115.272
Unnamed..................................................... 44.029 -115.368 44.026 -115.365
Unnamed - Off Olive Creek................................... 44.801 -116.661 44.787 -116.666
Unnamed - Off Beaver Creek.................................. 44.336 -115.718 44.318 -115.687
Unnamed - Off Black Warrior Creek........................... 43.896 -115.263 43.878 -115.245
Unnamed - Off East Fork Warm Springs Creek.................. 44.324 -115.564 44.312 -115.578
Unnamed - Off Long Creek.................................... 44.136 -115.535 44.148 -115.547
Unnamed - Off Middle Fork Warm Springs Creek................ 44.324 -115.541 44.332 -115.580
Unnamed - Off North Fork Canyon Creek....................... 44.241 -115.166 44.260 -115.199
Unnamed - Off South Fork Beaver Creek....................... 44.283 -115.722 44.294 -115.687
Unnamed 1 - Off Deer Creek.................................. 44.425 -115.587 44.407 -115.586
Unnamed 1 - Off Middle Fork Payette River................... 44.552 -115.835 44.524 -115.775
Unnamed 1 - Off Olive Creek................................. 44.812 -116.644 44.791 -116.649
Unnamed 1 - Off Third Fork Squaw Creek...................... 44.420 -116.148 44.424 -116.211
Unnamed 1- Off Emma Creek................................... 43.772 -114.884 43.759 -114.872
Unnamed 2 - Off Deer Creek.................................. 44.388 -115.554 44.401 -115.560
Unnamed 2 - Off Eightmile Creek............................. 44.198 -115.419 44.174 -115.398
Unnamed 2 - Off Of Unnamed 1 Off Of Third Fork Squaw Creek.. 44.421 -116.172 44.415 -116.191
Unnamed 3 - Off Deer Creek.................................. 44.422 -115.534 44.407 -115.542
Unnamed 3 - Off Middle Fork Payette River................... 44.540 -115.739 44.539 -115.771
Unnamed 3 - Off Of Unnamed 1 Off Of Third Fork Squaw Creek.. 44.426 -116.161 44.416 -116.202
Unnamed 3 - Off Third Fork Squaw Creek...................... 44.433 -116.168 44.434 -116.204
Unnamed 4 - Off Squaw Creek................................. 44.455 -116.200 44.470 -116.220
Unnamed 5 - Off Squaw Creek................................. 44.460 -116.166 44.479 -116.194
Unnamed 6 - Off Unamed 5 Off Of Squaw Creek................. 44.456 -116.175 44.476 -116.191
Unnamed Trib 3 - Off North Fork Gold Fork River............. 44.747 -115.812 44.708 -115.817
Unnamed Trib 4 - Off North Fork Gold Fork River............. 44.679 -115.812 44.706 -115.820
Valley Creek................................................ 44.280 -115.743 44.333 -115.777
Vienna Creek................................................ 43.802 -114.906 43.802 -114.910
Wagontown Creek............................................. 43.565 -115.277 43.607 -115.324
Wapiti Creek................................................ 44.117 -115.202 44.094 -115.186
Warm Spring Creek........................................... 44.292 -115.306 44.144 -115.304
Warm Springs Creek.......................................... 44.367 -115.580 44.279 -115.631
West Fork Big Peak Creek.................................... 43.628 -114.730 43.646 -114.719
West Fork Big Smoky Creek................................... 43.788 -114.821 43.744 -114.727
West Fork Creek............................................. 44.048 -115.247 44.055 -115.210
West Fork Skeleton Creek.................................... 43.672 -115.027 43.651 -114.974
[[Page 64041]]
West Parks Creek............................................ 43.623 -115.341 43.612 -115.366
West Warrior Creek.......................................... 43.882 -115.298 43.840 -115.257
Whitehawk Creek............................................. 44.261 -115.556 44.235 -115.524
Wild Buck Creek............................................. 44.389 -115.650 44.342 -115.658
Willow Creek................................................ 43.725 -115.023 43.605 -115.144
Willow Creek................................................ 43.959 -115.531 43.944 -115.484
Wilson Creek................................................ 44.366 -115.565 44.292 -115.641
Yuba River.................................................. 43.707 -115.202 43.803 -115.160
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 26, Southwest Idaho Basins - East Half follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64042]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.027
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(34) Unit 26: Southwest Idaho Basins - West Half
(i) The entire Southwest Idaho Basins unit consists of 2,150 km
(1,335.9 mi) of streams and 4,310.5 ha (10,651.5 ac) of lakes and
reservoirs. The unit is located in southwestern Idaho.
[[Page 64043]]
(ii) See paragraph (e)(33)(ii) of this entry for a list of
individual waterbodies in this unit.
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 26, Southwest Idaho Basins - West Half follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.028
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 64044]]
(35) Unit 27: Salmon River - East Half
(i) The entire Salmon River unit consists of 7,376.5 km (4,583.5
mi) of streams and 1,683.8 ha (4,160.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The
unit is located in central Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Mill Creek (Tributary to Big Creek)........................ 44.467 -113.685 44.507 -113.619
Airplane Lake............................................... 45.156 -114.599 ...........
Alpine Creek................................................ 45.032 -114.655 45.080 -114.619
Alpine Creek................................................ 43.930 -114.970 43.896 -114.907
Alpine Creek Lake 5................................ 45.078 -114.617 ...........
Alturas Lake................................................ 43.914 -114.861 ...........
Alturas Lake Creek.......................................... 43.893 -114.919 44.004 -114.837
Arctic Creek................................................ 45.498 -114.998 45.479 -115.031
Arnett Creek................................................ 45.265 -114.201 45.205 -114.134
Arrastra Creek.............................................. 44.841 -114.351 44.868 -114.426
Back Creek.................................................. 44.511 -115.707 44.512 -115.739
Baldwin Creek............................................... 44.500 -115.106 44.541 -115.068
Banner Creek................................................ 44.291 -115.188 44.356 -115.209
Bargamin Creek.............................................. 45.770 -114.935 45.567 -115.192
Basin Creek................................................. 44.368 -114.943 44.263 -114.818
Basin Creek................................................. 45.657 -114.960 45.674 -114.991
Bayhorse Creek.............................................. 44.378 -114.257 44.411 -114.402
Beagle Creek................................................ 44.996 -114.480 44.991 -114.462
Bear Creek.................................................. 44.597 -114.463 44.569 -114.362
Bear Creek.................................................. 44.834 -115.514 44.826 -115.483
Bear Creek.................................................. 45.106 -115.618 45.117 -115.638
Bear Creek.................................................. 44.606 -115.601 44.623 -115.691
Bear Creek-Loon............................................. 44.735 -114.862 44.742 -114.818
Bear Creek-Marsh............................................ 44.490 -115.099 44.439 -115.101
Bear Valley Creek........................................... 44.804 -113.867 44.772 -113.708
Bear Valley Creek........................................... 44.236 -115.500 44.449 -115.231
Bearskin Creek.............................................. 44.330 -115.529 44.415 -115.467
Beaver Creek................................................ 45.272 -114.186 45.274 -114.335
Beaver Creek................................................ 43.836 -114.907 43.925 -114.810
Beaver Creek................................................ 44.472 -114.954 44.406 -115.171
Beaver Creek................................................ 45.242 -115.315 45.250 -115.340
Belvidere Creek............................................. 45.041 -115.387 45.069 -115.365
Bernard Creek............................................... 44.975 -114.735 44.982 -114.760
Big Bear Creek.............................................. 45.472 -114.963 45.457 -115.093
Big Boulder Creek........................................... 44.113 -114.551 44.118 -114.429
Big Buck Creek.............................................. 45.252 -115.540 45.263 -115.586
Big Chief Creek............................................. 44.817 -115.369 44.838 -115.298
Big Cottonwood Creek........................................ 44.879 -115.207 44.912 -115.083
Big Creek................................................... 44.442 -113.601 44.495 -113.819
Big Creek................................................... 45.060 -115.452 45.094 -114.733
Big Creek Marsh............................................. 45.091 -115.333 ...........
