71880 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration 

50 CFR Part 226 

[Docket No. 041123329–4329–01; I.D. No. 

110904F] 

RIN 0648–AO04 

Endangered and Threatened Species; 

Designation of Critical Habitat for 

Seven Evolutionarily Significant Units 

of Pacific Salmon (Oncorhynchus 

tshawytscha) and Steelhead

(O. mykiss) in California

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries 

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, 

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The National Marine 

Fisheries Service (NMFS) proposes to 

designate critical habitat for two 

Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) 

of chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 

tshawytscha) and five ESUs of O. mykiss

(inclusive of anadromous steelhead and 

resident rainbow trout) listed under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA). The specific areas 

proposed for designation in the rule text 

set out below include approximately 

11,668 miles (18,669 km) of riverine 

habitat and 947 mi2 (2,444 km2) of bay/

estuarine habitat (primarily in San 

Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bays) in 

California. Some of the proposed areas, 

however, are occupied by two or more 

ESUs. However, as explained below, we 

are also considering excluding many of 

these areas from the final designation 

based on existing land management 

plans and policies, voluntary 

conservation efforts and other factors 

that could substantially reduce the 

scope of the final designations. The net 

economic impacts of ESA section 7 

associated with designating the areas 

described in the proposed rule are 

estimated to be approximately 

$83,511,186, but we believe the 

additional exclusions under review 

could reduce this impact by up to 57 

percent or more. We solicit information 

and comments from the public on all 

aspects of the proposal, including 

information on the economic, national 

security, and other relevant impacts of 

the proposed designation. We may 

revise this proposal and solicit 

additional comments prior to final 

designation to address new information 

received during the comment period.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule 

must be received by 5 p.m. P.s.t. on 

February 8, 2005. Requests for public 

hearings must be made in writing by 

January 24, 2005.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, 

identified by docket number 

[041123329–4329–01] and RIN number 

[0648–AO04], by any of the following 

methods: 

• E-mail: 

critical.habitat.swr@noaa.gov. Include 

docket number [041123329–4329–01] 

and RIN number [0648–AO04] in the 

subject line of the message. 

• Federal e-Rulemaking Portal: http:/

/www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Agency Web site: http://

ocio.nmfs.noaa.gov/ibrm-ssi/

index.shtml. Follow the instructions for 

submitting comments at http://

ocio.nmfs.noaa.gov/ibrm-ssi/

process.shtml.

• Mail: Submit written comments and 

information to: Assistant Regional 

Administrator, Protected Resources 

Division, NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Blvd., 

Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802–

4213. You may hand-deliver written 

comments to our office during normal 

business hours at the address given 

above. 

• Fax: 562–980–4027

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Craig Wingert at the above address, at 

562–980–4021, or by facsimile at 562–

980–4027; or Marta Nammack at 301–

713–1401. The proposed rule, maps, 

and other materials relating to this 

proposal can be found on our Web site 

at http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

NMFS is responsible for determining 

whether species, subspecies, or distinct 

population segments of Pacific salmon 

and O. mykiss (inclusive of anadromous 

steelhead and some populations of 

resident rainbow trout) are threatened or 

endangered, and for designating 

constitute critical habitat for them under 

the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq). To be 

considered for ESA listing, a group of 

organisms must constitute a ‘‘species.’’ 

Section 3 of the ESA defines a species 

as ‘‘any subspecies of fish or wildlife or 

plants, and any distinct population 

segment of any species of vertebrate fish 

or wildlife which interbreeds when 

mature.’’ Since 1991, NMFS has 

identified distinct population segments 

of Pacific salmon and O. mykiss by 

dividing the U.S. populations of each 

species into evolutionarily significant 

units (ESUs) which it determines are 

substantially reproductively isolated 

and represent an important component 

in the evolutionary legacy of the 

biological species (56 FR 58612; 

November 20, 1991). Using this 

approach, every Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss population in the U.S. is part of 

a distinct population segment that is 

eligible for listing as a threatened or 

endangered species under the ESU. In 

ESA listing determinations for Pacific 

salmon and O. mykiss since 1991 we 

have identified 52 ESUs in Washington, 

Oregon, Idaho and California. Presently, 

25 ESUs are listed as threatened or 

endangered. One additional ESU 

(Oregon Coast coho salmon) was listed 

as threatened from 1998 to 2004 when 

it was removed from the list of 

threatened or endangered species as a 

result of a Court Order. 

In a Federal Register document 

published on June 14, 2004 (69 FR 

33101), we proposed to list 27 ESUs as 

threatened or endangered. The ESUs 

proposed for listing include 25 that are 

currently listed, but in most cases the 

ESUs are being redefined in either of 

two significant ways: By including 

hatchery fish that are no more than 

moderately divergent genetically from 

naturally spawning fish within the ESU, 

and in the case of O. mykiss species, by 

including some resident trout 

populations in the ESUs. We have also 

proposed to list the previously-listed 

Oregon Coast coho salmon population 

which is redefined to include some fish 

reared in hatcheries, and are proposing 

to list one new ESU (Lower Columbia 

River O. mykiss, was previously thought 

to be extinct in the wild). In this 

document, O. mykiss ESUs refer to ESUs 

that include populations of both 

anadromous steelhead and resident 

rainbow trout. Also, references to 

‘‘salmon’’ in this notice generally 

include all members of the genus 

Oncorhynchus, including O. mykiss. 

This Federal Register document 

describes proposed critical habitat 

designations for the following seven 

ESUs of Pacific salmon and O. mykiss

in California: (1) California Coastal 

chinook salmon; (2) Northern California 

O. mykiss; (3) Central California Coast 

O. mykiss; (4) South-Central California 

Coast O. mykiss; (5) Southern California 

O. mykiss; (6) Central Valley spring run 

chinook salmon; and (7) Central Valley 

O. mykiss. 

Section 3 of the ESA defines critical 

habitat 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 (I) essential to the conservation 

of the species and (II) which may 

require special management 

considerations or protection; and 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71881

specific areas outside the geographical 

area occupied by the species at the time 

it is listed that are determined by the 

Secretary to be essential for the 

conservation of the species.’’ Section 3 

of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)) also 

defines the terms ‘‘conserve,’’

‘‘conserving,’’ and ‘‘conservation’’ to 

mean ‘‘to use, and the use of, all 

methods and procedures which are 

necessary to bring any endangered 

species or threatened species to the 

point at which the measures provided 

pursuant to this chapter are no longer 

necessary.’’ Section 4 of the ESA 

requires that before designating critical 

habitat, we must consider economic 

impacts, impacts on national security 

and other relevant impacts of specifying 

any particular area as critical habitat, 

and the Secretary may exclude any area 

from critical habitat if the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

inclusion, unless excluding an area from 

critical habitat will result in the 

extinction of the species concerned. 

Once critical habitat for a salmon or O. 

mykiss ESU is designated, section 

7(a)(2) of the ESA requires that each 

Federal agency shall, in consultation 

with and with the assistance of NMFS, 

ensure that any action authorized, 

funded or carried out by such agency is 

not likely to result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 

Previous Federal Action and Related 

Litigation 

Many Pacific salmon and O. mykiss

ESUs in California and the Pacific 

Northwest have suffered broad declines 

over the past hundred years. We have 

conducted several ESA status reviews 

and status review updates for Pacific 

salmon and O. mykiss in California, 

Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. The 

most recent ESA status review and 

proposed listing determinations were 

published on June 14, 2004 (69 FR 

33101). Six of the currently listed ESUs 

have final critical habitat designations. 

Table 1 summarizes the NMFS scientific 

reviews of West Coast salmon and O. 

mykiss and the ESA listing 

determinations and critical habitat 

designations made to date.

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ESA LISTING ACTIONS AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATIONS FOR WEST COAST

SALMON AND O. Mykiss

Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) 

Current endangered 

species Act (ESA) 

status 

Year listed 

Previous ESA listing determinations and 

critical habitat designations—Federal Register citations 

Previous scientific viability 

reviews and 

updates 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

56 FR 58619; 11/20/1991 (Final rule) 

56 FR 14055; 04/05/1991 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

58 FR 68543; 12/28/1993 (Final rule) 

Snake River sockeye ESU ........................... Endangered ............... 1991 57 FR 57051; 12/02/1992 (Proposed rule) NMES 1991a. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14528; 03/25/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11750; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) NMFS 1998d. 

Ozette Lake sockeye ESU ........................... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11750; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1997f. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

59 FR 440; 01/01/1994 (Final rule) 

57 FR 27416; 06/19/1992 (Proposed rule) 

55 FR 49623; 11/30/1990 (Final rule) 

55 FR 12831, 04/06/1990 (Emergency 

rule) 

55 FR 102260; 03/20/1990 (Proposed 

rule) 

54 FR 10260; 08/04/1989 (Emergency 

rule) 

52 FR 6041; 02/27/1987 (Final rule) 

Sacramento River winter-run chinook ESU Endangered ............... 1994 Critical Habitat Designations.

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 50394; 09/16/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) NMFS 1998b. 

Central Valley spring-run chinook ESU ....... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999d. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 50394; 09/16/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

71882 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ESA LISTING ACTIONS AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATIONS FOR WEST COAST

SALMON AND O. Mykiss—Continued

Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) 

Current endangered 

species Act (ESA) 

status 

Year listed 

Previous ESA listing determinations and 

critical habitat designations—Federal Register citations 

Previous scientific viability 

reviews and 

updates 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) NMFS 1998b. 

California Coastal chinook ESU ................... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999d. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14308; 03/24/99 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1998b. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1998e. 

Upper Willamette River chinook ESU .......... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations ................................ NMFS 1998e. 

Lower Columbia River chinook ESU ........... Threatened ................ 1999 69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) .... NMFS 1999c. 

64 FR 14308; 03/24/99 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14308; 03/24/99 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1998b. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1998e. 

Upper Columbia River spring-run chinook 

ESU.

Endangered. 1999 63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

NMFS 1998c. 

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed NMFS 

1999c rule) 

64 FR 14308; 03/24/99 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1998b. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1998e. 

Puget Sound chinook ESU .......................... Threatened. ............... 1999 63 FR 11482; 03/09/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

63 FR 1807; 0/12/1998 (Proposal withdrawn) 

59 FR 66784; 12/28/1994 (Proposed rule) 

59 FR 42529; 08/18/1994 (Emergency 

rule) 

57 FR 23458; 06/03/1992 (Correction) 

57 FR 14653; 04/22/1992 (Final rule) 

56 FR 29547; 06/27/1991 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1991c. 

Snake River fall-run chinook ESU ............... Threatened ................ 1992 Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1999d. 

58 FR 68543; 12/28/1993 (Final rule) 

57 FR 57051; 12/02/1992 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

63 FR 1807; 0/12/1998 (Proposal withdrawn) 

59 FR 66784; 12/28/1994 (Proposed rule) 

59 FR 42529; 08/18/1994 (Emergency 

rule) 

57 FR 23458; 06/03/1992 (Correction) 

57 FR 34639; 04/22/92 (Final rule) 

56 FR 29542; 06/27/1991 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

58 FR 68543; 12/28/1993 (Final rule) ........ NMFS 1991b. 

Snake River spring/summer-run chinook 

ESU.

Threatened 1992 57 FR 57051; 12/02/1992 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

NMFS 1998b. 

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

61 FR 56138;–10/31/1996 (Final rule) 

60 FR 38011; 07/25/1995 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

64 FR 24049; 05/05/1999 (Final rule) Bryant 1994. 

Central California Coast coho ESU ............. Threatened ................ 1996 62 FR 62791; 11/25/1997 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1995a.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71883

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ESA LISTING ACTIONS AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATIONS FOR WEST COAST

SALMON AND O. Mykiss—Continued

Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) 

Current endangered 

species Act (ESA) 

status 

Year listed 

Previous ESA listing determinations and 

critical habitat designations—Federal Register citations 

Previous scientific viability 

reviews and 

updates 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 24588; 05/06/1997 (Final rule) 

60 FR 38011; 07/25/1995 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1997a. 

Critical Habitat Designations NMFS1996c. 

64 FR 24049; 05/05/1999 (Final rule) NMFS 1996e. 

Southern Oregon/Northern California Coast Threatened 1997 62 FR 62791; 11/25/1997 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1995a. 

NMFS 1997a. 

Proposed NMFS 1996b. 

Oregon Coast coho ESU ............................. Threatened* 1998 Listing Determinations NMFS 1996d. 

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

69 FR 19975; 04/15/2004 (Candidate list) 

63 FR 42587; 08/10/1998 (Final rule) 

62 FR 24588; 05/06/1997 (Proposal withdrawn) 

61 FR 56138;10/31/1996 (6 mo. extension) 

60 FR 38011; 07/25/1995 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) 

64 FR 24998; 0510/1999 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1995a. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

69 FR 19975; 04/15/2004 (Candidate list) 

Proposed ................... 60 FR 38011; 07/25/1995 (Not warranted) NMFS 1996e. 

Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1995a. 

Lower Columbia River coho ESU ................ Threatened ................ 1995 n/a ............................................................... BNFS 1991a. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14508; 03/25/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11774; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1997e. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1999b. 

Columbia River chum ESU .......................... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11774; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14508; 03/25/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11774; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1996d. 

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1997e. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1999b. 

Hood Canal summer-run chum ESU ........... Threatened ................ 1999 63 FR 11774; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

67 FR 21568; 05/01/2002 (Redefinition of 

ESU) 

62 FR 43937; 08/18/1997 (Final rule) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) NMFS 1996b 

Southern California O. mykiss+ ESU ........... Endangered ............... 1997 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) .. NMFS 1997b. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43937; 08/18/1997 (Final rule) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1996b. 

South-Central California Coast O. mykiss

ESU 

Threatened ................ 1997 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) ..

Listing Determinations

NMFS 1997b. 

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43937; 08/18/1997 (Final rule) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

71884 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ESA LISTING ACTIONS AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATIONS FOR WEST COAST

SALMON AND O. Mykiss—Continued

Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) 

Current endangered 

species Act (ESA) 

status 

Year listed 

Previous ESA listing determinations and 

critical habitat designations—Federal Register citations 

Previous scientific viability 

reviews and 

updates 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1996b. 

Central California Coast O. mykiss ESU ..... Threatened ................ 1997 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) ..

Listing Determinations

NMFS 1997b. 

69 FR 33102; 6/14/04 (Proposed rule) ...... NMFS 1996b. 

63 FR 13347; 03/19/1998 (Final rule) ........ NMFS 1997b. 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (6 mo. extension).NMFS 1997c. 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1997d. 

California Central Valley O. mykiss ESU ..... Threatened ................ 1998 Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1998a. 

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) 

64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

65 FR 36074; 06/07/2000 (Final rule) 

65 FR 6960; 02/11/2000 (Proposed rule) 

63 FR 13347; 03/19/1998 (Not Warranted) 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (6 mo. extension) NMFS 1996b. 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) NMFS 1997c. 

Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1998a. 

Northern California O. mykiss ESU ............. Threatened ................ 2000 n/a ............................................................... NMFS 2000 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14517; 03/25/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11798; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (6 mo. extension) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designation ........................ NMFS 1996b. 

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1997d. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1999a. 

Upper Willamette River O. mykiss ESU ...... Threatened ................ 1999 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) .. NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

63 FR 13347; 03/19/1998 (Final rule) 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (6 mo. extension) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1996b. 

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) .......... NMFS 1997c. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1997d. 

Lower Columbia River O. mykiss ESU ........ Threatened ................ 1998 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) .. NMFS 1998a. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

64 FR 14517; 03/25/1999 (Final rule) 

63 FR 11798; 03/10/1998 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (6 mo. extension) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations ...................... NMFS 1996b. 

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal ........... NMFS 1997d. 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1999a. 

Middle Columbia River O. mykiss ESU ....... Threatened ................ 1999 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (proposed rule) ... NMFS 1999c. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43974; 08/18/1997 (Final rule) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1996b. 

Upper Columbia River O. mykiss ESU ........ Endangered ............... 1997 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) .. NMFS 1997b. 

Listing Determinations

69 FR 33102; 06/14/04 (Proposed rule) 

62 FR 43937; 08/18/1997 (Final rule) 

61 FR 41541; 08/09/1996 (Proposed rule) 

Critical Habitat Designations

68 FR 55900; 09/29/2003 (removal) 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71885

TABLE 1.—SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS ESA LISTING ACTIONS AND CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATIONS FOR WEST COAST

SALMON AND O. Mykiss—Continued

Evolutionarily significant unit (ESU) 

Current endangered 

species Act (ESA) 

status 

Year listed 

Previous ESA listing determinations and 

critical habitat designations—Federal Register citations 

Previous scientific viability 

reviews and 

updates 

65 FR 7764; 02/16/2000 (Final rule) .......... NMFS 1996b. 

Snake River Basin O. mykiss ESU .............. Threatened ................ 1997 64 FR 5740; 03/10/1999 (Proposed rule) .. NMFS 1997b. 

* Previously listed as a ‘‘threatened’’ species (63 FR 42587, August 10, 1998). Threatened listing set aside in Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans 

(Alsea Valley Alliance v. Evans, 161 F.Supp.2d 1154 (D.Or.2001), appeals dismissed 358 F.3d 1181 (9th Cir. 2004). 

+ O. mykiss ESUs include both anadromous ‘‘steelhead’’ and resident ‘‘rainbow trout’’ in certain areas (see 69 FR 33101; July 14, 2004). 

On February 16, 2000, NMFS 

published final critical habitat 

designations for 19 ESUs, thereby 

completing designations for all 25 ESUs 

listed at the time (65 FR 7764). The 19 

designations included more than 150 

river subbasins in Washington, Oregon, 

Idaho, and California. Within each 

occupied subbasin, we designated as 

critical habitat those lakes and river 

reaches accessible to listed fish along 

with the associated riparian zone, 

except for reaches on Indian land. Areas 

considered inaccessible included areas 

above long-standing natural impassable 

barriers and areas above impassable 

dams, but not areas above ephemeral 

barriers such as failed culverts. 

In considering the economic impact of 

the February 16, 2000, action, NMFS 

determined that the critical habitat 

designations would impose very little or 

no additional requirements on Federal 

agencies beyond those already 

associated with the listing of the ESUs 

themselves. NMFS reasoned that since it 

was designating only occupied habitat, 

there would be few or no actions that 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat that did not also jeopardize the 

continued existence of the species. 

Therefore, the agency reasoned that 

there would be no economic impact as 

a result of the designations (65 FR 7764, 

7765; February 16, 2000). 

The National Association of 

Homebuilders (NAHB) challenged the 

designations in District Court in 

Washington, DC on the grounds that he 

agency did not adequately consider 

economic impacts of the critical habitat 

designations (National Association of 

Homebuilders v. Evans, 2002 WL 

1205743 No. 00–CV–2799 (D.D.C.)). 

NAHB also challenged NMFS’

designation of Essential Fish Habitat 

(EFH) (Pacific Coast Salmon Fishery 

Management Plan, 2000). While the 

NAHB litigation was pending, the Court 

of Appeals for the 10th Circuit issued its 

decision in New Mexico Cattlegrowers’ 

Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 248 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2001) 

(NMCA). In that case, the Court rejected 

the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

(FWS) approach to economic analysis, 

which was similar to the approach taken 

by NMFS in the final rule designating 

critical habitat for 19 ESUs of West 

Coast salmon and O. mykiss. The Court 

ruled that ‘‘Congress intended that the 

FWS conduct a full analysis of all of the 

economic impacts of a critical habitat 

designation, regardless of whether those 

impacts are attributable co-extensively 

to other causes.’’ Subsequent to the 10th 

Circuit decision, we entered into and 

sought judicial approval of a consent 

decree resolving the NAHB litigation. 

That decree provided for the withdrawal 

of critical habitat designations for the 19 

Pacific salmon and O. mykiss ESUs and 

dismissed NAHB’s challenge to the EFH 

designations. The District Court 

approved the consent decree and 

vacated the critical habitat designations 

by Court order on April 30, 2002 

(National Ass’n of Homebuilders v. 

Evans, 2002 WL 1205743 (D.D.C. 2002)). 

Subsequently, in response to a 

complaint filed in the District of 

Columbia by the Pacific Coast 

Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, 

Institute for Fisheries Resources, the 

Center for Biological Diversity, the 

Oregon Natural Resources Council, the 

Pacific Rivers Council, and the 

Environmental Protection Information 

Center (PCFFA et al.) alleging that 

NMFS had failed to timely designate 

critical habitat for the 19 ESUs for 

which critical habitat had been vacated 

(as well as the Northern California O. 

mykiss ESU), PCFFA and NMFS filed—

and the court approved—an agreement 

resolving that litigation and establishing 

a schedule for designation of critical 

habitat. On July 13, 2004, the D.C. 

District Court approved an amendment 

to the Consent Decree and Stipulated 

Order of Dismissal providing for a 

revised schedule for the submission of 

proposed and final rules designating 

critical habitat for the 20 ESUs to the 

Federal Register. For those ESUs that 

are included on the list of threatened 

and endangered species as of September 

30, 2004, and which fall under the 

responsibility of the Northwest Regional 

office of NMFS, proposed rules must be 

submitted to the Federal Register no 

later than September 30, 2004. For those 

ESUs that are included on the list of 

threatened and endangered species as of 

November 30, 2004, and which fall 

under the responsibility of NMFS’s 

Southwest Regional office, proposed 

rules must be submitted to the Federal 

Register for publication no later than 

November 30, 2004. For those of the 20 

ESUs addressed in the proposed rules 

and included on the lists of threatened 

and endangered species as of June 15, 

2005, final rules must be submitted to 

the Federal Register for publication no 

later than June 15, 2005. On September 

17, 2004, NMFS filed a motion with the 

Court seeking an additional 60-day 

extension of the deadline for submitting 

to the Federal Register a proposed rule 

for the 13 ESUs subject to the September 

30, 2004, deadline. On October 7, 2004, 

the court granted the motion. 

Past critical habitat designations have 

generated considerable public interest. 

Therefore, in an effort to engage the 

public early in this rulemaking process, 

we published an advance notice of 

proposed rulemaking (ANPR) on 

September 29, 2003 (68 FR 55926). The 

ANPR identified issues for 

consideration and evaluation, and 

solicited comments regarding these 

issues and information regarding the 

areas and species under consideration. 

We received numerous comments in 

response to the ANPR and considered 

them during development of this 

proposed rulemaking. Where applicable 

we have referenced these comments in 

this Federal Register document as well 

as in other documents supporting this 

proposed rule. We encourage those who 

submitted comments on the ANPR to 

review and comment on this proposed 

rule as well. We will address all 

comments in the final rule.

71886 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Methods and Criteria Used to Identify 

Proposed Critical Habitat 

Salmon Life History 

Pacific salmon are anadromous fish, 

meaning adults migrate from the ocean 

to spawn in freshwater lakes and 

streams where their offspring hatch and 

rear prior to migrating back to the ocean 

to forage until maturity. The migration 

and spawning times vary considerably 

across and within species and 

populations (Groot and Margolis, 1991). 

At spawning, adults pair to lay and 

fertilize thousands of eggs in freshwater 

gravel nests or ‘‘redds’’ excavated by 

females. Depending on lake/stream 

temperatures, eggs incubate for several 

weeks to months before hatching as 

‘‘alevins’’ (a larval life stage dependent 

on food stored in a yolk sac). Following 

yolk sac absorption, alevins emerge 

from the gravel as young juveniles 

called ‘‘fry’’ and begin actively feeding. 

Depending on the species and location, 

juveniles may spend from a few hours 

to several years in freshwater areas 

before migrating to the ocean. The 

physiological and behavioral changes 

required for the transition to salt water 

result in a distinct ‘‘smolt’’ stage in most 

species. On their journey juveniles must 

migrate downstream through every 

riverine and estuarine corridor between 

their natal lake or stream and the ocean. 

For example, smolts from Idaho will 

travel as far as 900 miles from the 

inland spawning grounds. En route to 

the ocean the juveniles may spend from 

a few days to several weeks in the 

estuary, depending on the species. The 

highly productive estuarine 

environment is an important feeding 

and acclimation area for juveniles 

preparing to enter marine waters. 

Juveniles and subadults typically 

spend from 1 to 5 years foraging over 

thousands of miles in the North Pacific 

Ocean before returning to spawn. Some 

species, such as coho and chinook 

salmon, have precocious life history 

types (primarily male fish known as 

‘‘jacks’’) that mature and spawn after 

only several months in the ocean. 

Spawning migrations known as ‘‘runs’’

occur throughout the year, varying by 

species and location. Most adult fish 

return or ‘‘home’’ with great fidelity to 

spawn in their natal stream, although 

some do stray to non-natal streams. 

Salmon species die after spawning, 

while anadromous O. mykiss may return 

to the ocean and make repeat spawning 

migrations. This complex life cycle 

gives rise to complex habitat needs, 

particularly during the freshwater phase 

(see review by Spence et al., 1996). 

Spawning gravels must be of a certain 

size and free of sediment to allow 

successful incubation of the eggs. Eggs 

also require cool, clean, and welloxygenated waters for proper 

development. Juveniles need abundant 

food sources, including insects, 

crustaceans, and other small fish. They 

need places to hide from predators 

(mostly birds and bigger fish), such as 

under logs, root wads and boulders in 

the stream, and beneath overhanging 

vegetation. They also need places to 

seek refuge from periodic high flows 

(side channels and off channel areas) 

and from warm summer water 

temperatures (coldwater springs and 

deep pools). Returning adults generally 

do not feed in fresh water but instead 

rely on limited energy stores to migrate, 

mature, and spawn. Like juveniles, they 

also require cool water and places to 

rest and hide from predators. During all 

life stages salmon require cool water 

that is free of contaminants. They also 

require rearing and migration corridors 

with adequate passage conditions (water 

quality and quantity available at specific 

times) to allow access to the various 

habitats required to complete their life 

cycle. 

The homing fidelity of salmon has 

created a meta-population structure 

with distinct populations distributed 

among watersheds (McElhany et al., 

2000). Low levels of straying result in 

regular genetic exchange among 

populations, creating genetic 

similarities among populations in 

adjacent watersheds. Maintenance of the 

meta-population structure requires a 

distribution of populations among 

watersheds where environmental risks 

(e.g., from landslides or floods) are 

likely to vary. It also requires migratory 

connections among the watersheds to 

allow for periodic genetic exchange and 

alternate spawning sites in the case that 

natal streams are inaccessible due to 

natural events such as a drought or 

landslide. 

Identifying the Geographical Area 

Occupied by the Species and Specific 

Areas within the Geographical Area 

In past critical habitat designations, 

NMFS had concluded that the limited 

availability of species distribution data 

prevented mapping salmonid critical 

habitat at a scale finer than occupied 

river basins (65 FR 7764; February 16, 

2000). Therefore, the 2000 designations 

defined the ‘‘geographical area occupied 

by the species at the time of listing’’ as 

all accessible river reaches within the 

current range of the listed species. 

Comments received on the ANPR 

expressed a range of opinions about the 

appropriate scale for defining occupied 

areas; many expressed concern that the 

2000 designations were overly broad 

and inclusive and encouraged us to use 

a finer scale in designating critical 

habitat for salmon. 

In the 2000 designations, NMFS relied 

on the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) 

identification of subbasins, which was 

the finest scale mapped by USGS at that 

time, to define the ‘‘specific areas’’

within the geographical area occupied 

by the species. The subbasin boundaries 

are based on an area’s topography and 

hydrography, and USGS has developed 

a uniform framework for mapping and 

cataloging drainage basins using a 

unique hydrologic unit code (HUC) 

identifier (Seaber et al. 1986). The code 

contains separate two-digit identifier 

fields wherein the first two digits refer 

to a region comprising a relatively large 

drainage area (e.g., Region 17 for the 

entire Pacific Northwest), while 

subsequent fields identify smaller 

nested drainages. Under this 

convention, fourth field hydrologic 

units contain eight digits and are 

commonly referred to as ‘‘HUC4s’’ or 

‘‘subbasins.’’ In the 2000 designations, 

therefore, we identified as critical 

habitat all areas accessible to listed 

salmon within an occupied HUC4 

subbasin. Since the critical habitat 

designations in 2000, additional 

scientific information in the Pacific 

Northwest has significantly improved 

our ability to identify freshwater and 

estuarine areas occupied by salmonids 

and to group the occupied stream 

reaches into finer scale ‘‘specific areas’’

in the states of Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho. 

In the Pacific Northwest, we can now 

be somewhat more precise about the 

‘‘geographical area occupied by the 

species’’ because Federal, state, and 

tribal fishery biologists in the northwest 

have made progress mapping actual 

species distribution at the level of 

stream reaches. The current mapping 

identifies occupied stream reaches 

where the species has been observed. It 

also identifies stream reaches where the 

species is presumed to occur based on 

the professional judgement of biologists 

familiar with the watershed. However, 

such presumptions may not be 

sufficiently rigorous or consistent to 

support a critical habitat designation. 

Much of these data can now be accessed 

and analyzed using geographic 

information systems (GIS) to produce 

consistent and fine-scale maps. As a 

result, nearly all salmonid freshwater 

and estuarine habitats in Washington, 

Oregon, and Idaho are now mapped and 

available in GIS at a scale of 1:24,000. 

Previous distribution data were often 

compiled at a scale of 1:100,000 or 

greater.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71887

In California, similar fine-scale 

species distribution mapping efforts 

have not been conducted by Federal, 

State or tribal co-managers on the scale 

that was needed for the critical habitat 

designation effort, and therefore, maps 

of species distribution were not 

available for the seven ESUs addressed 

in this rulemaking. Given the need to 

identify and map occupied habitat more 

precisely and the lack of fine-scale 

species distribution mapping in 

California, the Southwest Regional 

office embarked on a major effort to 

compile available information on 

species distribution, habitat use, and 

other parameters, and develop species 

distribution and habitat use maps for all 

seven ESUs. In order to make this effort 

manageable, data were compiled for 

stream hydrography at a scale of 

1:100,000 rather than the 1:24,000 scale 

of data that were available in the Pacific 

Northwest. Fishery biologists in the 

Southwest Region were organized into a 

series of teams tasked with compiling 

and organizing information available in 

the literature, from Federal and state 

agencies, and personal knowledge, 

regarding the spatial distribution, 

habitat use (i.e. spawning, rearing, and/

or migration) and habitat quality on a 

stream reach basis for each of the seven 

ESUs in California. This information 

was organized into a series of databases 

and then converted to GIS data layers 

for the analysis of data and generation 

of distribution maps. The current 

mapping identifies occupied stream 

reaches where the various ESUs have 

been observed, and also identifies 

stream reaches where the ESUs are 

presumed to occur based on the 

professional judgement of biologists 

familiar with the watersheds. As in the 

Northwest, such presumptions, 

however, may not be sufficiently 

rigorous or consistent to support a 

critical habitat designation, and we 

therefore solicit information as to which 

stream reaches are actually occupied by 

the various ESUs addressed in this rule. 

We made use of these finer scale data 

for the critical habitat designations for 

the seven California ESUs, and now 

believe they enable us to make a more 

accurate delineation of the 

‘‘geographical area occupied by the 

species’’ referred to in the ESA 

definition of critical habitat. The final 

critical habitat designations will be 

based on the final listing decisions for 

these ESUs due by June 2005 and thus 

will reflect occupancy ‘‘at the time of 

listing’’ as the ESA requires. 

NMFS is now able to also identify 

‘‘specific areas’’ (section 3(5)(a)) and 

‘‘particular areas’(section 4(b)(2)) for 

ESUs in the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, 

Washington and Idaho) at a finer scale 

than in 2000. Since 2000, various 

Federal agencies in the Pacific 

Northwest have identified fifth field 

hydrologic units (referred to as 

‘‘HUC5s’’ or hereafter ‘‘watersheds’’) 

throughout the Pacific Northwest using 

the USGS mapping conventions referred 

to above. This information is now 

generally available from these agencies 

and via the internet (California Spatial 

Information Library, 2004; Interior 

Columbia Basin Ecosystem Management 

Project, 2003; Regional Ecosystem 

Office, 2004). For ESUs in the Pacific 

Northwest, the agency used this 

information to organize critical habitat 

information systematically and at a 

scale that is relevant to the spatial 

distribution of salmon. Organizing 

information at this scale is especially 

relevant to salmonids, since their innate 

homing ability allows them to return to 

the watersheds where they were born. 

Such site fidelity results in spatial 

aggregations of salmonid populations 

that generally correspond to the area 

encompassed by subbasins or HUC5 

watersheds (Washington Department of 

Fisheries et al., 1992; Kostow, 1995; 

McElhany et al., 2000).

In California, it was not possible to 

use the USGS’s HUC5 watershed 

framework to organize the biological 

and other types of information since 

HUC5s have not been delineated for the 

entire geographical area occupied by the 

seven ESUs addressed in this 

rulemaking. The Southwest Region, 

therefore, used the State of California’s 

CALWATER watershed classification 

system (version 2.2), which is similar to 

the USGS watershed classification 

system, to organize biological and other 

types of information. Under the 

CALWATER watershed classification 

system, geographic units range from 

hydrologic regions (the largest) to 

planning watersheds (the smallest). For 

the purposes of this critical habitat 

designation analysis, biological and 

other types of information were 

organized primarily by hydrologic 

subareas (HSAs) that generally 

correspond to major tributary 

watersheds and are roughly equivalent 

in size to USGS HUC5s. These smaller 

HSA watersheds were then aggregated 

into larger geographic units called 

hydrologic units that correspond to 

major watersheds or sub-regions for 

purposes of describing critical habitat 

for each of the seven ESUs in California. 

However, it must be recognized that 

even the CALWATER HSA watershed 

units used for the designations in 

California are very broad units, often 

containing several different populations 

of salmonids which may in fact be 

largely independent of each other.We 

therefore solicit information on ways to 

further improve the geographic 

precision of our habitat analyis. 

Both the USGS and CALWATER 

systems map watershed units as 

polygons that bound a drainage area and 

encompass streams, riparian areas and 

uplands. Within the boundaries of any 

such watershed unit (HUC5 or HSA), 

there are stream reaches not occupied 

by the species. Land areas within the 

HUC5 or HSA boundaries are also 

generally not ‘‘occupied’’ by the species 

(though certain areas such as flood 

plains or side channels may be occupied 

at some times of some years). In 

California, we used the HSA watershed 

boundaries as a basis for aggregating 

occupied stream reaches and to 

delineate ‘‘specific’’ areas occupied by 

the species. This document generally 

refers to the occupied stream reaches 

within the watershed boundary as the 

‘‘habitat area’’ to distinguish it from the 

entire area encompassed by the 

watershed boundary. 

At the same time, the ESA requires 

that an area cannot be designated as 

critical habitat unless at the time of 

listing it contains physical or biological 

features essential to the conservation of 

the species. The ESA does not permit an 

area lacking such features to be 

designated as critical habitat in the hope 

that it may over time acquire such 

features and therefore aid in the 

conservation of the species. 

The HSA watershed-scale aggregation 

of stream reaches also allowed us to 

analyze the impacts of designating a 

‘‘particular area,’’ as required by ESA 

section 4(b)(2). As a result of watershed 

processes, many activities occurring in 

riparian or upland areas and in nonfish-bearing streams may affect the 

physical or biological features essential 

to conservation in the occupied stream 

reaches. The watershed boundary thus 

describes an area in which Federal 

activities have the potential to affect 

critical habitat (Spence et al. 1996). 

Using HSA watershed boundaries for 

the economic analysis ensured that all 

potential economic impacts were 

considered. Section 3(5) defines critical 

habitat in terms of ‘‘specific areas,’’ and 

section 4(b)(2) requires the agency to 

consider certain factors before 

designating ‘‘particular areas.’’ In the 

case of Pacific salmonids, the biology of 

the species, the characteristics of its 

habitat, the nature of the impacts and 

the limited information currently 

available at finer geographic scales 

made it appropriate to consider 

71888 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

‘‘specific areas’’ and ‘‘particular areas’’

as the same unit. 

In addition, HSA watersheds are 

consistent with the scale of recovery 

efforts for West Coast salmon. In its 

review of the long-term sustainability of 

Pacific Northwest salmonids, the 

National Research Council’s Committee 

on Protection and Management of 

Pacific Northwest Anadromous 

Salmonids concluded that ‘‘habitat 

protection must be coordinated at 

landscape scales appropriate to salmon 

life histories’ and that social structures 

and institutions ‘‘must be able to 

operate at the scale of watersheds’’

(National Research Council, 1996). 

Watershed-level analyses are now 

common throughout the West Coast 

(Forest Ecosystem Management 

Assessment Team, 1993; Montgomery et 

al., 1995; Spence et al., 1996). The 

recent recovery strategy developed for 

coho salmon in California by the 

California Department of Fish and Game 

(CDFG, 2004) organized its watershed 

assessment and recovery 

recommendations on the basis of 

CALWATER HSA watersheds. There are 

presently more than 400 watershed 

councils or groups in Washington, 

Oregon, and California alone (For the 

Sake of the Salmon, 2004). Many of 

these groups operate at a geographic 

scale of one to several watersheds and 

are integral parts of larger-scale salmon 

recovery strategies (Northwest Power 

Planning Council, 1999; Oregon Plan for 

Salmon and Watersheds, 2001; Puget 

Sound Shared Strategy, 2002; CALFED 

Bay-Delta Program, 2003). Aggregating 

stream reaches into watersheds allowed 

us to consider ‘‘specific areas,’’ within 

or outside the geographical area 

occupied by the species, at a scale that 

often corresponds well to salmonid 

population structure and ecological 

processes. 

Occupied estuarine and marine areas 

were also considered with regard to the 

seven ESUs in California. In previous 

designations of salmonid critical habitat 

the agency did not designate marine 

areas outside of estuaries and Puget 

Sound. In the Pacific Ocean, we 

concluded that there may be essential 

habitat features, but that they did not 

require special management 

considerations or protection (see 

Physical or Biological Features Essential 

to the Conservation of the Species and 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protection sections below). Several 

commenters on that previous rule 

questioned the finding, and we stated 

that we would revisit the issue (65 FR 

7764; February 16, 2000). Since that 

time we have considered the best 

available scientific information, and 

related agency actions, such as the 

designation of Essential Fish Habitat 

under the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery 

Conservation and Management Act. 

We now conclude that it is possible 

to delineate some estuarine areas in 

California (e.g., the San Francisco-San 

Pablo-Suisun Bay complex, Humboldt 

Bay, and Morro Bay) that are occupied 

and contain essential habitat features 

that may require special management 

considerations or protection. Such 

estuarine areas are crucial for juvenile 

salmonids, given their multiple 

functions as areas for rearing/feeding, 

freshwater-saltwater acclimation, and 

migration (Simenstad et al., 1982; 

Marriott et al. 2002). In many areas, 

especially the San Francisco Bay 

estuary, these habitats are occupied by 

multiple ESUs. Accordingly, we are 

proposing to designate specific 

occupied estuarine areas as defined by 

a line connecting the furthest land 

points at the estuary mouth. 

Nearshore coastal marine areas may 

provide important habitat for rearing/

feeding and migrating salmonids in 

California; however, we were not able to 

identify essential habitat features or 

conclude that such areas require special 

management considerations or 

protection.

For salmonids in marine areas farther 

offshore, it becomes more difficult to 

identify specific areas where essential 

habitat can be found. Links between 

human activity, habitat conditions and 

impacts to listed salmonids are less 

direct in offshore marine areas. Perhaps 

the closest linkage exists for salmon 

prey species that are harvested 

commercially (e.g., Pacific herring) and, 

therefore, may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. However, because salmonids 

are opportunistic feeders we could not 

identify ‘‘specific areas’’ beyond the 

nearshore marine zone where these or 

other essential features are found within 

this vast geographic area occupied by 

Pacific salmon. Moreover, prey species 

move or drift great distances throughout 

the ocean and would be difficult to link 

to any ‘‘specific’’ areas. 

Unoccupied Areas 

ESA section 3(5)(A)(ii) defines critical 

habitat to include ‘‘specific areas 

outside the geographical area occupied’’

if the areas are determined by the 

Secretary to be ‘‘essential for the 

conservation of the species.’’ NMFS 

regulations at 50 CFR 424.12(e) 

emphasize that we ‘‘shall designate as 

critical habitat areas outside the 

geographical area presently occupied by 

a species only when a designation 

limited to its present range would be 

inadequate to ensure the conservation of 

the species.’’ NMFS regulations at 50 

CFR 424.12(e) emphasize that we ‘‘shall 

designate as critical habitat areas 

outside the geographical area presently 

occupied by a species only when a 

designation limited to its present range 

would be inadequate to ensure the 

conservation of the species.’’ We are not 

proposing to designate any areas not 

occupied at the time of listing; however, 

within the range of some ESUs, we have 

identified unoccupied areas which may 

be essential to their conservation, and 

we seek public comment on this issue. 