Big Eightmile Creek......................................... 44.560 -113.563 44.739 -113.460
Big Flat Creek.............................................. 45.227 -115.545 45.235 -115.590
Big Harrington Creek........................................ 45.518 -114.824 45.473 -114.964
Big Mallard Creek........................................... 45.537 -115.270 45.544 -115.280
Big Ramey Creek............................................. 45.279 -115.244 45.177 -115.160
Big Timber Creek............................................ 44.509 -113.539 44.699 -113.375
Birdseye Creek.............................................. 44.938 -114.457 44.927 -114.385
Blackeagle Creek............................................ 44.992 -114.568 45.006 -114.547
Blackmare Creek............................................. 44.809 -115.796 44.822 -115.704
Blue Fork Silver Creek...................................... 44.854 -114.359 44.883 -114.355
Blue Lake Creek............................................. 45.132 -115.781 45.133 -115.717
Bohannon Creek.............................................. 45.229 -113.668 45.112 -113.747
Boulder Creek............................................... 45.277 -115.341 45.242 -115.315
Boulder Creek............................................... 45.129 -116.476 45.204 -116.311
Bowery Creek................................................ 44.011 -114.390 44.032 -114.461
Bray Creek.................................................. 44.675 -113.814 44.706 -113.769
Browning Creek.............................................. 44.759 -115.364 44.738 -115.407
Bruin Creek................................................. 45.517 -115.076 45.492 -115.113
Brush Creek................................................. 44.965 -114.860 44.955 -114.734
Buck Creek.................................................. 44.929 -115.003 44.896 -115.065
Buck Creek.................................................. 44.751 -115.480 44.792 -115.519
Buckhorn Creek.............................................. 44.853 -115.887 44.922 -115.737
Bum Creek................................................... 45.036 -115.287 44.995 -115.319
Burgdorf Creek.............................................. 45.268 -115.911 45.255 -115.963
[[Page 64045]]
Burn Creek.................................................. 45.500 -116.105 45.505 -116.125
Burnt Creek................................................. 44.149 -113.633 44.284 -113.653
Burntlog Creek.............................................. 44.718 -115.420 44.803 -115.519
Cabin Creek................................................. 44.419 -114.902 44.397 -114.828
Cabin Creek................................................. 43.929 -114.880 43.928 -114.843
Cabin Creek................................................. 45.195 -114.838 45.126 -114.936
Cabin Creek................................................. 44.703 -115.648 44.666 -115.686
Cabin Creek-Loon............................................ 44.760 -114.693 44.691 -114.754
Cache Creek................................................. 45.636 -115.118 45.691 -115.181
Cache Creek................................................. 44.262 -115.403 44.346 -115.420
Cache Creek-Loon............................................ 44.776 -114.688 44.801 -114.806
California Creek............................................ 45.341 -115.851 45.448 -115.760
Camas Creek................................................. 44.708 -114.388 44.892 -114.723
Camp Creek.................................................. 45.222 -114.115 45.279 -114.159
Camp Creek.................................................. 44.945 -114.595 44.955 -114.611
Camp Creek.................................................. 45.643 -114.961 45.657 -115.001
Camp Creek.................................................. 44.985 -115.414 44.990 -115.444
Camp Creek.................................................. 44.607 -115.680 44.605 -115.634
Camp Creek.................................................. 44.898 -115.717 44.891 -115.618
Cane Creek.................................................. 44.978 -115.262 44.953 -115.292
Canyon Creek................................................ 44.575 -114.914 44.568 -114.847
Cape Horn Creek............................................. 44.333 -115.288 44.395 -115.169
Carlson Creek............................................... 45.345 -115.517 45.339 -115.560
Casner Creek................................................ 44.281 -115.452 44.295 -115.485
Castle Creek................................................ 44.826 -114.313 44.801 -114.472
Cat Creek................................................... 44.619 -114.653 44.652 -114.628
Cave-Big Creek.............................................. 45.240 -114.847 45.132 -114.956
Cayuse Creek................................................ 45.500 -114.603 45.474 -114.569
Challis Creek............................................... 44.552 -114.512 44.570 -114.187
Chamberlain Creek........................................... 45.336 -115.330 45.454 -114.933
Champion Creek.............................................. 44.026 -114.839 43.988 -114.691
Chicken Creek............................................... 45.287 -115.474 45.319 -115.412
Chip Creek.................................................. 44.443 -115.359 44.429 -115.341
Cinnabar Creek.............................................. 44.912 -115.267 44.952 -115.294
Clear Creek................................................. 45.146 -114.579 45.295 -114.352
Cliff Creek................................................. 44.790 -115.697 44.769 -115.744
Club Creek.................................................. 45.291 -115.037 45.266 -115.084
Cold Creek.................................................. 45.488 -115.071 45.465 -115.077
Cold Creek.................................................. 44.371 -115.318 44.425 -115.311
Cold Spring Creek-Loon...................................... 44.682 -114.841 44.718 -114.799
Colson Creek................................................ 45.299 -114.532 45.379 -114.552
Cook Creek.................................................. 44.373 -115.445 44.408 -115.378
Cooper Creek................................................ 44.675 -113.703 44.726 -113.726
Corn Creek.................................................. 45.368 -114.685 45.385 -114.559
Corral Creek................................................ 45.545 -114.111 45.498 -114.147
Corral Creek................................................ 44.876 -114.220 44.779 -114.248
Cottonwood Creek............................................ 44.623 -114.761 44.593 -114.680
Cougar Creek................................................ 44.810 -115.805 44.889 -115.717
Crooked Creek............................................... 45.195 -115.032 45.163 -115.129
Crooked Creek............................................... 45.612 -115.439 45.434 -115.667
Cub Creek................................................... 44.319 -115.518 44.324 -115.474
Cultus Creek................................................ 44.781 -115.211 44.813 -115.176
Curtis Creek................................................ 44.562 -115.760 44.652 -115.704
Dagger Creek................................................ 44.456 -115.374 44.523 -115.282
Dahlonega Creek............................................. 45.524 -113.836 45.541 -113.929
Dairy Creek................................................. 44.620 -113.594 44.637 -113.553
Deadhorse Creek............................................. 45.574 -116.145 45.613 -116.067
Deadwood Creek.............................................. 44.349 -114.836 44.376 -114.777
Deep Creek.................................................. 45.018 -114.098 45.126 -114.216
Deep Creek.................................................. 45.051 -115.754 45.071 -115.743
Deer Creek.................................................. 44.776 -113.810 44.793 -113.778
Deer Creek.................................................. 44.571 -114.907 44.548 -114.855
Deer Creek.................................................. 45.382 -115.092 45.453 -115.130
Devils Toe Creek............................................ 45.436 -114.893 45.419 -114.935
Dillinger Creek............................................. 45.530 -115.108 45.480 -115.215
Disappointment Creek........................................ 45.422 -114.880 45.300 -114.945
Dismal Creek................................................ 45.351 -114.950 45.306 -114.958
Ditch Creek................................................. 45.506 -114.004 45.597 -114.041
Dog Creek................................................... 45.380 -115.151 45.448 -115.163
Dollar Creek................................................ 44.722 -115.696 44.759 -115.752
[[Page 64046]]
Duffield Creek.............................................. 44.570 -114.931 44.551 -115.008
Dump Creek.................................................. 45.329 -114.041 45.318 -114.039
Dutch Creek................................................. 44.799 -115.520 44.798 -115.523
Dynamite Creek.............................................. 44.871 -115.208 44.876 -115.058
East Basin Creek............................................ 44.343 -114.791 44.277 -114.850
East Fork Big Ramey Creek................................... 45.245 -115.137 45.214 -115.188
East Fork Burntlog Creek.................................... 44.730 -115.427 44.737 -115.502
East Fork Cache Creek....................................... 44.306 -115.390 44.314 -115.424
East Fork Elk Creek......................................... 44.481 -115.360 44.485 -115.453
East Fork Fall Creek........................................ 45.360 -115.964 45.415 -115.976
East Fork Hayden Creek...................................... 44.664 -113.684 44.760 -113.712
East Fork Herd Creek........................................ 43.984 -114.204 44.058 -114.234
East Fork John Day Creek.................................... 45.577 -116.154 45.573 -116.230
East Fork Mayfield Creek.................................... 44.480 -114.714 44.539 -114.798
East Fork Morgan Creek...................................... 44.670 -113.829 44.675 -113.900
East Fork Owl Creek......................................... 45.340 -114.463 45.345 -114.458
East Fork Pahsimeroi River.................................. 44.081 -113.721 44.157 -113.704
East Fork Salmon River...................................... 43.929 -114.555 44.268 -114.327
East Fork South Fork Salmon River........................... 44.886 -115.257 45.015 -115.714
East Fork Thomas Creek...................................... 44.668 -115.043 44.705 -115.028
East Fork Valley Creek...................................... 44.327 -114.988 44.357 -115.049
East Fork Whimstick Creek................................... 45.300 -115.029 45.288 -114.962
East Pass Creek............................................. 44.050 -114.277 44.076 -114.244
Eightmile Creek............................................. 44.471 -114.716 44.426 -114.620
Elevenmile Creek............................................ 44.436 -114.545 44.467 -114.579
Elk Creek................................................... 44.196 -115.134 44.293 -115.024
Elk Creek................................................... 44.485 -115.453 44.410 -115.373
Elk Creek................................................... 45.157 -115.432 45.156 -115.585
Elkhorn Creek............................................... 44.582 -115.370 44.615 -115.257
Elkhorn Creek............................................... 45.270 -116.122 45.404 -116.095
Enos Creek.................................................. 45.148 -115.795 45.102 -115.851
Fall Creek.................................................. 45.331 -115.996 45.432 -115.984
Falls Creek................................................. 44.611 -113.685 44.565 -113.879
Falls Creek................................................. 44.881 -115.508 44.885 -115.536
Fernan Creek................................................ 45.238 -115.813 45.235 -115.850
Fir Creek................................................... 44.618 -114.671 44.655 -114.698
Fir Creek................................................... 44.344 -115.299 44.428 -115.291
Fish Creek.................................................. 45.352 -115.304 45.384 -115.335
Fishhook Creek.............................................. 44.133 -114.982 44.143 -114.920
Fitsum Creek................................................ 45.000 -115.763 44.999 -115.723
Fivemile Creek.............................................. 44.355 -114.616 44.405 -114.655
Fivemile Creek.............................................. 45.412 -115.470 45.392 -115.456
Flat Creek.................................................. 45.302 -115.880 45.271 -115.837
Float Creek................................................. 44.523 -115.179 44.571 -115.072
Flossie Creek............................................... 45.372 -115.207 45.389 -115.295
Fly Creek................................................... 44.670 -114.551 44.705 -114.497
Forty-Five Creek............................................ 44.665 -115.309 44.718 -115.233
Fourmile Creek.............................................. 44.798 -115.622 44.857 -115.696
Fourth of July Creek........................................ 45.427 -113.774 45.364 -113.944
Fourth of July Creek........................................ 44.986 -114.347 44.991 -114.414
Fourth of July Creek........................................ 44.044 -114.621 44.032 -114.837
French Creek................................................ 45.370 -116.042 45.425 -116.031
Fritser Creek............................................... 45.091 -115.627 45.103 -115.684
Furnace Creek............................................... 44.789 -114.344 44.766 -114.487
Game Creek.................................................. 45.404 -115.275 45.398 -115.193
Garden Creek................................................ 45.314 -114.404 45.239 -114.517
Germania Creek.............................................. 43.968 -114.704 44.039 -114.462
Goat Creek.................................................. 44.179 -115.009 44.219 -114.942
Goodman Creek............................................... 45.636 -114.965 45.647 -115.017
Granite Fork Lake Fork Rapid River.......................... 45.151 -116.553 45.187 -116.518
Green Creek................................................. 45.739 -115.023 45.771 -115.033
Greyhound Creek............................................. 44.588 -115.155 44.648 -115.168
Grimmet Creek............................................... 45.156 -115.800 45.184 -115.782
Grouse Creek................................................ 45.226 -115.545 45.186 -115.482
Grouse Creek................................................ 45.317 -115.817 45.265 -115.831
Guard Creek................................................. 45.308 -115.659 45.293 -115.696
Half Moon Creek............................................. 44.557 -115.412 44.558 -115.410
Hand Creek.................................................. 45.287 -115.246 45.228 -115.301
Hanson Creek................................................ 44.869 -115.508 44.865 -115.475
Hard Creek.................................................. 45.125 -116.240 45.183 -116.284
[[Page 64047]]
Hartan Creek................................................ 45.519 -115.258 45.477 -115.229
Hayden Creek................................................ 44.722 -113.820 44.869 -113.627
Hazard Creek................................................ 45.201 -116.255 45.184 -116.301
Hell Roaring Creek.......................................... 44.023 -114.842 44.027 -114.929
Hell Roaring Lake........................................... 44.024 -114.935 ...........
Herd Creek.................................................. 44.058 -114.234 44.154 -114.301
Hida Creek.................................................. 45.556 -115.167 45.515 -115.204
Holdover Creek.............................................. 44.845 -115.698 44.840 -115.726
Honeymoon Creek............................................. 44.553 -115.414 44.560 -115.411
Hoodoo Creek................................................ 45.060 -114.553 44.953 -114.582
Horse Creek................................................. 45.475 -114.402 45.395 -114.733
Hot Springs Creek........................................... 45.729 -115.032 45.721 -114.977
Hot Springs Creek........................................... 45.511 -115.042 45.468 -115.131
Hotzel Creek................................................ 45.373 -115.188 45.349 -115.204
Hughes Creek................................................ 45.582 -114.121 45.476 -113.989
Hull Creek.................................................. 45.468 -113.993 45.491 -114.094
Hungry Creek................................................ 45.392 -114.916 45.352 -114.870
Ibex Creek.................................................. 43.908 -114.493 43.953 -114.526
Indian Creek................................................ 45.552 -114.145 45.400 -114.168
Indian Creek................................................ 44.799 -115.390 44.770 -115.090
Indian Creek................................................ 44.970 -115.732 44.958 -115.691
Indian Creek-Loon........................................... 44.672 -114.840 44.692 -114.755
Inyo Creek.................................................. 44.532 -113.628 44.535 -113.684
Iron Creek.................................................. 44.189 -115.047 44.223 -114.948
J Fell Creek................................................ 44.614 -114.462 44.684 -114.459
Jack Creek.................................................. 44.678 -114.836 44.696 -114.761
Jeanette Creek.............................................. 45.276 -115.919 45.294 -115.899
Jefferson Creek............................................. 45.220 -114.120 45.242 -114.149
Job Creek................................................... 44.243 -115.003 44.243 -115.002
John Day Creek.............................................. 45.521 -116.196 45.586 -116.296
Johnson Creek............................................... 44.632 -115.526 44.962 -115.502
Jordan Creek................................................ 44.469 -114.771 44.379 -114.721
Josephine Creek............................................. 45.225 -115.971 45.224 -115.930
Jungle Creek................................................ 45.147 -115.799 45.108 -115.826
Kadletz Creek............................................... 44.740 -113.820 44.775 -113.743
Kenney Creek................................................ 45.110 -113.514 45.032 -113.663
Kinnikinic Creek............................................ 44.258 -114.402 44.260 -114.403
Knapp Creek................................................. 44.424 -114.916 44.365 -115.132
Knee Creek.................................................. 44.676 -115.662 44.695 -115.624
Krassel Creek............................................... 44.979 -115.727 44.987 -115.704
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.985 -114.081 45.017 -113.989
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.981 -114.646 44.947 -114.592
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.720 -115.142 44.714 -115.097
Lake Creek.................................................. 44.643 -115.181 44.662 -115.231
Lake Creek.................................................. 45.616 -115.687 45.514 -115.575
Lake Creek.................................................. 45.374 -115.899 45.372 -115.895
Lake Creek.................................................. 45.294 -116.220 45.400 -116.213
Lake Creek Lake............................................. 45.373 -115.897 ...........
Lake Fork Rapid River....................................... 45.190 -116.558 45.187 -116.483
Landmark Creek.............................................. 44.657 -115.543 44.626 -115.583
Lee Creek................................................... 44.740 -113.482 44.659 -113.616
Lemhi River................................................. 44.682 -113.355 45.188 -113.890
Liberty Creek............................................... 44.783 -114.618 44.759 -114.650
Lick Creek.................................................. 44.775 -114.348 44.722 -114.272
Lick Creek.................................................. 45.049 -115.915 45.062 -115.762
Lightning Creek............................................. 44.466 -114.788 44.388 -114.796
Little Beaver Creek......................................... 44.445 -115.528 44.409 -115.492
Little Boulder Creek........................................ 44.065 -114.543 44.099 -114.443
Little Buck Creek........................................... 45.252 -115.551 45.247 -115.588
Little Cottonwood Creek..................................... 44.942 -115.020 44.907 -115.074
Little Creek................................................ 44.695 -114.981 44.724 -114.998
Little Deep Creek........................................... 45.001 -114.163 45.108 -114.180
Little East Fork Elk Creek.................................. 44.480 -115.398 44.464 -115.446
Little Eightmile Creek...................................... 44.823 -113.366 44.739 -113.460
Little Horse Creek.......................................... 45.440 -114.585 45.477 -114.450
Little Indian Creek......................................... 44.871 -115.219 44.841 -115.257
Little Indian Creek......................................... 44.967 -115.727 44.951 -115.702
Little Jacket Creek......................................... 44.926 -114.479 44.953 -114.566
Little Lodgepole Creek...................................... 45.351 -115.155 45.328 -115.218
Little Loon Creek........................................... 44.615 -114.964 44.731 -114.941
[[Page 64048]]
Little Mallard Creek........................................ 45.530 -115.306 45.529 -115.304
Little Pistol Creek......................................... 44.721 -115.405 44.721 -115.204
Little Redfish Lake......................................... 44.161 -114.909 ...........
Little Salmon River......................................... 45.181 -116.302 45.417 -116.314
Little Slate Creek.......................................... 45.620 -116.067 45.463 -116.122
Little Timber Creek......................................... 44.605 -113.445 44.642 -113.384
Livingston Creek............................................ 44.144 -114.609 44.194 -114.604
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 44.554 -114.475 44.540 -114.409
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 45.372 -115.126 45.305 -115.255
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 44.576 -115.611 44.593 -115.687
Logan Creek................................................. 45.072 -115.456 45.118 -115.320
Lola Creek.................................................. 44.391 -115.240 44.408 -115.175
Long Tom Creek.............................................. 43.978 -114.402 44.027 -114.430
Loon Creek.................................................. 44.444 -114.941 44.553 -114.850
Loon Creek.................................................. 45.167 -115.837 45.170 -115.809
Loon Lake................................................... 45.163 -115.840 ...........
Lucky Creek................................................. 44.625 -115.277 44.664 -115.299
Luger Creek................................................. 44.618 -115.396 44.686 -115.358
Magpie Creek................................................ 45.548 -115.153 45.506 -115.201
Mahogany Creek.............................................. 44.159 -113.768 44.208 -113.702
Marble Creek................................................ 44.983 -115.080 44.743 -115.017
Marsh Creek................................................. 44.329 -115.092 44.449 -115.231
Martin Creek................................................ 44.426 -114.564 44.387 -114.495
Martin Creek................................................ 44.117 -114.798 44.137 -114.725
Martindale Creek............................................ 44.813 -114.545 44.825 -114.577
Mayfield Creek.............................................. 44.552 -114.850 44.539 -114.798
Mayflower Creek............................................. 45.259 -115.602 45.248 -115.654
McCalla Creek............................................... 45.255 -115.128 45.414 -114.982
McConn Creek................................................ 45.527 -114.243 45.504 -114.153
McHoney Creek............................................... 44.638 -114.610 44.670 -114.555
McKay Creek................................................. 44.475 -114.492 44.489 -114.551
McKee Creek................................................. 44.567 -114.672 44.577 -114.649
Meadow Creek................................................ 44.990 -114.487 44.977 -114.471
Meadow Creek................................................ 44.863 -115.373 44.902 -115.328
Meadow Creek - mouth to Trap................................ 44.316 -115.089 44.306 -115.053
Meridian Creek.............................................. 43.988 -114.257 44.011 -114.252
Middle Fork Elkhorn Creek................................... 44.628 -115.369 44.620 -115.291
Middle Fork Indian Creek.................................... 44.856 -115.104 44.796 -115.133
Middle Fork Salmon River.................................... 44.449 -115.231 45.296 -114.594
Middle Fork Smith Creek..................................... 45.157 -115.413 45.170 -115.381
Mill Creek.................................................. 44.656 -113.657 44.766 -113.519
Mill Creek.................................................. 44.470 -114.492 44.561 -114.275
Mill Creek.................................................. 45.356 -115.520 45.331 -115.581
Mink Creek.................................................. 44.865 -114.298 44.842 -114.331
Missouri Creek.............................................. 45.028 -115.352 45.007 -115.395
Moccasin Creek.............................................. 45.088 -114.090 45.153 -114.172
Monumental Creek............................................ 44.903 -115.263 45.160 -115.130
Moose Creek................................................. 45.691 -113.945 45.654 -113.971
Moose Creek................................................. 45.318 -114.039 45.328 -114.042
Moose Creek................................................. 45.283 -115.293 45.356 -115.250
Moose Creek................................................. 44.853 -115.510 44.838 -115.484
Moose Jaw Creek............................................. 45.312 -115.118 45.278 -115.172
Morgan Creek................................................ 44.675 -113.900 44.618 -113.964
Morgan Creek................................................ 44.846 -114.262 44.612 -114.169
Mormon Creek................................................ 44.499 -115.655 44.524 -115.696
Morse Creek................................................. 44.653 -113.709 44.569 -113.886
Moyer Creek................................................. 45.024 -114.312 44.900 -114.223
Musgrove Creek.............................................. 45.096 -114.471 45.022 -114.313
My Creek.................................................... 45.357 -115.004 45.338 -114.982
Mystery Creek............................................... 44.519 -114.775 44.490 -114.793
Napias Creek................................................ 45.244 -114.024 45.137 -114.218
Nasty Creek................................................. 44.877 -115.697 44.879 -115.630
Nelson Creek................................................ 44.499 -114.805 44.540 -114.804
Nethker Creek............................................... 45.249 -115.972 45.265 -115.906
Nick Creek.................................................. 44.927 -115.795 44.926 -115.855
Ninemile Creek.............................................. 44.414 -114.583 44.445 -114.605
No Name Creek............................................... 45.361 -115.225 45.322 -115.234
North Fork Bear Creek....................................... 44.826 -115.483 44.824 -115.437
North Fork Big Creek........................................ 44.552 -113.593 44.442 -113.601
North Fork Bowery Creek..................................... 44.049 -114.366 44.032 -114.401
[[Page 64049]]
North Fork Buckhorn Creek................................... 44.928 -115.775 44.941 -115.868
North Fork Camp Creek....................................... 44.888 -115.691 44.924 -115.629
North Fork Dollar Creek..................................... 44.715 -115.707 44.718 -115.710
North Fork Elk Creek........................................ 44.527 -115.459 44.485 -115.453
North Fork Elkhorn Creek.................................... 44.638 -115.363 44.625 -115.277
North Fork Fitsum Creek..................................... 44.985 -115.884 44.999 -115.760
North Fork Lick Creek....................................... 45.072 -115.784 45.075 -115.885
North Fork Little Timber Creek.............................. 44.605 -113.445 44.583 -113.513
North Fork Morgan Creek..................................... 44.710 -113.830 44.675 -113.900
North Fork Riordan Creek.................................... 44.867 -115.447 44.862 -115.389
North Fork Salmon River..................................... 45.702 -113.990 45.405 -113.994
North Fork Sand Creek....................................... 44.642 -115.497 44.656 -115.451
North Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 45.483 -113.774 45.482 -113.837
North Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 44.648 -114.964 44.649 -115.018
North Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 45.039 -115.584 45.059 -115.557
North Fork Six-bit Creek.................................... 44.670 -115.763 44.711 -115.782
North Fork Smith Creek...................................... 45.188 -115.346 45.197 -115.352
North Fork Sulphur Creek.................................... 44.597 -115.466 44.554 -115.440
North Fork Wolf Fang Creek.................................. 45.216 -115.444 45.212 -115.393
Norton Creek................................................ 44.890 -114.902 44.827 -114.794
Oompaul Creek............................................... 45.034 -115.736 45.054 -115.717
Opal Creek.................................................. 44.898 -114.278 44.896 -114.315
Opal Lake................................................... 44.899 -114.281 ...........
Otter Creek................................................. 44.869 -114.249 44.860 -114.291
Our Creek................................................... 45.364 -115.000 45.354 -114.976
Owl Creek................................................... 45.474 -114.383 45.318 -114.448
Pahsimeroi River............................................ 44.157 -113.704 44.692 -114.049
Panther Creek............................................... 44.829 -114.295 45.316 -114.406
Papoose Creek............................................... 45.174 -114.721 45.273 -114.821
Papoose Creek............................................... 44.796 -115.278 44.837 -115.246
Paradise Creek.............................................. 45.121 -115.765 45.123 -115.727
Park Creek.................................................. 44.734 -115.551 44.724 -115.593
Parker Creek................................................ 44.622 -114.597 44.608 -114.540
Parks Creek................................................. 44.955 -115.536 44.970 -115.531
Partridge Creek............................................. 45.287 -116.218 45.408 -116.127
Patterson Creek............................................. 44.635 -113.653 44.614 -113.966
Peanut Creek................................................ 44.688 -115.486 44.663 -115.454
Pepper Creek................................................ 44.949 -115.351 44.916 -115.384
Perkins Lake................................................ 43.929 -114.841 ...........