Primary Constituent Elements and 

Physical or Biological Features Essential 

to the Conservation of the Species 

In determining what areas are critical 

habitat, agency regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12(b) require that we must 

‘‘consider those physical or biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of a given species 

including space for individual and 

population growth and for normal 

behavior; food, water, air, light, 

minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; cover or 

shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, 

and rearing of offspring; and habitats 

that are protected from disturbance or 

are representative of the historical 

geographical and ecological distribution 

of a species.’’ The regulations further 

direct us to ‘‘focus on the principal 

biological or physical constituent 

elements * * * that are essential to the 

conservation of the species,’’ and 

specify that the ‘‘known primary 

constituent elements shall be listed with 

the critical habitat description.’’ The 

regulations identify primary constituent 

elements (PCE) as including, but not 

limited to: ‘‘roost sites, nesting grounds, 

spawning sites, feeding sites, seasonal 

wetland or dryland, water quality or 

quantity, host species or plant 

pollinator, geological formation, 

vegetation type, tide, and specific soil 

types.’’ An area must contain one or 

more PCEs at the time the species is 

listed to be eligible for designation as 

critical habitat; an area lacking a PCE 

may not be designated in the hope it 

will acquire one or more PCEs in the 

future. 

NMFS biologists developed a list of 

PCEs specific to salmon for the ANPR 

(68 FR 55926; September 29, 2003), 

based on a decision matrix (NMFS, 

1996) that describes general parameters 

and characteristics of most of the 

essential features under consideration in 

this critical habitat designation. As a 

result of biological assessments 

supporting this proposed rule (see 

Critical Habitat Analytical Review 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71889

Teams section), we are now proposing 

slightly revised PCEs. 

The ESUs addressed in this proposed 

rulemaking share many of the same 

rivers and estuaries and have similar life 

history characteristics and, therefore, 

many of the same PCEs. These PCEs 

include sites essential to support one or 

more life stages of the ESU (sites for 

spawning, rearing, migration and 

foraging). These sites in turn contain 

physical or biological features essential 

to the conservation of the ESU (for 

example, spawning gravels, water 

quality and quantity, side channels, 

forage species). Specific types of sites 

and the features associated with them 

include: 

1. Freshwater spawning sites with 

water quantity and quality conditions 

and substrate supporting spawning, 

incubation and larval development; 

2. Freshwater rearing sites with water 

quantity and floodplain connectivity to 

form and maintain physical habitat 

conditions and support juvenile growth 

and mobility; water quality and forage 

supporting juvenile development; and 

natural cover such as shade, submerged 

and overhanging large wood, log jams 

and beaver dams, aquatic vegetation, 

large rocks and boulders, side channels, 

and undercut banks; 

3. Freshwater migration corridors free 

of obstruction with water quantity and 

quality conditions and natural cover 

such as submerged and overhanging 

large wood, aquatic vegetation, large 

rocks and boulders, side channels, and 

undercut banks supporting juvenile and 

adult mobility and survival; 

4. Estuarine areas free of obstruction 

with water quality, water quantity, and 

salinity conditions supporting juvenile 

and adult physiological transitions 

between fresh- and saltwater; natural 

cover such as submerged and 

overhanging large wood, aquatic 

vegetation, large rocks and boulders, 

and side channels; and juvenile and 

adult forage, including aquatic 

invertebrates and fishes, supporting 

growth and maturation.

5. Nearshore marine areas free of 

obstruction with water quality and 

quantity conditions and forage, 

including aquatic invertebrates and 

fishes, supporting growth and 

maturation; and natural cover such as 

submerged and overhanging large wood, 

aquatic vegetation, large rocks and 

boulders, and side channels. 

6. Offshore marine areas with water 

quality conditions and forage, including 

aquatic invertebrates and fishes, 

supporting growth and maturation. 

The habitat areas designated in this 

proposal currently contain PCEs within 

the acceptable range of values required 

to support the biological processes for 

which the ESUs use the habitat. It is 

important to note that the contribution 

of the PCEs to the habitat varies by site 

and biological function, illustrating the 

interdependence of the habitat elements 

such that the quality of the elements 

may vary within a range of acceptable 

conditions. An area in which a PCE no 

longer exists because it has been 

degraded to the point where it no longer 

functions as a PCE cannot be designated 

in the hope that its function may be 

restored in the future. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protection 

An occupied area cannot be 

designated as critical habitat unless it 

contains physical and biological 

features that ‘‘may require special 

management considerations or 

protection.’’ Agency regulations at 

424.02(j) define ‘‘special management 

considerations or protection’’ to mean 

‘‘any methods or procedures useful in 

protecting physical and biological 

features of the environment for the 

conservation of listed species.’’ Many 

forms of human activity have the 

potential to affect the habitat of listed 

salmon ESUs including: (1) Forestry; (2) 

grazing and other associated rangeland 

activities; (3) agriculture and associated 

water withdrawals for agriculture; (4) 

road building/maintenance; (5) channel 

modifications/diking/stream bank 

stabilization; (6) urbanization; (7) sand 

and gravel mining; (8) mineral mining; 

(9) dams; (10) irrigation impoundments 

and water withdrawals; (11) wetland 

loss/removal; (12) exotic/invasive 

species introductions; and (13) 

impediments to fish passage. In addition 

to these, the harvest of salmonid prey 

species (e.g., herring, anchovy, and 

sardines) may present another potential 

habitat-related management activity 

(Pacific Fishery Management Council, 

1999). In recent years the Federal 

government and many non-Federal 

landowners have adopted many changes 

in land and water management practices 

that are contributing significantly to 

protecting and restoring the habitat of 

listed species. Thus, many of the 

available special management 

considerations or protections for these 

areas are already in place and the need 

for designating such areas as critical 

habitat is diminished accordingly. We 

request comment on the extent to which 

particular areas may require special 

management considerations or 

protection in light of existing 

management constraints. The 

contributions of these management 

measures are also relevant to the 

exclusion analysis under section 4(b)(2) 

of the ESA, and will be considered 

further in a later section of this notice. 

Military Lands 

The Sikes 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, by November 17, 2001, an 

Integrated Natural Resource 

Management Plan (INRMP). An INRMP 

integrates implementation of the 

military mission of the installation with 

stewardship of the natural resources 

found on the installation. 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 recent National Defense 

Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 

(Public Law 108–136) amended the ESA 

to limit areas eligible for designation as 

critical habitat. Specifically, section 

4(a)(3)(B)(I) of the ESA (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 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.’’

To address this new provision we 

contacted the Department of Defense 

(DOD) and requested information on all 

INRMPs that might benefit Pacific 

salmon. In response to the ANPR (68 FR 

55926, September 29, 2003) we had 

already received a letter from the U.S. 

Marine Corps regarding this and other 

issues associated with a possible critical 

habitat designation on its facilities in 

the range of the Southern California O. 

mykiss ESU. In response to our request, 

the military services identified 25 

installations in California with INRMPs 

in place or under development. Based 

on information provided by the military, 

71890 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

as well as GIS analysis of fish 

distributional information compiled by 

NMFS’’ Southwest Region (NMFS, 

2004a) and land use data, we 

determined that the following facilities 

with INRMPs overlap with habitat areas 

under consideration for critical habitat 

designation in California: (1) Camp 

Pendleton Marine Corps Base; (2) 

Vandenberg Air Force Base; (3) Camp 

San Luis Obispo; (4) Camp Roberts; and 

(5) Mare Island Army Reserve Center. 

Two additional facilities are adjacent to, 

but do not appear to overlap with, 

habitat areas under consideration for 

critical habitat in California: (1) Naval 

Weapons Station, Seal Beach/Concord 

Detachment; and (2) Point Mugu Naval 

Air Station. None of the remaining 

facilities with INRMPs in place 

overlapped with or were adjacent to 

habitat under consideration for critical 

habitat based on the information 

available to us. All of these INRMPs are 

final except for the Vandenberg Air 

Force Base INRMP, which is expected to 

be finalized in the near term. 

We identified habitat of value to listed 

salmonids in each INRMP and reviewed 

these plans, as well as other information 

available regarding the management of 

these military lands. Our preliminary 

review indicates that each of these 

INRMPs addresses habitat for 

salmonids, and all contain measures 

that provide benefits to ESA-listed 

salmon and steelhead. Examples of the 

types of benefits include actions that 

control erosion, protect riparian zones, 

minimize stormwater and construction 

impacts, reduce contaminants, and 

monitor listed species and their 

habitats. Also, we have received some 

information from the DOD identifying 

national security impacts at certain sites 

including the Camp Pendleton Marine 

Corps Base and Vandenberg Air Force 

Base. On the basis of this information, 

therefore, we are not proposing to 

designate critical habitat in areas subject 

to the final INRMPs or the draft INRMP 

for Vandenberg Air Force Base at this 

time. 

Critical Habitat Analytical Review 

Teams 

To assist in the designation of critical 

habitat, we convened several Critical 

Habitat Analytical Review Teams 

(Teams) organized by major geographic 

areas that roughly correspond to salmon 

recovery planning domains in 

California. The Teams consisted of 

NMFS fishery biologists from the 

Southwest Region with demonstrated 

expertise regarding salmonid habitat 

within the domain. The Teams were 

tasked with compiling and assessing 

biological information pertaining to 

areas under consideration for 

designation as critical habitat. Each 

Team worked closely with GIS 

specialists to develop maps depicting 

the spatial distribution of habitat 

occupied by each ESU and the use of 

occupied habitat on stream hydrography 

at a scale of 1:100,000. 

The Teams examined each habitat 

area within the watershed to determine 

whether the stream reaches occupied by 

the species contain the physical or 

biological features essential to 

conservation. The Teams also relied on 

their experience conducting section 7 

consultations to determine whether 

there are management activities in the 

area that threaten the currently existing 

primary constituent elements identified 

for the species. Where such activities 

occur, the Teams concluded that there 

were ‘‘any methods or procedures useful 

in protecting physical and biological 

features’’ for the area (50 CFR 424.02(j)), 

and therefore, that the features ‘‘may 

require special management 

considerations or protection.’’

However, the Teams were not asked 

to evaluate the effects of existing 

management protections on the species, 

or analyze the usefulness of protective 

methods or procedures in addressing 

risks to PCEs. Thus, the Teams’

evaluations do not reflect the extent to 

which an area will contribute to 

conservation of the species in the 

absence of a critical habitat designation. 

In addition to occupied areas, the 

definition of critical habitat also 

includes unoccupied areas if we 

determine that area is essential for 

conservation of a species. Accordingly 

the Teams were next asked whether 

there were any unoccupied areas within 

the historical range of the ESUs that 

may be essential for conservation. For 

the seven ESUs addressed in this 

rulemaking, the Teams did not have 

information available that would allow 

them to conclude that specific 

unoccupied areas were essential for 

conservation; however, in many cases 

they were able to identify areas they 

believed may be determined essential 

through future recovery planning 

efforts. These are identified under the 

Species Descriptions and Area 

Assessments section, and we are 

specifically requesting information 

regarding such areas under Public 

Comments Solicited. 

The Teams were next asked to 

determine the relative conservation 

value of each occupied area or 

watershed for each ESU. The Teams 

scored each habitat area based on 

several factors related to the quantity 

and quality of the physical and 

biological features. They next 

considered each area in relation to other 

areas and with respect to the population 

occupying that area. Based on a 

consideration of the raw scores for each 

area, and a consideration of that area’s 

contribution to conservation in relation 

to other areas and in relation to the 

overall population structure of the ESU, 

the Teams rated each habitat area as 

having a ‘‘high,’’ ‘‘medium’’ or ‘‘low’’

conservation value. 

The rating of habitat areas as having 

a high, medium, or low conservation 

value provided information useful for 

the discretionary balancing 

consideration in ESA section 4(b)(2). 

The higher the conservation value for an 

area, the greater may be the likely 

benefit of the ESA section 7 protections. 

The correlation is not perfect because 

the Teams did not take the additional 

step of separately considering two 

factors: how likely are section 7 

consultations in an area (that is, how 

strong is the ‘‘Federal nexus’’), and how 

much protection would exist in the 

absence of a section 7 consultation (that 

is, how protective are existing 

management measures and would they 

likely continue in the absence of section 

7 requirements). We considered the 

Team’s ratings one useful measure of 

the ‘‘benefit of designating a particular 

area as critical habitat’’ as contemplated 

in section 4(b)(2). We are soliciting 

public comments on approaches that 

would better refine this assessment. 

As discussed earlier, the scale chosen 

in California for the ‘‘specific area’’

referred to in the definition of critical 

habitat was an HSA watershed as 

delineated by the CALWATER 

classification system. This delineation 

required us to adapt the approach for 

some areas. In particular, a large stream 

or river might serve as a rearing and 

migration corridor to and from many 

watersheds, yet be embedded itself in a 

watershed. In any given watershed 

through which it passes, the stream may 

have a few or several tributaries. For 

rearing/migration corridors embedded 

in a watershed, the Teams were asked 

to rate the conservation value of the 

watershed based on the tributary 

habitat. We assigned the rearing/

migration corridor the rating of the 

highest-rated watershed for which it 

served as a rearing/migration corridor. 

The reason for this treatment of 

migration corridors is the role they play 

in the salmon’s life cycle. Salmon are 

anadromous—born in fresh water, 

migrating to salt water to feed and grow, 

and returning to fresh water to spawn. 

Without a rearing/migration corridor to 

and from the sea, salmon cannot 

complete their life cycle. It would be 

illogical to consider a spawning and 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71891

rearing area as having a particular 

conservation value and not consider the 

associated rearing/migration corridor as 

having a similar conservation value. 

Preliminary ESU mapping results and 

some of the preliminary HSA watershed 

conservation assessments developed by 

the Teams were shared with the CDFG 

for review and comment. In some 

instances, their reviews and comments 

resulted in changes to the ESU 

distribution maps, and in some cases 

changes in the conservation 

assessments. Because of time 

constraints, however, this comanager 

review process was limited in duration 

and focused on identifying major 

discrepancies in the mapping products 

developed by the Teams. These revised 

preliminary assessments, along with 

this proposed rulemaking, will once 

again be made available to these 

comanagers, as well as the general 

public and peer reviewers, during the 

public comment period leading up to 

the final rule. The Teams will be 

reconvened to review the comments and 

any new information that might bear on 

their assessments before the agency 

publishes final critical habitat 

designations. 

Lateral Extent of Critical Habitat 

In past designations NMFS described 

the lateral extent of critical habitat in 

various ways ranging from fixed 

distances to ‘‘functional’’ zones defined 

by important riparian functions (65 FR 

7764, February 16, 2000). Both 

approaches presented difficulties, and 

this was highlighted in several 

comments (most of which requested that 

we focus on aquatic areas only) received 

in response to the ANPR (68 FR 55926; 

September 29, 2003). Designating a set 

riparian zone width will (in some 

places) accurately reflect the distance 

from the stream on which PCEs might 

be found, but in other cases may overor understate the distance. Designating 

a functional buffer avoids that problem, 

but makes it difficult for Federal 

agencies to know in advance what areas 

are critical habitat. To address these 

issues we are proposing to define the 

lateral extent of designated critical 

habitat as the width of the stream 

channel defined by the ordinary highwater line as defined by the U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers (Corps) in 33 CFR 

329.11. In areas for which the ordinary 

high-water line has not been defined 

pursuant 33 CFR 329.11, the width of 

the stream channel shall be defined by 

its bankfull elevation. Bankfull 

elevation is the level at which water 

begins to leave the channel and move 

into the floodplain (Rosgen, 1996) and 

is reached at a discharge which 

generally has a recurrence interval of 1 

to 2 years on the annual flood series 

(Leopold et al., 1992). Such an interval 

is commensurate with nearly all of the 

juvenile freshwater life phases of most 

salmon and O. mykiss ESUs. Therefore, 

it is reasonable to assert that for an 

occupied stream reach this lateral extent 

is regularly ‘‘occupied.’’ Moreover, the 

bankfull elevation can be readily 

discerned for a variety of stream reaches 

and stream types using recognizable 

water lines (e.g., marks on rocks) or 

vegetation boundaries (Rosgen, 1996). 

As underscored in previous critical 

habitat designations, the quality of 

aquatic habitat within stream channels 

is intrinsically related to the adjacent 

riparian zones and floodplain, to 

surrounding wetlands and uplands, and 

to non-fish-bearing streams above 

occupied stream reaches. Human 

activities that occur outside the stream 

can modify or destroy physical and 

biological features of the stream. In 

addition, human activities that occur 

within and adjacent to reaches upstream 

(e.g., road failures) or downstream (e.g., 

dams) of designated stream reaches can 

also have demonstrable effects on 

physical and biological features of 

designated reaches.

In estuarine areas we believe that 

mean extreme high water is the best 

descriptor of lateral extent. We are 

proposing the area inundated by 

extreme high tide because it 

encompasses habitat areas typically 

inundated and regularly occupied 

during the spring and summer when 

juvenile salmonids are migrating in 

nearshore estuarine areas. However, it 

may be more appropriate to use the 

ordinary high water level in estuarine 

nearshore areas and we request 

comment on this issue. As noted above 

for stream habitat areas, human 

activities that occur outside the area 

inundated by extreme or ordinary high 

water can modify or destroy physical 

and biological features of the nearshore 

habitat areas and Federal agencies must 

be aware of these important habitat 

linkages as well. 

Species Descriptions and Area 

Assessments 

This section provides descriptions of 

the seven Pacific salmon and O. mykiss

ESUs addressed in this rulemaking and 

summarizes the Teams’ assessment of 

habitat areas for each ESU. The Teams’

assessments addressed PCEs in the 

habitat areas within occupied 

CALWATER HSA watersheds (as well 

as rearing/migration corridors for some 

ESUs). For ease of reporting and 

reference these HSA watersheds have 

been organized into ‘‘units’’ based on 

their associated subbasin or 

CALWATER Hydrologic Unit (HU). 

California Coastal (CC) Chinook Salmon 

ESU 

The CC chinook salmon ESU was 

listed as a threatened species in 1999 

(64 FR 50394). The ESU includes all 

naturally spawned populations of 

chinook salmon from rivers and streams 

south of the Klamath River to and 

including the Russian River. Following 

completion of an updated status review 

(NMFS, 2003a) and review of hatchery 

populations located within the range of 

the ESU (NMFS, 2003b), NMFS recently 

proposed that the ESU remain listed as 

a threatened species and that seven 

hatchery populations be included as 

part of the ESU (69 FR 33102; June 14, 

2004). Major watersheds occupied by 

naturally spawning fish in this ESU 

include Redwood Creek, Mad River, Eel 

River, several smaller coastal 

watersheds, and the Russian River. A 

Technical Recovery Team has been 

formed and is in the process of 

identifying the historical and extant 

population structure of this ESU; 

however, this is still in progress. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 45 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 8 associated 

subbasins or CALWATER HUs (NMFS, 

2004b). In addition to the 45 HSA 

watershed units, conservation 

assessments were also made for 

Humboldt Bay and the Eel River 

Estuary. As part of its assessment, the 

Team considered the conservation value 

of each habitat area in the context of the 

productivity, spatial distribution, and 

diversity of habitats across the range of 

the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of CC chinook 

salmon, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat 

Unit 1. Redwood Creek Subbasin (HU 

#1107) 

The Redwood Creek HU is located in 

the northern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Redwood Creek drainage. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

294 mi2 (758 km2) and includes three 

occupied HSA watersheds. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 107 miles (171 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that all occupied areas contain one or 

71892 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

forestry, sand and gravel mining, 

agricultural water withdrawals and 

impoundments, grazing, and 

channelization. Of the three occupied 

HSA watersheds, two were rated as 

having high conservation value and one 

as having medium conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did 

not identify any unoccupied areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential for 

the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 2. Trinidad Subbasin (HU #1108) 

The Trinidad HU is located in the 

northern portion of the ESU and 

includes Big Lagoon and Little River. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

131 mi2 (338 km2) and contains two 

HSA watersheds both of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 26 miles (42 km) 

of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e. spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry, 

agriculture, non-agricultural and 

agricultural water withdrawals, and 

grazing. Of the two occupied HSA 

watersheds, one was rated as having low 

conservation value and one as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 3. Mad River Subbasin (HU #1109) 

The Mad River HU is located in the 

northern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Mad River drainage. The 

HU encompasses approximately 499 mi2

(1287 km2) and includes four HSA 

watersheds, three of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 53 miles (85 km) 

of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e. spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

forestry, agriculture, and grazing. All of 

the occupied HSA watersheds were 

rated as having high conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

did not identify any unoccupied areas 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 4. Eureka Plain Subbasin (HU 

#1110) 

The Eureka Plain HU is located in the 

vicinity of Eureka and surrounds 

Humboldt Bay. The HU encompasses 

approximately 224 mi2 (578 km2) and 

contains a single HSA which is 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 74 miles (118 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in this HSA watershed (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, flood control 

channelization, and road building and 

maintenance. This single occupied HSA 

watershed was rated as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team also evaluated 

Humboldt Bay into which most of these 

freshwater streams in this subbasin 

drain as a separate habitat unit. 

Humboldt Bay contains approximately 

25 mi2 (65 km2) of estuarine habitat 

which the Team found contained PCEs 

for rearing and migration and was of 

high conservation value since it 

provides migratory connectivity for 

juveniles and adults between high value 

freshwater spawning and rearing habitat 

and the ocean. The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 5. Eel River Subbasin (HU #1111) 

The Eel River HU is located in the 

northern and central portion of the ESU 

and includes the Eel River and Van 

Duzen River drainages. This HU, which 

is the largest in the ESU, encompasses 

approximately 3,682 mi2 (9,500 km2) 

and contains 19 occupied HSA 

watersheds. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 841 

miles (1,345 km) of occupied riverine 

and estuarine habitat in the occupied 

HSA watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

habitat areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs including 

agriculture, forestry, sand and gravel 

mining, grazing, exotic/invasive species, 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals, and urbanization. Of these 

occupied HSA watersheds, three were 

rated as having low conservation value, 

four were rated as having medium 

conservation value, and twelve were 

rated as having high conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

also evaluated the Eel River estuary as 

a separate habitat unit and concluded it 

contained PCEs for rearing and 

migration and is of high conservation 

value since it provides migratory 

connectivity for juveniles and adults 

between high value freshwater 

spawning and rearing habitat and the 

ocean. The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 6. Cape Mendocino Subbasin (HU 

#1112)

The Cape Mendocino HU is located in 

the central portion of the ESU and 

includes the Bear River and Mattole 

River drainages. This HU encompasses 

approximately 499 mi2 (1,287 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, two of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 173 

miles (277 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSAs 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

agriculture, grazing, forestry, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. Both 

occupied HSA watersheds were rated as 

having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 7. Mendocino Coast Subbasin (HU 

#1113) 

The Mendocino Coast HU is located 

in the southern portion of the ESU and 

includes several smaller coastal streams 

including the Ten Mile, Noyo, Albion, 

Navarro, and Garcia Rivers. This HU 

encompasses approximately 1,598 mi2

(4,123 km2) and contains eighteen HSA 

watersheds, seven of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 204 miles (326 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e. spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry, 

grazing, urbanization, agriculture, and 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of the occupied HSA 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71893

watersheds, the Team rated two as low 

in conservation value, three as medium 

in conservation value, and two as high 

in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 8. Russian River Subbasin (HU 

#1114) 

The Russian River HU is located in 

the southernmost portion of the ESU 

and includes the Russian River drainage 

and its tributaries. The HU encompasses 

approximately 1,482 mi2 (3,824 km2) 

and contains ten HSA watersheds 

within the range of the ESU, nine of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 133 

miles (212 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSAs 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

these occupied HSA areas contained 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, or migratory habitat) for this 

ESU and identified several management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including urbanization, agriculture, 

forestry, sand and gravel mining, 

grazing, flood control channelization, 

and agricultural water withdrawals. Of 

the occupied HSA watersheds, the Team 

rated three as low in conservation value, 

two as medium in conservation value, 

and four as having high conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Northern California (NC) O. mykiss ESU 

The NC O. mykiss ESU was listed as 

a threatened species in 2000 (65 FR 

36074; June 7, 2000). The ESU includes 

all naturally spawned populations of O. 

mykiss in coastal river basins from 

Redwood Creek south to and including 

the Gualala River. Major watersheds 

occupied by naturally spawning fish in 

this ESU include Redwood Creek, Mad 

River, Eel River, several smaller coastal 

watersheds on the coast south to the 

Gualala River. O. mykiss within this 

ESU include both winter and summer 

run types, including what is presently 

considered to be the southernmost 

population of summer run O. mykiss in 

the Middle Fork Eel River (NMFS, 

1996). The half-pounder life history 

type also occurs in the ESU, specifically 

in the Mad and Eel Rivers. Based on an 

updated status review (NMFS, 2003a) 

and an assessment of hatchery 

populations located within the range of 

the ESU (NMFS, 2003b), NMFS recently 

proposed that the ESU remain listed as 

a threatened species and that resident O. 

mykiss co-occurring with anadromous 

populations below impassible barriers 

(both natural and man-made) as well as 

two artificial propagation programs 

(Yager Creek Hatchery and North Fork 

Gualala River Hatchery) also be 

included in the ESU (69 FR 33102; June 

14, 2004). A Technical Recovery Team 

has been formed and is in the process 

of identifying the historical and extant 

independent population structure of 

this ESU and associated population 

viability parameters for each 

population. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 50 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 7 associated 

subbasins or CALWATER HUs. In 

addition to the 50 HSA watershed units, 

conservation assessments were also 

made for Humboldt Bay and the Eel 

River Estuary. As part of its assessment, 

the Team considered the conservation 

value of each habitat area in the context 

of the productivity, spatial distribution, 

and diversity of habitats across the 

range of the ESU. The Team evaluated 

the conservation value of habitat areas 

on the basis of the physical and 

biological habitat requirements of NC O. 

mykiss, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat.

Unit 1. Redwood Creek Subbasin (HU 

#1107) 

The Redwood Creek HU is located in 

the northern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Redwood Creek drainage. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

294 mi2 (758km2) and includes three 

HSA watersheds, all of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 138 (220 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the three occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied HSA watersheds contained 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, or migratory habitat) and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

forestry, sand and gravel mining, 

agricultural water withdrawals and 

impoundments, grazing and 

channelization. Of the three occupied 

HSA watersheds, one was rated as 

medium and two were rated as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 2. Trinidad Subbasin (HU #1108) 

The Trinidad HU is located in the 

northern portion of the ESU and 

includes Big Lagoon and Little River. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

131 mi2 (338 km2) and contains two 

HSA watersheds, both of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 66 miles (106 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including forestry, agriculture, 

non-agricultural and agricultural water 

withdrawals and grazing. Of the two 

HSA watersheds, one was rated by the 

Team as having medium conservation 

value and one was rated as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 3. Mad River Subbasin (HU #1109) 

The Mad River HU is located in the 

northern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Mad River drainage. The 

HU encompasses approximately 499 mi2

(1,287 km2) and contains four HSA 

watersheds, all of which are occupied. 

Fish distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 169 miles (270 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in these occupied habitat areas (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including forestry, agriculture, 

and grazing. Of these occupied HSA 

watersheds, one was rated as having low 

conservation value and three were rated 

by the Team as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 4. Eureka Plain Subbasin (HU 

#1110) 

The Eureka Plain HU is located in the 

vicinity of Eureka and includes 

Humboldt Bay. The HU encompasses 

approximately 224 mi2 (578 km2) and 

contains a single HSA which is 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 122 miles (195 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

71894 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

habitat in the occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e. spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, flood control 

channelization, and road building and 

maintenance. The single HSA watershed 

in the subbasin was rated by the Team 

as having high conservation value to the 

ESU. The Team also evaluated 

Humboldt Bay into which most of these 

freshwater streams in this subbasin 

drain as a separate habitat unit. 

Humboldt Bay contains approximately 

25 mi2 (65 km2) of estuarine habitat 

which the Team found contained PCEs 

for rearing and migration and was of 

high conservation value since it 

provides migratory connectivity for 

juveniles and adults between high value 

freshwater spawning and rearing habitat 

and the ocean. The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 5. Eel River Subbasin (HU #1111) 

The Eel River HU is located in the 

north central portion of the ESU and 

includes the Eel River and Van Duzen 

River drainages. The HU encompasses 

approximately 3,682 mi2 (9,500 km2) 

and contains nineteen HSA watersheds, 

all of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 1,269 miles (2,030 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied watershed areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agriculture, forestry, 

sand and gravel mining, grazing, exotic/

invasive species, agricultural and nonagricultural water withdrawals, and 

urbanization. Of these nineteen 

occupied watersheds, nine were rated 

by the Team as medium in conservation 

value and ten were rated as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team also evaluated the Eel 

River estuary as a separate habitat unit 

and concluded it contained PCEs for 

rearing and migration and is of high 

conservation value since it provides 

migratory connectivity for juveniles and 

adults between high conservation value 

freshwater spawning and rearing habitat 

and the ocean. The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 6. Cape Mendocino Subbasin (HU 

#1112) 

The Cape Mendocino HU is located in 

the central portion of the ESU and 

includes the Bear River and Mattole 

River drainages. This HU encompasses 

approximately 499 mi2 (1,287 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds which 

are all occupied. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 342 

miles (547 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSA 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agriculture, grazing, 

forestry, and agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of these watersheds, the 

Team rated two as having low 

conservation value and one as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 7. Mendocino Coast Subbasin (HU 

#1112) 

The Mendocino Coast HU is located 

in the southern portion of the ESU and 

includes several smaller coastal streams 

such as Ten Mile, Noyo, Albion, 

Navarro, and Garcia Rivers. This HU 

encompasses approximately 1,598 mi2

(4,123 km2) and contains eighteen HSA 

watersheds that are all occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 1,022 miles (1,635 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in these watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

areas contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including forestry, grazing, 

urbanization, agriculture, and 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of these occupied HSA 

watersheds, the Team rated five as low 

in conservation value, four as medium 

in conservation value, and nine as high 

in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Central California Coast (CCC) O. 

mykiss ESU 

The CCC O. mykiss ESU was listed as 

a threatened species in 1997 (62 FR 

433937; August 18, 1997). The ESU 

includes all naturally spawned 

populations of O. mykiss in coastal river 

basins from the Russian River 

southward to and including Aptos 

Creek, as well as naturally spawned 

populations of O. mykiss in drainages of 

San Francisco and San Pablo Bay 

eastward to but excluding the 

Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. Major 

coastal watersheds occupied by 

naturally spawning fish in this ESU 

include the Russian River, Lagunitas 

Creek, and San Lorenzo River. 

Important watersheds occupied by 

naturally spawning fish within the San 

Francisco Bay/San Pablo Bay area 

include Alameda Creek, Coyote Creek, 

Guadelupe Creek, Petaluma River, and 

the Napa River. Based on an updated 

status review (NMFS, 2003a) and an 

assessment of hatchery populations 

located within the range of the ESU 

(NMFS, 2003b), NMFS recently 

proposed that the ESU remain listed as 

a threatened species (69 FR 33102; June 

14, 2004). In addition, NMFS proposed 

that: (1) Resident O. mykiss occurring 

with anadromous populations below 

impassable barriers (both natural and 

man made); (2) two artificially 

propagated populations (Don Clausen 

Fish Hatchery in the Russian River 

basin and the Kingfisher Flat Hatchery/

Scott Creek hatchery in Scott Creek 

south of San Francisco); and (3) three 

resident O. mykiss sub-populations 

above Dam 1 on Alameda Creek also be 

included in the CCC O. mykiss ESU. For 

the purposes of this re-designation 

proposal, therefore, the watershed units 

occupied by resident O. mykiss in upper 

Alameda Creek were considered 

occupied. A Technical Recovery Team 

has been formed and is in the process 

of identifying the historical and extant 

independent population structure of 

this ESU as well as the associated 

viability criteria for these populations. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 47 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 10 associated 

subbasins (or CALWATER HUs). Five of 

these HSAs encompass the San 

Francisco—San Pablo—Suisun Bay 

complex which constitutes migratory 

and rearing habitat for several Bay area 

tributary stream populations in this 

ESU. As part of this assessment, the 

Team considered the conservation value 

of each habitat area in the context of the 

productivity, spatial distribution, and 

diversity of habitats across the range of 

the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of the CCC O. 

mykiss ESU, consistent with the PCEs 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71895

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat.

Unit 1. Russian River Subbasin (HU 

#1114) 

The Russian River HU is located in 

the northern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Russian River drainage and 

its tributaries. The HU encompasses 

approximately 1,482 mi2 (3,824 km2) 

and contains eleven HSA watersheds, 

ten of which are occupied. The 

unoccupied HSA does not contain fish 

because it is located above Coyote Dam, 

which is an impassable fish barrier used 

to facilitate water diversions from the 

Eel River and delivery downstream for 

agricultural and municipal purposes. 

Fish distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 713 miles (1,141 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the 10 occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied HSAs watersheds 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

and identified several management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including urbanization, agriculture, 

grazing, flood control channelization, 

road building and maintenance, 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals, and non-hydro dams. Of 

the occupied HSA watersheds, the Team 

rated one as low in conservation value, 

two as medium in conservation value, 

and seven as high in conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

did not identify and unoccupied areas 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 2. Bodega Bay Subbasin (HU 

#1115) 

The Bodega Bay HU is located in the 

north central portion of the ESU and 

includes several small streams as well 

as Bodega Harbor. The HU encompasses 

approximately 147 mi2 (411 km2) and 

contains four HSA watersheds, two of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 18 

miles (29 km2) of occupied riverine or 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSAs 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including grazing, 

urbanization, agriculture, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. The 

Team rated one occupied HSA 

watershed as low in conservation value 

and one as medium in conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 3. Marin Coastal Subbasin (HU 

#2201) 

The Marin Coastal HU is located in 

the central portion of the ESU along the 

coast and includes several small 

watersheds including Lagunitas Creek. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

327 mi2 (844 km2) and contains five 

HSA watersheds, four of which are 

occupied. The unoccupied HSA lacks 

satisfactory habitat and is of high 

gradient. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 74 miles (118 

km) of occupied riverine or estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied habitat areas contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including grazing, 

urbanization, forestry, agricultural and 

non-agricultural water withdrawals, and 

non-hydro dams. Of the occupied HSA 

watersheds, the Team rated two as low 

in conservation value, one as medium in 

conservation value, and one as high in 

conservation value to the ESU. The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential to the conservation of the ESU.

Unit 4. San Mateo Subbasin (HU #2202) 

The San Mateo HU is located on the 

coast immediately south of the Golden 

Gate Bridge and includes several small 

creeks including San Gregorio and 

Pescadero Creeks. The HU encompasses 

approximately 257 mi2 (663 km2) and 

contains six HSA watersheds, five of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 146 

miles (234 km) of occupied riverine or 

estuarine habitat in the occupied 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agriculture, agricultural and 

non-agricultural water withdrawals, 

urbanization, non-hydro dams, and road 

building and maintenance. Of these 

occupied HSA watersheds, one is low in 

conservation value, two are medium in 

value, and two are high in conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify and unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 5. Bay Bridges Subbasin (HU 

#2203) 

The Bay Bridges HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

portions of northern San Francisco Bay, 

San Pablo Bay, and some associated 

watersheds. The HU encompasses 

approximately 191 mi2 (493 km2) and 

contains four HSA watersheds, three of 

which are occupied. The San Francisco 

Bayside HSA is unoccupied by this ESU 

due to intense urbanization and lack of 

stream habitat. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 46 

miles (74 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSA 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). One of the 

occupied HSAs (HSA #220312; Bay 

Waters) includes that portion of San 

Francisco Bay bounded by the Bay 

Bridge, the Golden Gate Bridge, and the 

Richmond Bridge, and encompasses an 

area of approximately 83 mi2 (214 km2). 

This occupied estuarine habitat area 

constitutes important migratory and 

rearing habitat and access to the ocean 

for some populations within this ESU. 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied habitat areas contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, channel modification, 

flood control channelization, road 

building and maintenance, and wetland 

loss. Of the occupied watersheds, one 

each is rated low, medium and high, 

respectively, in conservation value to 

the ESU. The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 6. South Bay Subbasin (HU #2204) 

The South Bay HU is located in the 

southern portion of the ESU and 

includes South San Francisco Bay and 

associated tributaries such as Alamada 

Creek. This HU encompasses 

approximately 1,220 mi2 (3.148 km2) 

and contains four occupied HSA 

watersheds. One of these four 

watersheds (Upper Alameda Creek; HSA 

#220430) is not accessible to 

anadromous fish at this time, but is 

nonetheless considered occupied for the 

purposes of this critical habitat 

designation because genetic evidence 

indicates the resident O. mykiss that 

reside there are closely related to local 

anadromous steelhead (Nielsen 2003) 

and we have proposed to include these 

fish in the listed ESU (69 FR 33102; 

June 14, 2004). Fish distribution and 

71896 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 172 

miles (275 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a), including 

the Upper Alameda Creek HSA 

(#220430). One of the occupied HSAs 

(Bay Channel; HSA #220410) includes 

that portion of San Francisco Bay south 

of the Bay Bridge to the Dumbarton 

Bridge, and encompasses an area of 

approximately 173 mi2 (446 km2). This 

occupied estuarine habitat area 

constitutes important migratory and 

rearing habitat and access to the ocean 

for some populations within this ESU. 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied habitat areas contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, flood control 

channelization, non-hydro dams, 

channel modification, and nonagricultural water withdrawals. Of these 

occupied HSAs, the Team rated one as 

low in conservation value, one as 

medium in conservation value, and two 

as high in conservation value to the 

ESU. The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 7. Santa Clara Subbasin (HU 

#2205) 

The Santa Clara HU is located in the 

southern portion of the ESU and 

includes part of South San Francisco 

Bay and associated tributaries including 

Coyote Creek and the Guadalupe River. 

This HU encompasses approximately 

840 mi2 (2,167 km2) and contains five 

HSA watersheds, four of which are 

occupied. The remaining HSA is 

unoccupied due to lack of stream 

habitat and intense urbanization. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 135 miles (216 km) of 

occupied riverine or estuarine habitat in 

the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). One of the occupied HSAs 

(Dumbarton South; HSA #220510) 

includes that portion of San Francisco 

Bay south of the Dumbarton Bridge, and 

encompasses an area of approximately 

15 mi2 (39 km2). This occupied 

estuarine habitat area constitutes 

important migratory and rearing habitat 

and access to the ocean for some 

populations within this ESU. The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including road building and 

maintenance, urbanization, wetland 

loss, flood control channelization, nonhydro dams, and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of the occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated one as low 

in conservation value, two as medium 

in conservation value, and one as high 

in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 8. San Pablo Subbasin (HU #2206) 

The San Pablo HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

part of San Pablo Bay as well as several 

associated tributaries including the 

Petaluma River, Sonoma Creek, and the 

Napa River. This HU encompasses 

approximately 1,018 mi2 (2,626 km2) 

and contains six occupied HSA 

watersheds. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 392 

miles (627 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). One of the 

occupied HSAs (San Pablo Bay; HSA 

#220610) includes San Pablo Bay from 

the Richmond Bridge to the Carquinez 

Bridge, and encompasses an area of 

approximately 115 mi2 (297 km2). This 

occupied estuarine habitat area 

constitutes important migratory and 

rearing habitat and access to the ocean 

for some populations within this ESU. 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, road building and 

maintenance, channel modification, 

flood control channelization, 

agriculture, wetland loss, and nonhydro dams. Of these occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated two as low, 

one as medium, and three as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU.

Unit 9. Suisun Bay Subbasin (HU 

#2207) 

The Suisun Bay HU is located in the 

easternmost portion of the ESU and 

includes Suisun Bay and associated 

tributaries including Mount Diablo 

Creek and Suisun Creek. This HU 

encompasses approximately 653 mi2

(1,684 km2) and contains eight HSA 

watersheds, five of which are occupied. 

The remaining three HSA watersheds 

are unoccupied due to unsuitable 

habitat and/or barriers and urbanization. 