Pete Creek.................................................. 45.298 -115.926 45.285 -115.979
Petit Lake.................................................. 43.980 -114.879 ...........
Pettit Lake Creek........................................... 43.976 -114.902 43.988 -114.841
Phelan Creek................................................ 45.146 -114.042 45.167 -114.161
Pierce Creek................................................ 45.670 -113.933 45.621 -113.964
Pigtail Creek............................................... 44.122 -114.736 44.129 -114.727
Pine Creek.................................................. 45.282 -114.168 45.364 -114.300
Pioneer Creek - Loon........................................ 44.521 -114.865 44.441 -114.895
Pistol Creek................................................ 44.644 -115.443 44.724 -115.150
Poet Creek.................................................. 45.722 -115.034 45.754 -115.073
Poker Creek................................................. 44.445 -115.367 44.429 -115.335
Pole Creek.................................................. 43.964 -114.691 43.926 -114.810
Pole Creek.................................................. 45.335 -115.160 45.308 -115.182
Pole Creek.................................................. 44.361 -115.367 44.386 -115.380
Pole Creek-Camas............................................ 44.763 -114.675 44.794 -114.595
Pony Creek.................................................. 45.194 -114.138 45.187 -114.059
Pony Creek.................................................. 45.179 -115.704 45.187 -115.563
Porcupine Creek............................................. 44.890 -115.499 44.902 -115.538
Porphyry Creek.............................................. 45.069 -114.434 45.004 -114.334
Porter Creek................................................ 44.470 -115.540 44.457 -115.451
Profile Creek............................................... 45.053 -115.417 44.957 -115.429
Prospect Creek.............................................. 44.357 -114.985 44.394 -114.986
Pruvan Creek................................................ 45.498 -113.821 45.467 -113.790
Pup Creek................................................... 45.378 -115.147 45.413 -115.139
Quartz Creek................................................ 45.048 -115.497 44.970 -115.478
Queen Creek................................................. 45.400 -115.049 45.458 -115.110
Raines Creek................................................ 45.332 -115.501 45.308 -115.591
Rams Creek.................................................. 44.861 -114.453 44.871 -114.456
Ranch Creek................................................. 45.374 -115.186 45.404 -115.234
Rapid River................................................. 44.551 -115.008 44.680 -115.153
Rapid River................................................. 45.114 -116.507 45.374 -116.356
[[Page 64050]]
Rapps Creek................................................. 45.268 -114.172 45.213 -114.164
Rat Creek................................................... 44.566 -114.785 44.588 -114.826
Rattlesnake Creek........................................... 45.249 -115.518 45.221 -115.492
Raven Creek................................................. 45.550 -115.161 45.517 -115.195
Red Top Creek............................................... 45.362 -115.266 45.384 -115.292
Redfish Lake................................................ 44.117 -114.932 ...........
Redfish Lake Creek.......................................... 44.099 -114.954 44.169 -114.899
Reeves Creek................................................ 44.686 -115.619 44.667 -115.667
Rhett Creek................................................. 45.476 -115.408 45.472 -115.394
Rice Creek.................................................. 44.510 -115.645 44.575 -115.686
Richardson Creek............................................ 45.539 -115.261 45.474 -115.240
Rim Creek................................................... 45.281 -115.383 45.336 -115.330
Riordan Creek............................................... 44.808 -115.392 44.907 -115.486
Riordan Lake................................................ 44.850 -115.439 ...........
Roaring Creek............................................... 45.259 -114.646 45.241 -114.615
Rock Creek.................................................. 44.639 -115.543 44.600 -115.593
Rock Creek-Loon............................................. 44.754 -114.671 44.674 -114.741
Rocky Creek................................................. 44.521 -113.434 44.535 -113.505
Rooster Creek............................................... 45.309 -115.490 45.328 -115.437
Root Creek.................................................. 45.382 -114.993 45.362 -114.964
Royal Creek................................................. 45.525 -116.098 45.525 -116.134
Rubie Creek................................................. 45.546 -116.079 45.543 -116.026
Ruby Creek.................................................. 45.190 -115.915 45.258 -115.879
Rush Creek.................................................. 44.536 -114.652 44.578 -114.614
Rush Creek.................................................. 44.933 -114.991 45.105 -114.861
Ryan Creek.................................................. 45.019 -115.395 45.033 -115.380
Sabe Creek.................................................. 45.681 -114.949 45.507 -115.025
Sack Creek.................................................. 44.320 -115.352 44.359 -115.408
Salmon River................................................ 43.797 -114.775 45.856 -116.795
Salt Creek.................................................. 44.984 -114.297 44.979 -114.223
Salt Creek.................................................. 44.973 -115.325 44.949 -115.353
Sand Creek.................................................. 44.632 -115.526 44.609 -115.414
Sand Creek.................................................. 45.327 -115.863 45.307 -115.821
Schissler Creek............................................. 45.320 -115.780 45.328 -115.708
Seafoam Creek............................................... 44.518 -115.119 44.542 -115.065
Secesh River................................................ 45.256 -115.897 45.025 -115.707
Sharkey Creek............................................... 45.222 -114.109 45.212 -114.048
Sheep Creek................................................. 45.482 -113.837 45.504 -113.954
Sheep Creek................................................. 44.770 -114.483 44.769 -114.516
Sheep Creek................................................. 44.649 -115.018 44.647 -115.058
Sheep Creek................................................. 44.708 -115.561 44.698 -115.613
Sheep Creek................................................. 45.049 -115.637 45.049 -115.515
Sheep Creek................................................. 45.614 -115.697 45.468 -115.811
Sheep Creek-Lmf............................................. 44.915 -114.904 44.943 -114.727
Sheep Trail Creek........................................... 44.360 -115.452 44.337 -115.448
Shell Creek................................................. 44.632 -114.834 44.613 -114.789
Ship Island Creek........................................... 45.152 -114.603 45.174 -114.633
Ship Island Lake 1................................. 45.166 -114.625 ...........
Shoban Lake................................................. 45.153 -114.602 ...........
Short Creek................................................. 44.773 -113.797 44.788 -113.768
Short Creek................................................. 44.313 -114.856 44.291 -114.872
Shovel Creek................................................ 45.034 -114.444 45.000 -114.479
Silge Creek................................................. 45.545 -115.248 45.517 -115.225
Silver Creek................................................ 44.852 -114.344 44.830 -114.502
Silver Rule Creek........................................... 44.146 -114.582 44.207 -114.597
Six-Bit Creek............................................... 44.645 -115.809 44.686 -115.707
Sixmile Creek............................................... 44.385 -114.596 44.413 -114.638
Slate Creek................................................. 44.154 -114.630 44.256 -114.564
Slate Creek................................................. 45.625 -116.055 45.626 -116.046
Slaughter Creek............................................. 45.297 -115.610 45.261 -115.673
Smith Creek................................................. 45.170 -115.381 45.152 -115.298
Smith Creek................................................. 45.241 -115.528 45.280 -115.583
Snowslide Creek............................................. 45.045 -115.282 45.098 -115.157
Soldier Creek............................................... 45.007 -114.882 45.029 -114.727
Soldier Creek............................................... 44.528 -115.202 44.626 -115.213
South Fork Bear Creek....................................... 44.826 -115.483 44.817 -115.458
South Fork Big Creek........................................ 44.385 -113.476 44.442 -113.601
South Fork Blackmare Creek.................................. 44.770 -115.804 44.809 -115.748
South Fork Buckhorn Creek................................... 44.840 -115.824 44.890 -115.824
South Fork Camas Creek...................................... 44.730 -114.641 44.721 -114.499
[[Page 64051]]
South Fork Chamberlain Creek................................ 45.336 -115.330 45.278 -115.353
South Fork Cottonwood Creek................................. 44.563 -114.781 44.621 -114.760
South Fork Dillinger Creek.................................. 45.495 -115.156 45.455 -115.169
South Fork East Fork Salmon River........................... 43.848 -114.567 43.929 -114.555
South Fork Elk Creek........................................ 45.136 -115.509 45.079 -115.467
South Fork Fitsum Creek..................................... 45.000 -115.763 44.970 -115.775
South Fork Fourmile Creek................................... 44.860 -115.680 44.814 -115.665
South Fork John Day Creek................................... 45.571 -116.229 45.555 -116.226
South Fork Moyer Creek...................................... 44.958 -114.294 44.879 -114.227
South Fork Rush Creek....................................... 44.965 -114.929 45.014 -114.979
South Fork Salmon River..................................... 44.493 -115.714 45.378 -115.513
South Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 45.449 -113.801 45.482 -113.837
South Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 44.603 -115.007 44.649 -115.018
South Fork Sheep Creek...................................... 45.036 -115.623 44.984 -115.604
South Fork Smith Creek...................................... 45.149 -115.420 45.170 -115.381
South Fork Threemile Creek.................................. 45.307 -115.929 45.315 -115.886
South Fork Warm Spring Creek................................ 44.568 -114.543 44.578 -114.552
South Fork Whimstick Creek.................................. 45.284 -115.031 45.243 -115.045
Spider Creek................................................ 44.697 -114.484 44.676 -114.512
Springfield Creek........................................... 44.789 -115.298 44.764 -115.313
Squaw Creek................................................. 45.504 -114.258 45.399 -114.169
Squaw Creek................................................. 44.249 -114.455 44.456 -114.504
Starvation Creek............................................ 45.358 -114.934 45.323 -114.980
Station Creek............................................... 45.352 -115.521 45.355 -115.473
Stoddard Creek.............................................. 45.235 -114.668 45.243 -114.687
Sugar Creek................................................. 44.936 -115.337 44.975 -115.246
Sulphur Creek............................................... 44.510 -115.519 44.555 -115.298
Sulphur Creek-Rapid......................................... 44.562 -115.162 44.586 -115.073
Summit Creek................................................ 45.172 -115.916 45.256 -115.897
Sunday Creek................................................ 44.341 -114.970 44.349 -114.906
Tamarack Creek.............................................. 44.984 -115.270 44.959 -115.390
Tater Creek................................................. 44.661 -113.840 44.632 -113.903
Tenmile Creek............................................... 44.484 -114.647 44.465 -114.582
Thirty-Eight Creek.......................................... 44.713 -115.413 44.673 -115.396
Thomas Creek................................................ 44.705 -115.028 44.715 -115.012
Thompson Creek.............................................. 44.284 -114.523 44.284 -114.523
Threemile Creek............................................. 45.334 -115.891 45.299 -115.930
Tie Creek................................................... 45.017 -115.770 45.037 -115.762
Trail Creek................................................. 45.215 -114.234 45.250 -114.320
Trail Creek................................................. 44.976 -114.532 44.964 -114.490
Trail Creek................................................. 44.628 -115.791 44.635 -115.718
Trail Creek-Loon............................................ 44.506 -114.960 44.543 -114.859
Trail Creek-Marble.......................................... 44.952 -114.935 44.841 -115.009
Trapper Creek............................................... 44.504 -114.618 44.597 -114.603
Trapper Creek............................................... 44.774 -115.405 44.831 -115.514
Tumbull Creek............................................... 45.523 -116.093 45.533 -116.136
Twelvemile Creek............................................ 44.497 -114.615 44.478 -114.565
Twin Creek.................................................. 45.591 -114.082 45.608 -113.965
Twist Creek................................................. 45.633 -114.961 45.628 -114.926
Tyndall Creek............................................... 44.562 -115.749 44.580 -115.685
Unnamed..................................................... 44.618 -113.964 44.670 -114.018
Unnamed..................................................... 44.670 -114.018 44.667 -114.025
Unnamed..................................................... 44.632 -113.903 44.618 -113.964
Unnamed..................................................... 44.565 -113.881 44.562 -113.877
Unnamed..................................................... 44.565 -113.881 44.569 -113.886
Unnamed - didgitized........................................ 44.766 -113.519 44.769 -113.515
Unnamed - digitized......................................... 44.562 -113.877 44.557 -113.881
Unnamed - digitized......................................... 44.565 -113.879 44.565 -113.881
Unnamed - digitized......................................... 44.667 -114.025 44.665 -114.030
Unnamed - Diversion between Geertson Creek and Kirtley Creek 45.175 -113.816 45.132 -113.770
Unnamed - North Fork Lake Creek............................. 45.015 -114.068 45.009 -114.017
Unnamed - North Fork Mayflower Creek........................ 45.245 -115.647 45.254 -115.635
Unnamed - Off Buck Creek.................................... 44.767 -115.485 44.761 -115.477
Unnamed - Off Burntlog Creek................................ 44.686 -115.468 44.680 -115.455
Unnamed - Off Corral Creek.................................. 44.840 -114.199 44.804 -114.225
Unnamed - Off Deep Creek.................................... 45.080 -114.092 45.064 -114.122
Unnamed - Off Mckay Creek................................... 44.445 -114.526 44.477 -114.526
Unnamed - Off Mormon Creek.................................. 44.509 -115.676 44.498 -115.674
Unnamed - Off Rice Creek.................................... 44.561 -115.644 44.551 -115.656
Unnamed - Off South Fork Salmon River....................... 44.556 -115.683 44.552 -115.707
[[Page 64052]]
Unnamed - Off Trail Creek................................... 44.599 -115.803 44.626 -115.746
Unnamed - Off Unnamed to Buck Creek......................... 44.767 -115.484 44.769 -115.479
Unnamed - Off Unnamed to Burntlog Creek..................... 44.730 -115.482 44.720 -115.463
Unnamed - to Knapp Creek.................................... 44.421 -115.036 44.433 -115.004
Unnamed 1 - Off Curtis Creek................................ 44.586 -115.804 44.609 -115.746
Unnamed 2 - Off Curtis Creek................................ 44.568 -115.794 44.594 -115.753
Unnamed Lake on Meadow Creek................................ 44.890 -115.351 ...........