Fish distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 86 miles (138 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in these watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). One 

of the occupied HSAs (Suisun Bay; HSA 

#220710) includes Suisun Bay which 

encompasses an area of approximately 

56 mi2 (143 km2). This occupied 

estuarine habitat area constitutes 

important migratory and rearing habitat 

and access to the ocean for some 

populations within this ESU. The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including urbanization, road building 

and maintenance, wetland loss, nonhydro dams, flood control 

channelization, and agricultural and 

non-agricultural water withdrawals. Of 

the occupied watersheds, the Team 

rated four as low and one as medium in 

conservation value for the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 10. Big Basin Subbasin (HU #3304) 

The Big Basin HU is located in the 

southernmost coastal portion of the ESU 

south of the Golden Gate Bridge and 

includes several small coastal streams 

such as Gazos Creek, Waddell Creek, 

Scott Creek, the San Lorenzo River, 

Soquel Creek and Aptos Creek. This HU 

encompasses approximately 367 mi2

(947 km2) and contains four occupied 

HSA watersheds. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 220 

miles (352 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in these watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including road 

building and maintenance, forestry, 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals, and non-hydro dams. Of 

these occupied watersheds, the Team 

rated one as medium and three as high 

in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

South-Central California Coast (SCCC) 

O. mykiss ESU 

The SCCC O. mykiss ESU was listed 

as a threatened species in 1997 (62 FR 

43937). The ESU includes all naturally 

spawned populations of O. mykiss in 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71897

coastal river basins from the Pajaro 

River southward to, but not including, 

the Santa Maria River. The major 

watersheds occupied by naturally 

spawning fish in this ESU include the 

Pajaro River, Salinas River, Carmel 

River, and numerous smaller rivers and 

streams along the Big Sur coast and 

southward. Most of the rivers in this 

ESU drain the Santa Lucia Range, the 

southernmost unit of the California 

Coast Range, and only winter steelhead 

are found in this ESU. The climate is 

drier and warmer than in the north, as 

reflected in vegetational changes from 

coniferous forest to chapparral and 

coastal scrub. The mouths of many 

rivers and streams in this ESU are 

seasonally closed by sand berms that 

form during periods of low flow in the 

summer. Based on an updated status 

review (NMFS, 2003a), NMFS recently 

proposed that the ESU remain listed as 

a threatened species and that resident O. 

mykiss co-occurring with anadromous 

populations below impassible barriers 

(both natural and man-made) be 

included in the ESU (69 FR 33102; June 

14, 2004). A Technical Recovery Team 

has been formed and is in the process 

of identifying the historical and extant 

independent population structure of 

this ESU and associated population 

viability criteria. The time frame for 

completion of this work is uncertain. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 30 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 8 associated 

subbasins (or CALWATER HUs). In 

addition to 29 HSA watershed units, a 

conservation assessment was also made 

for Morro Bay (a separate HSA unit) 

which provides rearing and migration 

PCEs for this ESU. As part of its 

conservation assessment, the Team 

considered the conservation value of 

each habitat area in the context of the 

productivity, spatial distribution, and 

diversity of habitat across the range of 

the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of the SCCC O. 

mykiss ESU, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat. 

Unit 1. Pajaro River Subbasin (HU 

#3305) 

The Pajaro River HU is located in the 

northern part of the ESU and includes 

the Pajaro River and its tributaries. The 

HU encompasses approximately 1,311 

mi2 (3,382 km2) and contains five 

occupied HSA watersheds, although a 

portion of one HSA is located outside 

the boundary of the ESU. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 296 miles (474 km) of 

occupied riverine and/or estuarine 

habitat in the occupied HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied HSAs contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including flood control 

channelization, agricultural and nonagricultural water withdrawals, road 

building and maintenance, and nonhydro dams. Of the five occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated three as 

medium in conservation value and two 

as high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible habitat above Uvas Dam in 

Uvas Creek (a tributary to the Pajaro 

River) may be essential to the 

conservation of the ESU. The Team 

concluded that this unoccupied habitat 

area may be essential for conservation 

because: (1) It supports O. mykiss native 

to the Pajaro River watershed and 

contains habitat suitable for spawning 

and rearing; and (2) efforts are 

underway to implement a long-standing 

agreement between the South Santa 

Clara Valley Water Conservation District 

and the State of California to provide 

fish passage past this dam. We seek 

comment on whether this unoccupied 

area should be proposed as critical 

habitat. 

Unit 2. Bolsa Neuva Subbasin (HU 

#3306) 

The Bolsa Neuva HU is a small 

watershed unit located in the northern 

part of the ESU which includes Elkhorn 

Slough. The HU encompasses 

approximately 51 mi2 (132 km2) and 

contains one HSA watershed and 

approximately 63 miles of streams (at 

1:100,000 hydrography). Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists indicate 

that this watershed is not occupied 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team did not 

identify this unoccupied HSA as a 

habitat area that was essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. Because this 

HU did not contain occupied habitat or 

unoccupied habitat that the Team 

believed may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU, it was not 

considered further in the designation 

process.

Unit 3. Carmel River Subbasin (HU 

#3307) 

The Carmel River HU is located in the 

northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Carmel River watershed. 

The HU encompasses approximately 

256 mi2 (660 km2) and contains only 

one HSA which is occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 136 miles (218 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in this watershed (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that this occupied 

watershed contained habitat areas with 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, or migratory habitat) and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including flood 

control channelization, non-hydro 

dams, and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals. The Team rated this 

watershed as having high conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 4. Santa Lucia Subbasin (HU 

#3308) 

The Santa Lucia HU is located along 

the Big Sur coastal area and includes the 

Big Sur River and Little Sur River 

watersheds. The HU encompasses 

approximately 302 mi2 (779 km2) and 

contains only a single HSA which is 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 102 miles (163 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in this watershed (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that this 

occupied watershed contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e. spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified at least 

one management activity that may affect 

the PCEs, including road building and 

maintenance. The Team rated this 

watershed as having high conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 5. Salinas River Subbasin (HU 

#3309) 

The Salinas River HU is located in the 

north-central portion of the ESU and 

includes the Salinas River watershed 

which is the largest in the ESU. The 

Salinas River HU encompasses 

approximately 3,527 mi2 (9,099km2) and 

contains twelve HSA watersheds, seven 

of which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 375 

miles (600 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSA 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

and identified management activities 

71898 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

agriculture, flood control 

channelization, wetland loss, road 

building and maintenance, non-hydro 

dams, and agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of the occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated four as 

having low conservation value, one as 

having medium conservation value, and 

two as having high conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

did not identify any unoccupied areas 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 6. Estero Bay (HU #3310)

The Estero Bay HU is located along 

the southern coast of the ESU and 

includes several relatively small coastal 

streams including Arroyo De La Cruz, 

San Simeon Creek, Santa Rosa Creek, 

Morro Creek, Chorro Creek, San Luis 

Obispo Creek, and Arroyo Grande 

Creek. The HU encompasses 

approximately 751 mi2 (436 km2) and 

contains seventeen HSA watersheds, 

sixteen of which are occupied. One of 

these occupied watersheds is Morro Bay 

into which the Morro Creek and Chorro 

Creek watersheds drain. Morro Bay 

proper encompasses an area of 

approximately 3 mi2 (8 km2) and is an 

important rearing and migratory habitat 

for populations that occupy the 

watersheds that drain into the Bay. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 352 miles (563 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied habitat areas contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including grazing, agriculture, 

urbanization, non-hydro dams, road 

building and maintenance, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. Of the 

occupied HSA watersheds, the Team 

rated two as low, seven as medium, and 

seven as high in conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did 

not identify any unoccupied areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential for 

the conservation of the ESU. 

Units 7 (Santa Maria HU #3312) and 8 

(Estrella HU #3317) 

Portions of the Santa Maria and 

Estrella HUs are within the geographic 

range of this ESU, but do not contain 

occupied riverine or estuarine habitat. 

The Santa Maria HU includes a single 

HSA (Guadalupe; 331210) which is 

divided by the ESU boundary. All 

occupied habitat within this HSA 

occurs within the range of the Southern 

California steelhead ESU. The Estrella 

HU contains a single HSA (Estrella 

River; 331700) which is unoccupied. 

The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. Because these areas did not 

contain occupied habitat or unoccupied 

habitat that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU, they were not 

considered further in the designation 

process. 

Southern California (SC) O. mykiss ESU 

The SC O. mykiss ESU was listed as 

an endangered species in 1997 (62 FR 

3937; August 18, 1997). In 2002, the 

status of the ESU was updated and its 

range extended based on new 

information indicating that anadromous 

O. mykiss had re-colonized watersheds 

from which it was thought to have been 

extirpated (67 FR 21586; May 1, 2002). 

The SC O. mykiss ESU includes all 

naturally spawned populations of O. 

mykiss in coastal river basins from the 

Santa Maria River in San Luis Obispo 

County southward to the U.S.—Mexican 

Border (67 FR 21586). Major coastal 

watersheds occupied by naturally 

spawning fish in this ESU include the 

Santa Maria, Santa Ynez, Ventura, and 

Santa Clara Rivers. Several smaller 

streams in Santa Barbara, Ventura and 

northern Los Angeles County also 

support naturally spawning steelhead, 

as do two watersheds (San Juan Creek 

and San Mateo Creek) in southern 

Orange County and northern San Diego 

County. These southernmost 

populations are disjunct in distribution 

and are separated from the 

northernmost populations by 

approximately 80 miles (128 km). Based 

on an updated status review (NMFS, 

2003a), NMFS recently proposed that 

the ESU remain listed as an endangered 

species (69 FR 33102; June 14, 2004). In 

addition, NMFS proposed that resident 

O. mykiss occurring with anadromous 

populations below impassable barriers 

(both natural and man made) also be 

included in the ESU. A Technical 

Recovery Team has been formed for the 

South-Central coast of California and is 

in the process of identifying the 

historical and extant independent 

population structure of this ESU and the 

SCCC O. mykiss ESU, as well as the 

associated viability criteria for these 

populations. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 37 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 8 associated 

subbasins or CALWATER HUs. As part 

of its assessment, the Team considered 

the conservation value of each habitat 

area (or HSA) in the context of the 

productivity, spatial distribution, and 

diversity of habitats across the range of 

the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of the SC O. 

mykiss, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat. 

Unit 1. Santa Maria River Subbasin (HU 

#3312) 

The Santa Maria River HU is located 

in the northwestern portion of the ESU 

and includes the Santa Maria River and 

its upstream tributaries, the Sisquoc and 

Cuyama Rivers. The HU encompasses 

an area of approximately 704 mi2 (1816 

km2) and contains three occupied HSA 

watersheds. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 219 

miles (350 km) of occupied riverine and 

estuarine habitat in these watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied HSA watersheds 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

and identified several management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including non-hydro dams, water 

withdrawals, sand and gravel mining, 

and grazing. Of the occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated two as low 

and one as high in conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

did not identify any unoccupied areas 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU.

Unit 2. Santa Ynez River Subbasin (HU 

#3314) 

The Santa Ynez River HU is located 

in the northwestern portion of the ESU 

and includes the Santa Ynez River 

watershed. The HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 485 mi2 (1,251 

km2) and contains six HSA watersheds, 

five of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 138 miles (221 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied watersheds contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including grazing, water 

withdrawals, non-hydro dams, 

urbanization, barriers to migration, and 

road building and maintenance. Of 

these occupied watersheds, the Team 

rated one as low, two as medium, and 

two as high in conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71899

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of the Santa Ynez 

River and its tributaries above Bradbury 

Dam may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. The Team 

reached this conclusion because 

historical records indicate that the 

upper portion of the Santa Ynez 

watershed above Bradbury Dam 

provided the principal spawning and 

rearing habitat for a historically large 

anadromous O. mykiss population 

within this river system prior to 

construction of the dam. In addition, 

most of these unoccupied river reaches 

are located on lands under public 

ownership and management, primarily 

the Los Padres National Forest. Because 

of the large size of the Santa Ynez river 

system, it is likely to have historically 

supported one or more independent 

populations which contributed to the 

resiliency of the ESU and served as a 

buffer against extinction. The currently 

occupied habitat areas within the range 

of the SC O. mykiss ESU are relatively 

small in number and size, and in many 

cases are isolated from other occupied 

habitats, thus the re-establishment of 

larger populations such as the one that 

historically occurred in the Santa Ynez 

River may be necessary to reduce the 

extinction probability of this ESU. We 

seek comment on whether unoccupied 

areas above Bradbury Dam should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 3. South Coast Subbasin (HU 

#3315) 

The South Coast HU is located in the 

northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes several small coastal streams 

such as Jalama Creek, Arroyo Hondo, 

Mission Creek, and Carpinteria Creek. 

The HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 375 mi2 (968 km2) and 

contains five occupied HSAs. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 152 miles (243 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied HSA watersheds contained 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, or migratory habitat) and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

agriculture, migration barriers or 

impediments, water withdrawals, 

urbanization, road building and 

maintenance, and wetland loss. Of the 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated all 

five as high in conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 4. Ventura River Subbasin (HU 

#4402) 

The Ventura River HU is located in 

the northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes the Ventura River and its 

associated tributaries. The HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

162 mi2 (259 km2) and contains four 

occupied HSA watersheds. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 68 miles (109 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied HSAs contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including urbanization, 

agriculture, water withdrawals, nonhydro dams, barriers or impediments, 

and exotic or invasive species. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated 

two as medium and two as high in 

conservation value (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of Matilija Creek 

and its tributaries above Matilija Dam 

and inaccessible reaches of Coyote and 

Santa Ana Creeks above Casitas Dam 

may be essential to the conservation of 

this ESU. The Team reached this 

conclusion because historical records 

indicate that the inaccessible habitat 

reaches above Matilija and Casitas Dams 

provided the principal spawning and 

rearing habitat for a historically large 

anadromous O. mykiss population 

within the Ventura River watershed 

prior to construction of the dams. In 

addition, most of these unoccupied river 

reaches are located on lands under 

public ownership and management, 

primarily the Los Padres National 

Forest. Because of the relatively large 

size of the Ventura River watershed, it 

is likely to have historically supported 

one or more independent populations 

prior to dam construction which 

contributed to the resiliency of the ESU 

and served as a buffer against 

extinction. The currently occupied 

habitat areas within the range of the SC 

O. mykiss ESU are relatively small in 

number and size, and in many cases are 

isolated from other occupied habitats. 

Thus the re-establishment of larger 

populations such as the ones that 

historically occurred in the Ventura 

River watershed may be necessary to 

reduce the extinction probability of this 

ESU. We seek comment on whether 

unoccupied areas above Matilija and 

Casitas Dams should be proposed as 

critical habitat.

Unit 5. Santa Clara—Calleguas Subbasin 

(HU #4403) 

The Santa Clara—Calleguas HU is 

located in the northwestern portion of 

the range of the ESU and includes the 

Santa Clara River and its tributaries 

including Sespe Creek. That portion of 

the HU within the range of the ESU 

encompasses a large area of 

approximately 1,236 mi2 (3,189 km2) 

and contains 14 HSA watersheds, only 

6 of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 182 miles (291 km) of 

occupied riverine and estuarine habitat 

in the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied HSAs contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agriculture, 

irrigation water withdrawals, barriers 

and impediments, dams, urbanization, 

and exotic/invasive species. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated 

one as medium and five as high in 

conservation value (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of Piru Creek and 

its tributaries above Santa Felicia Dam 

may be essential to the conservation of 

this ESU. The Team reached this 

conclusion because historical records 

indicate that the inaccessible habitat 

reaches above Santa Felicia Dam 

provided the principal spawning and 

rearing habitat for a historically large 

anadromous O. mykiss population 

within the Santa Clara River watershed 

prior to construction of the dam. In 

addition, most of these unoccupied river 

reaches are located on lands under 

public ownership and management, 

primarily the Los Padres National 

Forest. Because of the large size of the 

Santa Clara River watershed, it is likely 

to have historically supported one or 

more independent populations prior to 

dam construction which contributed to 

the resiliency of the ESU and served as 

a buffer against its extinction. The 

currently occupied habitat areas within 

the range of the SC O. mykiss ESU are 

relatively small in number and size, and 

in many cases are isolated from other 

occupied habitats, thus the reestablishment of larger populations such 

as the one that historically occurred in 

the Santa Clara River watershed may be 

necessary to reduce the extinction 

probability of this ESU. We seek 

comment on whether unoccupied areas 

above Santa Felicia Dam should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

71900 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Unit 6. Santa Monica Bay Subbasin (HU 

#4404) 

The Santa Monica Bay HU is located 

in the northwestern portion of the ESU 

and includes Topanga Creek, Malibu 

Creek, and Arroyo Sequit. That portion 

of the HU within the ESU encompasses 

approximately 328 mi2 (846 km2) and 

includes 29 HSA watersheds, only 3 of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify only approximately 

11 miles (18 km) of occupied riverine 

and estuarine habitat in the 3 occupied 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied 

watersheds contained one or more PCEs 

(i.e., spawning, rearing, or migratory 

habitat) and identified several 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including road building and 

maintenance, urbanization, barriers and 

impediments, and flood control and 

other channel modifications. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated all 

three as high in conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b).

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of Malibu Creek 

above Rindge Dam may be essential to 

the conservtion of this ESU. The Team 

reached this conclusion because 

historical records indicate that the 

inaccessible habitat reaches above 

Rindge Dam provided the principal 

spawning and rearing habitat for an 

important anadromous O. mykiss

population within the Malibu River 

watershed prior to construction of the 

dam. Because of the size of this 

watershed, it is likely to have 

historically supported an independent 

population prior to dam construction 

which contributed to the resiliency of 

the ESU and served as a buffer against 

its extinction. The currently occupied 

habitat areas within the range of the SC 

O. mykiss ESU are relatively small in 

number and size, and in many cases are 

isolated from other occupied habitats, 

thus the re-establishment of larger 

populations such as the one that 

historically occurred in Malibu Creek 

may be necessary to reduce the 

extinction probability of this ESU. We 

seek comment on whether unoccupied 

areas above Rindge Dam should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 7. Calleguas Subbasin (HU #4408) 

The Calleguas HU is located in the 

northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes Calleguas Creek and estuary. 

That portion of the HU within the range 

of the ESU encompasses a large area of 

approximately 344 mi2 (888 km2) and 12 

HSA watersheds, only 2 of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only approximately 1 mile (1.6 

km) of occupied freshwater and 

estuarine habitat in the occupied HSA 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

concluded that the occupied watersheds 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

rearing and migratory habitat) and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agriculture, channel modifications, and 

barriers or impediments. The Team also 

concluded that both watersheds have a 

low conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas that may 

be essential to the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 8. San Juan Subbasin (HU #4901) 

The San Juan HU is located in the 

southern portion of the ESU and 

includes the San Juan Creek and San 

Mateo Creek watersheds which have 

recently been re-colonized by 

anadromous O. mykiss. That portion of 

the HU within the range of the ESU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

496 mi2 (1,280 km2) and contains 18 

HSA watersheds, 9 of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 66 miles (106 

km) of occupied riverine and estuarine 

habitat in the occupied watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that the occupied watersheds contained 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, or migratory habitat) and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

urbanization, road building and 

maintenance, barriers and impediments, 

channel modifications or flood control 

structures, agriculture, agricultural and 

non-agricultural water withdrawals, and 

exotic/invasive species. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated 

one as low, one as medium, and seven 

as high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas that may 

be essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Within the range of the SC O. mykiss

ESU, which extends from the Santa 

Maria River southward to the U.S.—

Mexico border, there are a large number 

of HSA watersheds and their associated 

subbasins (or HUs) that are not 

occupied. These unoccupied subbasins 

include the San Gabriel River, Los 

Angeles River, Santa Ana River, Santa 

Margarita River, San Luis Rey River, San 

Dieguito River, San Diego River, 

Sweetwater River, Otay River and 

Tijuana River. Because these areas are 

unoccupied and were not considered 

essential for conservation of the ESU by 

the Team, they were not considered 

further in the designation process. 

Central Valley (CV) Spring-Run Chinook 

ESU 

The CV spring-run chinook ESU was 

listed as a threatened species in 1999 

(64 FR 50394). The ESU includes all 

naturally spawned populations of 

spring-run chinook salmon in the 

Sacramento River and its tributaries. 

The agency recently conducted a review 

to update the ESU’s status, taking into 

account new information and 

considering the net contribution of 

artificial propagation efforts in the ESU. 

A single artificially propagated springrun chinook stock resides within the 

historical geographic range of the ESU 

(Feather River Hatchery spring-run 

chinook program), but it is not 

considered part of the ESU because of 

introgression with fall-run chinook 

salmon. NMFS has recently proposed 

that the CV spring-run chinook ESU 

remain listed as a threatened species (69 

FR 33102; June 14, 2004). No artificial 

propagation programs were proposed for 

listing. 

A Technical Recovery Team has been 

established for the Central Valley 

recovery planning domain, and it has 

identified historic and extant 

demographically independent 

populations of spring chinook (NMFS, 

2004; NOAA Technical Memorandum 

NOAA–TM–NMFS–SWFSC–370). The 

TRT divided the range of the spring-run 

chinook ESU into four geographic 

groups. Geographic areas in each group 

inhabit similar environments based on a 

principle components analysis of 

environmental variables. The four 

geographic groups are the southern 

Cascades, northern Sierra, southern 

Sierra, and Coast Range. The TRT 

identified at least 18 historically 

demographically independent 

populations of spring-run chinook 

distributed among these four geographic 

areas, plus an additional seven likely 

dependent populations that may have 

been strongly influenced by adjacent 

independent population. Three of the 18 

independent populations are extant 

(Mill, Deer and Butte Creek populations) 

and all occur in the Southern Cascade 

geographic area. Several extant 

dependent populations have 

intermittent runs of spring chinook 

including Big Chico, Antelope, and 

Beegum Creeks. Recovery planning will 

likely emphasize the need for having 

viable populations distributed across 

the range of the identified geographic 

areas (Ruckelshaus et al., 2002; 

McElhany et al., 2003). Recovery 

planning efforts are currently focused 

on working with the CalFed and Central 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71901

Valley Project Improvement Act 

programs to implement habitat 

restoration projects and other recovery 

related efforts in the Central Valley. The 

Team considered the TRT products in 

rating each watershed and also solicited 

input from the TRT on the distributional 

and habitat use information that was 

compiled as well as the conservation 

assessment of occupied HSAs. 

The Team’s assessment for this ESU 

addressed habitat areas within 37 

occupied watersheds or CALWATER 

HSAs that occur in 15 associated 

subbasins or CALWATER HUs. This 

assessment also included four HSAs 

that encompass the San Francisco-San 

Pablo-Suisun Bay complex, which 

constitutes rearing and migration habitat 

for this ESU. This complex is treated as 

a separate unit in the following ESU 

description even though it is not a 

CALWATER HU. As part of its 

assessment, the Team considered the 

conservation value of each habitat area 

(or HSA) in the context of the 

productivity, spatial distribution, and 

diversity of habitats across the range of 

the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of the CV springrun chinook, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat. 

Unit 1. Tehama Subbasin (HU #5504) 

The Tehama HU is located in the 

north central portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of the mainstem 

Sacramento River, the lower portions of 

two westside tributaries (Thomes and 

Stony Creeks) and the lower portions of 

three eastside tributaries (Mill Creek, 

Deer Creek, and Pine Creek). The HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

1,119 square miles (2,887 km2) and 

contains two HSA watersheds, both of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 250 

miles (400 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in the occupied watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied watersheds 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

and identified several management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural water 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

stream bank stabilization for flood 

control, dam operations, urbanization, 

rangeland management, diking, and 

point and non-point source water 

pollution. Of these occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated one as 

medium and one as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

the ESU. 

Unit 2. Whitmore Subbasin (HU #5507)

The Whitmore HU is located in the 

north eastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of upper Battle Creek 

(North and South Forks), upper Bear 

Creek, and the Cow Creek watershed. 

The HU encompasses an area 

approximately 913 mi2 (2,355 km2) and 

contains seven HSA watersheds, four of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 58 

miles (93 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agricultural and noagricultural water withdrawals, forestry, 

rangeland management, hydropower 

diversions, urbanization, and fish 

passage impediments. Of these 

watersheds, the Team rated three as 

having low conservation value and one 

as having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 3. Redding Subbasin (HU #5508) 

The Redding HU is located in the 

northernmost portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of the upper 

Sacramento River mainstem, westside 

tributaries including Cottonwood Creek 

(portions of both the Middle and South 

Forks) and Clear Creek, and the lower 

portions of several eastside tributaries 

(Cow Creek, Bear Creek, and lower 

Battle Creek). The HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 705 mi2 (1,818 

km2) and contains two occupied HSA 

watersheds. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 159 

miles (254 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in these watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including rangeland 

management, gravel mining, fish 

passage impediments, dam operations 

and flood control water storage, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. The 

Team rated both occupied watersheds as 

having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 4. Eastern Tehama Subbasin (HU 

#5509) 

The Eastern Tehama HU is located in 

the northeastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of several important 

populations including Mill Creek, Deer 

Creek, Antelope Creek, and the upper 

portion of Big Chico Creek. The HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

896 mi2 (2,311 km2) and contains ten 

HSA watersheds, four of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 117 miles (187 

km) of occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry, 

rangeland management, fish passage 

impediments, road building and 

maintenance, and agricultural water 

withdrawals. Of the occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated them all 

high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 5. Sacramento Delta Subbasin (HU 

#5510) 

The Sacramento Delta HU is located 

in the southern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of the mainstem 

Sacramento River and the Deep Water 

Ship Channel. The HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 446 mi2 (1,150 

km2) and contains a single HSA which 

is occupied. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 180 

miles (288 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in this watershed (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural water withdrawals, point 

and non-point water pollution, 

invasive/non-native species, diking, and 

streambank stabilization for flood 

control. The Team rated this watershed 

as high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied habitat areas in 

the subbasin that may be essential for 

conservation of the ESU. 

71902 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Unit 6. Valley Putah-Cache Subbasin 

(HU #5511) 

The Valley Putah-Cache HU is located 

in the southern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of Putah and Cache 

Creeks. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 961 mi2 (2,479 km2) and 

contains two HSA watersheds within 

the range of the ESU, one of which is 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 16 miles (26 km) 

of occupied riverine habitat in this 

watershed (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e.,

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including urban development, 

agricultural water withdrawals, and 

impediments to fish passage. The Team 

rated the occupied watershed as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU.

Unit 7. Marysville Subbasin (HU #5515) 

The Marysville HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

portions of the lower Feather and Yuba 

Rivers. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 417 mi2 (1,076 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, two of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify only 58 miles (93 km) 

of occupied riverine habitat in these 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural water withdrawals, 

hydroelectric and municipal water 

diversions, water storage for flood 

control, dam operations, streambank 

stabilization for flood control, diking, 

and fish passage impediments. The 

Team rated both occupied watersheds as 

high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU; however, the 

Team did conclude that inaccessible 

stream reaches in the Upper Feather 

River above Oroville Dam in the 

adjacent subbasin (HU #5518) may be 

essential to the conservation of this 

ESU. Specifically, the Team identified 

the following stream reaches above 

Oroville Dam that may be essential for 

conservation of this ESU: from Oroville 

Dam upstream along the West Branch of 

the Feather River to the vicinity of 

Kimshew Falls; along the North Fork of 

the Feather River upstream of the 

location of Lake Almanor; along the East 

Branch of the NF Feather River 

including Indian Creek and Spanish 

Creek; the South Middle Fork of the 

Feather River, and the South Fork of the 

Feather River upstream to the first 

natural impassible barrier. Both springrun chinook and steelhead historically 

occurred in the Upper Feather River 

prior to Pacific Gas and Electric’s 

hydroelectric development in the North 

Fork watershed and the construction of 

Oroville Dam. Construction of Oroville 

Dam extirpated both the spring-run 

chinook and steelhead populations in 

this upper watershed. The Team 

concluded that spawning, rearing, and 

migratory habitat occurs above Oroville 

Dam in these inaccessible reaches, but 

it is in better condition for steelhead 

than spring-run chinook salmon. The 

feasibility of providing fish passage past 

Oroville Dam is currently being 

evaluated through the ongoing FERC 

relicensing process for this facility. The 

Team concluded this inaccessible 

habitat may be essential for the 

conservation of this ESU because the 

genetic integrity of spring-run chinook 

in the Lower Feather River has been 

compromised by Feather River Hatchery 

practices (i.e., introgression of spring 

and fall runs in the hatchery), and 

providing access to the unoccupied 

habitat above the dam would allow for 

expansion of the population in this 

watershed. We seek comment on 

whether this unoccupied habitat should 

be proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 8. Yuba River Subbasin (HU #5517) 

The Yuba River HU is located in the 

central and eastern portion of the ESU 

and includes part of the upper Yuba 

River watershed. This HU encompasses 

an area of approximately 1,436 mi2

(3,704 km2) and contains sixteen HSA 

watersheds, only four of which are 

occupied. Virtually all of these 

watersheds, however, are outside the 

previously identified boundary of the 

ESU. Fish distribution and habitat use 

data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only approximately 22 miles 

(35 km) of occupied riverine habitat in 

the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and non-agricultural water 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

and dam operations. Of these occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated one as low, 

one as medium, and two as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). 

The Team concluded that inaccessible 

stream reaches on the Upper Yuba River 

above Englebright Dam may be essential 

to the conservation of this ESU, 

including those upstream reaches on the 

North Yuba to New Bullards Bar Dam, 

on the Middle Yuba to Milton Dam, and 

on the South Yuba to Lake Spaulding. 

All three forks of the Upper Yuba River 

historically supported populations of 

spring chinook and steelhead 

(Yoshiyama et al., 1995). The Team 

considered this area to be essential for 

conservation because it provides one of 

the largest areas of suitable habitat in 

the Central Valley that can be accessed 

by providing passage at one relatively 

small dam. The Lower Yuba is also 

considered to have a good ‘‘seed’’

population of both spring chinook and 

steelhead and both populations are 

considered relatively free of hatchery 

influence. A large, multi-million dollar 

study program is underway through the 

CALFED Ecological Restoration Program 

to evaluate the feasibility of restoring 

anadromous salmonid populations to 

the Upper Yuba River. We seek 

comment on whether this unoccupied 

habitat should be proposed as critical 

habitat. 

Unit 9. Valley-American Subbasin (HU 

#5519) 

The Valley-American HU is located in 

the south-central and eastern portion of 

the ESU and includes portions of the 

Lower American River, the mainstem 

Sacramento River, and the lower 

Feather River. This HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 958 mi2 (2,471 

km2) and contains four HSA 

watersheds, only two of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only approximately 61 miles 

(98 km) of occupied riverine habitat in 

these watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

areas contained one or more PCEs (i.e.,

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural and municipal 

water withdrawals, point source and 

non-point source water pollution, 

streambank stabilization for flood 

control, fish passage impediments, 

water storage for flood control, dam 

operations, and urbanization. The Team 

rated one watershed as medium in 

conservation value and one as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71903

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 10. Colusa Basin Subbasin (HU 

#5520) 

The Colusa Basin HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

portions of the mainstem Sacramento 

River, lower Butte Creek, and the Butte 

Creek-Sutter Bypass. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

2,767 mi2 (7,139 km2) and contains five 

HSA watersheds, four of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 230 miles of 

occupied riverine habitat, including the 

Butte Creek-Sutter Bypass, in these 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e.,

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural and municipal 

water withdrawals, fish passage 

impediments, point and non-point 

source pollution, diking, wildlife habitat 

management, flood control operations, 

and non-native/invasive species. The 

Team rated all four occupied 

watersheds as having high conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

habitat areas in this subbasin that may 

be essential for the conservation of the 

ESU.

Unit 11. Butte Creek Subbasin (HU 

#5521) 

The Butte Creek HU is located in the 

northeastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of upper Butte Creek. 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 207 mi2 (534 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, only 

one of which is occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 15 miles (24 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

watershed (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e.,

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified water 

diversions for hydroelectric power as 

the principal management activity that 

may affect the PCEs. The Team rated 

this occupied watershed as high in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of Upper Butte 

Creek above Centerville Dam upstream 

to Butte Meadow may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. It is uncertain 

whether this area was historically used 

by the ESU, but spawning, rearing, and 

migration is present in the inaccessible 

areas and is thought to be in good 

condition. The Team believed this area 

may be essential for conservation 

because current spring run chinook and 

steelhead spawning in this watershed is 

all below an elevation of 1,000 ft and 

other spring-run chinook populations 

within the ESU typically spawn above 

2,000 ft. High water temperatures in the 

lower portion of Butte Creek have led to 

significant spring-run chinook prespawning mortalities in recent years, 

and the Team concluded that improved 

fish passage over the Centerville 

Diversion Dam would increase the range 

of this ESU and reduce the risk of adult 

losses in the lower stream reaches. The 

Team expects that feasibility of passage 

at the Centerville Diversion Dam will be 

evaluated through the upcoming FERC 

relicensing process for the facility. We 

seek comment on whether these 

unoccupied habitat areas should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 12. Ball Mountain Subbasin (HU 

#5523) 

The Ball Mountain HU is located in 

the northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes a portion of upper Thomes 

Creek. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 334 mi2 (862 km2) and 

contains three HSAs, only one of which 

is occupied primarily in the Thomes 

Creek watershed. Fish distribution and 

habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 15 

miles (24 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in the single occupied HSA 

watershed (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that the occupied areas in 

this watershed contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified rangeland management as the 

principal activity that may affect the 

PCEs. The Team rated this single 

occupied watershed as low in 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

occupied habitat areas in this subbasin 

that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 13. Shasta Bally Subbasin (HU 

#5524)

The Shasta Bally HU is located in the 

northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of South Fork 

Cottonwood Creek and Beegum Creek. 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 905 mi2 (2,335 km2) and 

contains nine HSA watersheds, four of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 50 

miles (80 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in these watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry, 

rangeland management, road building 

and maintenance, water diversion for 

hydroelectric power generation, water 

storage for flood control, dam 

operations, gravel mining, and fish 

passage impediments. The Team rated 

one watershed as low in conservation 

value and three as high in conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

habitat in this subbasin that is essential 

for the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 14. North Diablo Range Subbasin 

(HU #5543) 

The North Diablo Range HU is located 

in the southernmost portion of the ESU 

near the Delta and includes only a small 

portion of the south-central Delta. This 

HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 315 mi2 (812 km2) and 

only a single HSA which is partially 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only approximately 4 miles (6 

km) of occupied riverine or estuarine 

habitat in this HSA (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

areas contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

rearing and migratory habitat) for this 

ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural and municipal 

water withdrawals, fish passage 

impediments, and invasive/non-native 

species. The Team rated this single 

watershed as medium in conservation 

value (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied habitat areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential for 

the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 15. San Joaquin Delta Subbasin 

(HU #5544) 

The San Joaquin Delta HU is located 

in the southernmost portion of the ESU 

and includes portions of the central and 

south Delta. This HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 628 mi2 (1,620 

km2) and contains a single HSA 

watershed which is occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 142 miles (227 km) of 

occupied estuarine habitat in this HSA 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

71904 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

invasive/non-native species, and 

entrainment and flow alterations. The 

Team rated this single watershed as low 

in conservation value (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 16. Suisun Bay (HU #2207), San 

Pablo Bay (HU #2206) and San 

Francisco Bay (HU #s 2203 and 2204) 

Portions of four HUs (2207, 2206, 

2203, 2204) comprise the Suisun BaySan Pablo-San Francisco Bay complex 

that is utilized by this ESU. These four 

HUs contain both estuarine habitat in 

the Bay complex as well as freshwater 

tributaries to the Bay complex, but only 

the 4 HSAs (HSAs: 220710, 220610, 

220410, and 220312) that comprise the 

estuarine Bay complex are occupied by 

this ESU. These four HSAs encompass 

approximately 427 mi2 (1,102 km2) of 

estuarine habitat that serves as a rearing 

and migratory corridor providing 

connectivity between freshwater 

spawning, rearing, and migratory 

habitats for this ESU in the SacramentoSan Joaquin basin and the ocean. The 

Team concluded that these four HSAs 

were occupied and contained PCEs for 

migratory habitat that support this ESU, 

and identified management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, point and non-point 

source water pollution, diking, 

streambank stabilization activities, 

industrial development, invasive/nonnative species, wetland/estuary 

management, and habitat restoration. Of 

these occupied HSAs, the Team rated 

one as having low conservation value 

(#220410) and three as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in the San FranciscoSan Pablo-Suisun Bay complex that may 

be essential for the conservation of this 

ESU. 

Unoccupied Habitat Outside the ESU 

Range That May Be Essential to 

Conservation 

The Team identified several 

unoccupied habitat areas in the Central 

Valley that are outside the current range 

of the CV spring-run chinook ESU, but 

that may be essential for its 

conservation. We seek comment on 

whether these unoccupied areas should 

be proposed as critical habitat. These 

areas are identified below: 

(1) Lower and Upper Mokelumne 

River. The Team concluded that 

currently unoccupied portions of the 

Lower Mokelumne River from its 

confluence with the San Joaquin River 

upstream to Comanche Dam may be 

essential for the conservation of this 

ESU. In addition, the Team concluded 

that inaccessible reaches of the Upper 

Mokelumne River above Comanche Dam 

up to Bald Rock Falls (which is 7 miles 

above Electra Dam) may be essential to 

the conservation of this ESU. The 

Mokelumne River historically supported 

large runs of spring run chinook salmon 

(Yoshiyama et al., 1995) which have 

been extirpated. The lower portion of 

the Mokelumne River would be 

essential as a migratory corridor for 

spring chinook access to the upper 

watershed above Comanche Dam. 

Suitable habitat exists above Comanche 

Dam, but it has been altered by 

Comanche and Pardee reservoirs. The 

Central Valley Technical Recovery 

Team identifies this as a historically 

independent population and indicates 

that multiple independent populations 

of this ESU distributed throughout the 

Central Valley may be required to 

recover this ESU. 

(2) Lower and Middle Stanislaus 

River. The Team concluded that 

currently unoccupied reaches of the 

Lower Stanislaus River from its 

confluence with the San Joaquin River 

up to Goodwin Dam may be essential for 

the conservation of this ESU. The Team 

also concluded that inaccessible habitat 

reaches in the Middle Stanislaus River 

from Goodwin Dam to New Melones 

Dam may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. The Stanislaus 

River historically supported a large 

population of spring-run chinook 

salmon (McEwan 1996; Yoshiyama 

1996) which was extirpated with the 

construction of Goodwin Dam. The 

lower portion of the Stanislaus River 

would be essential as a migratory 

corridor for spring chinook access to the 

upper watershed above Goodwin Dam. 

Depending upon dam operations and 

resulting instream water temperatures, 

rearing and spawning habitat might be 

available in this lower reach. Suitable 

habitat exists above Goodwin Dam and 

fish passage at the Dam is thought to be 

feasible. The Central Valley Technical 

Recovery Team identifies this as a 

historically independent population and 

indicates that multiple independent 

populations of this ESU distributed 

throughout the Central Valley may be 

required to recover this ESU.

(3) Lower and Middle Tuolumne 

River. The Team concluded that 

currently unoccupied reaches of the 

Lower Tuolumne River from its 

confluence with the San Joaquin River 

up to LaGrange Dam may be essential 

for the conservation of this ESU. The 

Team also concluded that inaccessible 

habitat reaches in the Middle Tuolumne 

River between LaGrange and New Don 

Pedro Dams may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. The 

Tuolumne River historically supported 

a large population of spring-run chinook 

salmon (McEwan 1996; Yoshiyama 

1996) which was extirpated with the 

construction of LaGrange Dam. The 

lower portion of the Stanislaus River 

would be essential as a migratory 

corridor for spring chinook access to the 

upper watershed above LaGrange Dam. 

Depending upon dam operations and 

resulting instream water temperatures, 

rearing and spawning habitat might be 

available in this lower reach. Suitable 

habitat is thought to exist above 

LaGrange Dam for this ESU although 

feasibility of providing passage above 

the dam is uncertain. The Central Valley 

Technical Recovery Team identifies this 

as a historically independent population 

that is now extirpated and indicates that 

multiple independent populations of 

this ESU distributed throughout the 

Central Valley may be required to 

recover this ESU. 

(4) Lower and Middle Merced River.

The Team concluded that currently 

unoccupied reaches of the Lower 

Merced River from its confluence with 

the San Joaquin River up to CrockerHuffman Dam may be essential for the 

conservation of this ESU. The Team also 

concluded that inaccessible habitat 

reaches in the Middle Merced River 

between Crocker-Huffman and 

Exchequer Dams may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. The Merced 

River historically supported a large 

population of spring-run chinook 

salmon (Yoshiyama 1996) which was 

extirpated with the construction of 

Crocker-Huffman Dam. The lower 

portion of the Merced River would be 

essential as a migratory corridor for 

spring-chinook access to the upper 

watershed above Crocker-Huffman Dam. 

Depending upon dam operations and 

resulting instream water temperatures, 

rearing and spawning habitat might be 

available in this lower reach. Suitable 

habitat is thought to exist above 

Crocker-Huffman Dam for this ESU 

although passage at the Dam is thought 

to be feasible because of its low height. 

The Central Valley Technical Recovery 

Team identifies this as a historically 

independent population that is now 

extirpated and indicates that multiple 

independent populations of this ESU 

distributed throughout the Central 

Valley may be required to recover this 

ESU. 