Unnamed to Bearskin Creek................................... 44.374 -115.500 44.358 -115.523
Unnamed Trib 1-Off Trapper Creek............................ 44.794 -115.462 44.800 -115.452
Unnamed Trib 2-Off Trapper Creek............................ 44.795 -115.441 44.781 -115.427
Unnamed Trib 3- Off Trapper Creek........................... 44.772 -115.434 44.793 -115.465
Unnamed Tributary to Pete Creek............................. 45.281 -115.955 45.272 -115.967
Unnamed Tributary to Threemile Creek........................ 45.323 -115.912 45.317 -115.894
Unnamed Tributary to West Fork Elk Creek.................... 45.069 -115.483 45.095 -115.514
Valley Creek................................................ 44.377 -114.961 44.225 -114.928
Van Buren Creek............................................. 45.536 -116.169 45.532 -116.083
Van Horn Creek.............................................. 44.785 -114.338 44.757 -114.257
Vanity Creek................................................ 44.481 -115.077 44.553 -115.062
Vein Creek.................................................. 45.008 -115.472 45.056 -115.455
Victor Creek................................................ 45.147 -115.937 45.182 -115.822
Victor Creek................................................ 45.510 -116.101 45.515 -116.127
Vine Creek.................................................. 45.638 -114.001 45.611 -113.967
Wapiti Creek................................................ 45.335 -115.022 45.309 -115.074
Wardenhoff Creek............................................ 44.822 -115.518 44.832 -115.568
Warm Lake................................................... 44.645 -115.670 ...........
Warm Lake Creek............................................. 44.653 -115.662 44.666 -115.699
Warm Spring Creek........................................... 44.609 -114.482 44.653 -114.737
Warm Springs Creek.......................................... 44.059 -114.614 44.254 -114.676
Warren Creek................................................ 45.237 -115.676 45.397 -115.593
Weasel Creek................................................ 44.888 -114.273 44.887 -114.306
Webfoot Creek............................................... 45.217 -115.696 45.237 -115.676
West Fork Buckhorn Creek.................................... 44.917 -115.743 44.900 -115.858
West Fork Camas Creek....................................... 44.819 -114.655 44.831 -114.504
West Fork Chamberlain Creek................................. 45.463 -115.185 45.383 -115.167
West Fork East Fork Salmon River............................ 43.918 -114.656 43.929 -114.555
West Fork Elk Creek......................................... 44.480 -115.521 44.479 -115.458
West Fork Elk Creek......................................... 45.061 -115.520 45.147 -115.512
West Fork Enos Creek........................................ 45.148 -115.804 45.143 -115.837
West Fork Hayden Creek...................................... 44.697 -113.823 44.705 -113.757
West Fork Herd Creek........................................ 43.990 -114.225 44.058 -114.234
West Fork Indian Creek...................................... 45.489 -114.199 45.475 -114.139
West Fork Little Loon Creek................................. 44.666 -114.977 44.710 -114.935
West Fork Mayfield Creek.................................... 44.539 -114.798 44.465 -114.732
West Fork Monumental Creek.................................. 45.034 -115.276 45.005 -115.140
West Fork Morgan Creek...................................... 44.734 -114.394 44.681 -114.244
West Fork North Fork Salmon River........................... 45.667 -114.003 45.654 -113.971
West Fork Pahsimeroi River.................................. 44.092 -113.750 44.157 -113.704
West Fork Rapid River....................................... 45.230 -116.538 45.307 -116.420
West Fork Springfield Creek................................. 44.780 -115.383 44.786 -115.321
West Fork Thomas Creek...................................... 44.682 -115.055 44.705 -115.028
West Fork Whimstick Creek................................... 45.294 -115.031 45.291 -115.037
West Fork Yankee Fork....................................... 44.388 -114.933 44.351 -114.727
West Pass Creek............................................. 43.893 -114.419 43.988 -114.491
Whangdoodle Creek........................................... 45.150 -115.797 45.181 -115.738
Whimstick Creek............................................. 45.241 -115.054 45.378 -115.000
White Goat Creek............................................ 44.726 -114.416 44.741 -114.489
Wickiup Creek-Loon.......................................... 44.598 -114.659 44.606 -114.597
Willey Creek................................................ 45.043 -115.628 45.061 -115.604
Williams Lake............................................... 45.016 -113.976 ...........
Willow Basket Creek......................................... 45.192 -115.895 45.186 -115.832
Willow Creek................................................ 44.447 -114.446 44.428 -114.490
Willow Creek................................................ 45.356 -115.858 45.331 -115.950
Wilson Creek................................................ 45.143 -114.589 45.033 -114.724
Wimpey Creek................................................ 45.098 -113.721 45.176 -113.598
Wind River.................................................. 45.605 -115.918 45.455 -115.942
Winnemucca Creek............................................ 44.485 -114.963 44.436 -115.059
Woods Creek................................................. 45.535 -114.443 45.505 -114.460
Woodtick Creek.............................................. 44.973 -114.192 45.046 -114.283
Woodtick Creek.............................................. 44.808 -114.680 44.884 -114.626
Wright Creek................................................ 44.746 -113.836 44.783 -113.755
[[Page 64053]]
Wyoming Creek............................................... 44.355 -115.342 44.425 -115.321
Yankee Fork................................................. 44.510 -114.589 44.270 -114.735
Yellow Jacket Creek......................................... 45.145 -116.445 45.137 -116.413
Yellowbelly Creek........................................... 43.981 -114.928 44.000 -114.869
Yellowbelly Lake............................................ 44.001 -114.876 ...........
Yellowjacket Creek.......................................... 45.103 -114.536 44.892 -114.645
Zena Creek.................................................. 45.041 -115.748 45.057 -115.732
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 27, Salmon River - East Half follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64054]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.029
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(36) Unit 27: Salmon River - West Half
(i) The entire Salmon River unit consists of 7,376.5 km (4,583.5
mi) of streams and 1,683.8 ha (4,160.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The
unit is located in central Idaho.
(ii) See paragraph (e)(35)(ii) of this entry for a complete list of
individual waterbodies in this unit.
[[Page 64055]]
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 27, Salmon River - West Half follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.030
[[Page 64056]]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(37) Unit 28: Little Lost River
(i) This unit consists of 89.2 km (55.4 mi) of streams. The unit is
located in eastern Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Camp Creek.................................................. 44.408 -113.433 44.411 -113.418
Firebox Creek............................................... 44.434 -113.363 44.443 -113.380
Hawley Creek................................................ 44.361 -113.430 44.379 -113.404
Iron Creek.................................................. 44.387 -113.435 44.390 -113.461
Iron Creek.................................................. 44.389 -113.437 44.387 -113.435
Jackson Creek............................................... 44.372 -113.454 44.380 -113.413
Left Fork Iron Creek........................................ 44.384 -113.447 44.387 -113.435
Mill Creek.................................................. 44.387 -113.345 44.357 -113.375
North Fork Squaw Creek...................................... 44.379 -113.330 44.356 -113.330
Redrock Creek............................................... 44.417 -113.433 44.414 -113.419
Right Fork Little Lost River................................ 44.449 -113.370 44.446 -113.378
Sawmill Creek............................................... 44.452 -113.376 44.204 -113.299
Slide Creek................................................. 44.433 -113.442 44.432 -113.437
Smithie Fork................................................ 44.430 -113.394 44.467 -113.385
Squaw Creek................................................. 44.375 -113.306 44.375 -113.306
Timber Creek................................................ 44.394 -113.409 44.453 -113.450
Unnamed - Off Squaw Creek................................... 44.360 -113.315 44.359 -113.326
Warm Creek.................................................. 44.310 -113.302 44.306 -113.338
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 28, Little Lost River follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64057]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.031
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(38) Unit 29: Coeur d'Alene River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 821.5 km (510.5 mi) of streams and
12,606.9 ha (31,152.1 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located
in northern Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64058]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bad Bear Creek.............................................. 47.045 -115.460 47.045 -115.460
Bean Creek.................................................. 47.005 -115.271 46.993 -115.193
Beaver Creek................................................ 47.083 -115.356 47.064 -115.481
Big Elk Creek............................................... 47.804 -116.276 47.775 -116.374
Bluebells Creek............................................. 47.041 -115.157 47.050 -115.149
Boulder Creek............................................... 47.227 -116.020 47.149 -115.963
Buckskin Creek.............................................. 47.987 -116.226 48.034 -116.200
California Creek............................................ 47.041 -115.160 47.004 -115.178
Cascade Creek (St. Joe trib)................................ 47.044 -115.171 47.057 -115.162
Coeur d'Alene Lake.......................................... 47.525 -116.794 ...........