Central Valley (CV) O. mykiss ESU 

The CV O. mykiss ESU was listed as 

a threatened species in 1998 (63 FR 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71905

13347; March 19, 1998). The ESU 

includes all naturally spawned 

populations of O. mykiss in the 

Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers and 

their tributaries, but excludes O. mykiss

from San Francisco and San Pablo Bays 

and their tributaries. Based on an 

updated status review (NMFS 2003a) 

and an assessment of hatchery 

populations located within the range of 

the ESU (NMFS 2003b), NMFS recently 

proposed that the ESU remain listed as 

a threatened species (69 FR 33102; June 

14, 2004). In addition, NMFS proposed 

that resident O. mykiss occurring with 

anadromous populations below 

impassable barriers (both natural and 

man made) and two artificially 

propagated populations (Coleman 

National Fish Hatchery on Battle Creek 

and Feather River Hatchery on the 

Feather River) also be included in the 

CV O. mykiss ESU. Two artificially 

propagated O. mykiss stocks reside 

within the historical geographic range of 

the ESU (Nimbus Fish Hatchery on the 

American River and Mokelumne River 

Hatchery on the Mokelumne River), but 

are not considered part of the ESU 

because they are derived from out-ofESU broodstock (69 FR 33102; June 14, 

2004). A Technical Recovery Team has 

been established for the Central Valley 

recovery planning domain and is in the 

process of identifying the historical and 

extant independent population structure 

of this ESU as well as the associated 

viability criteria for these populations. 

The Team’s assessment for the CV O. 

mykiss ESU addressed habitat areas 

within 67 occupied watersheds or 

CALWATER HSAs that occur in over 25 

associated subbasins or CALWATER 

HUs. This assessment also included four 

HSAs that encompass the San 

Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bay 

complex which constitutes rearing and 

migration habitat for this ESU. This 

complex is treated as a separate unit in 

the following ESU description even 

though it is not a CALWATER HU. As 

part of its assessment, the Team 

considered the conservation value of 

each habitat area (or HSA) in the context 

of the productivity, spatial distribution, 

and diversity of habitat across the range 

of the ESU. The Team evaluated the 

conservation value of habitat areas on 

the basis of the physical and biological 

habitat requirements of the CV O. 

mykiss ESU, consistent with the PCEs 

identified for Pacific salmon and O. 

mykiss described under Methods and 

Criteria Used to Identify Proposed 

Critical Habitat. 

Unit 1. Tehama Subbasin (HU #5504) 

The Tehama HU is located in the 

north central portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of the mainstem 

Sacramento River, the lower portions of 

two westside tributaries (Thomes and 

Stony Creeks), and the lower portions of 

three eastside tributaries (Mill Creek, 

Deer Creek, and Pine Creek). The HU 

encompasses an area approximately 

1,119 mi2 (2,887 km2) and contains two 

HSAs, both of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 228 miles (365 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied HSA watersheds contained 

one or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, 

rearing, and/or migratory habitat) and 

identified several management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, dam operations, diking 

activities, streambank stabilization for 

flood control, rangeland management, 

fish passage impediments, and urban 

development. Of the occupied HSA 

watersheds, the Team rated one as 

medium and one as high in 

conservation value (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 2. Whitmore Subbasin (HU #5507) 

The Whitmore HU is located in the 

north eastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of upper Battle Creek 

(North and South Forks), upper Bear 

Creek, and the Cow Creek watershed. 

The HU encompasses an area 

approximately 913 mi2 (2,355km2) and 

contains seven HSA watersheds, all of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 177 

miles (283 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in the occupied HSAs (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agricultural and 

municipal water withdrawals, forest 

management, rangeland management, 

fish passage impediments, urban 

development, and hydropower 

diversions. Of these seven occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated two as 

having low conservation value, two as 

medium in conservation value, and 

three as high in conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did 

not identify any unoccupied areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential for 

the conservation of this ESU.

Unit 3. Redding Subbasin (HU #5508) 

The Redding HU is located in the 

northern most portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of the upper 

Sacramento River mainstem, westside 

tributaries including Cottonwood Creek 

(portions of both the Middle and South 

Forks) and Clear Creek, and the lower 

portions of several eastside tributaries 

(Cow Creek, Bear Creek, and lower 

Battle Creek). The HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 705 mi2 (1,818 

km2) and contains two HSA watersheds, 

both of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 233 miles (373 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in these 

watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). The Team 

concluded that these occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

and identified management activities 

that may affect the PCEs, including dam 

operations and water storage for flood 

control, fish passage impediments, point 

and non-point source water pollution, 

gravel mining, agricultural water 

withdrawals, and rangeland 

management. The Team rated both 

occupied watersheds as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in this subbasin that 

may be essential for the conservation of 

this ESU. 

Unit 4. Eastern Tehama Subbasin (HU 

#5509) 

The Eastern Tehama HU is located in 

the northeastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of several important 

watersheds including Mill Creek, Deer 

Creek, Antelope Creek, and the upper 

portion of Big Chico Creek. The HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

896 mi2 (2,311 km2) and contains ten 

HSA watersheds, six of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 151 miles (242 

km) of occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied HSAs (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

areas contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including forest management, rangeland 

management, fish passage impediments, 

road building and maintenance, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. Of the 

six occupied watersheds, the Team 

rated one as low, one as medium, and 

four as high in conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible stream reaches in Upper 

71906 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Deer Creek above Upper Deer Creek 

Falls may be essential for the 

conservation of this ESU. Historically, 

O. mykiss (steelhead) had access to this 

area when conditions allowed fish to 

pass the falls. A ladder was constructed 

in the late 1940s but it provides poor 

attraction and passage conditions and 

has been closed since 2001. Deer Creek 

currently supports a population of 

steelhead and improved passage 

conditions into this reach would 

increase the amount of spawning, 

rearing and migration habitat available 

to the ESU. We seek comment on 

whether this unoccupied habitat area 

should be proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 5. Sacramento Delta (HU #5510) 

The Sacramento Delta HU is located 

in the central portion of the ESU and 

includes portion of the mainstem 

Sacramento River and the Deep Water 

Ship Channel. The HU encompasses an 

area of approximately 446 mi2

(1,150km2) and contains a single HSA 

which is occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 194 

miles (310 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in this HSA (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

areas contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural water 

withdrawals, point and non-point 

source water pollution, invasive/nonnative species, diking activities, and 

streambank stabilization for flood 

control. The Team rated this watershed 

as high in conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied habitat areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential to 

the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 6. Valley Putah-Cache Subbasin 

(HU #5511) 

The Valley Putah-Cache HU is located 

in the southern portion of the 

Sacramento river basin includes a 

portion of the Yolo Bypass and portions 

of west side tributaries Putah, Ulatis, 

and Alamo Creeks. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

961 mi2 (2,479 km2) and contains three 

HSA watersheds, two of which are 

occupied. Portions of the occupied 

HSAs are outside the boundary of ESU 

and the unoccupied HSA is completely 

outside the ESU boundary. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 83 miles (133 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied HSAs (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that the occupied areas 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including urban development, 

impediments to fish passage, and 

agricultural water withdrawals. The 

Team rated both occupied watersheds as 

having medium conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b).

Within this subbasin, the Team also 

concluded that unoccupied stream 

reaches in Middle Putah Creek from 

Solano Irrigation Dam to Monticello 

Dam may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. Steelhead are 

thought to have historically utilized the 

upper watershed above Monticello Dam. 

There is currently a very small 

opportunistic population of steelhead in 

Lower Putah Creek, but habitat 

conditions in this area are not suitable 

for spawning or rearing. The provision 

of fish passage past the Solano Irrigation 

Dam would provide access to suitable 

habitat for this ESU and efforts are 

currently underway to investigate the 

feasibility of providing passage beyond 

this dam. The Team concluded that this 

unoccupied area may be essential to 

conservation of the ESU because 

populations of steelhead in the Central 

Valley are constrained by the lack of 

accessible habitat and access to this area 

would provide cold water rearing and 

spawning habitat for this population. 

We seek comments on whether these 

unoccupied areas should be proposed as 

critical habitat. 

Unit 7. American River Subbasin (HU 

#5514) 

The American River HU is located in 

the eastern portion of the ESU and 

includes portions of upper Coon Creek, 

Doty Creek, and Auburn Ravine. This 

HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 1,642 mi2 (4,236 km2) 

and contains fifteen HSA watersheds, 

all of which are outside the range of the 

ESU, and only one of which is partially 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 20 miles of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied HSA (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that the occupied 

watershed contained one or more PCEs 

(i.e., spawning, rearing, or migratory 

habitat) for this ESU and identified 

urban development as the primary 

management activity that may affect the 

PCEs. The Team rated this occupied 

watershed as having medium 

conservation value (NMFS, 2004b) and 

did not identify any unoccupied habitat 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 8. Marysville Subbasin (HU #5515) 

The Marysville HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

portions of the Feather and Yuba Rivers. 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 417 mi2 (1,076 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, all of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 75 

miles (120 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in these watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, point and non-point water 

pollution, diking, streambank 

stabilization activities, dam operations 

and water storage for flood control, and 

fish passage impediments. The Team 

rated one occupied watershed as low in 

conservation value and two as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. However, the 

Team did conclude that inaccessible 

stream reaches in the adjacent subbasin 

(in HU #5518) which contains the 

Upper Feather River above Oroville 

Dam may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. Specifically, 

the Team identified the following 

stream reaches above Oroville Dam that 

may be essential for conservation of this 

ESU: from Oroville Dam upstream along 

the West Branch of the Feather River to 

the vicinity of Kimshew Falls; along the 

North Fork of the Feather River 

upstream of the location of Lake 

Almanor; along the East Branch of the 

NF Feather River including Indian 

Creek and Spanish Creek; the South 

Middle Fork of the Feather River, and 

the South Fork of the Feather River 

upstream to the first natural impassible 

barrier. Both steelhead and spring-run 

chinook salmon historically occurred in 

the Upper Feather River prior to Pacific 

Gas and Electric’s hydroelectric 

development in the North Fork 

watershed and the construction of 

Oroville Dam. Construction of Oroville 

Dam extirpated both the steelhead and 

spring-run chinook populations in this 

upper watershed. The Team concluded 

that spawning, rearing, an migratory 

habitat is available above Oroville Dam 

in these inaccessible stream reaches, but 

it is in better condition for steelhead 

than spring-run chinook salmon. The 

feasibility of providing fish passage past 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71907

Oroville Dam is currently being 

evaluated through the ongoing FERC 

relicensing process for this facility. The 

Team concluded this inaccessible 

habitat may be essential for the 

conservation of this ESU because the 

natural production of steelhead in the 

lower Feather River is limited by the 

substantial lack of suitable spawning 

and rearing habitat below Oroville Dam, 

and access to the unoccupied habitat 

above the dam would allow for 

expansion of the population in this 

watershed. 

Unit 9. Yuba River Subbasin (HU #5517) 

The Yuba River HU is located in the 

central and eastern portion of the ESU 

and includes part of the upper Yuba 

River watershed (Dry and Deer Creeks). 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 1,436 mi2 (3,704 km2) 

and contains sixteen HSA watersheds, 

most of which are outside the 

recognized ESU boundary; however, 

four of these watersheds are partially 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only approximately 22 miles 

(35 km) of occupied riverine habitat in 

these occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

and dam operations. The Team rated 

two of these watersheds as having low 

conservation value, and two as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b).

The Team concluded that inaccessible 

stream reaches of the Upper Yuba River 

above Englebright Dam may be essential 

to the conservation of this ESU, 

including those upstream reaches on the 

North Yuba to New Bullards Bar Dam, 

on the Middle Yuba to Milton Dam, and 

on the South Yuba to Lake Spaulding. 

All three forks of the Upper Yuba River 

historically supported populations of 

spring chinook and steelhead 

(Yoshiyama et al., 1995). The Team 

considered this area to be essential for 

conservation because it provides one of 

the largest areas of suitable habitat in 

the Central Valley that can be accessed 

by providing passage at one relatively 

small dam. The Lower Yuba is also 

considered to have a good ‘‘seed’’

population of both spring chinook and 

steelhead and both populations are 

considered relatively free of hatchery 

influence. A large, multi-million dollar 

study program is underway through the 

CALFED Ecological Restoration Program 

to evaluate the feasibility of restoring 

anadromous salmonid populations to 

the Upper Yuba River. We seek 

comment on whether this unoccupied 

habitat should be proposed as critical 

habitat. 

Unit 10. Valley-American Subbasin (HU 

#5519) 

The Valley-American HU is located in 

the central-eastern portion of the ESU 

and includes portions of the American 

River and lower Auburn Ravine. This 

HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 958 mi2 (2,471 km2) and 

contains four HSA watersheds, only two 

of which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 190 

miles (304 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in these watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, agricultural and 

municipal water withdrawals, point and 

non-point source water pollution, 

streambank stabilization activities, fish 

passage impediments, diking, urban 

development, and dam operations and 

water storage for flood control. The 

Team rated both occupied watersheds as 

having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential to the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 11. Colusa Basin Subbasin (HU 

#5520) 

The Colusa Basin HU is located in the 

central portion of the ESU and includes 

portions of the mainstem Sacramento 

River, lower Butte Creek, the Butte 

Creek-Sutter Bypass and Little Chico 

Creek. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 2,767 mi2 (7,138 km2) 

and contains five HSA watersheds, three 

of which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 285 

miles (456 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat, including the Sutter Bypass, in 

the occupied watersheds (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural water withdrawals, point 

and non-point water pollution, diking, 

fish passage impediments, streambank 

stabilization activities, wildlife habitat 

management, and invasive/non-native 

species management. The Team rated all 

three occupied watersheds as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b) and did not identify any 

unoccupied habitat areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential to the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 12. Butte Creek Subbasin (HU 

#5521) 

The Butte Creek HU is located in the 

northeastern portion of the ESU and 

contains portions of Butte Creek and 

Little Chico Creek. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

207 mi2 (534 km2) and contains three 

HSA watersheds all of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify approximately 38 miles (61 km) 

of occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including urban 

development, rangeland management, 

agricultural water withdrawals, and 

hydroelectric water diversions. The 

Team rated two of these watersheds as 

having low conservation value and one 

as having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible reaches of Upper Butte 

Creek above Centerville Dam upstream 

to Butte Meadow may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. It is uncertain 

whether this area was historically used 

by the steelhead, but resident rainbow 

trout were historically present and still 

occur above Centerville Diversion Dam. 

Spawning, rearing, and migration is 

present and thought to be in good 

condition. The Team believed this area 

may be essential for conservation 

because current spring-run chinook and 

steelhead spawning in this watershed is 

all below an elevation of 1,000 ft. High 

water temperatures in the lower portion 

of Butte Creek has led to significant 

spring-run chinook pre-spawning 

mortalities in recent years, and the 

Team concluded that improved fish 

passage over the Centerville Diversion 

Dam would increase the range for both 

the spring run chinook and steelhead 

ESUs, as well as reduce the risk of adult 

losses in the lower stream reaches. The 

Team expects that feasibility of passage 

at the Centerville Diversion Dam will be 

evaluated through the upcoming FERC 

relicensing process for the facility. We 

seek comment on whether this 

unoccupied habitat area should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

71908 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Unit 13. Ball Mountain Subbasin (HU 

#5523) 

The Ball Mountain HU is located in 

the northwestern portion of the ESU and 

includes a portion of upper Thomes 

Creek and associated tributaries. This 

HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 334 mi2 (862 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, only 

one of which is occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 41 miles (66 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the single 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

rangeland management, forestry 

management, agricultural water 

withdrawals, and municipal water 

withdrawals. The Team rated this single 

occupied watershed as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas in the subbasin that 

may be essential for conservation of the 

ESU.

Unit 14. Shasta Bally Subbasin (HU 

#5524) 

The Shasta Bally HU is located in the 

northwestern corner of the ESU and 

includes portions of SF Cottonwood 

Creek and Beegum Creek among others. 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 905 mi2 (2,335 km2) and 

contains nine HSA watersheds, five of 

which are occupied. Fish distribution 

and habitat use data compiled by NMFS 

biologists identify approximately 122 

miles (195 km) of occupied riverine 

habitat in the occupied watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry 

management, rangeland management, 

road building and maintenance, 

hydroelectric power water diversions, 

water storage for flood control, dam 

operations, gravel mining, and fish 

passage impediments. Of the occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated three as 

having medium conservation value and 

two as having high conservation value 

for the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team 

did not identify any unoccupied habitat 

areas in this subbasin that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU. 

Unit 15. North Valley Floor Subbasin 

(HU #5531) 

The North Valley Floor HU is located 

in the southeastern portion of the ESU 

and includes portions of the Calaveras, 

Mokelumne, and Cosumnes Rivers. This 

HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 1,378 mi2 (3,555 km2) 

and contains five HSA watersheds, three 

of which are occupied by the ESU. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

about 190 miles (304 km) of occupied 

riverine habitat in these watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

rangeland management, diking, 

channelization, streambank stabilization 

activities, and dam operations. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated 

one as low in conservation value, one as 

having medium conservation value, and 

one as having high conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

The Team also concluded that 

inaccessible stream reaches of the Upper 

Mokelumne River above Comanche Dam 

up to Bald Rock Falls (which is 7 miles 

above Electra Dam) may be essential to 

the conservation of this ESU, as well as 

spring-run chinook salmon. Portions of 

this inaccessible habitat area extend into 

the Middle Sierra Subbasin (HU #5532). 

The Upper Mokelumne historically 

supported large runs of spring-run 

chinook salmon (Yoshiyama et al., 

1995), and since steelhead and springrun chinook use similar habitats it is 

assumed this area also supported large 

runs of steelhead. Suitable habitat exists 

above Comanche Dam, but it has been 

altered by Comanche and Pardee 

reservoirs. The Team concluded that 

this area may be essential for 

conservation of the ESU because 

steelhead have been extirpated from the 

area above the dam and recovery of this 

ESU may require the re-establishment of 

multiple independent populations of 

steelhead throughout the Central Valley. 

We seek comment on whether these 

unoccupied habitat areas should be 

proposed as critical habitat. 

Unit 16. Middle Sierra Subbasin (HU 

#5532) 

The Middle Sierra HU is located in 

the eastern portion of the ESU and 

contains portions of the upper 

Cosumnes River watershed. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

1,424 mi2 (3,674 km2) and contains six 

HSA watersheds, four of which are 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only about 70 miles (112 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat in the 

occupied watersheds (NMFS, 2004a). 

The Team concluded that these 

occupied areas contained one or more 

PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including forestry 

management, agricultural water 

withdrawals, rangeland management, 

and urban development. Of these 

occupied watersheds, the Team rated all 

four as having low conservation value to 

the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). As discussed 

for Unit 15 (North Valley Floor 

Subbasin—HU #5531), inaccessible 

portions of the upper Mokelumne River 

which may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU extend into 

this subbasin. The Team did not 

identify any other unoccupied areas in 

this subbasin that may be essential to 

the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 17. Upper Calavera Subbasin (HU 

#5533) 

The Upper Calaveras HU is located in 

the eastern portion of the ESU and 

contains portions of the Calaveras River. 

This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 362 mi2 (934 km2) and 

contains three HSA watersheds, only 

one of which is occupied by the ESU. 

Fish distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

only about 6 miles of occupied riverine 

habitat in the HSA (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that occupied areas in 

this HSA watershed contained one or 

more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, gravel mining, and water 

storage for flood control. The Team 

rated this single occupied watershed as 

having high conservation value to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b) and did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for 

conservation.

Unit 18. Stanislaus River Subbasin (HU 

#5534) 

The Stanislaus River HU is located in 

the southeastern portion of the ESU and 

contains portions of the Stanislaus 

River. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 998 mi2 (2,575 km2 and 

contains eight HSA watersheds; 

however, only one is in the ESU and 

occupied. Fish distribution and habitat 

use data compiled by NMFS biologists 

identify only about 3 miles of occupied 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71909

riverine habitat in this HSA (NMFS, 

2004a). The Team concluded that the 

occupied areas in this watershed 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e., 

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural water 

withdrawals, fish passage impediments, 

dam operations, and water storage for 

flood control. The Team rated this 

single occupied watershed as having 

high conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). 

Within this subbasin, the Team also 

concluded that inaccessible stream 

reaches in the Middle Stanislaus River 

from Goodwin Dam to New Melones 

Dam may be essential to the 

conservation of this ESU. The Stanislaus 

River historically supported a large 

population of spring-run chinook 

salmon and because steelhead utilize 

similar habitats it is likely that this 

River system also supported a large 

population of steelhead. Construction of 

Goodwin Dam blocked access of 

steelhead to those portions of the 

Stanislaus River above the Dam and 

largely extirpated this population. 

Recently, however, dam operations have 

provided conditions that allowed a few 

steelhead to spawn below Goodwin 

Dam. Suitable habitat is thought to exist 

above Goodwin Dam for steelhead and 

fish passage is considered feasible 

because of its low height. Based on 

preliminary technical recovery planning 

for ESUs in the central valley, recovery 

of this ESU will likely require the 

establishment of multiple independent 

steelhead populations particularly in 

the San Joaquin portion of the central 

valley. We seek comment on whether 

these unoccupied areas should be 

proposed as critical habitat for this ESU. 

Unit 19. San Joaquin Valley Floor 

Subbasin (HU #5535) 

The San Joaquin Valley Floor HU is 

located in the southeastern portion of 

the ESU and contains portions of the 

Merced, Tuolumne, and Stanislaus 

Rivers. This HU encompasses an area of 

approximately 1,932 mi2 (4,985 km2) 

and contains nine HSA watersheds, 

several of which occur outside of or 

partially outside of the geographic 

boundary of the ESU. Of these 

watersheds, seven are occupied and fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

about 159 miles (254 km) of occupied 

riverine habitat (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that these occupied 

watersheds contained one or more PCEs 

(i.e., spawning, rearing, or migratory 

habitat) for this ESU and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agricultural and 

municipal water withdrawals, diking, 

fish passage impediments, streambank 

stabilization activities, and urban 

development. Of these occupied 

watersheds, the Team rated three as 

having medium conservation value and 

four as having high conservation value 

to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

Within this subbasin, the Team also 

concluded that inaccessible stream 

reaches in the Middle Tuolumne River 

(between LaGrange and New Don Pedro 

Dams) and the Middle Merced River 

(between Crocker-Huffman and 

Exchequer Dams) may be essential to 

the conservation of this ESU. Both rivers 

historically supported large populations 

of spring-run chinook salmon and 

because steelhead utilize similar habitat 

it is likely that these rivers also 

supported large populations of 

steelhead. Although current central 

valley steelhead populations are 

considered winter-run, habitat 

conditions in most San Joaquin basins, 

including the Tuolumne and Merced, 

may have historically supported 

summer steelhead (McEwan, 1996; 

Yoshiyama, 1996). With construction of 

LaGrange and Crocker-Huffman Dams, 

spring-chinook in both basins were 

extirpated, and most likely steelhead as 

well. Although steelhead cannot access 

the upper watersheds in the Tuolumne 

and Merced Rivers, dam operations in 

both watersheds have provided 

conditions allowing steelhead to spawn 

downstream of LaGrange and CrockerHuffman Dams. The Team believes that 

suitable habitat conditions exist above 

LaGrange and Crocker-Huffman Dams 

and that there may be opportunities to 

provide fish passage at each facility. 

Based on preliminary technical recovery 

planning for ESUs in the central valley, 

it is likely that recovery of this ESU will 

require the establishment of multiple 

independent steelhead populations 

particularly in the San Joaquin portion 

of the central valley. We seek comment 

on whether these unoccupied areas 

should be proposed as critical habitat 

for this ESU. 

Units 20 (Tuolumne River; HU #5536) 

and 21 (Merced River; HU #5537) 

The Tuolumne River and Merced 

River HUs contain portions of the upper 

Tuolumne and Merced Rivers that are 

mostly or entirely outside the range of 

the ESU. These HUs contain eighteen 

HSA watersheds and over 2,800 miles 

(4,480 km) of streams (at 1:100,000 

hydrography), but all are unoccupied by 

the ESU. The Team did not identify any 

areas in these subbasins that may be 

essential for the conservation of the 

ESU, and therefore, they were not 

considered further in the critical habitat 

designation process.

Unit 22. Delta-Mendota Canal Subbasin 

(HU #5541) 

The Delta-Mendota Canal HU is 

located in the southernmost portion of 

the ESU and contains portions of the 

Delta-Mendota Canal. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

1,220 mi2 (3,148 km2) and contains two 

HSAs, both of which are occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

only about 50 miles of occupied riverine 

habitat in these HSA watersheds 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

that these occupied areas contained one 

or more PCEs (i.e., spawning, rearing, or 

migratory habitat) for this ESU and 

identified management activities that 

may affect the PCEs, including 

agricultural and municipal water 

withdrawals, invasive/non-native 

species management, urban 

development, dredging, and point and 

non-point source water pollution. The 

Team rated these occupied watersheds 

as having medium and high 

conservation value, respectively, to the 

ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The Team did not 

identify any unoccupied areas in this 

subbasin that may be essential for the 

conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 23. Middle West Side Subbasin 

(HU #5542) 

The Middle West Side Subbasin is 

located in the southwestern portion of 

the ESU in the San Joaquin basin. The 

HU contains four HSAs and 

approximately 509 miles (814 km) of 

streams (at 1:100,000 hydrography), but 

all are unoccupied by the ESU. The 

Team did not identify any habitat areas 

in this subbasin that may be essential 

for the conservation of the ESU, and 

therefore, they were not considered 

further in the critical habitat designation 

process. 

Unit 24. North Diablo Range (HU #5543) 

The North Diablo Range HU is located 

in the southwestern portion of the ESU 

in the south Delta. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

315 mi2 (812 km2) and contains only a 

single HSA which is partially occupied. 

Fish distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

only approximately 4 miles of occupied 

riverine/estuarine habitat in this HSA 

(NMFS, 2004a). The Team concluded 

the occupied areas in this HSA 

contained one or more PCEs (i.e.

spawning, rearing, or migratory habitat) 

for this ESU and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural and water 

71910 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

withdrawals, point and non-point 

source water pollution, and invasive/

non-native species management. The 

Team rated this watershed as having 

medium conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b), and did not identify any 

unoccupied areas that may be essential 

to the conservation of the ESU. 

Unit 25. San Joaquin Delta Subbasin 

(HU #5544) 

The San Joaquin Delta HU is located 

in the southwestern portion of the ESU 

and includes portions of the south and 

central Delta channel complex. This HU 

encompasses an area of approximately 

628 mi2 (1,620 km2) and contains a 

single HSA which is occupied. Fish 

distribution and habitat use data 

compiled by NMFS biologists identify 

approximately 276 miles (442 km) of 

occupied riverine and/or estuarine 

habitat in this HSA (NMFS, 2004a). The 

Team concluded that the occupied areas 

in this HSA contained one or more PCEs 

(i.e., spawning, rearing, or migratory 

habitat) for this ESU and identified 

management activities that may affect 

the PCEs, including agricultural water 

and municipal water withdrawals, 

entrainment associated with water 

diversions, invasive/non-native species 

management, and point and non-point 

source water pollution. The Team rated 

this HSA as having high conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). The 

Team did not identify any unoccupied 

habitat areas in this subbasin that may 

be essential for the conservation of this 

ESU. 

Unit 26. Suisun Bay (HU #2207), San 

Pablo Bay (HU #2206) and San 

Francisco Bay (HU #s 2203 and 2204) 

Portions of four HUs (2207, 2206, 

2203, 2204) comprise the Suisun BaySan Pablo-San Francisco Bay complex 

that is utilized by this ESU. These four 

HUs contain both estuarine habitat in 

the Bay complex as well as freshwater 

tributaries to the Bay complex, but only 

the 4 HSAs (HSAs: 220710, 220610, 

220410, and 220312) that comprise the 

Bay complex are occupied by this ESU. 

These four HSAs encompass 

approximately 427 mi2 (1,102 km2) of 

estuarine habitat that serves as a rearing 

and migratory corridor providing 

connectivity between freshwater 

spawning, rearing, and migratory 

habitats for this ESU in the SacramentoSan Joaquin basin and the ocean. 

Collectively, these HSAs encompass an 

area of approximately 427 mi2 (1,102 

km2). The Team concluded that these 

four HSAs were occupied and contained 

PCEs for migratory habitat that support 

this ESU, and identified management 

activities that may affect the PCEs, 

including agricultural and municipal 

water withdrawals, point and non-point 

source water pollution, diking, 

streambank stabilization activities, 

industrial development, invasive/nonnative species, wetland/estuary 

management, and habitat restoration. Of 

these occupied HSAs, the Team rated 

one as having low conservation value 

(#220410) and three as having high 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). The Team did not identify any 

unoccupied areas that may be essential 

for the conservation as critical habitat 

for this ESU. 

Application of ESA Section 4(b)(2)

The foregoing discussion describes 

those areas that are eligible for 

designation as critical habitat—the 

specific areas that fall within the ESA 

section 3(5)(A) definition of critical 

habitat, minus those lands owned or 

controlled by the DOD, or designated for 

its use, that are covered by an INRMP 

that we have determined in writing 

provides a benefit to the species. The 

application of section 4(b)(2) was a 

major concern of those commenting on 

the ANPR (68 FR 55926; September 29, 

2003). Many commenters requested that 

we describe the process used—in 

particular the economic analysis—as 

part of our proposed rulemaking. 

Specific areas eligible for designation 

are not automatically designated as 

critical habitat. Section 4(b)(2) of the 

ESA requires that the Secretary first 

considers the economic impact, impact 

on national security, and any other 

relevant impact. The Secretary has the 

discretion to exclude an area from 

designation if he determines the benefits 

of exclusion (that is, avoiding the 

impact that would result from 

designation), outweigh the benefits of 

designation. The Secretary may not 

exclude an area from designation if 

exclusion will result in the extinction of 

the species. Because the authority to 

exclude is discretionary, exclusion is 

not required for any areas. 

In this proposed rule, the Secretary 

has applied his statutory discretion to 

exclude areas from critical habitat for 

several different reasons. To be 

consistent, we used CALWATER HSAs 

or watersheds for ESUs in California as 

the unit for exclusion in each case. 

However, the agency is asking for public 

comment on whether considering 

exclusions on a stream-by-stream 

approach would be more appropriate. 

Impacts to Tribes 

We believe there is very little benefit 

to designating critical habitat on Indian 

lands. Although there is a broad array of 

activities on Indian lands that may 

trigger section 7 consultation, Indian 

lands comprise only a minor portion 

(substantially less than 1 percent) of the 

total habitat under consideration for 

these seven California ESUs. 

Specifically, occupied stream reaches 

on Indian lands only occur within the 

range of the California Coastal chinook, 

Northern California O. mykiss, and 

Central California Coast O. mykiss

ESUs, and these areas represent less 

than 0.1 percent of the total occupied 

habitat under consideration for these 

three ESUs. Based on our analysis, the 

remaining four ESUs did not contain 

any Indian lands that overlapped with 

occupied stream habitat. These 

percentages are likely overestimates as 

they include all habitat area within 

reservation boundaries. 

There are several benefits to 

excluding Indian 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. Pursuant to these authorities 

lands 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 Pacific salmon in 

California and in the Northwest, there is 

a unique partnership between the 

Federal government and Indian tribes 

regarding salmon management. Indian 

tribes in California and the Northwest 

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. 

The benefits of excluding Indian 

lands from designation include: (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 the 

conservation of salmonids on an 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71911

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; and (4) continued respect for 

tribal sovereignty over management of 

natural resources on Indian lands 

through established tribal natural 

resource programs. 

We believe that the current comanager process addressing activities 

on an ecosystem-wide basis across three 

states is currently beneficial for the 

conservation of the salmonids. Because 

the co-manager process provides 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 ESA 

section 7 to Federal activities on Indian 

lands, which comprise much less than 

one percent of the total area under 

consideration for these ESUs. 

Additionally, we have determined that 

the exclusion of tribal lands will not 

result in the extinction of the species 

concerned. We also believe that 

maintenance of our current co-manager 

relationship consistent with existing 

policies is an important benefit to 

continuance of our tribal trust 

responsibilities and relationship. Based 

upon our consultation with the Round 

Valley Indian Tribes and the Bureau of 

Indian Affairs (BIA), we believe that 

designation of Indian lands as critical 

habitat would adversely impact our 

working relationship and the benefits 

resulting from this relationship.

Based upon these considerations, we 

have determined to exercise agency 

discretion under ESA section 4(b)(2) 

and propose to exclude Indian lands 

from the eligible critical habitat 

designation for these ESUs of 

salmonids. The Indian lands specifically 

excluded from critical habitat are those 

defined in the Secretarial Order, 

including: (1) Lands held in trust by the 

United States for the benefit of any 

Indian tribe; (2) land 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. The 

Indian tribes for which these exclusions 

apply in California include: Big Lagoon 

Reservation, Blue Lake Rancheria, 

Round Valley Indian Tribes, Laytonville 

Rancheria, Redwood Valley Rancheria, 

Coyote Valley Reservation, and 

Manchester—Point Arena Rancheria. 

Impacts to National Security 

As noted previously (see Military 

Lands section) the U.S. Marine Corps 

provided comments in response to the 

ANPR (68 FR 55926; September 29, 

2003) regarding their INRMP for Camp 

Pendleton Marine Corps Base and 

potential impacts to national security 

for this facility, which is within the 

range of the southern California O. 

mykiss ESU. By letter, NMFS 

subsequently provided the DOD with 

information about the areas we were 

considering to designate as critical 

habitat for the seven ESUs in California 

(as well as the 13 ESUs in the Pacific 

Northwest) and, in addition to a request 

for information about DOD’s INRMPs, 

requested information about potential 

impacts to national security as a result 

of any critical habitat designation. In 

response to the request concerning 

national security impacts, Camp 

Pendleton Marine Corps Base and the 

Vandenberg Air Force Base provided 

detailed information on such impacts. 

Both military agencies concluded that 

critical habitat designation at either of 

these sites would likely impact national 

security by diminishing military 

readiness. The possible impacts include: 

(1) Preventing, restricting, or delaying 

training or testing exercises or access to 

such sites; (2) restricting or delaying 

activities associated with space 

launches; (3) delaying response times 

for troop deployments and overall 

operations; and (4) creating 

uncertainties regarding ESA 

consultation (e.g., reinitiation 

requirements) or imposing compliance 

conditions that would divert military 

resources. Also, both military agencies 

cited their ongoing and positive 

consultation history with NMFS and 

underscored cases where they are 

implementing best management 

practices to reduce impacts on listed 

salmonids. 

The Teams assessing conservation 

values for the overlap areas of habitat 

and Camp Pendleton and Vandenberg 

AFB concluded that all of them were of 

high conservation value to the 

respective ESUs. The overlap areas, 

however, are a small percentage of the 

total area for the affected ESUs. 

Designating habitat on these two 

installations will likely reduce the 

readiness capability of the Marine Corps 

and the Air Force, both of which are 

actively engaged in training, 

maintaining, and deploying forces in the 

current war on terrorism. Therefore, we 

conclude that the benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of designation, 

and we are not proposing to designate 

these DoD sites as critical habitat.

We anticipate working with DOD to 

obtain and review any additional 

information regarding national security 

impacts to other military installations 

before issuing a final critical habitat 

designation for the seven ESUs that are 

the subject of this proposed rulemaking. 

We will analyze any information we 

receive and prepare findings that will be 

made available for public review and 

comment through a notice of availability 

in the Federal Register. 

Other Potential Exclusions 

As discussed above, in 2001 the Tenth 

Circuit issued a ruling in NMCA, which 

criticized the historic approach that 

FWS and NMFS had taken towards the 

economic analysis required in the 

critical habitat designation process. As a 

result of this ruling, both agencies 

engaged in a long-term process of 

reevaluating existing critical habitat 

designations consistent with the Tenth 

Circuit’s ruling. NMFS’s critical habitat 

designations for steelhead and salmon 

ESUs and FWS’s designations for bull 

trout are the first to fully evaluate the 

economic impacts of the designations 

for aquatic species on a broad landscape 

scale. As a result, many of the critical 

issues faced by the two agencies are 

issues of first impression. 

On October 6, 2004, the FWS issued 

a final rule designating critical habitat 

for the bull trout, a species in many 

respects co-extensive in distribution 

with listed salmon and steelhead ESUs 

in the Pacific Northwest. Necessarily, 

the FWS had to make determinations on 

many of these novel issues. The 

Secretary of the Interior found that a 

number of conservation measures 

designed to protect salmon and 

steelhead on Federal, state, tribal and 

private lands would also have 

significant beneficial impacts to 

bulltrout. Therefore, the Secretary of the 

Interior determined that the benefits of 

excluding those areas exceeded the 

benefits of including those areas as 

critical habitat. 

The Secretary of Commerce has 

reviewed the bull trout rule and has 

recognized the merits of the approach 

taken by the Secretary of the Interior 

with these emerging issues. As a result, 

the Secretary of Commerce is 

considering the following exclusions 

because the benefits of exclusion may 

outweigh the benefits of inclusion and 

expects the final rule will include some 

or all of these exclusions. However, 

given the time constraints associated 

with this rule making and the broader 

geographic range of the potential salmon 

and steelhead designations in California 

and the Pacific Northwest, the Secretary 

of Commerce has not had an 

71912 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

opportunity to fully evaluate all of the 

potential exclusions, the geographical 

extent of such exclusions, or compare 

the benefits of these exclusions to the 

benefits of inclusion. As a result, the 

proposed designations included in this 

rule generally represent an upper bound 

to the area that the Secretary is 

considering designating as critical 

habitat and do not include the following 

additional exclusions that the Secretary 

is considering: 

A set of exclusions based on existing 

land management plans adopted and 

currently implemented by Federal 

agencies within the relevant geographic 

area: These plans are the Northwest 

Forest Plan, PACFISH and INFISH 

which are implemented by the U.S. 

Forest Service (USFS) and the Bureau of 

Land Management (BLM) in parts of 

California and the Pacific Northwest. 

The Secretary is considering excluding 

from critical habitat all Federal lands 

subject to these plans. We may make 

these exclusions on a fifth field 

watershed basis or a stream-by-stream 

basis and we invite comment on the 

appropriate method. Each of these plans 

is designed to provide very substantial 

conservation benefits to salmonid 

species including areas occupied by 

each of the seven California ESUs, while 

permitting provision of other multiple 

uses on those Federal lands to the extent 

compatible with the provisions of the 

plan. Imposing an overlay of critical 

habitat in these areas could threaten the 

provision of the other multiple used 

contemplated by these plans and 

potentially impede vital land restoration 

activities while potentially offering a 

negligible conservation benefit in light 

of the other existing conservation 

measures provided by the plans. The 

threat to forest restoration activities 

(forest thinning and brush clearing to 

reduce catastrophic fire risks), economic 

activities (e.g. grazing and timber 

production) and recreational uses on 

public lands may outweigh the benefit 

of a critical habitat designation in these 

areas. 

Federal land managed by the Forest 

Service and BLM constitutes a relatively 

lesser proportion of the land ownership 

within the range of the seven California 

ESUs (4–25 percent) compared with 

private land (71–88 percent). However, 

the estimated annualized economic 

impacts attributable to section 7 

consultations on Federal land 

management activities comprise a 

disproportionately large portion of the 

total annual costs for several of the 

California ESUs. This relationship is 

most pronounced for the California 

Coastal chinook and Northern California 

O. mykiss ESUs. For example, Federal 

lands comprise only 16 percent of the 

land ownership within the California 

Coastal chinook ESU, but approximately 

77 percent of the annualized section 7 

economic impacts are attributable to 

Federal land management. Similarly, 

Federal lands comprise only 18 percent 

of the land ownership within the 

Northern California O. mykiss ESU, but 

approximately 87 percent of the 

annualized section 7 economic impacts 

are attributable to Federal land 

management. Section 7 related 

economic impacts associated with 

Federal land management also 

constitute a significant portion of the 

total annual economic impact for the 

South-Central California Coast O. 

mykiss (44 percent) and Southern 

California O. mykiss (69 percent) ESUs. 

An exclusion of areas covered by 

conservation commitments by state and 

private landowners: Another set of 

exclusions is based on conservation 

commitments by state and private 

landowners reflected in habitat 

conservation plans (HCPs) and 

cooperative agreements approved by 

NMFS. In California, we have not 

identified any state conservation 

commitments that would apply, but 

seek public comment on this issue. With 

regard to private lands, however, the 

HCP adopted by the Pacific Lumber 

Company would constitute such a 

commitment. Lands managed under the 

existing Pacific Lumber Company HCP 

are relatively limited in comparison to 

the broad geographic area addressed in 

this rulemaking, but do occur within the 

geographic range of the California 

Coastal chinook and Northern California 

O. mykiss ESUs. Several other HCPs are 

under development in California, but 

they have not yet been adopted and 

therefore their conservation benefits are 

uncertain. 