Coeur d'Alene River......................................... 47.460 -116.799 47.557 -116.258
Cougar Creek................................................ 47.640 -116.192 47.732 -116.306
Delaney Creek............................................... 47.062 -115.998 47.059 -115.987
Dolly Creek................................................. 47.126 -115.255 47.140 -115.223
Downey Creek................................................ 47.778 -116.037 47.746 -116.075
Eagle Creek................................................. 47.644 -115.922 47.652 -115.904
East Fork Downey Creek...................................... 47.746 -116.075 47.723 -116.079
East Fork Steamboat Creek................................... 47.716 -116.200 47.787 -116.205
Entente Creek............................................... 47.231 -115.494 47.271 -115.478
Falls Creek................................................. 47.787 -115.955 47.811 -115.878
Fly Creek................................................... 47.113 -115.386 47.081 -115.490
Freezeout Creek............................................. 47.071 -116.009 47.027 -116.036
Gold Creek.................................................. 47.151 -115.409 47.224 -115.354
Heller Creek................................................ 47.061 -115.221 47.091 -115.177
Homestead Creek............................................. 47.109 -116.058 47.123 -116.038
Independence Creek.......................................... 47.877 -116.209 47.862 -116.428
Little Lost Fork............................................ 47.862 -116.002 47.862 -116.046
Marble Creek................................................ 47.251 -116.022 47.021 -116.026
Medicine Creek.............................................. 47.028 -115.150 47.060 -115.132
Mill Creek.................................................. 46.997 -115.227 46.971 -115.214
Mosquito Creek.............................................. 48.018 -116.245 48.055 -116.229
My Creek.................................................... 46.971 -115.377 46.946 -115.375
North Fork Bean Creek....................................... 47.005 -115.235 47.014 -115.199
North Fork Coeur d'Alene River.............................. 47.557 -116.258 48.005 -116.322
North Grizzly Creek......................................... 47.753 -116.054 47.717 -116.061
Prichard Creek.............................................. 47.658 -115.977 47.644 -115.922
Quartz Creek................................................ 47.201 -115.517 47.231 -115.494
Red Ives Creek.............................................. 47.056 -115.352 47.043 -115.279
Ruby Creek.................................................. 46.983 -115.368 46.961 -115.431
Sentinel Creek.............................................. 47.861 -116.001 47.842 -116.032
Sherlock Creek.............................................. 47.064 -115.219 47.064 -115.138
Shoshone Creek.............................................. 47.703 -115.972 47.922 -115.995
Simmons Creek............................................... 47.137 -115.401 47.090 -115.232
Spruce Creek................................................ 47.982 -116.226 47.993 -116.333
St. Joe River............................................... 47.354 -116.726 47.005 -115.119
Steamboat Creek............................................. 47.662 -116.155 47.716 -116.200
Tepee Creek................................................. 47.881 -116.133 47.739 -116.300
Timber Creek................................................ 47.018 -115.369 46.991 -115.463
Tinear Creek................................................ 47.002 -115.231 46.961 -115.256
Ulm Creek................................................... 47.861 -116.001 47.886 -115.974
West Fork Downey Creek...................................... 47.746 -116.075 47.727 -116.107
West Fork Eagle Creek....................................... 47.652 -115.904 47.750 -115.804
West Fork Steamboat Creek................................... 47.716 -116.200 47.736 -116.278
Wisdom Creek................................................ 47.009 -115.134 47.027 -115.088
Yankee Bar Creek............................................ 47.049 -115.192 47.021 -115.195
Yellow Dog Creek............................................ 47.776 -116.050 47.736 -116.114
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) No waterbodies are excluded from critical habitat designation
in this unit.
(iv) Map of Unit 29, Coeur d'Alene River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64059]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.032
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(39) Unit 30: Kootenai River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 522.5 km (324.7 mi) of streams and
12,089.2 ha (29,873.0 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located
in northern Idaho and northwestern Montana.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64060]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ball Creek.................................................. 48.787 -116.410 48.794 -116.420
Bear Creek.................................................. 48.162 -115.654 48.184 -115.508
Blue Sky Creek.............................................. 48.895 -114.776 48.887 -114.752
Boulder Creek............................................... 48.625 -116.052 48.613 -116.070
Bull Lake................................................... 48.247 -115.852 ...........
Callahan Creek.............................................. 48.457 -115.882 48.435 -116.013
Caribou Creek............................................... 48.664 -116.400 48.659 -116.402
Clarence Creek.............................................. 48.889 -114.799 48.930 -114.825
Deep Creek.................................................. 48.708 -116.384 48.664 -116.400
East Fork Pipe Creek........................................ 48.616 -115.619 48.692 -115.594
Fisher River................................................ 48.069 -115.375 48.366 -115.324
Grave Creek................................................. 48.798 -114.953 48.927 -114.751
Keeler Creek................................................ 48.360 -115.852 48.335 -115.961
Kootenai River.............................................. 48.617 -116.048 48.617 -116.048
Lake Creek.................................................. 48.360 -115.852 48.282 -115.859
Lake Koocanusa.............................................. 48.727 -115.244 ...........
Libby Creek................................................. 48.121 -115.544 48.121 -115.544
Long Canyon Creek........................................... 48.961 -116.527 48.784 -116.652
Moyie River................................................. 48.715 -116.186 48.732 -116.176
Myrtle Creek................................................ 48.739 -116.412 48.707 -116.430
North Callahan Creek........................................ 48.435 -116.013 48.506 -116.192
North Fork Keeler Creek..................................... 48.342 -115.897 48.362 -115.934
O'Brien Creek............................................... 48.448 -115.867 48.531 -115.763
Pipe Creek.................................................. 48.424 -115.607 48.616 -115.619
Quartz Creek................................................ 48.438 -115.639 48.573 -115.690
Snow Creek.................................................. 48.664 -116.403 48.665 -116.409
South Callahan Creek........................................ 48.414 -116.049 48.435 -116.013
South Fork Keeler Creek..................................... 48.320 -115.927 48.333 -115.919
Tobacco River............................................... 48.897 -115.127 48.798 -114.953
Trout Creek................................................. 48.840 -116.411 48.835 -116.420
West Fisher Creek........................................... 48.069 -115.375 48.052 -115.555
West Fork Quartz Creek...................................... 48.479 -115.654 48.523 -115.750
Wigwam River................................................ 49.000 -114.801 48.965 -114.856
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plan (HCP) totaling 66.2 km (41.1 mi) of streams have been
excluded from critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act in this unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic area
covered by the Plum Creek Native Fish Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP),
including portions of the Kootenai River and Lake Koocanusa CHSUs.
(iv) Map of Unit 30, Kootenai River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64061]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.033
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(40) Unit 31: Clark Fork River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 5,356.0 km (3,328.1 mi) of streams and
119,620.1 ha (295,586.6 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is
located in northwestern Montana and northern Idaho.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64062]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Akokala Creek............................................... 48.881 -114.199 48.920 -114.167
Akokala Lake................................................ 48.879 -114.199 ...........
Albert Creek................................................ 46.972 -114.311 46.972 -114.311
Alder Creek................................................. 46.442 -113.826 46.471 -113.777
Arrow Lake.................................................. 48.706 -113.885 ...........
Babcock Creek............................................... 47.366 -113.270 47.359 -113.353
Barker Creek................................................ 46.100 -113.116 46.163 -113.116
Basin Creek................................................. 47.966 -112.996 47.935 -113.075
Bear Creek.................................................. 48.234 -113.567 48.296 -113.384
Beatrice Creek.............................................. 47.794 -115.103 47.775 -115.153
Belmont Creek............................................... 46.954 -113.570 47.054 -113.642
Bench Creek................................................. 48.869 -117.003 48.876 -117.014
Big Creek................................................... 48.604 -114.164 48.515 -114.327
Big Salmon Creek............................................ 47.586 -113.420 47.567 -113.495
Big Salmon Lake............................................. 47.602 -113.387 ...........
Bitterroot River............................................ 46.861 -114.118 45.944 -114.129
Blackfoot River............................................. 46.870 -113.891 47.043 -112.409
Blodgett Creek.............................................. 46.304 -114.154 46.304 -114.154
Blue Joint Creek............................................ 45.695 -114.314 45.600 -114.519
Boles Creek................................................. 47.119 -113.547 47.099 -113.731
Boulder Creek............................................... 46.343 -113.077 46.478 -113.238
Boulder Creek............................................... 45.817 -114.239 45.842 -114.272
Bowl Creek.................................................. 47.996 -113.058 47.966 -112.996
Bowles Creek................................................ 46.192 -113.748 46.207 -113.813
Bowman Creek................................................ 48.906 -114.118 48.974 -114.064
Bowman Lake................................................. 48.864 -114.161 ...........
Bull River.................................................. 48.024 -115.845 48.193 -115.816
Bunker Creek................................................ 47.830 -113.416 47.829 -113.582
Burnt Fork Bitterroot River................................. 46.542 -114.100 46.304 -113.838
Butte Cabin Creek........................................... 46.482 -113.684 46.520 -113.768
Cabinet Gorge Reservoir..................................... 48.036 -115.873 ...........
Cache Creek................................................. 46.813 -114.640 46.725 -114.759
Calispell Creek............................................. 48.321 -117.308 48.321 -117.308
Calispell Lake.............................................. 48.274 -117.333 ...........
Camas Creek................................................. 48.664 -113.935 48.737 -113.883
Caribou Creek............................................... 48.748 -116.865 48.798 -116.815
Carpp Creek................................................. 46.025 -113.428 46.032 -113.525
Cedar Creek................................................. 47.048 -115.044 47.178 -114.863
Cedar Creek................................................. 48.893 -116.916 48.880 -116.960
Cedar Creek................................................. 48.742 -117.412 48.845 -117.522
Cerulean Lake............................................... 48.872 -114.057 ...........
Char Creek.................................................. 48.291 -116.074 48.262 -116.068
Clack Creek................................................. 48.012 -113.090 47.988 -113.106
Clark Fork River............................................ 46.601 -113.037 47.961 -115.734
Clearwater Lake............................................. 47.385 -113.560 ...........
Clearwater River............................................ 47.067 -113.391 47.395 -113.531
Clearwater River, E Fk...................................... 47.342 -113.496 47.352 -113.581
Coal Creek.................................................. 48.690 -114.194 48.698 -114.540
Cold Creek.................................................. 47.547 -113.920 47.584 -113.757
Cooper Gulch................................................ 47.544 -115.592 47.513 -115.648
Copper Creek................................................ 47.009 -112.558 47.060 -112.753
Copper Creek................................................ 46.068 -113.539 45.948 -113.570
Cottonwood Creek............................................ 47.025 -113.282 47.161 -113.346
Crow Creek.................................................. 47.539 -115.547 47.525 -115.558
Crow Creek.................................................. 47.525 -115.558 47.539 -115.547
Cyclone Creek............................................... 48.665 -114.239 48.712 -114.392
Cyclone Lake................................................ 48.705 -114.301 ...........
Daly Creek.................................................. 46.168 -113.911 46.250 -113.807
Danaher Creek............................................... 47.445 -113.183 47.275 -113.014
Dead Horse Creek............................................ 48.663 -114.279 48.659 -114.296
Deer Creek.................................................. 45.595 -114.322 45.570 -114.510
Divide Creek................................................ 46.043 -113.819 46.064 -113.968
Doctor Creek................................................ 47.402 -113.485 47.407 -113.480
Doctor Lake................................................. 47.404 -113.481 ...........
Dolly Varden Creek.......................................... 48.066 -113.245 47.995 -113.185
Dry Lake Creek.............................................. 47.259 -113.904 47.308 -113.894
Dunham Creek................................................ 47.103 -113.156 47.238 -113.317
East Branch LeClerc Creek................................... 48.534 -117.283 48.673 -117.189
East Fork Bitterroot River.................................. 45.944 -114.129 45.911 -113.596
East Fork Bull River........................................ 48.109 -115.783 48.091 -115.645
[[Page 64063]]
East Fork Creek............................................. 48.241 -116.113 48.262 -116.040
East Fork Crow Creek........................................ 47.525 -115.558 47.519 -115.556
East Fork Reservoir......................................... 46.118 -113.375 ...........
East Fork Rock Creek........................................ 46.103 -113.369 46.200 -113.500
East Fork Small Creek....................................... 48.328 -117.355 48.371 -117.399
East Fork Strawberry Creek.................................. 48.064 -113.031 48.092 -112.992
East Fork Swift Creek....................................... 48.687 -114.583 48.757 -114.585
East River.................................................. 48.371 -116.820 48.353 -116.853
Elk Creek................................................... 47.544 -113.742 47.480 -113.857
Fish Creek.................................................. 47.003 -114.699 46.927 -114.697
Fishtrap Creek.............................................. 47.713 -115.059 47.817 -115.152
Fitzsimmons Creek........................................... 48.735 -114.734 48.751 -114.618
Flathead Lake............................................... 47.885 -114.134 ...........
Flathead River.............................................. 47.365 -114.777 48.467 -114.070
Flint Creek................................................. 46.528 -113.227 46.528 -113.227
Foster Creek................................................ 46.164 -113.120 46.284 -113.110
Fourth of July Creek........................................ 48.556 -117.273 48.557 -117.264
Fred Burr Creek............................................. 46.348 -114.152 46.357 -114.316
Frozen Creek................................................ 49.000 -114.678 48.990 -114.738
Frozen Lake................................................. 48.999 -114.681 ...........
Gateway Creek............................................... 48.030 -113.022 48.046 -112.959
Goat Creek.................................................. 47.749 -113.829 47.760 -113.657
Gold Creek.................................................. 46.919 -113.677 47.058 -113.745
Gold Creek.................................................. 46.398 -113.904 46.363 -113.931
Gold Creek.................................................. 47.971 -116.455 47.953 -116.452
Gold Creek.................................................. 48.811 -117.032 48.821 -116.974
Gordon Creek................................................ 47.423 -113.439 47.434 -113.474
Granite Creek............................................... 48.145 -113.377 48.227 -113.333
Granite Creek............................................... 48.087 -116.428 48.060 -116.330
Granite Creek............................................... 48.639 -116.864 48.700 -117.030
Grant Creek................................................. 46.868 -114.104 47.036 -113.955
Graves Creek................................................ 47.682 -115.410 47.718 -115.381
Grouse Creek................................................ 48.403 -116.478 48.483 -116.229
Hallowat Creek.............................................. 48.574 -114.317 48.625 -114.425
Harrison Creek.............................................. 48.529 -113.751 48.574 -113.702
Harrison Lake............................................... 48.516 -113.771 ...........
Harvey Creek................................................ 46.581 -113.574 46.707 -113.373
Hogback Creek............................................... 46.410 -113.703 46.440 -113.626
Holland Creek............................................... 47.451 -113.582 47.451 -113.572
Holland Lake................................................ 47.448 -113.598 ...........
Hughes Creek................................................ 45.621 -114.304 45.657 -114.044
Hughes Fork................................................. 48.805 -116.924 48.893 -117.001
Hungry Horse Reservoir...................................... 48.201 -113.798 ...........
Indian Creek................................................ 48.610 -116.837 48.634 -116.790
Indian Creek................................................ 48.242 -117.153 48.299 -117.152
Jackson Creek............................................... 48.856 -117.002 48.854 -117.024
Jim Creek................................................... 47.648 -113.793 47.587 -113.898
Jocko River................................................. 47.195 -113.853 47.201 -113.924
Johnson Creek............................................... 48.131 -116.226 48.139 -116.230
Keokee Creek................................................ 48.389 -116.698 48.407 -116.685
Kintla Creek................................................ 48.975 -114.250 48.986 -114.064
Kintla Lake................................................. 48.959 -114.307 ...........
Kishenehn Creek............................................. 48.950 -114.412 49.000 -114.365
Lake Alva................................................... 47.313 -113.582 ...........
Lake Inez................................................... 47.282 -113.567 ...........
Lake Isabel................................................. 48.422 -113.494 ...........
Lake Marshall............................................... 47.288 -113.650 ...........
Lake McDonald............................................... 48.583 -113.926 ...........
Lake Pend Oreille........................................... 48.152 -116.410 ...........
Landers Fork................................................ 46.965 -112.563 47.099 -112.569
LeClerc Creek............................................... 48.518 -117.284 48.534 -117.283
Lick Creek.................................................. 45.939 -113.679 45.938 -113.718
Lightning Creek............................................. 48.140 -116.192 48.353 -116.176
Lime Creek.................................................. 48.907 -116.957 48.894 -116.965
Lincoln Creek............................................... 48.592 -113.767 48.596 -113.759
Lincoln Lake................................................ 48.591 -113.771 ...........
Lindbergh Lake.............................................. 47.381 -113.734 ...........
Lion Creek.................................................. 47.681 -113.816 47.670 -113.711
Lion Creek.................................................. 48.736 -116.832 48.725 -116.673
Little Boulder Creek........................................ 45.716 -114.278 45.726 -114.228
[[Page 64064]]
Little Joe Creek............................................ 47.269 -115.141 47.297 -115.121
Little Salmon Creek......................................... 47.587 -113.611 47.654 -113.361
Little Stony Creek.......................................... 46.293 -113.683 46.286 -113.775
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 47.182 -113.203 47.229 -113.271
Lodgepole Creek............................................. 48.115 -113.264 48.141 -113.133
Logging Creek............................................... 48.776 -114.020 48.784 -114.002
Logging Lake................................................ 48.758 -114.075 ...........
Lolo Creek.................................................. 46.712 -114.533 46.743 -114.061
Long Creek.................................................. 48.157 -113.530 48.094 -113.497
Lost Creek.................................................. 47.870 -113.849 47.873 -113.825
Lost Creek.................................................. 47.118 -115.109 47.118 -115.109
Lost Horse Creek............................................ 46.120 -114.306 46.120 -114.306
Lower Quartz Lake........................................... 48.807 -114.172 ...........
Lunch Creek................................................. 48.825 -117.399 48.820 -117.389
Malcom Creek................................................ 48.982 -116.940 48.980 -116.931
Marshall Creek.............................................. 47.279 -113.598 47.276 -113.727
Martin Creek................................................ 45.930 -113.724 46.009 -113.812
Mathias Creek............................................... 48.669 -114.423 48.647 -114.472
McDonald Creek.............................................. 48.506 -114.006 48.646 -113.848
McDonald Lake............................................... 47.421 -113.977 ...........
Meadow Creek................................................ 46.128 -113.429 46.097 -113.441
Meadow Creek................................................ 45.908 -113.781 45.813 -113.791
Middle Branch Le Clerc Creek................................ 48.585 -117.262 48.654 -117.218
Middle Fork East River...................................... 48.371 -116.820 48.386 -116.678
Middle Fork Flathead River.................................. 48.468 -114.070 47.996 -113.058
Middle Fork Rock Creek...................................... 46.001 -113.526 46.223 -113.522
Middle Quartz Lake.......................................... 48.822 -114.142 ...........
Mill Creek.................................................. 48.489 -117.266 48.447 -117.139
Mission Creek............................................... 47.320 -113.990 47.324 -113.974
Mission Reservoir........................................... 47.319 -114.008 ...........
Monture Creek............................................... 47.020 -113.236 47.268 -113.181
Moose Creek................................................. 45.922 -113.728 46.009 -113.708
Mormon Creek................................................ 46.756 -114.115 46.697 -114.205
Morrell Creek............................................... 47.141 -113.461 47.342 -113.472
Morris Creek................................................ 48.208 -116.081 48.224 -116.118
Morrison Creek.............................................. 48.110 -113.311 48.237 -113.261
Nez Perce Fork.............................................. 45.802 -114.268 45.734 -114.473
North Fork Blackfoot River.................................. 46.985 -113.130 47.196 -112.887
North Fork Cold Creek....................................... 47.562 -113.812 47.555 -113.906
North Fork East River....................................... 48.371 -116.820 48.449 -116.735
North Fork Fish Creek....................................... 46.907 -114.806 46.932 -114.924
North Fork Flathead River................................... 48.469 -114.073 49.000 -114.475
North Fork Granite Creek.................................... 48.700 -117.030 48.771 -117.067
North Fork Indian Creek..................................... 48.658 -116.719 48.634 -116.790
North Fork Jocko River...................................... 47.201 -113.924 47.226 -113.816
North Fork Little Joe Creek................................. 47.203 -115.275 47.269 -115.141
North Fork Lost Creek....................................... 47.873 -113.825 47.896 -113.738
North Fork Of South Fork Tacoma Creek....................... 48.399 -117.362 48.435 -117.483
North Fork Rock Creek....................................... 46.212 -113.697 46.232 -113.756
North Gold Creek............................................ 47.973 -116.453 47.975 -116.427
Noxon Rapids Reservoir...................................... 47.892 -115.675 ...........
Nyack Creek................................................. 48.452 -113.797 48.490 -113.701
O'Brien Creek............................................... 46.837 -114.299 46.850 -114.103
Ole Creek................................................... 48.283 -113.599 48.316 -113.464
Oregon Gulch................................................ 47.143 -114.968 47.122 -115.021
Overwhich Creek............................................. 45.674 -114.308 45.717 -114.081
Pack River.................................................. 48.320 -116.383 48.603 -116.637
Painted Rocks Reservoir..................................... 45.701 -114.294 ...........
Park Creek.................................................. 48.310 -113.614 48.420 -113.509
Pend Oreille River.......................................... 48.989 -117.349 48.251 -116.538
Petty Creek................................................. 46.992 -114.447 46.849 -114.439
Piper Creek................................................. 47.675 -113.816 47.622 -113.956
Placid Creek................................................ 47.116 -113.542 47.178 -113.675
Placid Lake................................................. 47.119 -113.525 ...........
Pocket Creek................................................ 48.934 -114.079 48.955 -114.104
Poorman Creek............................................... 46.897 -112.653 46.897 -112.653
Porcupine Creek............................................. 48.267 -116.124 48.253 -116.157
Post Creek.................................................. 47.416 -113.961 47.399 -113.893
Priest Lake................................................. 48.588 -116.865 ...........