An exclusion for intermingled lands:

If a large part of a watershed is 

determined to warrant exclusion, the 

Secretary is considering excluding the 

entire watershed. For example, if a large 

proportion of a watershed consists of 

Federal land to be excluded based on an 

existing management plan, the entire 

watershed could be excluded. There 

may be little policy justification for 

designating non-Federal lands as critical 

habitat in a watershed dominated by 

excluded Federal lands. As noted above, 

Federal lands do not constitute a large 

portion of the land ownership in any of 

the seven California ESUs under 

consideration. However, there are areas 

within the range of each of the ESUs 

where Federal lands are more 

concentrated and intermingled nonFederal lands occur to a limited extent. 

Such conditions occur mainly in 

specific watersheds within the range of 

the California Coastal chinook, Northern 

California O. mykiss, South-Central 

California Coast O. mykiss, and 

Southern California O. mykiss ESUs.

Accordingly, NMFS specifically asks 

for public comment on the categories of 

exclusions discussed above. 

Specifically, NMFS requests comment 

on the benefits of excluding: 

(1) Other Federal lands subject to 

protective management provisions for 

salmonids (e.g., the Aquatic 

Conservation Strategy of the Northwest 

Forest Plan, PACFISH, or INFISH); 

(2) Other state, tribal, or private lands 

subject to (or planned to receive) other 

forms of protective management for 

salmonids (e.g., private land HCPs, State 

of California Forest Practices Act lands); 

and 

(3) Other state, tribal, or private lands 

within watersheds containing a large 

proportion of Federal, state, tribal or 

private lands already subject to 

protective management measures. 

Exclusions Primarily Based on 

Economic Impacts 

In this exercise of discretion, the first 

issue we must address is the scope of 

impacts relevant to the 4(b)(2) 

evaluation. As discussed in the Previous 

Federal Action section, we are redesignating critical habitat for these 

seven ESUs in California because the 

previous designations were vacated. 

(National Association of Homebuilders

v. Evans, 2002 WL 1205743 No. 00–CV–

2799 (D.D.C.) (NAHB)). The NAHB

Court had agreed with the reasoning of 

the Court of Appeals for the Tenth 

Circuit in New Mexico Cattle Growers 

Association v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 248 F.3d 1277 (10th Cir. 2001). 

In that decision, the Tenth Circuit stated 

‘‘[t]he statutory language is plain in 

requiring some kind of consideration of 

economic impact in the critical habitat 

designation phase.’’ The Tenth Circuit 

concluded that, given the FWS’ failure 

to distinguish between ‘‘adverse 

modification’’ and ‘‘jeopardy’’ in its 

4(b)(2) analysis, the FWS must analyze 

the full impacts of critical habitat 

designation, regardless of whether those 

impacts are co-extensive with other 

impacts (such as the impact of the 

jeopardy requirement). 

In re-designating critical habitat for 

these seven salmon and O. mykiss ESUs, 

we have followed the Tenth Circuit 

Court’s directive regarding the statutory 

requirement to consider the economic 

impact of designation. Areas designated 

as critical habitat are subject to ESA 

section 7 requirements, which provide 

that Federal agencies ensure that their 

actions are not likely to destroy or 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71913

adversely modify critical habitat. To 

evaluate the economic impact of critical 

habitat we first examined our 

voluminous section 7 consultation 

record for these as well as other ESUs 

of salmon. That record includes 

consultations on habitat-modifying 

Federal actions both where critical 

habitat has been designated and where 

it has not. We could not discern a 

distinction between the impacts of 

applying the jeopardy provision versus 

the adverse modification provision in 

occupied critical habitat. Given our 

inability to detect a measurable 

difference between the impacts of 

applying these two provisions, the only 

reasonable alternative was to follow the 

recommendation of the Tenth Circuit, 

approved by the NAHB court—to 

measure the co-extensive impacts; that 

is, measure the entire impact of 

applying the adverse modification 

provision of section 7, regardless of 

whether the jeopardy provision alone 

would result in the identical impact. 

The Tenth Circuit’s opinion only 

addressed ESA section 4(b)(2)’s 

requirement that economic impacts be 

considered. The Court did not address 

how ‘‘other relevant impacts’’ were to be 

considered, nor did it address the 

benefits of designation. Because section 

4(b)(2) requires a consideration of other 

relevant impacts of designation, and the 

benefits of designation, and because our 

record did not support a distinction 

between impacts resulting from 

application of the adverse modification 

provision versus the jeopardy provision, 

we are uniformly considering 

coextensive impacts and coextensive 

benefits, without attempting to 

distinguish the benefit of a critical 

habitat consultation from the benefit 

that would otherwise result from a 

jeopardy consultation that would occur 

even if critical habitat were not 

designated. To do otherwise would 

distort the balancing test contemplated 

by section 4(b)(2). 

The principal benefit of designating 

critical habitat is that Federal activities 

that may affect such habitat are subject 

to consultation pursuant to section 7 of 

the ESA. Such consultation requires 

every Federal agency to ensure that any 

action it authorizes, funds or carries out 

is not likely to result in the destruction 

or adverse modification of critical 

habitat. This complements the section 7 

provision that Federal agencies ensure 

that their actions are not likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a 

listed species. Another benefit is that 

the designation of critical habitat can 

serve to educate the public regarding the 

potential conservation value of an area, 

and thereby, focus and contribute to 

conservation efforts by clearly 

delineating areas of high conservation 

value for certain species. It is unknown 

to what extent this process actually 

occurs and what the actual benefit is, as 

there are also concerns, noted above, 

that a critical habitat designation may 

discourage such conservation efforts.

The balancing test in section 4(b)(2) 

contemplates weighing benefits that are 

not directly comparable—the benefit to 

species conservation balanced against 

the economic benefit, benefit to national 

security, or other relevant benefit that 

results if an area is excluded from 

designation. Section 4(b)(2) does not 

specify a method for the weighing 

process. Agencies are frequently 

required to balance benefits of 

regulations against impacts; Executive 

Order 12866 established this 

requirement for Federal agency 

regulation. Ideally such a balancing 

would involve first translating the 

benefits and impacts into a common 

metric. Executive branch guidance from 

the Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) suggests that benefits should first 

be monetized (i.e., converted into 

dollars). Benefits that cannot be 

monetized should be quantified (for 

example, numbers of fish saved). Where 

benefits can neither be monetized nor 

quantified, agencies are to describe the 

expected benefits (OMB, Circular A–4, 

September 17, 2003 (OMB, 2003)). 

It may be possible to monetize 

benefits of critical habitat designation 

for a threatened or endangered species 

in terms of willingness-to-pay (OMB, 

2003). However, we are not aware of any 

available data that would support such 

an analysis for salmon. The short 

statutory time-frames, geographic scale 

of the designations under consideration, 

and the statute’s requirement to use best 

‘‘available’’ information suggests such a 

costly and time-consuming approach is 

not currently available. In addition, ESA 

section 4(b)(2) requires analysis of 

impacts other than economic impacts 

that are equally difficult to monetize, 

such as benefits to national security of 

excluding areas from critical habitat. In 

the case of salmon designations, impacts 

to Indian tribes are an ‘‘other relevant 

impact’’ that also may be difficult to 

monetize. 

An alternative approach, approved by 

OMB, is to conduct a cost-effectiveness 

analysis. A cost-effectiveness analysis 

ideally first involves quantifying 

benefits, for example, percent reduction 

in extinction risk, percent increase in 

productivity, or increase in numbers of 

fish. Given the state of the science, it 

would be difficult to reliably quantify 

the benefits of including particular areas 

in the critical habitat designation. 

Although it is difficult to monetize or 

quantify benefits of critical habitat 

designation, it is possible to 

differentiate among habitat areas based 

on their relative contribution to 

conservation. For example, habitat areas 

can be rated as having a high, medium 

or low conservation value. The 

qualitative ordinal evaluations can then 

be combined with estimates of the 

economic costs of critical habitat 

designation in a framework that 

essentially adopts that of costeffectiveness. Individual habitat areas 

can then be assessed using both their 

biological evaluation and economic 

cost, so that areas with high 

conservation value and lower economic 

cost might be considered to have a 

higher priority for designation while 

areas with a low conservation value and 

higher economic cost might have a 

higher priority for exclusion. While this 

approach can provide useful 

information to the decision-maker, there 

is not rigid formula through which this 

information translates into exclusion 

decisions. Every geographical area 

containing habitat eligible for 

designation is different, with a unique 

set of ‘‘relevant impacts’’ that may be 

considered in the exclusion process. 

Regardless of the analytical approach, 

section 4(b)(2) makes clear that what 

weight the agency gives various impacts 

and benefits, and whether the agency 

excludes areas from the designation, is 

discretionary. 

Assessment of Economic Impacts

Assessment of economic impact 

generated considerable interest from 

commenters on the ANPR (68 FR 55926; 

September 29, 2003). A number of 

commenters requested that we make the 

economic analysis available as part of 

the proposed rulemaking, and some 

identified key considerations (e.g., 

sector-specific impacts, direct and 

indirect costs, ecological services/

benefits) that they believed must be 

taken into account. In a draft report, we 

have documented our conclusions 

regarding the economic impacts of 

designating each of the particular areas 

found to meet the definition of critical 

habitat for the seven ESUs addressed in 

this rulemaking (NMFS, 2004c). This 

report is available from NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES). 

The first step was to identify existing 

legal and regulatory constraints on 

economic activity that are independent 

of critical habitat designation, such as 

Clean Water Act requirements. 

Coextensive impacts of the ESA section 

7 requirement to avoid jeopardy were 

not considered part of the baseline. 

Given the uncertainty that existing 

71914 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

critical habitat designations in 

California (i.e., Sacramento River winter 

run chinook salmon, Central California 

Coast coho salmon, and Southern 

Oregon/Northern California coho 

salmon ESUs) will remain in place in 

their current configuration, we decided 

not to consider them. 

Next, from the consultation record, 

we identified Federal activities that 

might affect habitat and that might 

result in a section 7 consultation. (We 

did not consider Federal actions, such 

as the approval of a fishery, that might 

affect the species directly but not affect 

its habitat.) We identified nine types of 

activities including: hydropower dams; 

non-hydropower dams and other water 

supply structures; Federal lands 

management, including grazing 

(considered separately); transportation 

projects; utility line projects; in-stream 

activities, including dredging 

(considered separately); activities 

permitted under Environmental 

Protection Agency’s (EPA) National 

Pollution Discharge Elimination System; 

sand & gravel mining; and residential 

and commercial development. Based on 

our consultation record and other 

available information, we determined 

the modifications each type of activity 

was likely to undergo as a result of 

section 7 consultation (regardless of 

whether the modification might be 

required by the jeopardy or the adverse 

modification provision). We developed 

an expected direct cost for each type of 

action and projected the likely 

occurrence of each type of project in 

each watershed, using existing spatial 

databases (e.g., the Corps 404(d) permit 

database). Finally, we aggregated the 

costs from the various types of actions 

and estimated an annual impact, taking 

into account the probability of 

consultation occurring and the likely 

rate of occurrence of that project type. 

This analysis allowed us to estimate 

the coextensive economic impact of 

designating each ‘‘particular area’’ that 

was occupied by each ESU (i.e. each 

occupied CALWATER HSA watershed). 

Expected economic impacts from this 

analysis ranged from zero to several 

million dollars per occupied habitat 

area within the range of the seven ESUs 

addressed in this rulemaking. Where a 

watershed included both tributaries and 

a migration corridor that served other 

watersheds, we attempted to estimate 

the separate impacts of designating the 

tributaries and the migration corridor. 

We did this by identifying those 

categories of activities most likely to 

affect tributaries and those most likely 

to affect larger migration corridors. 

Because of the methods we selected 

and the data limitations, portions of our 

analysis both under- and over-estimate 

the co-extensive economic impact of 

section 7 requirements. For example, we 

lacked data on the likely impact on 

flows at non-Federal hydropower 

projects, which would increase 

economic impacts. We also did not have 

sufficient information currently 

available allowing us to estimate the 

likely economic impact of a judiciallyimposed ban on pesticide use near 

salmon-bearing streams. The EPA was 

recently enjoined from authorizing the 

application of a set of pesticides within 

a certain distance of ‘‘salmon supporting 

waters.’’ We have completed a 

preliminary analysis of these impacts at 

the ESU level (NMFS, 2004c). Because 

of existing data limitations of the 

preliminary nature of the analysis, we 

determined not to use these estimates in 

the proposed designations. However, we 

believe the information presented in 

this preliminary consideration will aid 

public comment and assist in the 

development of a more complete 

examination of these impacts for the 

final rule. Finally, we did not have 

information about potential changes in 

irrigation flows associated with section 

7 consultations. These impacts would 

increase the estimate of co-extensive 

costs. On the other hand, we estimated 

an impact on all activities occurring 

within the geographic boundaries of a 

watershed, even though in some cases 

activities would be far removed from 

occupied stream reaches and so might 

not require modification or even 

consultation. We intend to pursue 

information prior to issuing a final rule 

that will allow us to refine our estimates 

of economic impacts and better inform 

our analysis under section 4(b)(2). 

In addition, we had no information on 

the costs of critical habitat designation 

that occur outside the section 7 

consultation process, including costs 

resulting from state or local regulatory 

burdens imposed on developers and 

landowners as a result of a Federal 

critical habitat designation. We solicit 

information on these subjects during the 

public comment period.

Exclusion Process 

In determining whether the economic 

benefit of excluding a habitat area (that 

is, an HSA watershed) might outweigh 

the benefit of designation to the species, 

we took into consideration a costeffectiveness approach giving priority to 

excluding habitat areas with a relatively 

lower benefit of designation and a 

relatively higher economic impact. We 

believe it is reasonable at this stage of 

the analysis to assume that all areas 

containing physical or biological 

features essential to the conservation of 

the species are essential to the 

conservation of the species. 

The circumstances of most listed 

ESUs can make a cost-effectiveness 

approach useful. Pacific salmon are 

wide-ranging species and occupy 

numerous habitat areas with thousands 

of stream miles. Not all occupied areas, 

however, are of equal importance to 

conserving an ESU. Within the currently 

occupied range there are areas that 

support highly productive populations, 

areas that support less productive 

populations, and areas that support 

production in only some years. Some 

populations within an ESU may be more 

important to long-term conservation of 

the ESU than other populations. 

Therefore, in many cases it may be 

possible to construct different scenarios 

for achieving conservation. Scenarios 

might have more or less certainty of 

achieving conservation, and more or 

less economic impact. Future 

applications of this methodology will 

strive to better distinguish the relative 

conservation value of habitat areas (i.e.

HSA watersheds) eligible for 

designation, which should improve the 

utility of this approach. 

We attempted to consider the effect of 

excluding areas, either alone or in 

combination with other areas, on the 

opportunities for conservation of the 

ESUs. We preferred exclusions in areas 

with a lower conservation value to those 

with a high conservation value. We also 

recognize that in practice a large 

proportion of all watersheds received a 

‘‘high’’ conservation rating, making it 

difficult to establish priorities within 

that subgroup. In the second step of the 

process, we asked the Teams whether 

excluding any of the habitat areas 

identified in the first step would 

significantly impede conservation, 

recognizing that the breadth of available 

conservation measures makes such 

judgements necessarily subjective. The 

Teams considered this question in the 

context of all of the areas eligible for 

exclusion as well as the information 

they had developed in providing the 

initial conservation ratings. The 

following section describes the results 

of applying this process to each ESU. 

The results are discussed in greater 

detail in a separate report that is 

available for public review and 

comment (NMFS, 2004d). While the 

possible effect on conservation was 

useful information, it was not 

determinative in deciding whether to 

propose the exclusion of an area. The 

only determinative limitation is the 

statutory bar on excluding any area that 

‘‘will result in the extinction of the 

species concerned.’’

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71915

Critical Habitat Designation 

Not including any of the additional 

categories of potential exclusions 

identified above, we are proposing to 

designate approximately 11,668 mi 

(18,669 km) of riverine habitat and 947 

mi2 (2,444 km2) of estuarine habitat 

within the geographical areas presently 

occupied by the seven ESUs (Table 2). 

This proposal excludes approximately 

1,109 mi (1,774 km) of occupied 

riverine habitat as a result of economic 

considerations, 36 mi (22 km) of 

occupied riverine habitat on Tribal 

lands, and 41 mi (66 km) of occupied 

riverine habitat on DOD lands. In 

addition, the proposal excludes 

approximately 229 mi2 (591 km2) of 

estuarine habitat in San Francisco Bay. 

Some of these areas proposed for 

designation or exclusion overlap 

substantially with two or more ESUs. 

For example, the CC chinook and NC O. 

mykiss ESUs have similar geographic 

distributions in coastal watersheds 

north of San Francisco Bay, the CV 

spring-run chinook and CV O. mykiss

ESUs have overlapping distributions in 

the Sacramento River watershed and 

Delta within the central valley, and the 

CV spring-run chinook, CV O. mykiss, 

and CCC O. mykiss ESUs have 

overlapping distributions in portions of 

the San Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bay 

estuarine complex. As described 

previously, NMFS is not proposing to 

designate Tribal lands with occupied 

habitat or DOD controlled lands with 

occupied habitat that are subject to 

INRMPs that benefit the listed ESUs. 

The net economic impacts (coextensive 

with ESA section 7) associated with the 

areas proposed for designation for all 

ESUs combined are estimated to be 

approximately $83,511,186. This 

estimate does not account for reductions 

that occur as a result of excluding 

Indian lands or military lands. 

Moreover, as discussed previously, we 

are soliciting comment on additional 

exclusions which, if adopted, would 

further reduce the estimate of 

coextensive costs. 

The proposed designated habitat 

areas, summarized below by ESU, 

contain physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species and that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. Some of the areas proposed 

for designation are likely to be excluded 

in the final rule after consideration of 

the additional three categories of 

potential exclusions identified above.

TABLE 2.—APPROXIMATE QUANTITY OF PROPOSED CRITICAL HABITAT* AND OWNERSHIP WITHIN WATERSHEDS

CONTAINING HABITAT AREAS PROPOSED FOR DESIGNATION

ESU 

Streams

(mi)

(km) 

Estuary habitat

(sq mi)

(sq km) 

Federal Tribal State/local Private 

California Coastal Chinook ...................... 1,513 25 16.4 0.4 3.4 79.8 

2,421 65 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

Northern California O. mykiss .................. 2,989 25 18.8 0.5 3.7 77.1 

4,782 65 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

Central California Coast O. mykiss ......... 1,675 386 4.5 0.0 7.2 88.3 

2,680 996 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

South-Central California O. mykiss ......... 1,240 3 16.3 0.0 2.2 81.6 

1,984 8 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

Southern California O. mykiss ................. 784 ........................ 25.0 1.0 2.4 71.6 

1,254 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

Central Valley spring-run Chinook ........... 1,150 254 12.1 0.0 3.3 84.5 

1,840 655 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

Central Valley O. mykiss ......................... 2,317 254 8.6 0.0 3.1 88.3 

3,707 655 ........................ ........................ ........................ ........................

*These estimates are the total amount proposed for each ESU. They do not account for overlapping areas proposed for multiple ESUs. 

California Coastal Chinook Salmon ESU 

There are 45 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

aggregated into 8 larger subbasin units 

(or CALWATER HUs). Eight HSA 

watersheds received a low rating, 10 

received a medium rating, and 27 

received a high rating of conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). Two 

estuarine habitat areas used for rearing 

and migration (Humboldt Bay and the 

Eel River Estuary) that are not 

CALWATER HSAs were also evaluated 

and received a high conservation value 

rating. 

HSA watershed habitat areas in this 

ESU include approximately 1,638 mi 

(2,635 km) of occupied stream habitat 

and 25 mi2 (65 km2) of occupied 

estuarine habitat (Humboldt Bay). 

Approximately 12 mi (19 km) of 

occupied stream habitat is within the 

boundaries of Indian reservations and 

proposed for exclusion. We have not 

calculated the potential reduction in 

estimated economic impact as a result of 

these Indian land exclusions, but expect 

it would be small given the small 

percentage of stream miles these 

exclusions represent (less than 0.1 

percent of all occupied stream miles). 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is currently proposing to 

exclude from the designation, at a 

minimum, the habitat areas (or HSAs) 

shown in Table 3. Of the areas eligible 

for designation, no fewer than 

approximately 113 stream miles (180 

km) are proposed for exclusion because 

the economic benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of designation. 

The total potential estimated economic 

impact, with no exclusions, would be 

$11,651,723. The exclusions set forth in 

Table 3 would reduce the total 

estimated economic impact to 

$7,586,559. However, as indicated 

above, the Secretary is considering a 

number of additional exclusions which 

may further reduce this economic 

impact by a substantial amount. For this 

ESU, a preliminary analysis of the 

economic impact of designating critical 

habitat after considering some of these 

additional exclusions (primarily the 

exclusion of watersheds with a large 

percentage of Federal lands) indicates 

cost impacts could be reduced to about 

$3,200,000.

71916 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 3.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE CALIFORNIA COASTAL CHINOOK SALMON ESU AND PROPOSED FOR

EXCLUSION FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

(HSA) code 

Watershed

(HSA) name 

Area proposed for exclusion 

Unit 1. Eel River HU .............................................. 111122

111171

111173

111174

Bridgeville ..............................................................

Eden Valley ...........................................................

Black Butte River ...................................................

Wilderness .............................................................

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed 

Unit 8. Russian River HU ...................................... 111422 Santa Rosa ............................................................ Entire watershed. 

Northern California O. mykiss ESU 

There are 50 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

aggregated into seven larger subbasin 

units (or CALWATER HUs) within 

which the HSA watersheds are nested. 

Nine watersheds received a low rating, 

14 received a medium rating, and 27 

received a high rating of conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). Two 

estuarine habitat areas used for rearing 

and migration (Humboldt Bay and the 

Eel River Estuary) that are not 

CALWATER HSAs were also evaluated 

and received a high conservation value 

rating. 

HSA watershed habitat areas in this 

ESU include approximately 3,128 mi 

(5,005 km) of occupied stream habitat 

and 25 mi2 (65 km2) of occupied 

estuarine habitat (Humboldt Bay). 

Approximately 23 mi (37 km) of stream 

habitat are within the boundaries of 

Indian reservations and are proposed for 

exclusion. We have not calculated the 

potential reduction in estimated 

economic impact as a result of these 

Indian land exclusions, but expect it 

would be small given the small 

percentage of stream miles these 

exclusions represent.

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is currently proposing to 

exclude from the designation, at a 

minimum, the habitat areas (or HSAs) 

shown in Table 4. Of the areas eligible 

for designation, no fewer than 

approximately 116 mi (185 km) are 

proposed for exclusion because the 

economic benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of designation. 

Total potential estimated economic 

impact, with no exclusions, is 

$10,842,357. The exclusions set forth in 

Table 4 would reduce the total 

estimated economic impact to 

$6,688,254. However, as indicated 

above, the Secretary is considering a 

number of additional exclusions which 

may further reduce this economic 

impact by a substantial amount. For this 

ESU, a preliminary analysis of the 

economic impact of designating critical 

habitat after considering some of these 

additional exclusions (primarily the 

exclusion of watersheds with a large 

percentage of Federal lands) indicates 

the cost impact could be reduced to 

about $1,900,000.

TABLE 4.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE NORTHERN CALIFORNIA O. MYKISS ESU AND PROPOSED FOR

EXCLUSION FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/unit Watershed

code Watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 3. Mad River HU ............................................ 110940 Ruth ....................................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 5. Eel River HU .............................................. 111150 

111163 

North Fork Eel .......................................................

Lake Pillsbury ........................................................

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Central California Coast O. mykiss ESU 

There are 47 occupied HSA occupied 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU, including 

the Upper Alameda Creek watershed 

which supports a resident O. mykiss

population that is proposed for listing. 

For ease of reference these watersheds 

have been aggregated into10 larger 

subbasin units (or CALWATER Hus) 

within which the HSA watersheds are 

nested. Fourteen HSA watersheds 

received a low rating, 13 received a 

medium rating, and 20 received a high 

rating of conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b ). Five of these HSA 

watershed units comprise portions of 

the San Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bay 

complex which constitutes rearing and 

migratory habitat for this ESU. 

HSA watershed habitat areas in this 

ESU include approximately 2,002 miles 

(3,203 km) of occupied stream habitat 

and 442 mi2 (1,140 km2) of occupied 

estuarine habitat in the San Francisco 

Bay complex. Approximately 1.0 mi (2.0 

km) of occupied stream habitat is within 

the boundaries of Indian reservations 

and proposed for exclusion. We have 

not calculated the potential reduction in 

estimated economic impact as a result of 

these Indian land exclusions, but expect 

it would be small given the small 

percentage of stream miles these 

exclusions represent. 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is currently proposing to 

exclude from the designation, at a 

minimum, the HSA habitat areas shown 

in Table 5. Of the areas eligible for 

designation, no fewer than 

approximately 326 mi (522 km) of 

stream habitat and 56 mi2 (144 km2) of 

estuarine habitat in Suisun Bay (HSA 

220710) are proposed for exclusion 

because the economic benefits of 

exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

designation. The total potential 

estimated economic impact, with no 

exclusions, is $9,327,996. The 

exclusions set forth in Table 5 would 

reduce the total estimated economic 

impact to $5,452,712. However, as 

indicated above, the Secretary is 

considering a number of additional 

exclusions which may further reduce 

this economic impact. For this ESU, a 

preliminary analysis of the economic 

impact of designating critical habitat 

after considering some of these 

additional exclusions (primarily the 

exclusion of watersheds with a large 

percentage of Federal lands), indicates 

the cost impact could be reduced to 

approximately $5,000,000.

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71917

TABLE 5.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE CENTRAL CALIFORNIA COAST O. MYKISS ESU AND PROPOSED FOR

FULL OR PARTIAL EXCLUSION FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

(HSA) code Watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 1. Russian River HU ...................................... 111422 

111431 

Santa Rosa ............................................................

Ukiah .....................................................................

Entire watershed. 

Tributaries. 

Unit 5. Bay Bridges HU ......................................... 220330 San Rafael ............................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 6. South Bay HU ............................................ 220440 

220420 

San Mateo Bayside ...............................................

Eastbay Cities .......................................................

Entire watershed. 

Tributaries. 

Unit 7. Santa Clara HU .......................................... 220540 Guadelupe River ................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 8. San Pablo HU ............................................ 220620 

220660 

Novato ...................................................................

Pinole .....................................................................

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Unit 9. Suisun HU .................................................. 220710 

220721 

220731 

220733 

Suisun Bay ............................................................

Benecia ..................................................................

Pittsburg ................................................................

Martinez .................................................................

Entire unit. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Watersheds for which tributaries only are excluded contain rearing/migration corridors necessary for conservation. 

South-Central California Coast O. 

mykiss ESU 

There are 30 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

organized into eight larger subbasin 

units (or CALWATER HUs) within 

which the HSA watersheds are nested. 

Six watersheds received a low 

conservation rating, 11 received a 

medium rating, and 13 received a high 

rating of conservation value to the ESU 

(NMFS, 2004b). One of these occupied 

watershed units is Morro Bay which is 

rearing and migratory habitat for those 

populations which spawn and rear in 

tributaries to the Bay. Of the 1,261 mi 

(2,018 km) of occupied riverine habitat 

and 3 mi2 (8 km2) of occupied estuarine 

habitat (Morro Bay) in the ESU, 

approximately 21 mi (34 km) are not 

proposed for designation because they 

are within lands controlled by the 

military (Camp San Luis Obispo and 

Camp Roberts) that have qualifying 

INRMPs. 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is not proposing to 

exclude any areas from the habitat that 

is eligible for designation. The total 

potential estimated economic impact of 

the designation, without exclusions, 

would be $10,084,293. However, as 

indicated above, the Secretary is 

considering a number of additional 

exclusions which may reduce this 

economic impact by a substantial 

amount. For this ESU, a preliminary 

analysis of the economic impact of 

designating critical habitat after 

considering some of these additional 

exclusions (primarily the exclusion of 

watersheds with a large percentage of 

Federal lands) indicates the cost 

impacts could be reduced to about 

$4,300,000. 

Southern California O. mykiss ESU 

There are 37 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

aggregated into eight subbasin units (or 

CALWATER HUs) within which the 

HSA watersheds are nested. Six HSA 

watersheds received a low rating, 6 

received a medium rating, and 25 

received a high rating of conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

There are 837 mi (1,339 km) of 

occupied stream habitat in the 37 HSA 

watersheds comprising this ESU. Of 

these, approximately 20 mi (32 km) 

occupied stream miles (30.0 km) occur 

on Vandenberg AFB and Camp 

Pendleton Marine Corps Base which are 

not proposed for designation because 

they are within lands controlled by the 

military that have qualifying INRMPs. 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is currently proposing to 

exclude from the designation, at a 

minimum, the habitat areas shown in 

Table 6. Of the areas eligible for 

designation, no fewer than 33 mi (53km) 

are proposed for exclusion because the 

economic benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of designation. 

The total potential estimated economic 

impact, with no exclusions, would be 

$21,008,746. The exclusions set forth in 

Table 6 would reduce the total 

estimated economic impact to 

$12,716,386. However, as indicated 

above, the Secretary is considering a 

number of additional exclusions which 

may further reduce this economic 

impact by a substantial amount for this 

ESU. For this ESU, a preliminary 

analysis of the economic impact of 

designating critical habitat after 

considering some of these additional 

exclusions (primarily the exclusion of 

watersheds with a large percentage of 

Federal lands) indicates that impacts 

could be reduced to about $3,600,000.

TABLE 6.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA O. MYKISS ESU AND PROPOSED FOR

EXCLUSION FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

code HSA watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 1. Santa Maria River HU ................................ 331210 

331230

Guadelupe .............................................................

Cuyama Valley ......................................................

Tributaries only. 

Entire watershed. 

Unit 2. Santa Ynez HU .......................................... 331430 

331451

Buelton ..................................................................

Santa Cruz Creek ..................................................

Tributaries only. 

Entire watershed 

Unit 7. Calleguas HU ............................................. 440811 East of Oxnard ...................................................... Entire watershed. 

71918 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Central Valley Spring-Run Chinook 

Salmon ESU 

There are 37 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

aggregated into 15 subbasin units (or 

CALWATER HUs) within which the 

HSA watersheds are nested. Four of 

these HSA watershed units comprise the 

San Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bay 

complex through which this ESU 

migrates to and from the ocean, and 

these HSAs were aggregated into a 

separate unit for descriptive purposes. 

Eight HSA watersheds received a low 

rating, 4 received a medium rating, and 

25 received a high rating of conservation 

value to the ESU (NMFS, 2004b). 

Occupied habitat areas or HSA 

watersheds for this ESU include 

approximately 1,381 mi (2,212 km) of 

riverine habitat, in addition to 

approximately 427 mi2 (1,102 km2) of 

estuarine habitat in the San FranciscoSan Pablo-Suisun Bay complex. 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is currently proposing to 

exclude from the designation, at a 

minimum, the habitat areas (or HSAs) 

shown in Table 7. Of the areas eligible 

for designation, no fewer than 

approximately 231 mi (369 km) of 

stream habitat and 173 mi2 (446 km2) of 

estuarine habitat in San Francisco Bay 

are proposed for exclusion because the 

economic benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of designation. 

The total potential estimated economic 

impact, with no exclusions, is 

$23,577,391. The exclusions set forth in 

Table 7 would reduce the total 

estimated economic impact to 

16,787,737. However, the Secretary is 

considering a number of additional 

exclusions which may further reduce 

this economic impact by a substantial 

amount. For this ESU, a preliminary 

analysis of the economic impact of 

designating critical habitat after 

considering some of these additional 

exclusions (primarily the exclusion of 

watersheds with a large percentage of 

Federal lands) indicates the cost impact 

could be reduced to about $12,900,000.

TABLE 7.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE CENTRAL VALLEY SPRING-RUN CHINOOK SALMON ESU AND PROPOSED

FOR EXCLUSION FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

code HSA watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 2. Whitmore HU ............................................. 550731 South Cow Creek .................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 5. Sacramento Delta HU ................................ 551000 Sacramento Delta .................................................. Partial. 

Unit 8. Yuba River HU ........................................... 551713 Mildred Lake .......................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 9. Valley American HU ................................... 551921 Lower American .................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 12. Ball Mountain HU ..................................... 552310 Thomes Creek ....................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 13. Shasta Bally HU ....................................... 552433 South Fork ............................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 14. No. Diable Range HU .............................. 554300 No. Diablo Range .................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 15. San Joaquin Delta HU ............................. 554400 San Joaquin Delta ................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 16 South SF Bay HU ..................................... 220410 South SF Bay ........................................................ Entire unit. 

Central Valley O. mykiss ESU 

There are 67 occupied HSA 

watersheds within the freshwater and 

estuarine range of this ESU. For ease of 

reference these watersheds have been 

aggregated into 25 subbasin units (or 

CALWATER HUs) within which the 

HSA watersheds are nested. Four of 

these HSA watershed units comprise the 

San Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun Bay 

complex through which this ESU 

migrates to and from the ocean, and 

these HSAs were aggregated into a 

separate unit for descriptive purposes. 

Fourteen HSA watersheds received a 

low rating, 16 received a medium rating, 

and 37 received a high rating of 

conservation value to the ESU (NMFS, 

2004b). Occupied habitat areas or HSA 

watersheds for this ESU include 

approximately 2,607 mi (4,171 km) of 

stream habitat, in addition to 

approximately 427 mi2 (1,102 km2) of 

estuarine habitat in the San FranciscoSan Pablo-Suisun Bay complex. 

As a result of the balancing process 

for economic impacts described above, 

the Secretary is proposing to exclude 

from the designation, at a minimum, the 

habitat areas (or HSAs) shown in Table 

8. Of the areas eligible for designation, 

no fewer than approximately 290 mi 

(464 km) of stream and 173 mi2 (446 

km2) of estuarine habitat in San 

Francisco Bay are proposed for 

exclusion because the economic benefits 

of exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

designation. The total potential 

estimated economic impact, with no 

exclusions, is $29,187,888. The 

exclusions set forth in Table 8 would 

reduce the total estimated economic 

impact to $24,195,245. However, as 

indicated above, the Secretary is 

considering a number of additional 

exclusions which may further reduce 

this economic impact by a substantial 

amount. For this ESU, a preliminary 

analysis of the economic impact of 

designating critical habitat after 

considering some of these additional 

exclusions (primarily the exclusion of 

watersheds with a large percentage of 

Federal lands) indicates that economic 

impacts could be reduced to about 

$18,500,000.

TABLE 8.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE CENTRAL VALLEY O. MYKISS ESU AND PROPOSED FOR EXCLUSION

FROM CRITICAL HABITAT

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

(HSA) code Watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 5. Sacramento Delta HU ................................ 551000 Sacramento Delta .................................................. Partial watershed. 

Unit 6. Valley-Putah Cache HU ............................. 551110 Elmira .................................................................... Entire watershed. 

Unit 8. Marysville HU ............................................. 551510 Lower Bear River .................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 9. Yuba River HU ........................................... 551713 

551720 

Mildred Lake ..........................................................

Nevada City ...........................................................

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Unit 12. Butte Creek HU ........................................ 552110 Upper Dry Creek ................................................... Entire watershed. 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71919

TABLE 8.—HSA WATERSHEDS OCCUPIED BY THE CENTRAL VALLEY O. MYKISS ESU AND PROPOSED FOR EXCLUSION

FROM CRITICAL HABITAT—Continued

Subbasin/hydrologic unit Watershed

(HSA) code Watershed name Area proposedfor exclusion 

Unit 15. North Valley Floor HU .............................. 553111 

553120 

Herald ....................................................................

Lower Mokelumne .................................................

Entire watershed. 

Partial watershed. 

Unit 16. Middle Sierra ............................................ 553221 

553223 

553224 

553240

Big Canyon Creek .................................................

NF Cosumnes .......................................................

Omo Ranch ...........................................................

Sutter Creek ..........................................................

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Entire watershed. 

Unit 21. No. Diablo Range .................................... 554300 No. Diablo Range .................................................. Entire watershed. 

Unit 23. So. SF Bay ............................................... 220410 So. SF Bay ............................................................ Entire unit. 

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation 

Section 7 Consultation 

Section 7 of the ESA requires Federal 

agencies, including NMFS, to ensure 

that actions they fund, authorize, 

permit, or carry out do not destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat. In 

agency regulations at 50 CFR 402.02, we 

define destruction or adverse 

modification as ‘‘a direct or indirect 

alteration that appreciably diminishes 

the value of critical habitat for both the 

survival and recovery of a listed species. 

Such alterations include, but are not 

limited to: Alterations adversely 

modifying any of those physical or 

biological features that were the basis 

for determining the habitat to be 

critical.’’ However, in a March 15, 2001, 

decision of the United States Court of 

Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Sierra 

Club v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

243 F.3d 434 (5th Cir. 2001), and an 

August 9, 2004 decision of the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit (Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife, No. 03–35279, 

the courts have found the agencies’

definition of destruction or adverse 

modification to be invalid. In response 

to this decision, we are reviewing this 

regulatory definition. 

Section 7(a) of the ESA requires 

Federal agencies, including NMFS, to 

evaluate their actions with respect to 

any species that is proposed or listed as 

endangered or threatened and with 

respect to its critical habitat, if any is 

proposed or designated. Regulations 

implementing this provision of the ESA 

are codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 

7(a)(4) of the ESA requires Federal 

agencies to confer with us on any action 

that is likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of a proposed species or result 

in the destruction or adverse 

modification of proposed critical 

habitat. Conference reports provide 

conservation recommendations to assist 

the agency in eliminating conflicts that 

may be caused by the proposed action. 

The conservation recommendations in a 

conference report are advisory. 

We may issue a formal conference 

report if requested by a Federal agency. 

Formal conference reports include an 

opinion that is prepared according to 50 

CFR 402.14, as if the species were listed 

or critical habitat designated. We may 

adopt the formal conference report as 

the biological opinion when the species 

is listed or critical habitat designated, if 

no substantial new information or 

changes in the action alter the content 

of the opinion (see 50 CFR 402.10(d)). 

If a species is listed or critical habitat 

is designated, ESA section 7(a)(2) 

requires Federal agencies to ensure that 

activities they authorize, fund, or carry 

out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of such a species or 

to destroy or adversely modify its 

critical habitat. If a Federal action may 

affect a listed species or its critical 

habitat, the responsible Federal agency 

(action agency) must enter into 

consultation with us. Through this 

consultation, we would review actions 

to determine if they would destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat. 

If we issue a biological opinion 

concluding that a project is likely to 

result in the destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat, we will 

also provide reasonable and prudent 

alternatives to the project, if any are 

identifiable. Reasonable and prudent 

alternatives are defined at 50 CFR 

402.02 as alternative actions identified 

during consultation that can be 

implemented in a manner consistent 

with the intended purpose of the action, 

that are consistent with the scope of the 

Federal agency’s legal authority and 

jurisdiction, that are economically and 

technologically feasible, and that we 

believe would avoid destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 

Reasonable and prudent alternatives can 

vary from slight project modifications to 

extensive redesign or relocation of the 

project. Costs associated with 

implementing a reasonable and prudent 

alternative are similarly variable. 

Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require 

Federal agencies to reinitiate 

consultation on previously reviewed 

actions in instances where critical 

habitat is subsequently designated and 

the Federal agency has retained 

discretionary involvement or control 

over the action or such discretionary 

involvement or control is authorized by 

law. Consequently, some Federal 

agencies may request reinitiation of 

consultation or conference with us on 

actions for which formal consultation 

has been completed, if those actions 

may affect designated critical habitat or 

adversely modify or destroy proposed 

critical habitat.

Activities on Federal lands that may 

affect these ESUs or their critical habitat 

will require ESA section 7 consultation. 

Activities on private or state lands 

requiring a permit from a Federal 

agency, such as a permit from the Corps 

under section 404 of the Clean Water 

Act, a section 10(a)(1)(B) permit from 

NMFS, or some other Federal action, 

including funding (e.g., Federal 

Highway Administration (FHA) or 

Federal Emergency Management Agency 

(FEMA) funding), will also be subject to 

the section 7 consultation process. 

Federal actions not affecting listed 

species or critical habitat and actions on 

non-Federal and private lands that are 

not federally funded, authorized, or 

permitted do not require section 7 

consultation. 

Activities Affected by Critical Habitat 

Designation 

Section 4(b)(8) of the ESA requires 

that we evaluate briefly and describe, in 

any proposed or final regulation that 

designates critical habitat, those 

activities involving a Federal action that 

may adversely modify such habitat or 

that may be affected by such 

designation. As noted in the Special 

Management Considerations or 

Protection section above, we received 

several comments on the ANPR (68 FR 

55926; September 29, 2003) regarding 

71920 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

activities potentially affected by a 

critical habitat designation. 