Priest River................................................ 48.173 -116.893 48.490 -116.905
[[Page 64065]]
Prospect Creek.............................................. 47.592 -115.358 47.568 -115.677
Quartz Creek................................................ 48.815 -114.166 48.839 -114.004
Quartz Lake................................................. 48.829 -114.102 ...........
Quintonkon Creek............................................ 48.013 -113.768 48.026 -113.708
Railroad Creek.............................................. 46.158 -113.886 46.167 -113.816
Rainbow Creek............................................... 48.855 -114.054 48.869 -114.054
Rainy Lake.................................................. 47.339 -113.595 ...........
Ranch Creek................................................. 46.468 -113.578 46.583 -113.679
Rapid Creek................................................. 47.372 -113.055 47.382 -113.026
Rattle Creek................................................ 48.326 -116.173 48.314 -116.101
Rattlesnake Creek........................................... 46.867 -113.986 47.098 -113.910
Red Meadow Creek............................................ 48.805 -114.325 48.773 -114.543
Reynolds Creek.............................................. 45.947 -113.718 45.957 -113.682
Rock Creek.................................................. 46.725 -113.683 46.223 -113.522
Rock Creek.................................................. 47.975 -115.744 48.044 -115.654
Rock Creek.................................................. 48.923 -116.966 48.906 -116.971
Ross Fork................................................... 46.184 -113.526 46.184 -113.526
Ruby Creek.................................................. 48.556 -117.343 48.568 -117.510
Saint Mary's Lake........................................... 47.261 -113.923 ...........
Saint Regis River........................................... 47.297 -115.090 47.349 -115.292
Salmon Lake................................................. 47.093 -113.404 ...........
Sand Basin Creek............................................ 46.197 -113.704 46.153 -113.688
Savage Creek................................................ 48.226 -116.029 48.248 -116.097
Scalp Creek................................................. 47.982 -113.042 47.957 -113.082
Schafer Creek............................................... 48.038 -113.270 48.071 -113.251
Seeley Lake................................................. 47.194 -113.510 ...........
Shorty Creek................................................ 48.851 -114.594 48.818 -114.614
Skalkaho Creek.............................................. 46.220 -114.163 46.071 -113.818
Slate Creek................................................. 45.698 -114.287 45.712 -114.166
Slate Creek................................................. 48.923 -117.333 48.927 -117.318
Sleeping Child Creek........................................ 46.161 -114.160 46.033 -113.815
Small Creek................................................. 48.321 -117.308 48.337 -117.410
Soup Creek.................................................. 47.837 -113.844 47.812 -113.751
South Boulder Creek......................................... 46.415 -113.201 46.415 -113.201
South Fork Bull River....................................... 48.170 -115.789 48.193 -115.816
South Fork Coal Creek....................................... 48.680 -114.346 48.674 -114.472
South Fork Fish Creek....................................... 46.927 -114.697 46.813 -114.640
South Fork Flathead River................................... 47.830 -113.416 47.833 -113.417
South Fork Granite Creek.................................... 48.700 -117.030 48.691 -117.134
South Fork Indian Creek..................................... 48.624 -116.717 48.634 -116.790
South Fork Jocko River...................................... 47.103 -113.768 47.195 -113.853
South Fork Little Joe Creek................................. 47.172 -115.224 47.269 -115.141
South Fork Lolo Creek....................................... 46.762 -114.266 46.605 -114.309
South Fork Lost Creek....................................... 47.868 -113.738 47.873 -113.825
South Fork Tacoma Creek..................................... 48.394 -117.324 48.432 -117.507
South Woodward Creek........................................ 47.754 -113.858 47.717 -113.858
Spotted Bear River.......................................... 47.924 -113.526 47.877 -113.212
Squeezer Creek.............................................. 47.750 -113.816 47.717 -113.729
Stillwater River............................................ 48.604 -114.657 48.789 -114.686
Stony Creek................................................. 46.274 -113.731 46.274 -113.731
Storm Lake Creek............................................ 46.169 -113.154 46.075 -113.268
Strawberry Creek............................................ 47.996 -113.058 48.111 -113.028
Strong Creek................................................ 48.243 -116.303 48.264 -116.279
Sullivan Creek.............................................. 48.050 -113.689 47.879 -113.657
Sullivan Creek.............................................. 48.865 -117.371 48.955 -117.069
Sullivan Springs............................................ 48.088 -116.412 48.084 -116.388
Swamp Creek................................................. 47.920 -115.689 47.994 -115.565
Swan Lake................................................... 47.955 -113.895 ...........
Swan River.................................................. 47.346 -113.742 47.404 -113.718
Swift Creek................................................. 48.481 -114.425 48.654 -114.551
Tacoma Creek................................................ 48.391 -117.289 48.445 -117.508
The Thorofare............................................... 48.740 -116.843 48.766 -116.865
Thompson River.............................................. 47.576 -115.241 47.713 -115.059
Tillicum Creek.............................................. 48.725 -117.071 48.729 -117.083
Tin Cup Creek............................................... 45.973 -114.349 46.016 -114.168
Tolan Creek................................................. 45.777 -113.827 45.856 -113.913
Trail Creek................................................. 48.013 -113.020 48.012 -112.946
Trail Creek................................................. 48.924 -114.386 48.933 -114.536
Trapper Creek............................................... 48.796 -116.897 48.851 -116.879
Trestle Creek............................................... 48.351 -116.235 48.283 -116.353
[[Page 64066]]
Trout Creek................................................. 47.030 -114.966 47.106 -114.897
Trout Lake.................................................. 48.680 -113.910 ...........
Twelvemile Creek............................................ 47.349 -115.292 47.465 -115.325
Twin Lakes Creek............................................ 46.070 -113.221 46.169 -113.153
Two Bear Creek.............................................. 46.111 -114.010 46.094 -113.897
Two Mouth Creek............................................. 48.674 -116.677 48.687 -116.837
Uleda Creek................................................. 48.388 -116.708 48.362 -116.696
Upper Kintla Lake........................................... 48.976 -114.176 ...........
Upper Priest Lake........................................... 48.785 -116.889 ...........
Upper Priest River.......................................... 48.799 -116.912 48.995 -116.942
Upper Stillwater Lake....................................... 48.588 -114.637 ...........
Upper Whitefish Lake........................................ 48.687 -114.579 ...........
Vermilion River............................................. 47.832 -115.535 47.879 -115.355
Ward Creek.................................................. 47.274 -115.355 47.312 -115.234
Warm Springs Creek.......................................... 46.210 -112.768 46.261 -113.137
Warm Springs Creek.......................................... 45.860 -114.026 45.742 -114.070
Welcome Creek............................................... 46.566 -113.701 46.603 -113.768
Wellington Creek............................................ 48.295 -116.174 48.290 -116.163
West Branch LeClerc Creek................................... 48.534 -117.283 48.701 -117.212
West Fork Bitterroot River.................................. 45.621 -114.304 45.718 -114.281
West Fork Clearwater River.................................. 47.256 -113.551 47.287 -113.745
West Fork Fish Creek........................................ 46.927 -114.697 46.812 -114.891
West Fork Fishtrap Creek.................................... 47.793 -115.224 47.816 -115.145
West Fork Gold Creek........................................ 46.996 -113.686 47.032 -113.828
West Fork Rock Creek........................................ 46.170 -113.762 46.171 -113.762
West Fork Swift Creek....................................... 48.654 -114.551 48.726 -114.653
West Fork Thompson River.................................... 47.650 -115.174 47.714 -115.207
West Gold Creek............................................. 47.953 -116.452 47.930 -116.504
Whale Creek................................................. 48.849 -114.353 48.851 -114.594
Wheeler Creek............................................... 48.097 -113.730 48.066 -113.776
White River................................................. 47.588 -113.299 47.611 -113.204
Whitefish Lake.............................................. 48.451 -114.381 ...........
Winchester Creek............................................ 48.271 -117.343 48.329 -117.476
Woodward Creek.............................................. 47.767 -113.880 47.777 -113.846
Wounded Buck Creek.......................................... 48.280 -113.936 48.234 -113.963
Youngs Creek................................................ 47.445 -113.183 47.282 -113.314
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following habitat
conservation plan (HCP) totaling 209.0 km (129.9 mi) of streams and
32.2 ha (79.7 ac) of lakes and reservoirs have been excluded from
critical habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this
unit. These are waterbodies within the geographic area covered by the
Plum Creek Native Fish Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP), including
portions of Lower Clark Fork River, Middle Clark Fork River, Upper
Clark Fork River, Bitterroot River, Rock Creek, Blackfoot, Clearwater,
Flathead, Swan, and South Fork CHSUs.
(iv) Map of Unit 31, Clark Fork River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64067]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.034
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
(41) Unit 32: St. Mary River Basin
(i) This unit consists of 34.7 km (21.6 mi) of streams and 1,669.3
ha (4,125.0 ac) of lakes and reservoirs. The unit is located in
northwestern Montana.
(ii) Individual waterbodies in the unit are bounded by the
following coordinates:
[[Page 64068]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stream Stream
Begin Point Begin Point Stream End Stream End
Waterbody Name or Lake or Lake Point Point
Center Center Latitude Longitude
Latitude Longitude
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Boulder Creek............................................... 48.776 -113.550 48.839 -113.460
Canyon Creek................................................ 48.740 -113.647 48.730 -113.657
Cracker Lake................................................ 48.744 -113.644 ...........
Divide Creek................................................ 48.694 -113.421 48.751 -113.438
Kennedy Creek............................................... 48.851 -113.604 48.905 -113.409
Lee Creek................................................... 48.998 -113.601 48.919 -113.638
Lower St. Mary Lake......................................... 48.796 -113.423 ...........
Middle Fork Lee Creek....................................... 48.998 -113.550 48.978 -113.585
Otatso Creek................................................ 48.894 -113.638 48.904 -113.621
Otatso Lake................................................. 48.892 -113.677 ...........
Red Eagle Creek............................................. 48.648 -113.510 48.630 -113.541
Red Eagle Lake.............................................. 48.652 -113.507 ...........
Saint Mary River............................................ 48.756 -113.425 48.844 -113.418
Slide Lakes - lower pool.................................... 48.905 -113.616 ...........
Slide Lakes - upper pool.................................... 48.902 -113.625 ...........
St. Mary Lake............................................... 48.699 -113.509 ...........
Swiftcurrent Creek.......................................... 48.836 -113.429 48.839 -113.460
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(iii) Waterbodies associated with the following tribal lands
totaling 82.1 km (51.0 mi) of streams and 886.1 ha (2,189.5 ac) of
lakes and reservoirs have been excluded from critical habitat
designation under section 4(b)(2) of the Act in this unit. These are
waterbodies within the areas under management by the Blackfeet Tribe,
within reservation boundaries, and waterbodies that are adjacent to:
(A) Lands held in trust by the United States for their benefit;
(B) Lands held in trust by the United States for any Indian Tribe
or individual subject to restrictions by the United States against
alienation;
(C) Fee lands, either within or outside the reservation boundaries,
owned by the tribal government; and
(D) Fee lands within the reservation boundaries owned by individual
Indians.
(iv) Map of Unit 32, St. Mary River Basin follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S
[[Page 64069]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR18OC10.035
[[Page 64070]]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
* * * * *
Dated: September 10, 2010
Thomas L. Strickland,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-25028 Filed 10-15-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S