A wide variety of activities may affect 

critical habitat and, when carried out, 

funded, or authorized by a Federal 

agency, require that an ESA section 7 

consultation be conducted. Such 

activities include, but are not limited to, 

those described in the Species 

Descriptions and Area Assessments 

section. Generally these include water 

and land management actions of Federal 

agencies (e.g., USFS, BLM, Corps, U.S. 

Bureau of Reclamation (BOR), the FHA, 

Natural Resource Conservation Service 

(NRCS), National Park Service (NPS), 

BIA, and the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (FERC)) and related or 

similar actions of other federally 

regulated projects and lands, including 

livestock grazing allotments by the 

USFS and BLM; hydropower sites 

licensed by the FERC; dams built or 

operated by the Corps or BOR; timber 

sales and other vegetation management 

activities conducted by the USFS, BLM, 

and BIA; irrigation diversions 

authorized by the USFS and BLM; road 

building and maintenance activities 

authorized by the FHA, USFS, BLM, 

NPS, and BIA; and mining and road 

building/maintenance activities 

authorized by the State of California. 

Other actions of concern include dredge 

and fill, mining, diking, and bank 

stabilization activities authorized or 

conducted by the Corps, habitat 

modifications authorized by the FEMA, 

and approval of water quality standards 

and pesticide labeling and use 

restrictions administered by the EPA. 

The Federal agencies that will most 

likely be affected by this critical habitat 

designation include the USFS, BLM, 

BOR, Corps, FHA, NRCS, NPS, BIA, 

FEMA, EPA, and the FERC. This 

designation will provide these agencies, 

private entities, and the public with 

clear notification of critical habitat 

designated for listed salmonids and the 

boundaries of the habitat. This 

designation will also assist these 

agencies and others in evaluating the 

potential effects of their activities on 

listed salmon and their critical habitat 

and in determining if section 7 

consultation with NMFS is needed. 

As noted above, numerous private 

entities also may be affected by this 

critical habitat designation because of 

the direct and indirect linkages to an 

array of Federal actions, including 

Federal projects, permits, and funding. 

For example, private entities may 

harvest timber or graze livestock on 

Federal land or have special use permits 

to convey water or build access roads 

across Federal land; they may require 

Federal permits to armor stream banks, 

construct irrigation withdrawal 

facilities, or build or repair docks; they 

may obtain water from federally funded 

and operated irrigation projects; or they 

may apply pesticides that are only 

available with Federal agency approval. 

These activities will need to be analyzed 

with respect to their potential to destroy 

or adversely modify critical habitat. In 

some cases, proposed activities may 

require modifications that may result in 

decreases in activities such as timber 

harvest and livestock and crop 

production. The transportation and 

utilities sectors may need to modify the 

placement of culverts, bridges and 

utility conveyances (e.g., water, sewer 

and power lines) to avoid barriers to fish 

migration. Developments occurring in or 

near salmon streams (e.g., marinas, 

residential, or industrial facilities) that 

require Federal authorization or funding 

may need to be altered or built in a 

manner that ensures that critical habitat 

is not destroyed or adversely modified 

as a result of the construction, or 

subsequent operation, of the facility. 

These are just a few examples of 

potential impacts, but it is clear that the 

effects will encompass numerous 

sectors of private and public activities. 

If you have questions regarding whether 

specific activities will constitute 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat, contact NMFS (see 

ADDRESSES and FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Public Comments Solicited 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposal will be as 

accurate and as effective as possible. 

Therefore, comments or suggestions 

from the public, other concerned 

governments and agencies, the scientific 

community, industry, or any other 

interested party concerning this 

proposed rule are hereby solicited. 

Comments particularly are sought 

concerning: 

(1) Maps and specific information 

describing the amount, distribution, and 

use type (e.g., spawning, rearing, or 

migration) of salmon habitat in each 

ESU, as well as any additional 

information on occupied and 

unoccupied habitat areas; 

(2) The reasons why any habitat 

should or should not be determined to 

be critical habitat as provided by 

sections 3(5)(A) and 4(b)(2) of the ESA; 

(3) Information regarding the benefits 

of excluding lands covered by HCPs 

(ESA section 10(a)(1)(B) permits), 

including the regulatory burden 

designation may impose on landowners 

and the likelihood that exclusion of 

areas covered by existing plans will 

serve as an incentive for other 

landowners to develop plans covering 

their lands; 

(4) Information regarding the benefits 

of excluding Federal and other lands 

covered by habitat conservation 

strategies and plans (e.g., Northwest 

Forest Plan, PACFISH, etc.), including 

the regulatory burden designation may 

impose on land managers and the 

likelihood that exclusion of areas 

covered by existing plans will serve as 

an incentive for land user to implement 

the conservation measures covering the 

lands subject to those plans; 

(5) Information regarding the benefits 

of designating particular areas as critical 

habitat; 

(6) Current or planned activities in the 

areas proposed for designation and their 

possible impacts on proposed critical 

habitat; 

(7) Any foreseeable economic or other 

potential impacts resulting from the 

proposed designations, in particular, 

any impacts on small entities;

(8) Whether our approach to critical 

habitat designation could be improved 

or modified in any way to provide for 

greater public participation and 

understanding, or to assist us in 

accommodating public concern and 

comments; and 

(9) Whether specific unoccupied areas 

(e.g., dewatered stream reaches, areas 

behind dikes or dams, above dams, etc) 

not presently proposed for designation 

may be essential to provide additional 

spawning and rearing areas for an ESU. 

In particular we are seeking information 

regarding unoccupied areas that may be 

essential for the conservation of the SC 

and CV O. mykiss ESUs, and the CV 

spring-run chinook ESU (see ESU 

Descriptions for specific unoccupied 

areas that may be essential for 

conservation and for which comments 

are being solicited). 

If you wish to comment on this 

proposal, you may submit your 

comments and materials concerning this 

proposal by any one of several methods 

(see ADDRESSES section). The proposed 

rule, maps, fact sheets, and other 

materials relating to this proposal can be 

found on our Web site at http://

swr.nmfs.noaa.gov. We will consider all 

comments and information received 

during the comment period on this 

proposed rule as we prepare our final 

rulemaking. Accordingly, the final 

decision may differ from this proposal. 

Public Hearings 

Joint Commerce-Interior ESA 

implementing regulations state that the 

Secretary shall promptly hold at least 

one public hearing if any person 

requests one within 45 days of 

publication of a proposed regulation to 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71921

list a species or to designate critical 

habitat (see 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3)). 

Requests for public hearing must be 

made in writing (see ADDRESSES) by 

January 24, 2005. Details regarding the 

specific hearing locations and times will 

be posted on our Web site at http://

swr.nmfs.noaa.gov. These hearings will 

provide the opportunity for interested 

individuals and parties to give 

comments, exchange information and 

opinions, and engage in a constructive 

dialogue concerning this proposed rule. 

We encourage the public’s involvement 

in such ESA matters. 

Peer Review 

In accordance with an ESA policy 

published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 

34270), we will solicit the expert 

opinions of at least three appropriate 

independent specialists regarding this 

proposed rule. Given the varied 

considerations involved in making the 

proposed designations, we intend to 

solicit reviews from specialist(s) with 

biological expertise as well as 

specialist(s) with economic expertise in 

the geographic range of these ESUs. The 

purpose of such review is to ensure that 

the critical habitat designation is based 

on scientifically sound data, 

assumptions, and analyses. We will 

send these reviewers copies of this 

proposed rule immediately following 

publication in the Federal Register. We 

will invite them to comment, during the 

public comment period, on the specific 

assumptions and conclusions regarding 

the proposed designation of critical 

habitat. 

In response to the ANPR (68 FR 

55926; September 29, 2003) we received 

the names of two potential independent 

reviewers and will identify other 

candidates prior to or soon after 

publishing this proposed rule. We will 

announce the availability of comments 

received from these reviewers and the 

public and make them available via the 

internet as soon as practicable during or 

after the comment period but in advance 

of a final rule.

Required Determinations 

Clarity of the Rule 

Executive Order 12866 requires each 

agency to write regulations and notices 

that are easy to understand. We invite 

your comments on how to make this 

proposed rule easier to understand, 

including answers to questions such as 

the following: (1) Are the requirements 

in the proposed rule clearly stated? (2) 

Does the proposed rule contain 

technical jargon that interferes with its 

clarity? (3) Does the format of the 

proposed rule (grouping and order of 

the sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its 

clarity? (4) What else could we do to 

make this proposed rule easier to 

understand? You may send comments 

on how we could make this proposed 

rule easier to understand to one of the 

addresses identified in the ADDRESSES

section or via e-mail to: 

critical.habitat.swr@noaa.gov.

Regulatory Planning and Review 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12866, this document is a significant 

rule and has been reviewed by the OMB. 

As noted above, we have prepared 

several reports to support the exclusion 

process under section 4(b)(2) of the 

ESA. The economic costs of the 

proposed critical habitat designations 

are described in our draft economic 

report (NMFS, 2004c). The benefits of 

the proposed designations are described 

in the Critical Habitat Analytical Review 

Team preliminary findings report 

(NMFS, 2004b). This document uses a 

biologically-based ranking system for 

gauging the benefits of applying section 

7 of the ESA to particular watersheds. 

Because data are not available to express 

these benefits in monetary terms, we 

have adopted a cost-effectiveness 

framework, as outlined in our draft 

4(b)(2) report (NMFS, 2004d). This 

approach is in accord with OMB’s 

guidance on regulatory analysis (OMB 

Circular A–4, Regulatory Analysis, 

September 17, 2003). By taking this 

approach, we seek to designate 

sufficient critical habitat to meet the 

biological goal of the ESA while 

imposing the least burden on society, as 

called for by E.O. 12866. 

In assessing the overall cost of critical 

habitat designation for the seven Pacific 

salmon and O. mykiss ESUs, the annual 

total impact figures given in the draft 

economic analysis (NMFS, 2004c) 

cannot be added together to obtain an 

aggregate annual impact. Because some 

watersheds are included in more than 

one ESU, a simple summation would 

entail duplication, resulting in an 

overestimate. Accounting for this 

duplication, the aggregate annual 

economic impact of the seven proposed 

critical habitat designations is 

$83,511,186 (in contrast to a 

$115,680,394 aggregate annual 

economic impact from designating all

areas considered in the 4(b)(2) process 

for these ESUs). These amounts include 

impacts that are co-extensive with the 

implementation of the jeopardy 

standard of section 7 (NMFS, 2004c). 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended by the 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), 

whenever an agency is required to 

publish a notice of rulemaking for any 

proposed or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effects of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). We have prepared a draft 

regulatory flexibility analysis and this 

document (NMFS, 2004e) is available 

upon request (see ADDRESSES). This 

analysis estimates that the number of 

regulated small entities potentially 

affected by this proposed rulemaking 

ranges from 379 to 3,151, depending on 

the ESU. If the proposed areas are 

designated as critical habitat, the 

estimated co-extensive costs of section 7 

consultation incurred by small entities 

are estimated to range from $1.6 million 

to $18.2 million depending on the ESU. 

As described in the analysis, we 

considered various alternatives for 

designating critical habitat for these 

seven ESUs. We considered and rejected 

the alternative of not designating critical 

habitat for any of the ESUs because such 

an approach did not meet the legal 

requirements of the ESA. We also 

examined and rejected an alternative in 

which all the potential critical habitat of 

the seven Pacific salmon and O. mykiss

ESUs is proposed for designation (i.e., 

no areas are excluded) because many of 

the areas considered to have a low 

conservation value also had relatively 

high economic impacts that might be 

mitigated by excluding those areas from 

designation. A third alternative we 

examined and rejected would exclude 

all habitat areas with a low or medium 

conservation value. While this 

alternative furthers the goal of reducing 

economic impacts, it is not sensitive to 

the fact that for most ESUs, eliminating 

all habitat areas with low and medium 

conservation value is likely to 

significantly impede conservation. 

Moreover, for some habitat areas the 

incremental economic benefit from 

excluding that area is relatively small. 

Therefore, after considering these 

alternatives in the context of the section 

4(b)(2) process of weighing benefits of 

exclusion against benefits of 

designation, we determined that the 

current proposal for designating critical 

habitat (i.e., designating some but not all 

areas with low or medium conservation 

value) provides an appropriate balance 

of conservation and economic 

71922 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

mitigation and that excluding the areas 

identified in this proposed rulemaking 

would not result in extinction of the 

ESUs. It is estimated that small entities 

could save from $650,000 to $4.3 

million in compliance costs, depending 

on the ESU, if the areas proposed for 

exclusion in this proposed rule are 

excluded from the designation.

Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

an Executive Order on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. This 

proposed rule may be a significant 

regulatory action under Executive Order 

12866. We have prepared a draft 

analysis of the energy effects of critical 

habitat designation and this document 

(NMFS, 2004e; see Appendix G) is 

available upon request (see ADDRESSES). 

Approximately 90 hydropower 

projects exist within the area covered by 

the seven ESUs addressed in this 

rulemaking. The projects range from 

very small ones with installed capacities 

considerably less than 5 MW to much 

larger projects ranging up to 196 MW 

installed capacity. Within California, 

the majority of hydropower project are 

private or State-owned and licensed by 

FERC. A smaller percentage of all 

projects are owned and operated by the 

Corps or BOR. Consultations on 

hydropower projects represent a 

relatively small percentage of the total 

section 7 consultations concerning 

listed salmon, but cost of project 

modification may be higher that for 

other activities. According to the 

economic analysis performed for the 

proposed designation (NMFS, 2004e), 

costs to hydropower projects associated 

with salmon section 7 actions are 

anticipated to be approximately 23 

percent of the annual costs of overall 

section 7 statewide. The primary 

modifications resulting from section 7 

include construction or improvements 

to fish passage facilities and programs, 

research and monitoring of water 

quality and fish passage efficiency, and 

other offsite mitigation efforts. 

Two threshold tests were considered 

to determine whether critical habitat 

designation would have a ‘‘significant 

adverse effect on the supply, 

distribution, or use of energy’’: 

Reductions in electricity production in 

excess of 1 billion kilowatt-hours per 

year or in excess of 500 megawattts of 

installed capacity; and increases in the 

cost of energy production in excess of 

one percent. For both thresholds of the 

energy impacts analysis, the assessment 

concludes that the total impacts of 

salmon conservation/mitigation 

measures for hydropower projects may 

exceed the thresholds for determining 

that an adverse energy effect is 

significant. However, the assessment 

also concludes based on the agency’s 

section 7 consultation history, that the 

total impacts of such conservation or 

mitigation overestimate the incremental 

impacts of critical habitat designation 

alone because there is strong evidence 

that consultation based on the jeopardy 

standard alone is capable of imposing 

significant impacts on such projects. 

Based on the energy impacts analysis, 

NMFS believes that the designation of 

critical habitat will not have impacts 

that exceed the thresholds identified 

above. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, we make the 

following findings: 

(a) This proposed 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, 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 tribal 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; AFDC 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 ESA, the only regulatory 

effect is that Federal agencies must 

ensure that their actions do not destroy 

or adversely modify critical habitat 

under section 7. While non-Federal 

entities who receive Federal funding, 

assistance, permits or 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 nonFederal 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 to 

State governments. 

(b) Due to current public knowledge 

of salmon protection and the 

prohibition against take of these species 

both within and outside of the 

designated areas, we do not anticipate 

that this proposed rule will significantly 

or uniquely affect small governments. 

As such, a Small Government Agency 

Plan is not required. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630, the proposed rule does not have 

significant takings implications. A 

takings implication assessment is not 

required. The designation of critical 

habitat affects only Federal agency 

actions. The proposed rule will not 

increase or decrease the current 

restrictions on private property 

concerning take of salmon. As noted 

above, due to widespread public 

knowledge of salmon protection and the 

prohibition against take of the species 

both within and outside of the 

designated areas, we do not anticipate 

that property values will be affected by 

the proposed critical habitat 

designations. While real estate market 

values may temporarily decline 

following designation, due to the 

perception that critical habitat 

designation may impose additional 

regulatory burdens on land use, we 

expect any such impacts to be short 

term (NMFS, 2004c). Additionally, 

critical habitat designation does not 

preclude development of HCPs and 

issuance of incidental take permits. 

Owners of areas that are included in the 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71923

designated critical habitat will continue 

to have the opportunity to use their 

property in ways consistent with the 

survival of listed salmon.

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

13132, this proposed rule does not have 

significant federalism effects. A 

federalism assessment is not required. 

In keeping with Department of 

Commerce policies, we requested 

information from, and coordinated 

development of, this proposed critical 

habitat designation with appropriate 

state resource agencies in California. 

The proposed designation may have 

some benefit to the states and local 

resource agencies in that the areas 

essential to the conservation of the 

species are more clearly defined, and 

the primary constituent elements of the 

habitat necessary to the survival of the 

species are specifically identified. While 

making this definition and 

identification does not alter where and 

what federally sponsored activities may 

occur, it may assist local governments in 

long-range planning (rather than waiting 

for case-by-case section 7 consultations 

to occur). 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988, the Department of the Commerce 

has determined that this proposed rule 

does not unduly burden the judicial 

system and meets the requirements of 

sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the Order. 

We are proposing to designate critical 

habitat in accordance with the 

provisions of the ESA. This proposed 

rule uses standard property descriptions 

and identifies the primary constituent 

elements within the designated areas to 

assist the public in understanding the 

habitat needs of the seven salmon ESUs. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This proposed rule does not contain 

new or revised information collection 

for which OMB approval is required 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act. 

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 

We have determined that we need not 

prepare environmental analyses as 

provided for under the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 for 

critical habitat designations made 

pursuant to the ESA. See Douglas 

County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 

1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 698 (1996). 

Government-to-Government 

Relationship With Tribes 

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. Pursuant to these authorities 

lands 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. 

Administration policy contained in 

the Secretarial Order: ‘‘American Indian 

Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 

Responsibilities, and the Endangered 

Species Act’’ (June 5, 1997) (‘‘Secretarial 

Order’’); the President’s Memorandum 

of April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native 

American Tribal Governments’’ (50 FR 

2291); Executive Order 13175; and 

Department of Commerce-American 

Indian and Alaska Native Policy (March 

30, 1995) reflects and defines this 

unique relationship. 

These policies also recognize the 

unique status of Indian lands. The 

Presidential Memorandum of April 29, 

1994, provides that, to the maximum 

extent possible, tribes should be the 

governmental entities to manage their 

lands and tribal trust resources. The 

Secretarial Order provides that, ‘‘Indian 

lands are not Federal public lands or 

part of the public domain, and are not 

subject to Federal public lands laws.’’

In implementing these policies the 

Secretarial Order specifically seeks to 

harmonize this unique working 

relationship with the Federal 

Government’s duties pursuant to the 

ESA. The order clarifies our 

responsibilities when carrying out 

authorities under the ESA and requires 

that we consult with and seek 

participation of, the affected Indian 

Tribes to the maximum extent 

practicable in the designation of critical 

habitat. Accordingly, we recognize that 

we must carry out our responsibilities 

under the ESA in a manner that 

harmonizes these duties with the 

Federal trust responsibility to the tribes 

and tribal sovereignty while striving to 

ensure that Indian Tribes do not bear a 

disproportionate burden for the 

conservation of species. Any decision to 

designate Indian land as critical habitat 

must be informed by the Federal laws 

and policies establishing our 

responsibility concerning Indian lands, 

treaties and trust resources, and by 

Department of Commerce policy 

establishing our responsibility for 

dealing with tribes when we implement 

the ESA. 

Pursuant to the Secretarial Order we 

consulted with the 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. Additionally, one 

California Indian tribe and the BIA 

provided written comments that are a 

part of the administrative record for this 

proposed rulemaking.

We understand from the tribes and 

the BIA that there is general agreement 

that Indian lands should not be 

designated critical habitat. The 

Secretarial Order defines Indian lands 

as ‘‘any lands title to which is either: (1) 

Held in trust by the United States for the 

benefit of any Indian tribe or (2) held by 

an Indian Tribe or individual subject to 

restrictions by the United States against 

alienation.’’ In clarifying this definition 

with the tribes, we agree that (1) fee 

lands within the reservation boundaries 

and owned by the Tribe or individual 

Indian, and (2) fee lands outside the 

reservation boundaries and owned by 

the Tribe would be considered Indian 

lands for the purposes of this proposed 

rule. (Fee lands outside the reservation 

owned by individual Indians are not 

included within the definition of Indian 

lands for the purposes of this rule.) 

In evaluating Indian lands for 

designation as critical habitat we look to 

section 4(b)(2) of the ESA. Section 

4(b)(2) requires us to base critical 

habitat designations on the best 

scientific and commercial data 

available, after taking into consideration 

the economic impact, the impact on 

national security and any other relevant 

impact of specifying any particular area 

as critical habitat. The Secretary may 

exclude areas from a critical habitat 

designation when the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh the benefits of 

designation, provided the exclusion will 

not result in the extinction of the 

species. We find that a relevant impact 

for consideration is the degree to which 

the Federal designation of Indian lands 

would impact the longstanding unique 

71924 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

relationship between the tribes and the 

Federal Government and the 

corresponding effect on Pacific salmon 

protection and management (See Other 

Relevant Impacts and Critical Habitat 

Designation sections). This is consistent 

with recent case law addressing the 

designation of critical habitat on tribal 

lands. ‘‘It is certainly reasonable to 

consider a positive working relationship 

relevant, particularly when the 

relationship results in the 

implementation of beneficial natural 

resource programs, including species 

preservation.’’ Center for Biological 

Diversity et al. v. Norton, 240 F. Supp. 

2d 1090, 1105); Douglas County v. 

Babbitt, 48 F3d 1495, 1507 (1995) 

(defining ‘‘relevant’’ as impacts 

consistent with the purposes of the 

ESA). 

NMFS and many tribal governments 

in California currently have cooperative 

working relationships that have enabled 

us to implement natural resource 

programs of mutual interest for the 

benefit of threatened and endangered 

salmonids. Some tribes have existing 

natural resource programs that assist us 

on a regular basis in providing 

information relevant to salmonid 

protection throughout the region. Our 

consultation with the tribes and the BIA 

indicates that they view the designation 

of Indian lands as an unwanted 

intrusion into tribal self-governance, 

compromising the government-togovernment relationship that is essential 

to achieving our mutual goal of 

conserving threatened and endangered 

salmonids. 

At this time, for the general reasons 

described above, we anticipate that the 

ESA 4(b)(2) analysis will lead us to 

exclude all Indian lands with occupied 

habitat in our final designation for these 

seven ESUs of salmon and O. mykiss.

Consistent with other proposed 

exclusions, any exclusion in the final 

rule will be made only after 

consideration of all comments received. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this rulemaking can be found on our 

Web site at http://swr.nmfs.noaa.gov

and is available upon request from the 

NMFS office in Long Beach, California 

(see ADDRESSES section).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 226 

Endangered and threatened species.

Dated: November 29, 2004. 

William T. Hogarth, 

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, 

National Marine Fisheries Service.

For the reasons set out in the 

preamble, we propose to amend part 

226, title 50 of the Code of Regulations 

as set forth below:

PART 226—[AMENDED] 

1. The authority citation of part 226 

continues to read as follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1533.

2. Add § 226.211 to read as follows:

§ 226.211 Critical habitat for seven 

Evolutionarily Significant Units (ESUs) of 

salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) in California.

Critical habitat is designated in the 

following counties for the following 

ESUs as described in paragraph (a) of 

this section, and as further described in 

paragraphs (b) through (e) of this 

section. The textual descriptions of 

critical habitat for each ESU are 

included in paragraphs (f) through (l) of 

this section, and these descriptions are 

the definitive source for determining the 

critical habitat boundaries. General 

location maps are provided at the end 

of each ESU description (paragraphs (f) 

through (l) of this section) and are 

provided for general guidance purposes 

only, and not as a definitive source for 

determining critical habitat boundaries. 

(a) Critical habitat is designated for 

the following ESUs in the following 

counties:

ESU State—Counties 

(1) California Coastal Chinook ................................................................. CA—Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, Sonoma, Lake, Napa, Glenn, 

Colusa, and Tehama. 

(2) Northern California O. mykiss ............................................................. CA—Humboldt, Trinity, Mendocino, Sonoma, Lake, Glenn, Colusa, and 

Tehama. 

(3) Central California Coast O. mykiss .................................................... CA—Lake, Mendocino, Sonoma, Napa, Marin, San Francisco, San 

Mateo, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, Alameda, Contra Costa, and San 

Joaquin. 

(4) South-Central Coast O. mykiss .......................................................... CA—Monterey, San Benito, Santa Clara, Santa Cruz, San Luis Obispo. 

(5) Southern California O. mykiss ............................................................ CA—San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange 

and San Diego. 

(6) Central Valley spring-run Chinook ...................................................... CA—Tehama, Butte, Glenn, Shasta, Yolo, Sacramento, Solano, 

Colusa, Yuba, Sutter, Trinity, Alameda, San Joaquin, and Contra 

Costa. 

(7) Central Valley O. mykiss .................................................................... CA—Tehama, Butte, Glenn, Shasta, Yolo, Sacramento, Solona, Yuba, 

Sutter, Placer, Calaveras, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Tuolumne, 

Merced, Alameda, Contra Costa. 

(b) Critical habitat boundaries.

Critical habitat includes the stream 

channels within the proposed stream 

reaches, and includes a lateral extent as 

defined by the ordinary high-water line 

(33 CFR 329.11). In areas for which the 

ordinary high-water line has not been 

defined pursuant to 33 CFR 329.11, the 

lateral extent will be defined by the 

bankfull elevation. Bankfull elevation is 

the level at which water begins to leave 

the channel and move into the 

floodplain and is reached at a discharge 

which generally has a recurrence 

interval of 1 to 2 years on the annual 

flood series. Critical habitat in estuaries 

(e.g. San Francisco-San Pablo-Suisun 

Bay, Humboldt Bay, and Morro Bay) is 

defined by the perimeter of the water 

body as displayed on standard 1:24,000 

scale topographic maps or the elevation 

of extreme high water, whichever is 

greater. 

(c) Primary constituent elements.

Within these areas, the primary 

constituent elements essential for the 

conservation of these ESUs are those 

sites and habitat components that 

support one or more life stages, 

including: 

(1) Freshwater spawning sites with 

water quantity and quality conditions 

and substrate supporting spawning, 

incubation and larval development; 

(2) Freshwater rearing sites with: 

(i) Water quantity and floodplain 

connectivity to form and maintain 

physical habitat conditions and support 

juvenile growth and mobility; 

(ii) Water quality and forage 

supporting juvenile development; and 

(iii) Natural cover such as shade, 

submerged and overhanging large wood, 

log jams and beaver dams, aquatic 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71925

vegetation, large rocks and boulders, 

side channels, and undercut banks. 

(3) Freshwater migration corridors 

free of obstruction and excessive 

predation with water quantity and 

quality conditions and natural cover 

such as submerged and overhanging 

large wood, aquatic vegetation, large 

rocks and boulders, side channels, and 

undercut banks supporting juvenile and 

adult mobility and survival. 

(4) Estuarine areas free of obstruction 

and excessive predation with: 

(i) Water quality, water quantity, and 

salinity conditions supporting juvenile 

and adult physiological transitions 

between fresh- and saltwater; 

(ii) Natural cover such as submerged 

and overhanging large wood, aquatic 

vegetation, large rocks and boulders, 

side channels; and 

(iii) Juvenile and adult forage, 

including aquatic invertebrates and 

fishes, supporting growth and 

maturation. 

(d) Exclusion of Indian lands. Critical 

habitat does not include occupied 

habitat areas on Indian lands. The 

Indian lands specifically excluded from 

critical habitat are those defined in the 

Secretarial Order, including: 

(1) Lands held in trust by the United 

States for the benefit of any Indian tribe; 

(2) Land 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. 

(e) Land owned or controlled by the 

Department of Defense. Additionally, 

critical habitat does not include the 

following areas owned or 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): 

(1) Camp Pendleton Marine Corps 

Base;

(2) Vandenberg Air Force Base; 

(3) Camp San Luis Obispo; 

(4) Camp Roberts; and 

(5) Mare Island Army Reserve Center. 

(f) California Coastal Chinook Salmon 

(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Critical 

habitat is proposed to include the areas 

defined in the following units: 

(1) Redwood Creek Hydrologic Unit 

1107—(i) Orick Hydrologic Sub-area 

110710. Outlet(s) = Redwood Creek (Lat 

¥41.2997, Long ¥124.0917) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Boyes Creek (41.3639, 

¥123.9845); Bridge Creek (41.137, 

¥124.0012); Brown Creek (41.3986, 

¥124.0012); Emerald (Harry Weir) 

(41.2142, ¥123.9812); Godwood Creek 

(41.3889, ¥124.0312); Larry Dam Creek 

(41.3359, ¥124.003); Little Lost Man 

Creek (41.2944, ¥124.0014); Lost Man 

Creek (41.3133, ¥123.9854); May Creek 

(41.3547, ¥123.999); McArthur Creek 

(41.2705, ¥124.041); North Fork Lost 

Man Creek (41.3374, ¥123.9935); 

Prairie Creek (41.4239, ¥124.0367); 

Redwood Creek (41.1367, ¥123.9309); 

Redwood Creek (41.2997, ¥124.0499); 

Tom McDonald (41.1628, ¥124.0419). 

(ii) Beaver Hydrologic Sub-area 

110720. Outlet(s) = Redwood Creek (Lat 

41.1367, Long ¥123.9309) upstream to 

endpoint(s): Lacks Creek (41.0334, 

¥123.8124); Minor Creek (40.9706, 

¥123.7899). 

(iii) Lake Prairie Hydrologic Sub-area 

110730. Outlet(s) = Redwood Creek (Lat 

40.9070, Long ¥123.8170) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Redwood Creek 

(40.7432, ¥123.7206). 

(2) Trinidad Hydrologic Unit 1108—

(i) Big Lagoon Hydrologic Sub-area 

110810. Outlet(s) = Maple Creek (Lat 

41.1555, Long ¥124.1380) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: North Fork Maple Creek 

(41.1294, ¥124.0771); Maple Creek 

(41.1223, ¥124.0995). 

(ii) Little River Hydrologic Sub-area 

110820. Outlet(s) = Little River 

(41.0277, ¥124.1112) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: South Fork Little River 

(40.9961, ¥124.0435); Little River 

(41.0463, ¥123.9818); Railroad Creek 

(41.0474, ¥124.0453); Lower South 

Fork Little River (41.003, ¥124.0081); 

Upper South Fork Little River (41.0163, 

¥123.9939). 

(3) Mad River Hydrologic Unit 1109—

(i) Blue Lake Hydrologic Sub-area 

110910. Outlet(s) = Mad River (Lat 

40.9139, Long ¥124.0642) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Lindsay Creek (40.983, 

¥124.0326); Mill Creek (40.9008, 

¥124.0086); North Fork Mad River 

(40.8687, ¥123.9649); Squaw Creek 

(40.9426, ¥124.0202); Warren Creek 

(40.8901, ¥124.0402). 

(ii) North Fork Mad River 110920.

Outlet(s) = North Fork Mad River (Lat 

40.8687, Long ¥123.9649) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Sullivan Gulch (40.8557, 

¥123.9487); North Fork Mad River 

(40.8837, ¥123.9436). 

(iii) Butler Valley 110930. Outlet(s) = 

Mad River (Lat 40.8449, Long 

¥123.9807) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Black Creek (40.7547, ¥123.9016); 

Black Dog Creek (40.8334, ¥123.9805); 

Canon Creek (40.8362, ¥123.9028); 

Mad River (40.7007, ¥123.8642); Maple 

Creek (40.7928, ¥123.8742). 

(4) Eureka Plain Hydrologic Unit 

1110—(i) Eureka Plain Hydrologic Subarea 111000. Outlet(s) = Mad River (Lat 

40.9560, Long ¥124.1278); Jacoby Creek 

(40.8435, ¥124.0815); Freshwater Creek 

(40.8088, ¥124.1442); Elk River 

(40.7568, ¥124.1948); Salmon Creek 

(40.6868, ¥124.2194) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bridge Creek (40.6958, 

¥124.0795); Dunlap Gulch (40.7101, 

¥124.1155); Elk River (40.7025, 

¥124.1522); Freshwater Creek (40.7389, 

¥123.9944); Gannon Slough (40.8628, 

¥124.0818); Jacoby Creek (40.7944, 

¥124.0093); Little Freshwater Creek 

(40.7485, ¥124.0652); North Branch of 

the North Fork Elk River (40.6878, 

¥124.0131); North Fork Elk River 

(40.6756, ¥124.0153); Ryan Creek 

(40.7835, ¥124.1198); Salmon Creek 

(40.6438, ¥124.1319); South Branch of 

the North Fork Elk River (40.6691, 

¥124.0244); South Fork Elk River 

(40.6626, ¥124.061); South Fork 

Freshwater Creek (40.7097, ¥124.0277). 

(5) Eel River Hydrologic Unit 1111—

(i) Ferndale Hydrologic Sub-area 

111111. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.6282, Long ¥124.2838) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Atwell Creek (40.472, 

¥124.1449); Howe Creek (40.4748, 

¥124.1827); Price Creek (40.5028, 

¥124.2035); Strongs Creek (40.5986, 

¥124.1222); Van Duzen River (40.5337, 

¥124.1262). 

(ii) Scotia Hydrologic Sub-area 

111112. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.4918, Long ¥124.0998) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.391, 

¥124.0156); Chadd Creek (40.3921, 

¥123.9542); Jordan Creek (40.4324, 

¥124.0428); Monument Creek (40.4676, 

¥124.1133). 

(iii) Larabee Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111113. Outlet(s) = Larabee Creek 

(40.4090, Long ¥123.9334) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Carson Creek (40.4189, 

¥123.8881); Larabee Creek (40.3950, 

¥123.8138). 

(iv) Hydesville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111121. Outlet(s) = Van Duzen River 

(Lat 40.5337, Long ¥124.1262) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Cummings 

Creek (40.5258, ¥123.9896); Hely Creek 

(40.5042, ¥123.9703); Yager Creek 

(40.5383, ¥124.1121); Unnamed 

(40.5383, ¥124.1121). 

(v) Yager Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111123. Outlet(s) = Yager Creek (Lat 

40.5583, Long ¥124.0577) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Corner Creek (40.6189, 

¥123.9994); Fish Creek (40.6392, 

¥124.0032); Lawrence Creek (40.6394, 

¥123.9935); Middle Fork Yager Creek 

(40.5799, ¥123.9015); North Fork Yager 

Creek (40.6044, ¥123.9084); Owl Creek 

(40.5557, ¥123.9362); Shaw Creek 

(40.6245, ¥123.9518); Yager Creek 

(40.5673, ¥123.9403).

(vi) Weott Hydrologic Sub-area 

111131. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 40.3500, Long ¥213.9305) 

71926 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Bridge Creek 

(40.2929, ¥123.8569); Bull Creek 

(40.3148,¥124.0343); Canoe Creek 

(40.2909, ¥123.922); Cow Creek 

(40.3583, ¥123.9626); Cuneo Creek 

(40.3377, ¥124.0385); Elk Creek 

(40.2837, ¥123.8365); Fish Creek 

(40.2316, ¥123.7915); Harper Creek 

(40.354, ¥123.9895); Mill Creek 

(40.3509, ¥124.0236); Salmon Creek 

(40.2214, ¥123.9059); South Fork 

Salmon River (40.1769, ¥123.8929); 

Squaw Creek (40.3401, ¥123.9997); 

Tostin Creek (40.1722, ¥123.8796). 

(vii) Benbow Hydrologic Sub-area 

111132. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 40.1932, Long ¥123.7692) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Anderson 

Creek (39.9337, ¥123.8933); Bear Pen 

Creek (39.9125, ¥123.8108); Bear 

Wallow Creek (39.7296, ¥123.7172); 

Bond Creek (39.7856, ¥123.6937); 

Butler Creek (39.7439, ¥123.692); 

China Creek (40.1035, ¥123.9493); 

Connick Creek (40.0911, ¥123.8187); 

Cox Creek (40.0288, ¥123.8542); 

Cummings Creek (39.8431, ¥123.5752); 

Dean Creek (40.1383, ¥123.7625); 

Dinner Creek (40.0915, ¥123.937); East 

Branch South Fork Eel River (39.9433, 

¥123.6278); Elk Creek (39.7986, 

¥123.5981); Fish Creek (40.0565, 

¥123.7768); Foster Creek (39.8455, 

¥123.6185); Grapewine Creek (39.7991, 

¥123.5186); Hartsook Creek (40.012, 

¥123.7888); Hollow Tree Creek 

(39.7316, ¥123.6918); Huckleberry 

Creek (39.7315, ¥123.7253); Indian 

Creek (39.9464, ¥123.8993); Jones 

Creek (39.9977, ¥123.8378); Leggett 

Creek (40.1374, ¥123.8312); Little 

Sproul Creel (40.0897, ¥123.8585); Low 

Gap Creek (39993, ¥123.767); McCoy 

Creek (399598, ¥123.7542); Michael’s 

Creek (397642, ¥123.7175); Miller 

Creek (40.1215, ¥123.916); Moody 

Creek (399531, ¥123.8819); Mud Creek 

(398232, ¥123.6107); Piercy Creek 

(399706, ¥123.8189); Pollock Creek 

(40.0822, ¥123.9184); Rattlesnake 

Creek (397974, ¥123.5426); Redwood 

Creek (397721, ¥123.7651); Redwood 

Creek (40.0974, ¥123.9104); Seely 

Creek (40.1494, ¥123.8825); Somerville 

Creek (40.0896, ¥123.8913); South Fork 

Redwood Creek (397663, ¥123.7579); 

Spoul Creek (40.0125, ¥123.8585); 

Standley Creek (399479, ¥123.8083); 

Tom Long Creek (40.0315, ¥123.6891); 

Twin Rocks Creek (398269, ¥123.5543); 

Warden Creek (40.0625, ¥123.8546); 

West Fork Sproul Creek (40.0386, 

¥123.9015); Wildcat Creek (399049, 

¥123.7739); Wilson Creek (39841, 

¥123.6452); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.1136, ¥123.9359); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.0538, ¥123.8293). 

(viii) Laytonville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111133. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 39.7665, Long ¥123.6484) ) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek 

(39.6413, ¥123.5797); Cahto Creek 

(39.6624, ¥123.5453); Dutch Charlie 

Creek (39.6892, ¥123.6818); Grub Creek 

(39.7777, ¥123.5809); Jack of Hearts 

Creek (39.7244, ¥123.6802); Kenny 

Creek (39.6733, ¥123.6082); Mud Creek 

(39.6561, ¥123.592); Redwood Creek 

(39.6738, ¥123.6631); Rock Creek 

(39.6931, ¥123.6204); South Fork Eel 

River (39.6271, ¥123.5389); Streeter 

Creek (39.7328, ¥123.5542); Ten Mile 

Creek (39.6651, ¥123.451). 

(ix) Sequoia Hydrologic Sub-area 

111141. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 40.3558, Long ¥123.9194) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Brock Creek 

(40.2411, ¥123.7248); Dobbyn Creek 

(40.2216, ¥123.6029); Hoover Creek 

(40.2312, ¥123.5792); Line Gulch 

(40.1655, ¥123.4831); North Fork 

Dobbyn Creek (40.2669, ¥123.5467); 

South Fork Dobbyn Creek (40.1723, 

¥123.5112); South Fork Eel River 

(40.35, ¥123.9305); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.3137, ¥123.8333); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.2715, ¥123.549).

(x) Spy Rock Hydrologic Sub-area 

111142. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.1736, Long ¥123.6043) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bell Springs Creek 

(39.9399, ¥123.5144); Burger Creek 

(39.6943, ¥123.413); Chamise Creek 

(40.0563, ¥123.5479); Jewett Creek 

(40.1195, ¥123.6027); Kekawaka Creek 

(40.0686, ¥123.4087); North Fork Eel 

River (39.9567, ¥123.4375); Woodman 

Creek (39.7639, ¥123.4338). 

(xi) North Fork Eel River Hydrologic 

Sub-area 111150. Outlet(s) = North Fork 

Eel River (Lat 39.9567, Long 

¥123.4375) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

North Fork Eel River (39.9370, 

¥123.3758). 

(xii) Outlet Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111161. Outlet(s) = Outlet Creek (Lat 

39.6263, Long ¥123.3453) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Baechtel Creek (39.3688, 

¥123.4028); Berry Creek (39.4272, 

¥123.2951); Bloody Run (39.5864, 

¥123.3545); Broaddus Creek (39.3907, 

¥123.4163); Davis Creek (39.3701, 

¥123.3007); Dutch Henry Creek 

(39.5788, ¥123.4543); Haehl Creek 

(39.3795, ¥123.3393); Long Valley 

Creek (39.6091, ¥123.4577); Outlet 

Creek (39.4526, ¥123.3338); Ryan Creek 

(39.4803, ¥123.3642); Upp Creek 

(39.4276, ¥123.3578); Upp Creek 

(39.4276, ¥123.3578); Willits Creek 

(39.4315, ¥123.3794). 

(xiii) Tomki Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111162. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

39.7138, Long ¥123.3531) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cave Creek (39.3925, 

¥123.2318); Long Branch Creek 

(39.4074, ¥123.1897); Middle Fork Eel 

River (39.7136, ¥123.353); Outlet Creek 

(39.6263, ¥123.3453); Rocktree Creek 

(39.4533, ¥123.3079); Salmon Creek 

(39.4461, ¥123.2104); Scott Creek 

(39.456, ¥123.2297); String Creek 

(39.4855, ¥123.2891); Tomki Creek 

(39.549, ¥123.3613); Wheelbarrow 

Creek (39.5029, ¥123.3287). 

(xiv) Lake Pillsbury Hydrologic Subarea 111163. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

39.3860, Long ¥123.1163) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Eel River (39.4078, 

¥122.958). 

(xv) Round Valley Hydrologic Subarea 111172. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat 

39.7398, Long ¥123.1431); Williams 

(39.8147, ¥123.1335) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Mill Creek (39.8456, 

¥123.2822); Murphy Creek (39.8804, 

¥123.1636); Poor Mans Creek (39.8179, 

¥123.1833); Short Creek (39.8645, 

¥123.2242); Turner Creek (39.7238, 

¥123.2191); Williams Creek (39.8596, 

¥123.1341). 

(6) Cape Mendocino Hydrologic Unit 

1112—(i) Capetown Hydrologic Subarea 111220. Outlet(s) = Bear River (Lat 

40.4744, Long ¥124.3881) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear River (40.3591, 

¥124.0536); South Fork Bear River 

(40.4271, ¥124.2873). 

(ii) Mattole River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111230. Outlet(s) = Mattole River (Lat 

40.2942, Long ¥124.3536) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.1262, 

¥124.0631); Blue Slide Creek (40.1286, 

¥123.9579); Bridge Creek (40.0503, 

¥123.9885); Conklin Creek (40.3169, 

¥124.229); Dry Creek (40.2389, 

¥124.0621); East Fork Honeydew Creek 

(40.1633, ¥124.0916); East Fork of the 

North Fork Mattole River (40.3489, 

¥124.2244); Eubanks Creek (40.0893, 

¥123.9743); Gilham Creek (40.2162, 

¥124.0309); Grindstone Creek (40.1875, 

¥124.0041); Honeydew Creek (40.1942, 

¥124.1363); Mattole Canyon (40.1833, 

¥123.9666); Mattole River (39.9735, 

¥123.9548); McGinnis Creek (40.3013, 

¥124.2146); McKee Creek (40.0674, 

¥123.9608); Mill Creek (40.0169, 

¥123.9656); North Fork Mattole River 

(40.3729, ¥124.2461); North Fork Bear 

Creek (40.1422, ¥124.0945); Oil Creek 

(40.3008, ¥124.1253); Rattlesnake 

Creek (40.2919, ¥124.1051); South Fork 

Bear Creek (40.0334, ¥124.0232); 

Squaw Creek (40.219, ¥124.1921); 

Thompson Creek (39.9969, ¥123.9638); 

Unnamed (40.1522, ¥124.0989); Upper 

North Fork Mattole River (40.2907, 

¥124.1115); Westlund Creek (40.2333, 

¥124.0336); Woods creek (40.2235, 

¥124.1574); Yew Creek (40.0019, 

¥123.9743).

(7) Mendocino Coast Hydrologic Unit 

1113—(i) Wages Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111312. Outlet(s) = Wages Creek 

(Lat 39.6513, Long ¥123.7851) 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71927

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Wages Creek 

(39.6393, ¥123.7146). 

(ii) Ten Mile River Hydrologic Subarea 111313. Outlet(s) = Ten Mile River 

(Lat 39.5529, Long ¥123.7658) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Middle Fork 

Ten Mile River (39.5397, ¥123.5523); 

Little North Fork Ten Mile River 

(39.6188, ¥123.7258); Ten Mile River 

(39.5721, ¥123.7098); South Fork Ten 

Mile River (39.4927, ¥123.6067); North 

Fork Ten Mile River (39.5804, 

¥123.5735). 

(iii) Noyo River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111320. Outlet(s) = Noyo River (Lat 

39.4274, Long ¥123.8096) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: North Fork Noyo River 

(39.4541, ¥123.5331); Noyo River 

(39.431, ¥123.494); South Fork Noyo 

River (39.3549, ¥123.6136). 

(iv) Big River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111330. Outlet(s) = Big River (Lat 

39.3030, Long ¥123.7957) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Big River (39.3095, 

¥123.4454). 

(v) Albion River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111340. Outlet(s) = Albion River (Lat 

39.2253, Long ¥123.7679) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Albion River (39.2644, 

¥123.6072); North Fork Albion River 

(39.2827, ¥123.607). 

(vi) Navarro River Hydrologic Subarea 111350. Outlet(s) = Navarro River 

(Lat 39.1921, Long ¥123.7611) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Navarro 

River (39.0534); Rancheria Creek 

(38.9689, ¥123.4169). 

(vii) Garcia River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111370. Outlet(s) = Garcia River (Lat 

38.9455, Long ¥123.7257) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Garcia River (38.9160, 

¥123.4900). 

(8) Russian River Hydrologic Unit 

1114—(i) Guerneville Hydrologic Subarea 111411. Outlet(s) = Russian River 

(Lat 38.4507, Long ¥123.1289) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Austin 

Creek (38.5099, ¥123.0681); Mark West 

Creek (38.4961, ¥122.8489). 

(ii) Austin Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111412. Outlet(s) = Austin Creek (Lat 

38.5099, Long ¥123.0681) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Austin Creek (38.5326, 

¥123.0844). 

(iii) Mark West Hydrologic Sub-area 

111423. Outlet(s) = Mark West Creek 

(Lat 38.4961, Long ¥122.8489) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Mark West 

Creek (38.4526, ¥122.8347). 

(iv) Warm Springs Hydrologic Subarea 111424. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek (Lat 

38.5861, Long ¥122.8573) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Dry Creek (38.7179, 

¥123.0075). 

(v) Geyserville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111425. Outlet(s) = Russian River (Lat 

38.6132, Long ¥122.8321) upstream. 

(vi) Ukiah Hydrologic Sub-area 

111431. Outlet(s) = Russian River (Lat 

38.8828, Long ¥123.0557) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Feliz Creek (38.9941, 

¥123.1779). 

(vii) Forsythe Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111433. Outlet(s) = Russian River 

(Lat 39.2257, Long ¥123.2012) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Forsythe 

Creek (39.2780, ¥123.2608); Russian 

River (39.3599, ¥123.2326). 

(9) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the California Coast chinook salmon 

ESU follow:

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

71928 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71929


EP10DE04.001</GPH>
71930 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71931


EP10DE04.003</GPH>
71932 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.004</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71933


EP10DE04.005</GPH>
71934 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.006</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71935

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (g) Northern California O. mykiss 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss). Critical habitat 

is proposed to include the areas defined 

in the following units: 


EP10DE04.007</GPH>
71936 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Redwood Creek Hydrologic Unit 

1107—(i) Orick Hydrologic Sub-area 

110710. Outlet(s) = Boat Creek (Lat 

41.4059, Long —124.0675); Home Creek 

(41.4027, ¥124.0683); Redwood Creek 

(41.2923, ¥124.0917); Squashan Creek 

(41.389, ¥124.0703) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Boat Creek (41.4110, 

¥124.0583); Bond Creek (41.2326, 

¥124.0262); Boyes Creek (41.3701, 

¥124.9891); Bridge Creek (41.1694, 

¥123.9964); Brown Creek (41.3986, 

¥124.0012); Cloquet Creek (41.2456, 

¥124.0116); Cole Creek (41.2187, 

¥124.0087); Copper Creek (41.1516, 

¥123.9258); Dolason Creek (41.1969, 

¥123.9667); Elam Creek (41.2613, 

¥124.0321); Emerald Creek (41.2164, 

¥123.9808); Forty Four Creek (41.2187, 

¥124.0195); Gans South Creek 

(41.2617, ¥124.0157); Godwood Creek 

(41.3787, ¥124.0354); Hayes Creek 

(41.2889, ¥124.0295); Home Creek 

(41.3951, ¥124.0386); Larry Dam Creek 

(41.3441, ¥123.9966); Little Lost Man 

Creek (41.3078, ¥124.0084); Lost Man 

Creek (41.3187, ¥123.9892); May Creek 

(41.3521, ¥124.0164); McArthur Creek 

(41.2702, ¥124.0427); Miller Creek 

(41.2290, ¥124.0116); North Fork Lost 

Man Creek (41.3405, ¥123.9859); Oscar 

Larson Creek (41.2559, ¥123.9943); 

Prairie Creek (41.4440, ¥124.0411); 

Redwood Creek (41.1367, ¥123.9309); 

Skunk Cabbage Creek (41.3211, 

¥124.0802); Slide Creek (41.1736, 

¥123.9450); Squashan Creek (41.3739, 

¥124.0440); Streelow Creek (41.3622, 

¥124.0472); Tom McDonald Creek 

(41.1933, ¥124.0164); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.3619, ¥123.9967); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.3424, 

¥124.0572). 

(ii) Beaver Hydrologic Sub-area 

110720. Outlet(s) = Redwood Creek (Lat 

41.1367, Long —123.9309) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Beaver Creek (41.0208, 

¥123.8608); Captain Creek (40.9199, 

¥123.7944); Cashmere Creek (41.0132, 

¥123.8862); Coyote Creek (41.1249, 

¥123.8796); Devils Creek (41.1224, 

¥123.9384); Garcia Creek (41.0180, 

¥123.8923); Garrett Creek (41.0904, 

¥123.8712); Karen Court Creek 

(41.0368, ¥123.8953); Lacks Creek 

(41.0306, ¥123.8096); Loin Creek 

(40.9465, ¥123.8454); Lupton Creek 

(40.9058, ¥123.8286); Mill Creek 

(41.0045, ¥123.8525); Minor Creek 

(40.9706, ¥123.7899); Molasses Creek 

(40.9986, ¥123.8490); Moon Creek 

(40.9807, ¥123.8368); Panther Creek 

(41.0732, ¥123.9275); Pilchuck Creek 

(41.9986, ¥123.8710); Roaring Gulch 

(41.0319, ¥123.8674); Santa Fe Creek 

(40.9368, ¥123.8397); Sweathouse 

Creek (40.9332, ¥123.8131); Toss-Up 

Creek (40.9845, ¥123.8656); Wiregrass 

Creek (40.9652, ¥123.8553). 

(iii) Lake Prairie Hydrologic Sub-area 

110730. Outlet(s) = Redwood Creek (Lat 

40.9070, Long —123.8170) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bradford Creek (40.7812, 

¥123.7215); Cut-Off Meander (40.8507, 

¥123.7729); Emmy Lou Creek (40.8655, 

¥123.7771); Gunrack Creek (40.8391, 

¥123.7650); High Prairie Creek 

(40.8191, ¥123.7723); Jena Creek 

(40.8742, ¥123.8065); Lake Prairie 

Creek (40.7984, ¥123.7558); Lupton 

Creek (40.9069, ¥123.8172); Minon 

Creek (40.8140, ¥123.7372); Noisy 

Creek (40.8613, ¥123.8044); Pardee 

Creek (40.7779, ¥123.7416); Redwood 

Creek (40.7432, ¥123.7206); Simion 

Creek (40.8241, ¥123.7560); Six Rivers 

Creek (40.8352, ¥123.7842); 

Smokehouse Creek (40.7405, 

¥123.7278); Snowcamp Creek (40.7415, 

¥123.7296); Squirrel Trail Creek 

(40.8692, ¥123.7844); Twin Lakes 

Creek (40.7369, ¥123.7214); Panther 

Creek (40.8019, ¥123.7094); Windy 

Creek (40.8866, ¥123.7956). 

(2) Trinidad Hydrologic Unit 1108—

(i) Big Lagoon Hydrologic Sub-area 

110810. Outlet(s) = Maple Creek (Lat 

41.1555, Long —124.1380); McDonald 

Creek (41.2521, ¥124.0919) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Beach Creek (41.0716, 

¥124.0239); Clear Creek (41.1031, 

¥124.0030); Diamond Creek (41.1571, 

¥124.0926); Maple Creek (41.0836, 

¥123.9790); McDonald Creek (41.1850, 

¥124.0773); M-Line Creek (41.0752, 

¥124.0787); North Fork McDonald 

Creek (41.2107, ¥124.0664); North Fork 

of Maple Creek (41.1254, ¥124.0539); 

Pitcher Creek (41.1521, ¥124.0897); 

South Fork Maple Creek (41.1003, 

¥124.1119); Tom Creek (41.1773, 

¥124.0966); Unnamed Tributary 

(41.1004, ¥124.0155); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.0780, ¥124.0676); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.1168, 

¥124.0886); Unnamed Tributary 

(41.0851, ¥124.0966); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.1132, ¥124.0827); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.0749, 

¥124.0889); Unnamed Tributary 

(41.1052, ¥124.0675); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.0714, ¥124.0611); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.0948, 

¥124.0016). 

(ii) Little River Hydrologic Sub-area 

110820. Outlet(s) = Little River (Lat 

41.0277, Long —124.1112) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: South Fork Little River 

(40.9899, ¥124.0394); Freeman Creek 

(41.0283, ¥124.0585); Little River 

(41.0530, ¥123.9689); Lower South 

Fork Little River (40.9893, ¥124.0007); 

Railroad Creek (41.0468, ¥124.0466); 

Strawberry Creek (40.9963, ¥124.1155); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.0356, 

¥123.9958); Unnamed Tributary 

(41.0407, ¥124.0598); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.0068, ¥123.9830); 

Unnamed Tributary (41.0365, 

¥124.0361); Unnamed Tributary 

(41.0444, ¥124.0194); Unnamed 

Tributary (41.0431, ¥124.0125); Upper 

South Fork Little River (41.0131, 

¥123.9852). 

(3) Mad River Hydrologic Unit 1109—

(i) Blue Lake Hydrologic Sub-area 

110910. Outlet(s) = Mad River (Lat 

40.9139, Long —124.0642); Strawberry 

Creek (40.9964, ¥124.1155); Widow 

White Creek (40.9635, ¥124.1253) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Boundary 

Creek (40.8395, ¥123.9920); Grassy 

Creek (40.9314, ¥124.0188); Hall Creek 

(40.9162, ¥124.0141); Kelly Creek 

(40.8656, ¥124.0260); Leggit Creek 

(40.8808, ¥124.0269); Lindsay Creek 

(40.9838, ¥124.0283); Mather Creek 

(40.9796, ¥124.0526); Mill Creek 

(40.9296, ¥124.1037); Mill Creek 

(40.8521, ¥123.9617); North Fork Mad 

River (40.8687, ¥123.9649); Norton 

Creek (40.9572, ¥124.1003); Palmer 

Creek (40.8633, ¥124.0193); Puter 

Creek (40.8474, ¥123.9966); Quarry 

Creek (40.8526, ¥124.0098); Squaw 

Creek (40.9426, ¥124.0202); Strawberry 

Creek (40.9761, ¥124.0630); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.9624, ¥124.0179); 

Unnamed Tribitary (40.9713, 

¥124.0477); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.9549, -124.0554); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.9672, ¥124.0218); Warren 

Creek (40.8860, ¥124.0351); Widow 

White Creek (40.9522, ¥124.0784).

(ii) North Fork Mad River Hydrologic 

Sub-area 110920. Outlet(s) = North Fork 

Mad River (Lat 40.8687, Long 

¥123.9649) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Bald Mountain Creek (40.8922, 

¥123.9097); Denman Creek (40.9293, 

¥123.9429); East Fork North Fork 

(40.9702, ¥123.9449); Gosinta Creek 

(40.9169, ¥123.9420); Hutchery Creek 

(40.8712, ¥123.9450); Jackson Creek 

(40.9388, ¥123.9462); Krueger Creek 

(40.9505, ¥123.9611); Long Prairie 

Creek (40.9235, ¥123.8945); Mule 

Creek (40.9416, ¥123.9309); North Fork 

Mad River (40.9918, ¥123.9610); Pine 

Creek (40.9299, ¥123.9114); Pollock 

Creek (40.9081, ¥123.9071); Sullivan 

Gulch (40.8512, ¥123.9401); Tyson 

Creek (40.9559, ¥123.9738); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.9879, ¥123.9511); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.9906, 

¥123.9540); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.9294, ¥123.8842); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.9866, ¥123.9788); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.9927, 

¥123.9736). 

(iii) Butler Valley Hydrologic Sub-area 

110930. Outlet(s) = Mad River (Lat 

40.8449, Long ¥123.9807) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.5468, 

¥123.6728); Black Creek (40.7521, 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71937

¥123.9080); Black Dog Creek (40.8334, 

¥123.9805); Blue Slide Creek (40.7333, 

¥123.9225); Boulder Creek (40.7634, 

¥123.8667); Bug Creek (40.6587, 

¥123.7356); Cannon Creek (40.8535, 

¥123.8850); Coyote Creek (40.6147, 

¥123.6488); Devil Creek (40.8032, 

¥123.9175); Dry Creek (40.8218, 

¥123.9751); East Creek (40.5403, 

¥123.5579); Maple Creek (40.7933, 

¥123.8353); Pilot Creek (40.5950, 

¥123.5888); Simpson Creek (40.8138, 

¥123.9156); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.7306, ¥123.9019); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7739, ¥123.9255); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.7744, 

¥123.9137); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.8029, ¥123.8716); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.8038, ¥123.8691); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.8363, 

¥123.8973). 

(4) Eureka Plain Hydrologic Unit 

1110—(i) Eureka Plain Hydrologic Subarea 111000. Outlet(s) = Elk River (Lat 

40.7568, Long ¥124.1948); Freshwater 

Creek (40.8088, ¥124.1442); Jacoby 

Creek (40.8436, ¥124.0834); Mad River 

(40.9560, ¥124.1278); Rocky Gulch 

(40.8309, ¥124.0813); Salmon Creek 

(40.6868, ¥124.2194); Washington 

Gulch (40.8317, ¥124.0805) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Bridge Creek (40.6958, 

¥124.0805); Browns Gulch (40.7038, 

¥124.1074); Clapp Gulch (40.6967, 

¥124.1684); Cloney Gulch (40.7826, 

¥124.0347); Doe Creek (40.6964, 

¥124.0201); Dunlap Gulch (40.7076, 

¥124.1182); Falls Gulch (40.7655, 

¥124.0261); Fay Slough (40.8033, 

¥124.0574); Freshwater Creek (40.7385, 

¥124.0035); Golf Course Creek 

(40.8406, ¥124.0402); Graham Gulch 

(40.7540, ¥124.0228); Guptil Gulch 

(40.7530, ¥124.1202); Henderson Gulch 

(40.7357, ¥124.1394); Jacoby Creek 

(40.7951, ¥124.0087); Lake Creek 

(40.6848, ¥124.0831); Line Creek 

(40.6578, ¥124.0460); Little Freshwater 

Creek (40.7371, ¥124.0649); Little 

North Fork Elk River (40.6972, 

¥124.0100); Little South Fork Elk River 

(40.6555, ¥124.0877); Martin Slough 

(40.7679, ¥124.1578); McCready Gulch 

(40.7824, ¥124.0441); McWinney Creek 

(40.6968, ¥124.0616); Morrison Gulch 

(40.8105, ¥124.0437); North Branch of 

the North Fork Elk River (40.6879, 

¥124.0130); North Fork Elk River 

(40.6794¥123.9834); Railroad Gulch 

(40.6955, ¥124.1545); Rocky Gulch 

(40.8079, ¥124.0528); Ryan Creek 

(40.7352, ¥124.0996); Salmon Creek 

(40.6438, ¥124.1318); South Branch of 

the North Fork Elk River (40.6700, 

¥124.0251); South Fork Freshwater 

Creek (40.7110, ¥124.0367); South Fork 

Elk River (40.6437, ¥124.0388); Swain 

Slough (40.7524, ¥124.1825); Tom 

Gulch (40.6794, ¥124.1452); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7850, ¥124.0561); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.7496, 

¥124.1651); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.7785,—124.1081); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7667, ¥124.1054); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.7559, 

¥124.0870); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.7952, ¥124.0568); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7408, ¥124.1118); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.7186, 

¥124.1385); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.7224, ¥124.1038); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.8194, ¥124.0305); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.8106, 

¥124.0083); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.7585, ¥124.1456); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7457, ¥124.1138); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.8085, 

¥124.0713); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.6634, ¥124.1193); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.7576, ¥124.1576); 

Washington Gulch (40.8116, 

¥124.0491). 

(5) Eel River Hydrologic Unit 1111—

(i) Ferndale Hydrologic Sub-area 

111111. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.6275, Long ¥124.2520) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Atwell Creek (40.4824, 

¥124.1498); Dean Creek (40.4847, 

¥124.1217); Horse Creek (40.5198, 

¥124.1702); House Creek (40.4654, 

¥124.1916); Howe Creek (40.4956, 

¥124.1690); Nanning Creek (40.4914, 

¥124.0652); North Fork Strongs Creek 

(40.6077, ¥124.1047); Price Creek 

(40.5101, ¥124.2731); Rohner Creek 

(40.6151, ¥124.1408); Strongs Creek 

(40.5999, ¥124.0985); Sweet Creek 

(40.4900, ¥124.2007); Van Duzen River 

(40.5337, ¥124.1262). 

(ii) Scotia Hydrologic Sub-area 

111112. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.4918, Long ¥124.0988) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.3942, 

¥124.0262); Bridge Creek (40.4278, 

¥123.9317); Chadd Creek (40.3919, 

¥123.9540); Darnell Creek (40.4533, 

¥123.9808); Dinner Creek (40.4406, 

¥124.0855); Greenlaw Creek (40.4315, 

¥124.0231); Jordan Creek (40.4171, 

¥124.0517); Kiler Creek (40.4465, 

¥124.0952); Larabee Creek (40.4089, 

¥123.9331); Monument Creek (40.4371, 

¥124.1165); Shively Creek (40.4454, 

¥123.9539); South Fork Bear Creek 

(40.3856, ¥124.0182); South Fork Eel 

River (40.3558, ¥123.9194); Stitz Creek 

(40.4649, ¥124.0531); Twin Creek 

(40.4419, ¥124.0714); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3933, ¥123.9984); Weber 

Creek (40.3767, ¥123.9094).

(iii) Larabee Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111113. Outlet(s) = Larabee Creek 

(Lat 40.4089, Long -123.9331) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Arnold Creek 

(40.4006, -123.8583); Balcom Creek 

(40.4030, -123.8986); Bosworth Creek 

(40.3584, -123.7089); Boulder Flat Creek 

(40.3530, -123.6381); Burr Creek 

(40.4250, -123.7767); Carson Creek 

(40.4181, -123.8879); Chris Creek 

(40.4146, -123.9235); Cooper Creek 

(40.3123, -123.6463); Dauphiny Creek 

(40.4049, -123.8893); Frost Creek 

(40.3765, -123.7357); Hayfield Creek 

(40.3350, -123.6535); Knack Creek 

(40.3788, -123.7385); Larabee Creek 

(40.2807, -123.6445); Martin Creek 

(40.3730, -123.7060); Maxwell Creek 

(40.3959, -123.8049); McMahon Creek 

(40.3269, -123.6363); Mill Creek 

(40.3849, -123.7440); Mountain Creek 

(40.2955, -123.6378); Scott Creek 

(40.4020, -123.8738); Smith Creek 

(40.4194, -123.8568); Thurman Creek 

(40.3506, -123.6669); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3842, -123.8062); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.3982, 

-123.7862); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.3806, -123.7564); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3661, -123.7398); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.3524, 

-123.7330). 

(iv) Hydesville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111121. Outlet(s) = Van Duzen River 

(Lat 40.5337, Long -124.1262) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Cuddeback Creek 

(40.5421, -124.0263); Cummings Creek 

(40.5282, -123.9770); Fiedler Creek 

(40.5351, -124.0106); Hely Creek 

(40.5165, -123.9531); Yager Creek 

(40.5583, -124.0577); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.5718, -124.0946); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4915, 

-124.0000). 

(v) Bridgeville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111122. Outlet(s) = Van Duzen River 

(Lat 40.4942, Long -123.9720) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.3455, 

-123.5763); Blanket Creek (40.3635, 

-123.5710); Browns Creek (40.4958, 

-123.8103); Butte Creek (40.4119, 

-123.7047); Dairy Creek (40.4174, 

-123.5981); Fish Creek (40.4525, 

-123.8434); Grizzly Creek (40.5193, 

-123.8470); Little Larabee Creek 

(40.4708, -123.7395); Little Van Duzen 

River (40.3021, -123.5540); North Fork 

Van Duzen (40.4881, -123.6411); 

Panther Creek (40.3921, -123.5866); 

Root Creek (40.4490, -123.9018); 

Stevens Creek (40.5062, -123.9073); 

Thompson Creek (40.4222, -123.6084); 

Van Duzen River (40.4820, -123.6629); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4932, 

-123.9120); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4724, -123.8836); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.4850, -123.8468); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.3994, 

-123.6821); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.3074, -123.5834). 

(vi) Yager Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111123. Outlet(s) = Yager Creek (Lat 

40.5583, Long -124.0577) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bell Creek (40.6809, 

-123.9685); Blanten Creek (40.5839, 

-124.0165); Booths Run (40.6584, 

71938 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

-123.9428); Corner Creek (40.6179, 

-124.0010); Fish Creek (40.6390, 

-124.0024); Yager Creek (40.5673, 

-123.9403); Lawrence Creek (40.6986, 

-123.9314); Middle Fork Yager Creek 

(40.5782, -123.9243); North Fork Yager 

Creek (40.6056, -123.9080); Shaw Creek 

(40.6231, -123.9509); South Fork Yager 

Creek (40.5451, -123.9409); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.5892, -123.9663); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.5891, 

-124.0608). 

(vii) Weott Hydrologic Sub-area 

111131. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 40.3500, Long —123.9305) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Albee Creek 

(40.3592, -124.0088); Bridge Creek 

(40.2960, -123.8561); Bull Creek 

(40.3587, -123.9624); Burns Creek 

(40.3194, -124.0420); Butte Creek 

(40.1982, -123.8387); Canoe Creek 

(40.2669, -123.9556); Coon Creek 

(40.2702, -123.9013); Cow Creek 

(40.2664, -123.9838); Cuneo Creek 

(40.3401, -124.0494); Decker Creek 

(40.3312, -123.9501); Elk Creek 

(40.2609, -123.7957); Fish Creek 

(40.2459, -123.7729); Harper Creek 

(40.3591, -123.9930); Mill Creek 

(40.3568, -124.0333); Mowry Creek 

(40.2937, -123.8895); North Fork Cuneo 

Creek (40.3443, -124.0488); Ohman 

Creek (40.1924, -123.7648); Panther 

Creek (40.2775, -124.0289); Preacher 

Gulch (40.2944, -124.0047); Salmon 

Creek (40.2145, -123.8926); Slide Creek 

(40.3011, -124.0390); South Fork 

Salmon Creek (40.1769, -123.8929); 

Squaw Creek (40.3167, -123.9988); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.3065, 

-124.0074); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.2831, -124.0359). 

(viii) Benbow Hydrologic Sub-area 

111132. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 40.1932, Long -123.7692) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Anderson Creek 

(39.9325, -123.8928); Bear Creek 

(39.7885, -123.7620); Bear Pen Creek 

(39.9201, -123.7986); Bear Wallow Creek 

(39.7270, -123.7140); Big Dan Creek 

(39.8430, -123.6992); Bond Creek 

(39.7778, -123.7060); Bridges Creek 

(39.9087, -123.7142); Buck Mountain 

Creek (40.0944, -123.7423); Butler Creek 

(39.7423, -123.6987); Cedar Creek 

(39.8834, -123.6216); China Creek 

(40.1035, -123.9493); Connick Creek 

(40.0912, -123.8154); Couborn Creek 

(39.9820, -123.8973); Cox Creek 

(40.0310, -123.8398); Cruso Cabin Creek 

(39.9281, -123.5842); Dean Creek 

(40.1342, -123.7363); Durphy Creek 

(40.0205, -123.8271); East Branch South 

Fork Eel River (39.9359, -123.6204); 

Elkhorn Creek (39.9272, -123.6279); 

Fish Creek (40.0390, -123.7630); 

Hartsook Creek (40.0081, -123.8113); 

Hollow Tree Creek (39.7250, -123.6924); 

Huckleberry Creek (39.7292, -123.7275); 

Indian Creek (39.9470, -123.9008); Islam 

John Creek (39.8062, -123.7363); Jones 

Creek (39.9958, -123.8374); Leggett 

Creek (40.1470, -123.8375); Little Sproul 

Creek (40.0890, -123.8577); Lost Man 

Creek (39.7983, -123.7287); Low Gap 

Creek (39.8029, -123.6803); Low Gap 

Creek (39.9933, -123.7601); McCoy 

Creek (39.9572, -123.7369); Michael’s 

Creek (39.7665, -123.7035); Middle 

Creek (39.8052, -123.7691); Milk Ranch 

Creek (40.0102, -123.7514); Mill Creek 

(39.8673, -123.7605); Miller Creek 

(40.1319, -123.9302); Mitchell Creek 

(39.7350, -123.6862); Moody Creek 

(39.9471, -123.8827); Mule Creek 

(39.8169, -123.7745); North Fork Cedar 

Creek (39.8864, -123.6363); North Fork 

McCoy Creek (39.9723, -123.7496); 

North Fork Standley Creek (39.9442, 

-123.8330); Ohman Creek (40.1929, 

-123.7687); Piercy Creek (39.9597, 

-123.8442); Pollock Creek (40.0802, 

-123.9341); Rattlesnake Creek (39.7912, 

-123.5428); Red Mountain Creek 

(39.9363, -123.7203); Redwood Creek 

(39.7723, -123.7648); Redwood Creek 

(40.0974, -123.9104); Rock Creek 

(39.8962, -123.7065); Sebbas Creek 

(39.9934, -123.8903); Somerville Creek 

(40.1006, -123.8884); South Fork Mule 

Creek (39.8174, -123.7788); South Fork 

Redwood Creek (39.7662, -123.7579); 

Sproul Creek (40.0226, -123.8649); 

Squaw Creek (40.0760, -123.7257); 

Standly Creek (39.9327, -123.8309); 

Tom Long Creek (40.0175, -123.6551); 

Waldron Creek (39.7469, -123.7465); 

Walter’s Creek (39.7921, -123.7250); 

Warden Creek (40.0629, -123.8551); 

West Fork Sproul Creek (40.0587, 

-123.9170); Wildcat Creek (39.8956, 

-123.7820); Wilson Creek (39.8362, 

-123.6345); Unnamed tributary (39.9927, 

-123.8807). 

(ix) Laytonville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111133. Outlet(s) = South Fork Eel River 

(Lat 39.7665, Long -123.6484) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (39.6446, 

-123.5766); Big Rick Creek (39.7117, 

-123.5512); Cahto Creek (39.6527, 

-123.5579); Dark Canyon Creek 

(39.7333, -123.6614); Dutch Charlie 

Creek (39.6843, -123.7023); Elder Creek 

(39.7234, -123.6192); Fox Creek 

(39.7441, -123.6142); Grub Creek 

(39.7777, -123.5809); Jack of Hearts 

Creek (39.7136, -123.6896); Kenny Creek 

(39.6838, -123.5929); Little Case Creek 

(39.6892, -123.5441); Mill Creek 

(39.6839, -123.5118); Mud Creek 

(39.6713, -123.5741); Mud Springs 

Creek (39.6929, -123.5629); Redwood 

Creek (39.6545, -123.6753); Rock Creek 

(39.6922, -123.6090); Section Four Creek 

(39.6137, -123.5297); South Fork Eel 

River (39.6242, -123.5468); Streeter 

Creek (39.7340, -123.5606); Ten Mile 

Creek (39.6652, -123.4486); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.7004, -123.5678).

(x) Sequoia Hydrologic Sub-area 

111141. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.3557, Long ¥123.9191) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Beatty Creek (40.3198, 

¥123.7500); Brock Creek (40.2410, 

¥123.7246); Cameron Creek (40.3313, 

¥123.7707); Kapple Creek (40.3531, 

¥123.8585); Dobbyn Creek (40.2216, 

¥123.6029); Mud Creek (40.2078, 

¥123.5143); North Fork Dobbyn Creek 

(40.2669, ¥123.5467); Sonoma Creek 

(40.2974, ¥123.7953); South Fork 

Dobbyn Creek (40.1723, ¥123.5112); 

Line Gulch Creek (40.1640, ¥123.4783); 

South Fork Eel River (40.3500, 

¥123.9305); South Fork Thompson 

Creek (40.3447, ¥123.8334); Thompson 

Creek (40.3552, ¥123.8417); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.2745, ¥123.5487). 

(xi) Spy Rock Hydrologic Sub-area 

111142. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

40.1736, Long ¥123.6043) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Pen Canyon 

(39.6943, ¥123.4359); Bell Springs 

Creek (39.9457, ¥123.5313); Blue Rock 

Creek (39.8937, ¥123.5018); Burger 

Creek (39.6693, ¥123.4034); Chamise 

Creek (40.0035, ¥123.5945); Gill Creek 

(39.7879, ¥123.3465); Iron Creek 

(39.7993, ¥123.4747); Jewett Creek 

(40.1122, ¥123.6171); Kekawaka Creek 

(40.0686, ¥123.4087); Rock Creek 

(39.9347, ¥123.5187); Shell Rock Creek 

(39.8414, ¥123.4614); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.7579, ¥123.4709); White 

Rock Creek (39.7646, ¥123.4684); 

Woodman Creek (39.7612, ¥123.4364). 

(xii) Outlet Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111161. Outlet(s) = Outlet Creek (Lat 

39.4248, Long ¥123.3453) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Baechtel Creek (39.3623, 

¥123.4143); Berry Creek (39.4271, 

¥123.2777); Bloody Run Creek 

(39.5864, ¥123.3545); Broaddus Creek 

(39.3869, ¥123.4282); Cherry Creek 

(39.6043, ¥123.4073); Conklin Creek 

(39.3756, ¥123.2570); Davis Creek 

(39.3354, ¥123.2945); Haehl Creek 

(39.3735, ¥123.3172); Long Valley 

Creek (39.6246, ¥123.4651); Mill Creek 

(39.4196, ¥123.3919); Outlet Creek 

(39.4526, ¥123.3338); Ryan Creek 

(39.4804, ¥123.3644); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.4956, ¥123.3591); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4322, 

¥123.3848); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.5793, ¥123.4546); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.3703, ¥123.3419); Upp 

Creek (39.4479, ¥123.3825); Willts 

Creek (39.4445, ¥123.3898). 

(xiii) Tomki Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111162. Outlet(s) = Eel River (Lat 

39.7138, Long ¥123.3532) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cave Creek (39.3842, 

¥123.2148); Dean Creek (39.6924, 

¥123.3727); Garcia Creek (39.5153, 

¥123.1512); Little Cave Creek (39.3915, 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71939

¥123.2462); Little Creek (39.4146, 

¥123.2595); Long Branch Creek 

(39.4074, ¥123.1897); Outlet Creek 

(39.6263, ¥123.3453); Rocktree Creek 

(39.4534, ¥123.3053); Salmon Creek 

(39.4367, ¥123.1939); Scott Creek 

(39.4492, ¥123.2286); String Creek 

(39.4658, ¥123.3206); Tarter Creek 

(39.4715, ¥123.2976); Thomas Creek 

(39.4768, ¥123.1230); Tomki Creek 

(39.5483, ¥123.3687); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.5064, ¥123.3574); 

Whitney Creek (39.4399, ¥123.1084); 

Wheelbarrow Creek (39.4851, 

¥123.3391). 

(xiv) Eden Valley Hydrologic Sub-area 

111171. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork Eel 

River (Lat 39.7136, Long ¥123.3530) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Black Butte 

River (39.8238, ¥123.0877); Crocker 

Creek (39.5559, ¥123.0409); Eden Creek 

(39.5992, ¥123.1746); Elk Creek 

(39.5371, ¥123.0101); Hayshed Creek 

(39.7082, ¥123.0967); Mill Creek 

(39.7398, ¥123.1431); Salt Creek 

(39.6765, ¥123.2740); Sportsmans 

Creek (39.5373, ¥123.0247); Sulper 

Springs (39.5536, ¥123.0365); Thatcher 

Creek (39.6686, ¥123.0639); Williams 

Creek (39.8147, ¥123.1335).

(xv) Round Valley Hydrologic Subarea 111172. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat 

39.7398, Long ¥123.1431); Williams 

Creek (39.8147, ¥123.1335) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cold Creek (39.8714, 

¥123.2991); Grist Creek (39.7640, 

¥123.2883); Mill Creek (39.8481, 

¥123.2896); Murphy Creek (39.8885, 

¥123.1612); Short Creek (39.8703, 

¥123.2352); Town Creek (39.7991, 

¥123.2889); Turner Creek (39.7218, 

¥123.2175); Williams Creek (39.8903, 

¥123.1212); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.7428, ¥123.2757); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.7493, ¥123.2584). 

(xvi) Black Butte River Hydrologic 

Sub-area 111173. Outlet(s) = Black 

Butte River (Lat 39.8234, Long 

¥123.0862) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Black Butte River (39.5946, ¥122.8579); 

Buckhorn Creek (39.6563, ¥122.9225); 

Cold Creek (39.6960, ¥122.9063); Estell 

Creek (39.5966, ¥122.8224); Spanish 

Creek (39.6287, ¥122.8331). 

(xvii) Wilderness Hydrologic Sub-area 

111174. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork Eel 

River (Lat 39.8240, Long ¥123.0877) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Beaver 

Creek (39.9352, ¥122.9943); Fossil 

Creek (39.9447, ¥123.0403); Middle 

Fork Eel River (40.0780, ¥123.0442); 

North Fork Middle Fork Eel River 

(40.0727, ¥123.1364); Palm of Gileade 

Creek (40.0229, ¥123.0647); Pothole 

Creek (39.9347, ¥123.0440). 

(6) Cape Mendocino Hydrologic Unit 

1112—(i) Oil Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111210. Outlet(s) = Guthrie Creek (Lat 

40.5407, Long ¥124.3626); Oil Creek 

(40.5195, ¥124.3767) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Guthrie Creek (40.5320, 

¥124.3128); Oil Creek (40.5061, 

¥124.2875); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4946, ¥124.3091); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.4982, ¥124.3549); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.5141, 

¥124.3573); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4992, ¥124.3070). 

(ii) Capetown Hydrologic Sub-area 

111220. Outlet(s) = Bear River (Lat 

40.4744, Long ¥124.3881); Davis Creek 

(40.3850, ¥124.3691); Singley Creek 

(40.4311, ¥124.4034) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Antone Creek (40.4281, 

¥124.2114); Bear River (40.3591, 

¥124.0536); Beer Bottle Gulch (40.3949, 

¥124.1410); Bonanza Gulch (40.4777, 

¥124.2966); Brushy Creek (40.4102, 

¥124.1050); Davis Creek (40.3945, 

¥124.2912); Harmonica Creek (40.3775, 

¥124.0735); Hollister Creek (40.4109, 

¥124.2891); Nelson Creek (40.3536, 

¥124.1154); Peaked Creek (40.4123, 

¥124.1897); Pullen Creek (40.4057, 

¥124.0814); Singley Creek (40.4177, 

¥124.3305); South Fork Bear River 

(40.4047, ¥124.2631); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.4271, ¥124.3107); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4814, 

¥124.2741); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.3633, ¥124.0651); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3785, ¥124.0599); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4179, 

¥124.2391); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4040, ¥124.0923); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3996, ¥124.3175); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4045, 

¥124.0745); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4668, ¥124.2364); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.4389, ¥124.2350); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4516, 

¥124.2238); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.4136, ¥124.1594); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.4350, ¥124.1504); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4394, 

¥124.3745); West Side Creek (40.4751, 

¥124.2432). 

(iii) Mattole River Hydrologic Subarea 111230. Outlet(s) = Big Creek (Lat 

40.1567, Long ¥124.2114); Big Flat 

Creek (40.1275, ¥124.1764); Buck Creek 

(40.1086, ¥124.1218); Cooskie Creek 

(40.2192, ¥124.3105); Fourmile Creek 

(40.256, ¥124.3578); Gitchell Creek 

(40.0938, ¥124.1023); Horse Mountain 

Creek (40.0685, ¥124.0822); Kinsey 

Creek (40.1717, ¥124.2310); Mattole 

River (40.2942, ¥124.3536); McNutt 

Gulch (40.3541, ¥124.3619); Oat Creek 

(40.1785, ¥124.2445); Randall Creek 

(40.2004, ¥124.2831); Shipman Creek 

(40.1175, ¥124.1449); Spanish Creek 

(40.1835, ¥124.2569); Telegraph Creek 

(40.0473, ¥124.0798); Whale Gulch 

(39.9623, ¥123.9785) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Anderson Creek 

(40.0329, ¥123.9674); Baker Creek 

(40.0143, ¥123.9048); Bear Creek 

(40.1262, ¥124.0631); Bear Creek 

(40.2819, ¥124.3336); Bear Trap Creek 

(40.2157, ¥124.1422); Big Creek 

(40.1742, ¥124.1924); Big Finley Creek 

(40.0910, ¥124.0179); Big Flat Creek 

(40.1444, ¥124.1636); Blue Slide Creek 

(40.1562, ¥123.9283); Box Canyon 

Creek (40.1078, ¥123.9854); Bridge 

Creek (40.0447, ¥124.0118); Buck Creek 

(40.1166, ¥124.1142); Conklin Creek 

(40.3197, ¥124.2055); Cooskie Creek 

(40.2286, ¥124.2986); Devils Creek 

(40.3432, ¥124.1365); Dry Creek 

(40.2646, ¥124.0660); East Branch 

North Fork Mattole River (40.3333, 

¥124.1490); East Fork Honeydew Creek 

(40.1625, ¥124.0929); Eubank Creek 

(40.0997, ¥123.9661); Fire Creek 

(40.1533, ¥123.9509); Fourmile Creek 

(40.2604, ¥124.3079); Fourmile Creek 

(40.1767, ¥124.0759); French Creek 

(40.1384, ¥124.0072); Gibson Creek 

(40.0304, ¥123.9279); Gilham Creek 

(40.2078, ¥124.0085); Gitchell Creek 

(40.1086, ¥124.0947); Green Ridge 

Creek (40.3254, ¥124.1258); Grindstone 

Creek (40.2019, ¥123.9890); Harris 

Creek (40.0381, ¥123.9304); Harrow 

Creek (40.1612, ¥124.0292); Helen 

Barnum Creek (40.0036, ¥123.9101); 

Honeydew Creek (40.1747, ¥124.1410); 

Horse Mountain Creek (40.0769, 

¥124.0729); Indian Creek (40.2772, 

¥124.2759); Jewett Creek (40.1465, 

¥124.0414); Kinsey Creek (40.1765, 

¥124.2220); Lost Man Creek (39.9754, 

¥123.9179); Mattole Canyon (40.2021, 

¥123.9570); Mattole River (39.9714, 

¥123.9623); McGinnis Creek (40.3186, 

¥124.1801); McKee Creek (40.0864, 

¥123.9480); McNutt Gulch (40.3458, 

¥124.3418); Middle Creek (40.2591, 

¥124.0366); Mill Creek (40.0158, 

¥123.9693); Mill Creek (40.3305, 

¥124.2598); Mill Creek (40.2839, 

¥124.2946); Nooning Creek (40.0616, 

¥124.0050); North Fork Mattole River 

(40.3866, ¥124.1867); North Fork Bear 

Creek (40.1494, ¥124.1060); North Fork 

Fourmile Creek (40.2019, ¥124.0722); 

Oat Creek (40.1884, ¥124.2296); Oil 

Creek (40.3214, ¥124.1601); Painter 

Creek (40.0844, ¥123.9639); Prichett 

Creek (40.2892, ¥124.1704); Randall 

Creek (40.2092, ¥124.2668); 

Rattlesnake Creek (40.3250, 

¥124.0981); Shipman Creek (40.1250, 

¥124.1384); Sholes Creek (40.1603, 

¥124.0619); South Branch West Fork 

Bridge Creek (40.0326, ¥123.9853); 

South Fork Bear Creek (40.0176, 

¥124.0016); Spanish Creek (40.1965, 

¥124.2429); Squaw Creek (40.1934, 

¥124.2002); Stanley Creek (40.0273, 

¥123.9166); Sulphur Creek (40.3647, 

¥124.1586); Telegraph Creek (40.0439, 

¥124.0640); Thompson Creek (39.9913, 

¥123.9707); Unnamed Tributary 

71940 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(40.3475, ¥124.1606); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3522, ¥124.1533); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.0891, 

¥123.9839); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.2223, ¥124.0172); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.1733, ¥123.9515); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.2899, 

¥124.0955); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.2853, ¥124.3227); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.9969, ¥123.9071); Upper 

East Fork Honeydew Creek (40.1759, 

¥124.1182); Upper North Fork Mattole 

River (40.2907, ¥124.1115); Vanauken 

Creek (40.0674, ¥123.9422); West Fork 

Bridge Creek (40.0343, ¥123.9990); 

West Fork Honeydew Creek (40.1870, 

¥124.1614); Westlund Creek (40.2440, 

¥124.0036); Whale Gulch (39.9747, 

¥123.9812); Woods Creek (40.2119, 

¥124.1611); Yew Creek (40.0018, 

¥123.9762).

(7) Mendocino Coast Hydrologic Unit 

1113—(i) Usal Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111311. Outlet(s) = Jackass Creek 

(Lat 39.8806, Long ¥123.9155); Usal 

Creek (39.8316, ¥123.8507) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (39.8898, 

¥123.8344); Jackass Creek (39.8901, 

¥123.8928); Little Bear Creek (39.8782, 

¥123.8250); Waterfall Gulch (39.8725, 

¥123.8784); North Fork Jackass Creek 

(39.9095, ¥123.9101); North Fork Julias 

Creek (39.8634, ¥123.7967); Soldier 

Creek (39.8679, ¥123.8162); South Fork 

Usal Creek (39.8356, ¥123.7865); Julias 

Creek (39.8574, ¥123.7912); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.9279, ¥123.8666); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.8890, 

¥123.8480); Usal Creek (39.9160, 

¥123.8787). 

(ii) Wages Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111312. Outlet(s) = Cottaneva Creek (Lat 

39.7360, Long ¥123.8293); Hardy Creek 

(39.7107, ¥123.8082); Howard Creek 

(39.6778, ¥123.7915); Juan Creek 

(39.7028, ¥123.8042); DeHaven Creek 

(39.6592, ¥123.7863); Wages Creek 

(39.6513, ¥123.7851) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cottaneva Creek 

(39.7825, ¥123.8210); Dunn Creek 

(39.8103, ¥123.8320); Hardy Creek 

(39.7221, ¥123.7822); Howard Creek 

(39.6808, ¥123.7463); Juan Creek 

(39.7107, ¥123.7472); Kimball Gulch 

(39.7559, ¥123.7828); Little Juan Creek 

(39.7003, ¥123.7609); DeHaven Creek 

(39.6572, ¥123.7350); Middle Fork 

Cottaneva Creek (39.7738, ¥123.8058); 

North Fork Cottaneva Creek (39.8011, 

¥123.8047); North Fork Dehaven Creek 

(39.6660, ¥123.7382); North Fork 

Wages Creek (39.6457, ¥123.7066); 

Rider Gulch (39.6348, ¥123.7621); 

Rockport Creek (39.7346, ¥123.8021); 

Slaughterhouse Gulch (39.7594, 

¥123.7914); South Fork Cottaneva 

Creek (39.7447, ¥123.7773); South Fork 

Wages Creek (39.6297, ¥123.6862); 

Upper Wages Creek (39.6396, 

¥123.6773). 

(iii) Ten Mile River Hydrologic Subarea 111313. Outlet(s) = Abalobadiah 

Creek (Lat 39.5654, Long ¥123.7672); 

Chadbourne Gulch (39.6133, 

¥123.7822); Ten Mile River (39.5529, 

¥123.7658); Seaside Creek (39.5592, 

¥123.7655) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Abalobadiah Creek (39.5878, 

¥123.7503); Bald Hill Creek (39.6278, 

¥123.6461); Barlow Gulch (39.6044, 

¥123.7501); Bear Pen Creek (39.5824, 

¥123.6402); Booth Gulch (39.5598, 

¥123.5908); Buckhorn Creek (39.6093, 

¥123.6980); Campbell Creek (39.5053, 

¥123.6610); Cavanough Gulch 

(39.6164, ¥123.6853); Chadbourne 

Gulch (39.6190, ¥123.7682); Clark Fork 

(39.5409, ¥123.5403); Curchman Creek 

(39.4789, ¥123.6398); Gulch 11 

(39.4686, ¥123.5764); Gulch 19 

(39.5993, ¥123.5730); Little Bear Haven 

Creek (39.5654, ¥123.6050); Little 

North Fork (39.6264, ¥123.7350); Mill 

Creek (39.5392, ¥123.7068); North Fork 

Ten Mile River (39.5870, ¥123.5480); 

O’Conner Gulch (39.6205, ¥123.6655); 

Patsy Creek (39.5714, ¥123.5669); 

Redwood Creek (39.5142, ¥123.5620); 

Seaside Creek (39.5612, ¥123.7501); 

Smith Creek (39.5251, ¥123.6499); 

South Fork Bear Haven Creek (39.5688, 

¥123.6527); South Fork Ten Mile River 

(39.5083, ¥123.5395); Ten Mile River 

(39.5721, ¥123.7098); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.5234, ¥123.5893); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.5191, 

¥123.6263); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.5558, ¥123.5450); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.5898, ¥123.7657); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.5813, 

¥123.7526); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.6032, ¥123.5893). 

(iv) Noyo River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111320. Outlet(s) = Digger Creek (Lat 

39.4088, Long ¥123.8164); Hare Creek 

(39.4171, ¥123.8128); Jug Handle Creek 

(39.3767, ¥123.8176); Mill Creek 

(39.4894, ¥123.7967); Mitchell Creek 

(39.3923, ¥123.8165); Noyo River 

(39.4274, ¥123.8096); Pudding Creek 

(39.4588, ¥123.8089); Virgin Creek 

(39.4714, ¥123.8045) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Gulch (39.3881, 

¥123.6614); Brandon Gulch (39.4191, 

¥123.6645); Bunker Gulch (39.3969, 

¥123.7153); Burbeck Creek (39.4354, 

¥123.4235); Covington Gulch (39.4099, 

¥123.7546); Digger Creek (39.4058, 

¥123.8092); Duffy Gulch (39.4469, 

¥123.6023); Gulch Creek (39.4441, 

¥123.4684); Gulch Seven (39.4523, 

¥123.5183); Hare Creek (39.3781, 

¥123.6922); Hayworth Creek (39.4857, 

¥123.4769); Hayshed Creek (39.4200, 

¥123.7391); Jug Handle Creek (39.3647, 

¥123.7523); Kass Creek (39.4273, 

¥123.6797); Little North Fork (39.4532, 

¥123.6636); Little Valley Creek 

(39.5026, ¥123.7277); Marble Gulch 

(39.4423, ¥123.5479); McMullen Creek 

(39.4383, ¥123.4488); Middle Fork 

North Fork (39.4924, ¥123.5231); Mill 

Creek (39.4843, ¥123.7575); Mitchell 

Creek (39.3813, ¥123.7734); North Fork 

Hayworth Creek (39.4891, ¥123.5026); 

North Fork Noyo (39.4974, ¥123.5405); 

North Fork Noyo (39.4765, ¥123.5535); 

North Fork South Fork Noyo River 

(39.3971, ¥123.6108); Noyo River 

(39.4242, ¥123.4356); Olds Creek 

(39.3964, ¥123.4448); Parlin Creek 

(39.3700, ¥123.6111); Pudding Creek 

(39.4591, ¥123.6516); Redwood Creek 

(39.4660, ¥123.4571); South Fork Hare 

Creek (39.3785, ¥123.7384); South Fork 

Noyo River (39.3620, ¥123.6188); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4113, 

¥123.5621); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.3918, ¥123.6425);Unnamed 

Tributary (39.4168, ¥123.4578); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4653, 

¥123.7549); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.4640, ¥123.7473); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.4931, ¥123.7371); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4922, 

¥123.7381); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.4939, ¥123.7184); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.4158, ¥123.6428); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4002, 

¥123.7347); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.3831, ¥123.6177); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.4926, ¥123.4764); Virgin 

Creek (39.4621, ¥123.7855);

(v) Big River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111330. Outlet(s) = Big River (Lat 

39.3030, Long ¥123.7957); Casper 

Creek (39.3617, ¥123.8169); Doyle 

Creek (39.3603, ¥123.8187); Jack Peters 

Creek (39.3193, ¥123.8006); Russian 

Gulch (39.3288, ¥123.8050) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Berry Gulch (39.3585, 

¥123.6930); Big River (39.3166, 

¥123.3733); Casper Creek (39.3462, 

¥123.7556); Chamberlain Creek 

(39.4007, ¥123.5317); Daugherty Creek 

(39.1700, ¥123.3699); Doyle Creek 

(39.3517, ¥123.8007); East Branch 

Little North Fork Big River (39.3372, 

¥123.6410); East Branch North Fork Big 

River (39.3354, ¥123.4652); Gates Creek 

(39.2083, ¥123.3944); Jack Peters Gulch 

(39.3225, ¥123.7850); James Creek 

(39.3922, ¥123.4747); Johnson Creek 

(39.1963, ¥123.3927); Johnson Creek 

(39.2556, ¥123.4485); Laguna Creek 

(39.2914, ¥123.6301); Little North Fork 

Big River (39.3497, ¥123.6242); Marten 

Creek (39.3290, ¥123.4279); Mettick 

Creek (39.2591, ¥123.5193); Middle 

Fork North Fork Casper Creek (39.3575, 

¥123.7170); North Fork Big River 

(39.3762, ¥123.4591); North Fork 

Casper Creek (39.3610, ¥123.7356); 

North Fork James Creek (39.3980, 

¥123.4939); North Fork Ramone Creek 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71941

(39.2760, ¥123.4846); Pig Pen Gulch 

(39.3226, ¥123.4609); Pruitt Creek 

(39.2592, ¥123.3812); Ramone Creek 

(39.2714, ¥123.4415); Rice Creek 

(39.2809, ¥123.3963); Russell Brook 

(39.2863, ¥123.4461); Russian Gulch 

(39.3237, ¥123.7650); Snuffins Creek 

(39.1836, ¥123.3854); Soda Creek 

(39.2230, ¥123.4239); South Fork Big 

River (39.2317, ¥123.3687); South Fork 

Casper Creek (39.3493, ¥123.7216); 

Two Log Creek (39.3484, ¥123.5781); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.3897, 

¥123.5556); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.3637, ¥123.5464); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.3776, ¥123.5274); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.4029, 

¥123.5771); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.3209, ¥123.5964); Valentine Creek 

(39.2694, ¥123.3957); Water Gulch 

(39.3608, ¥123.5916). 

(vi) Albion River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111340. Outlet(s) = Albion River (Lat 

39.2253, Long ¥123.7679); Big Salmon 

Creek (39.2150, ¥123.7660); Buckhorn 

Creek (39.2593, ¥123.7839); Dark Gulch 

(39.2397, ¥123.7740); Little Salmon 

Creek (39.2150, ¥123.7660); Little River 

(39.2734, ¥123.7914) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Albion River (39.2613, 

¥123.5766); Big Salmon Creek 

(39.2045, ¥123.6425); Buckhorn Creek 

(39.2513, ¥123.7595); Dark Gulch 

(39.2379, ¥123.7592); Duck Pond Gulch 

(39.2456, ¥123.6960); East Railroad 

Gulch (39.2604, ¥123.6381); Hazel 

Gulch (39.2141, ¥123.6418); Kaison 

Gulch (39.2733, ¥123.6803); Little 

North Fork South Fork Albion River 

(39.2350, ¥123.6431); Little River 

(39.2683, ¥123.7190); Little Salmon 

Creek (39.2168, ¥123.7515); Marsh 

Creek (39.2325, ¥123.5596); Nordon 

Gulch (39.2489, ¥123.6503); North Fork 

Albion River (39.2854, ¥123.5752); 

Pleasant Valley Gulch (39.2379, 

¥123.6965); Railroad Gulch (39.2182, 

¥123.6932); Soda Springs Creek 

(39.2943, ¥123.5944); South Fork 

Albion River (39.2474, ¥123.6107); 

Tom Bell Creek (39.2805, ¥123.6519); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.2279, 

¥123.6972); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.2194, ¥123.7100); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.2744, ¥123.5889); 

Unnamed Tributary (39.2318, 

¥123.6800). 

(vii) Navarro River Hydrologic Subarea 111350. Outlet(s) = Navarro River 

(Lat 39.1921, Long ¥123.7611) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Alder Creek 

(38.9830, ¥123.3946); Anderson Creek 

(38.9644, ¥123.2907); Bailey Creek 

(39.1733, ¥123.4804); Barton Gulch 

(39.1804, ¥123.6783); Bear Creek 

(39.1425, ¥123.4326); Bear Wallow 

Creek (39.0053, ¥123.4075); Beasley 

Creek (38.9366, ¥123.3265); Bottom 

Creek (39.2117, ¥123.4607); Camp 16 

Gulch (39.1937, ¥123.6095); Camp 

Creek (38.9310, ¥123.3527); Cold 

Spring Creek (39.0376, ¥123.5027); Con 

Creek (39.0374, ¥123.3816); Cook Creek 

(39.1879, ¥123.5109); Cune Creek 

(39.1622, ¥123.6014); Dago Creek 

(39.0731, ¥123.5068); Dead Horse 

Gulch (39.1576, ¥123.6124); Dutch 

Henry Creek (39.2112, ¥123.5794); 

Floodgate Creek (39.1291, ¥123.5365); 

Fluem Gulch (39.1615, ¥123.6695); 

Flynn Creek (39.2099, ¥123.6032); 

German Creek (38.9452, ¥123.4269); 

Gut Creek (39.0803, ¥123.3312); Ham 

Canyon (39.0164, ¥123.4265); Horse 

Creek (39.0144, ¥123.4960); Hungry 

Hollow Creek (39.1327, ¥123.4488); 

Indian Creek (39.0708, ¥123.3301); 

Jimmy Creek (39.0117, ¥123.2888); 

John Smith Creek (39.2275, ¥123.5366); 

Little North Fork Navarro River 

(39.1941, ¥123.4553); Low Gap Creek 

(39.1590, ¥123.3783); Navarro River 

(39.0537, ¥123.4409); Marsh Gulch 

(39.1692, ¥123.7049); McCarvey Creek 

(39.1589, ¥123.4048); Mill Creek 

(39.1270, ¥123.4315); Minnie Creek 

(38.9751, ¥123.4529); Murray Gulch 

(39.1755, ¥123.6966); Mustard Gulch 

(39.1673, ¥123.6393); North Branch 

(39.2069, ¥123.5361); North Fork 

Indian Creek (39.1213, ¥123.3345); 

North Fork Navarro River (39.1708, 

¥123.5606); Parkinson Gulch (39.0768, 

¥123.4070); Perry Gulch (39.1342, 

¥123.5707); Rancheria Creek (38.8626, 

¥123.2417); Ray Gulch (39.1792, 

¥123.6494); Robinson Creek (38.9845, 

¥123.3513); Rose Creek (39.1358, 

¥123.3672); Shingle Mill Creek 

(39.1671, ¥123.4223); Soda Creek 

(39.0238, ¥123.3149); Soda Creek 

(39.1531, ¥123.3734); South Branch 

(39.1534, ¥123.4173); Spooner Creek 

(39.2221, ¥123.4811); Tramway Gulch 

(39.1481, ¥123.5958); Yale Creek 

(38.8882, ¥123.2785).

(viii) Greenwood Creek Hydrologic 

Sub-area 111361. Outlet(s) = 

Greenwood Creek (Lat 39.1262, Long 

¥123.7181) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Greenwood Creek (39.1245, 

¥123.6474). 

(ix) Elk Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111362. Outlet(s) = Elk Creek (Lat 

39.1024, Long ¥123.7080) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Elk Creek (39.0657, 

¥123.6245). 

(x) Alder Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111363. Outlet(s) = Alder Creek (Lat 

39.0044, Long ¥123.6969); Mallo Pass 

Creek (39.0341, ¥123.6896) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Alder Creek (338.9961, 

¥123.6471); Mallo Pass Creek (39.0287, 

¥123.6373). 

(xi) Brush Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111364. Outlet(s) = Brush Creek (Lat 

38.9760, Long ¥123.7120) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Brush Creek (38.9730, 

¥123.5563); Mill Creek (38.9678, 

¥123.6515); Unnamed Tributary 

(38.9724, ¥123.6571). 

(xii) Garcia River Hydrologic Sub-area 

111370. Outlet(s) = Garcia River (Lat 

38.9550, Long ¥123.7338); Point Arena 

Creek (38.9141, ¥123.7103); Schooner 

Gulch (38.8667, ¥123.6550) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Blue Water Hole Creek 

(38.9378, ¥123.5023); Flemming Creek 

(38.8384, ¥123.5361); Garcia River 

(38.8965, ¥123.3681); Hathaway Creek 

(38.9351, ¥123.7098); Inman Creek 

(38.8804, ¥123.4370); Larmour Creek 

(38.9419, ¥123.4469); Mill Creek 

(38.9078, ¥123.3143); North Fork 

Garcia River (38.9233, ¥123.5339); 

North Fork Schooner Gulch (38.8758, 

¥123.6281); Pardaloe Creek (38.8895, 

¥123.3423); Point Arena Creek 

(38.9069, ¥123.6838); Redwood Creek 

(38.9241, ¥123.3343); Rolling Brook 

(38.8965, ¥123.5716); Schooner Gulch 

(38.8677, ¥123.6198); South Fork 

Garcia River (38.8450, ¥123.5420); 

Stansburry Creek (38.9422, ¥123.4720); 

Signal Creek (38.8639, ¥123.4414); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.8758, 

¥123.5692); Unnamed Tributary 

(38.8818, ¥123.5723); Whitlow Creek 

(38.9141, ¥123.4624). 

(xiii) North Fork Gualala River 

Hydrologic Sub-area 111381. Outlet(s) = 

North Fork Gualala River (Lat 38.7784, 

Long ¥123.4992) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (38.8347, 

¥123.3842); Billings Creek (38.8652, 

¥123.3496); Doty Creek (38.8495, 

¥123.5131); Dry Creek (38.8416, 

¥123.4455); McGann Gulch (38.8026, 

¥123.4458); North Fork Gualala River 

(38.8479, ¥123.4113); Robinson Creek 

(38.8416, ¥123.3725); Robinson Creek 

(38.8386, ¥123.4991); Stewart Creek 

(38.8109, ¥123.4157); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.8295, ¥123.5570); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.8353, 

¥123.3760); Unnamed Tributary 

(38.8487, ¥123.3820). 

(xiv) Rockpile Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111382. Outlet(s) = Rockpile Creek 

(Lat 38.7507, Long ¥123.4706) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Rockpile 

Creek (38.7966, ¥123.3872). 

(xv) Buckeye Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111383. Outlet(s) = Buckeye Creek 

(Lat 38.7405, Long ¥123.4573) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Buckeye 

Creek (38.7400, ¥123.2697); Flat Ridge 

Creek (38.7616, ¥123.2400); Franchini 

Creek (38.7500, ¥123.3708); North Fork 

Buckeye (38.7991, ¥123.3166). 

(xvi) Wheatfield Fork Hydrologic Subarea 111384. Outlet(s) = Wheatfield 

Fork Gualala River (Lat 38.7014, Long 

¥123.4154) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Danfield Creek (38.6369, ¥123.1431); 

Haupt Creek (38.6220, ¥123.2551); 

House Creek (38.6545, ¥123.1184); 

71942 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

North Fork Fuller Creek (38.7252, 

¥123.2968); Pepperwood Creek 

(38.6205, ¥123.1665); South Fork 

Fuller Creek (38.6973, ¥123.2860); 

Tombs Creek (38.6989, ¥123.1616); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.7175, 

¥123.2744); Wheatfield Fork Gualala 

River (38.7497, ¥123.2215); Fuller 

Creek (38.7109, ¥123.3256).

(xvii) Gualala Hydrologic Sub-area 

111385. Outlet(s) = Fort Ross Creek (Lat 

38.5119, Long ¥123.2436); Gualala 

River (38.7687, ¥123.5334); Kolmer 

Gulch (38.5238, ¥123.2646) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Big Pepperwood Creek 

(38.7951, ¥123.4638); Carson Creek 

(38.5653, ¥123.1906); Fort Ross Creek 

(38.5174, ¥123.2363); Groshong Gulch 

(38.7814, ¥123.4904); Gualala River 

(38.7780, ¥123.4991); Kolmer Gulch 

(38.5369, ¥123.2247); Little 

Pepperwood (38.7738, ¥123.4427); 

McKenzie Creek (38.5895, ¥123.1730); 

Palmer Canyon Creek (38.6002, 

¥123.2167); Sproule Creek (38.6122, 

¥123.2739); Unknown Tributary 

(38.5634, ¥123.2003); Turner Canyon 

(38.5294, ¥123.1672); South Fork 

Gualala River (38.5646, ¥123.1689); 

Marshall Creek (38.5647, ¥123.2058). 

(xviii) Russian Gulch Hydrologic Subarea 111390. Outlet(s) = Russian Gulch 

Creek (Lat 38.4669, Long ¥123.1569) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Russian 

Gulch Creek (38.4956, ¥123.1535); 

West Branch Russian Gulch Creek 

(38.4968, ¥123.1631). 

(8) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the Northern California O. mykiss

ESU follow:

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71943


EP10DE04.008</GPH>
71944 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.009</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71945


EP10DE04.010</GPH>
71946 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71947


EP10DE04.012</GPH>
71948 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71949

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (h) Central California Coast O. mykiss 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss). Critical habitat 

is proposed to include the areas defined 

in the following units: 


EP10DE04.014</GPH>
71950 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Russian River Hydrologic Unit 

1114—(i) Guerneville Hydrologic Subarea 111411. Outlet(s) = Russian River 

(Lat 38.4507, Long ¥123.1289) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Atascadero 

Creek (38.3473, ¥122.8626); Austin 

Creek (38.5098, ¥123.0680); Baumert 

Springs (38.4195, ¥122.9658); Dutch 

Bill Creek (38.4132, ¥122.9508); 

Duvoul Creek (38.4527, ¥122.9525); 

Fife Creek (38.5584, ¥122.9922); 

Freezeout Creek (38.4405, ¥123.0360); 

Green Valley Creek, (38.4445, 

¥122.9185); Grub Creek (38.4411, 

¥122.9636); Hobson Creek (38.5334, 

¥122.9401); Hulbert Creek (38.5548, 

¥123.0362); Jenner Gulch (38.4869, 

¥123.0996); Kidd Creek (38.5029, 

¥123.0935); Lancel Creek (38.4247, 

¥122.9322); Mark West Creek (38.4961, 

¥122.8489); Mays Canyon (38.4800, 

¥122.9715); North Fork Lancel Creek 

(38.4447, ¥122.9444); Pocket Canyon 

(38.4650, ¥122.9267); Porter Creek 

(38.5435, ¥122.9332); Purrington Creek 

(38.4083, ¥122.9307); Sheep House 

Creek (38.4820, ¥123.0921); Smith 

Creek (38.4622, ¥122.9585); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.4560, ¥123.0246); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.3976, 

¥122.8994); Unnamed Tributary 

(38.3772, ¥122.8938); Willow Creek 

(38.4249, ¥123.0022). 

(ii) Austin Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111412. Outlet(s) = Austin Creek (Lat 

38.5098, Long ¥123.0680) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Pen Creek (38.5939, 

¥123.1644); Big Oat Creek (38.5615, 

¥123.1299); Blue Jay Creek (38.5618, 

¥123.1399); Conshea Creek (38.5830, 

¥123.0824); Devil Creek (38.6163, 

¥123.0425); Black Rock Creek (38.5586, 

¥123.0730); Thompson Creek (38.5747, 

¥123.0300); Pole Mountain Creek 

(38.5122, ¥123.1168); Red Slide Creek 

(38.6039, ¥123.1141); Saint Elmo Creek 

(38.5130, ¥123.1125); Schoolhouse 

Creek (38.5595, ¥123.0175); Spring 

Creek (38.5041, ¥123.1364); Sulphur 

Creek (38.6187, ¥123.0553); Austin 

Creek (38.6262, ¥123.1347); East 

Austin Creek (38.6349, ¥123.1238); 

Gilliam Creek (38.5803, ¥123.0152); 

Gray Creek (38.6132, ¥123.0107); Ward 

Creek (38.5720, ¥123.1547). 

(iii) Laguna Hydrologic Sub-area 

111421. Outlet(s) = Laguna de Santa 

Rosa (Lat 38.4522, Long ¥122.8347) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Crane Creek 

(38.3521, ¥122.6022); Hinebaugh Creek 

(38.3509, ¥122.6913); Laguna de Santa 

Rosa (38.3431, ¥122.7229); Blucher 

Creek (38.3509, ¥122.8258); Copeland 

Creek (38.3371, ¥122.6038). 

(iv) Mark West Hydrologic Sub-area 

111423. Outlet(s) = Mark West Creek 

(Lat 38.4858, Long ¥122.8419) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Humbug 

Creek (38.5412, ¥122.6249); Laguna de 

Santa Rosa (38.4526, ¥122.8347); Mark 

West Creek (38.5187, ¥122.5995); Pool 

Creek (38.5486, ¥122.7641); Pruit Creek 

(38.5313, ¥122.7615); Windsor Creek 

(38.5484, ¥122.8101). 

(v) Warm Springs Hydrologic Subarea 111424. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek (Lat 

38.5862, Long ¥122.8577) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Angel Creek (38.6101, 

¥122.9833); Crane Creek (38.6434, 

¥122.9451); Dry Creek (38.7181, 

¥123.0091); Dutcher Creek (38.7223, 

¥122.9770); Felta (38.5679, 

¥122.9379); Foss Creek (38.6244, 

¥122.8754); Grape Creek (38.6593, 

¥122.9707); Mill Creek (38.5976, 

¥122.9914); North Slough Creek 

(38.6392, ¥122.8888); Palmer Creek 

(38.5770, ¥122.9904); Redwood Log 

Creek (38.6705, ¥123.0725); Salt Creek 

(38.5543, ¥122.9133); Pena Creek 

(38.6384, ¥123.0743); Wallace Creek 

(38.6260, ¥122.9651); Wine Creek 

(38.6662, ¥122.9682); Woods Creek 

(38.6069, ¥123.0272).

(vi) Geyserville Hydrologic Sub-area 

111425. Outlet(s) = Russian River (Lat 

38.6132, Long ¥122.8321) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (38.8556, 

¥123.0082); Bear Creek (38.7253, 

¥122.7038); Bidwell Creek (38.6229, 

¥122.6320); Big Sulphur Creek 

(38.8279, ¥122.9914); Bluegum Creek 

(38.6988, ¥122.7596); Briggs Creek 

(38.6845, ¥122.6811); Coon Creek 

(38.7105, ¥122.6957); Crocker Creek 

(38.7771, ¥122.9595); Edwards Creek 

(38.8592, ¥123.0758); Foss Creek 

(38.6373, ¥122.8753); Franz Creek 

(38.5726, ¥122.6343); Gill Creek 

(38.7552, ¥122.8840); Gird Creek 

(38.7055, ¥122.8311); Ingalls Creek 

(38.7344, ¥122.7192); Kellog Creek 

(38.6753, ¥122.6422); Little Briggs 

Creek (38.7082, ¥122.7014); Maacama 

Creek (38.6743, ¥122.7431); McDonnell 

Creek (38.7354, ¥122.7338); Mill Creek 

(38.7009, ¥122.6490); Miller Creek 

(38.7211, ¥122.8608); Oat Valley Creek 

(38.8461, ¥123.0712); Redwood Creek 

(38.6342, ¥122.6720); Foote Creek 

(38.6433, ¥122.6797); Sausal Creek 

(38.6924, ¥122.7930); South Fork Gill 

Creek (38.7420, ¥122.8760); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.7329, ¥122.8601); 

Yellowjacket Creek (38.6666, 

¥122.6308). 

(vii) Sulphur Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111426. Outlet(s) = Big Sulphur 

Creek (Lat 38.8279, Long ¥122.9914) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Alder Creek 

(38.8503, ¥122.8953); Anna Belcher 

Creek (38.7537, ¥122.7586); Big 

Sulphur Creek (38.8243, ¥122.8774); 

Cobb Creek (38.7953, ¥122.7909); 

Frasier Creek (38.8439, ¥122.9341); 

Humming Bird Creek (38.8460, 

¥122.8596); Lovers Gulch (38.7396, 

¥122.8275); North Branch Little 

Sulphur Creek (38.7783, ¥122.8119); 

Squaw Creek (38.8199, ¥122.7945); 

Little Sulphur Creek (38.7469, 

¥122.7425). 

(viii) Ukiah Hydrologic Sub-area 

111431. Outlet(s) = Russian River (Lat 

38.8828, Long ¥123.0557) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Pieta Creek (38.8622, 

¥122.9329). 

(ix) Forsythe Creek Hydrologic Subarea 111433. Outlet(s) = West Branch 

Russian River (Lat 39.2257, Long 

¥123.2012) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Bakers Creek (39.2859, ¥123.2432); 

Eldridge Creek (39.2250, ¥123.3309); 

Forsythe Creek (39.2976, ¥123.2963); 

Jack Smith Creek (39.2754, ¥123.3421); 

Mariposa Creek (39.3472, ¥123.2625); 

Mill Creek (39.2969, ¥123.3360); Salt 

Hollow Creek (39.2585, ¥123.1881); 

Seward Creek (39.2606, ¥123.2646); 

West Branch Russian River (39.3642, 

¥123.2334). 

(2) Bodega Hydrologic Unit 1115—(i) 

Salmon Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

111510. Outlet(s) = Salmon Creek (Lat 

38.3554, Long ¥123.0675) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Coleman Valley Creek 

(38.3956, ¥123.0097); Faye Creek 

(38.3749, ¥123.0000); Finley Creek 

(38.3707, ¥123.0258); Salmon Creek 

(38.3877, ¥122.9318); Tannery Creek 

(38.3660, ¥122.9808). 

(ii) Estero Americano Hydrologic Subarea 111530. Outlet(s) = Estero 

Americano (Lat 38.2939, Long 

¥123.0011) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Estero Americano (38.3117, 

¥122.9748); Ebabias Creek (38.3345, 

¥122.9759). 

(3) Marin Coastal Hydrologic Unit 

2201—(i) Walker Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220112. Outlet(s) = Walker Creek 

(Lat 38.2213, Long ¥122.9228); 

Millerton Gulch (38.1055, ¥122.8416) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Chileno 

Creek (38.2145, ¥122.8579); Frink 

Canyon (38.1761, ¥122.8405); Millerton 

Gulch (38.1376, ¥122.8052); Verde 

Canyon (38.1630, ¥122.8116); 

Unnamed Trib (38.1224, ¥122.8095); 

Walker Creek (38.1617, ¥122.7815). 

(ii) Lagunitas Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220113. Outlet(s) = Lagunitas Creek 

(Lat 38.0827, Long ¥122.8274) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Cheda Creek 

(38.0483, ¥122.7329); Devil’s Gulch 

(38.0393, ¥122.7128); Giacomini Creek 

(38.0032, ¥122.7617); Horse Camp 

Gulch (38.0078, ¥122.7624); Lagunitas 

Creek (37.9974, ¥122.7045); Olema 

Creek (37.9719, ¥122.7125); Quarry 

Gulch (38.0345, ¥122.7639); San 

Geronimo Creek (38.0131, ¥122.6499); 

Unnamed Tributary (37.9893, 

¥122.7328); Unnamed Tributary 

(37.9976, ¥122.7553).

(iii) Point Reyes Hydrologic Sub-area 

220120. Outlet(s) = Creamery Bay Creek 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71951

(Lat 38.0809, Long ¥122.9561); East 

Schooner Creek (38.0913, ¥122.9293); 

Home Ranch (38.0705, ¥122.9119); 

Laguna Creek (38.0235, ¥122.8732); 

Muddy Hollow Creek (38.0329, 

¥122.8842) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Creamery Bay Creek (38.0779, 

¥122.9572); East Schooner Creek 

(38.0928, ¥122.9159); Home Ranch 

Creek (38.0784, ¥122.9038); Laguna 

Creek (38.0436, ¥122.8559); Muddy 

Hollow Creek (38.0549, ¥122.8666). 

(iv) Bolinas Hydrologic Sub-area 

220130. Outlet(s) = Easkoot Creek (Lat 

37.9026, Long ¥122.6474); McKinnon 

Gulch (37.9126, ¥122.6639); Morse 

Gulch (37.9189, ¥122.6710); Pine 

Gulch Creek (37.9218, ¥122.6882); 

Redwood Creek (37.8595, ¥122.5787); 

Stinson Gulch (37.9068, ¥122.6517); 

Wilkins Creek (37.9343, ¥122.6967) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Easkoot 

Creek (37.8987, ¥122.6370); Kent 

Canyon (37.8866, ¥122.5800); 

McKinnon Gulch (37.9197, ¥122.6564); 

Morse Gulch (37.9240, ¥122.6618); 

Pine Gulch Creek (37.9557, ¥122.7197); 

Redwood Creek (37.9006, ¥122.5787); 

Stinson Gulch (37.9141, ¥122.6426); 

Wilkins Creek (37.9450, ¥122.6910). 

(4) San Mateo Hydrologic Unit 2202—

(i) San Mateo Coastal Hydrologic Subarea 220221. Outlet(s) = Arroyo de en 

Medio (Lat 37.4929, Long ¥122.4606); 

Denniston Creek (37.5033, ¥122.4869); 

Frenchmans Creek (37.4804, 

¥122.4518); San Pedro Creek (37.5964, 

¥122.5057) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Arroyo De En Medio (37.5202, 

¥122.4562); Denniston Creek (37.5184, 

¥122.4896); Frenchmans Creek 

(37.5170, ¥122.4332); Middle Fork San 

Pedro Creek (37.5758, ¥122.4591); 

North Fork San Pedro Creek (37.5996, 

¥122.4635); San Pedro Creek (37.5825, 

¥122.4771). 

(ii) Half Moon Bay Hydrologic Subarea 220222. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Leon 

Creek (Lat 37.4758, Long ¥122.4493) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Apanolio 

Creek (37.5202, ¥122.4158); Arroyo 

Leon Creek (37.4560, ¥122.3442); Mills 

Creek (37.4629, ¥122.3721); Pilarcitos 

Creek (37.5259, ¥122.3980); Unnamed 

Tributary (37.4705, ¥122.3616). 

(iii) Tunitas Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220223. Outlet(s) = Lobitos Creek 

(Lat 37.3762, Long ¥122.4093); Tunitas 

Creek (37.3567, ¥122.3999) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: East Fork Tunitas Creek 

(37.3981, ¥122.3404); Lobitos Creek 

(37.4246, ¥122.3586); Tunitas Creek 

(37.4086, ¥122.3502). 

(iv) San Gregorio Creek Hydrologic 

Sub-area 220230. Outlet(s) = San 

Gregorio Creek (Lat 37.3215, Long 

¥122.4030) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Alpine Creek (37.3062, ¥122.2003); 

Bogess Creek (37.3740, ¥122.3010); El 

Corte Madera Creek (37.3650, 

¥122.3307); Harrington Creek (37.3811, 

¥122.2936); La Honda Creek (37.3680, 

¥122.2655); Langley Creek (37.3302, 

¥122.2420); Mindego Creek (37.3204, 

¥122.2239); San Gregorio Creek 

(37.3099, ¥122.2779); Woodruff Creek 

(37.3415, ¥122.2495). 

(v) Pescadero Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220240. Outlet(s) = Pescadero 

Creek (Lat 37.2669, Long ¥122.4122); 

Pomponio Creek (37.2979, ¥122.4061) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Bradley 

Creek (37.2819, ¥122.3802); Butano 

Creek (37.2419, ¥122.3165); Evans 

Creek (37.2659, ¥122.2163); Honsinger 

Creek (37.2828, ¥122.3316); Little 

Boulder Creek (37.2145, ¥122.1964); 

Little Butano Creek (37.2040, 

¥122.3492); Oil Creek (37.2572, 

¥122.1325); Pescadero Creek (37.2320, 

¥122.1553); Lambert Creek (37.3014, 

¥122.1789); Peters Creek (37.2883, 

¥122.1694); Pomponio Creek (37.3030, 

¥122.3805); Slate Creek (37.2530, 

¥122.1935); Tarwater Creek (37.2731, 

¥122.2387); Waterman Creek (37.2455, 

¥122.1568). 

(5) Bay Bridges Hydrologic Unit 

2203—San Rafael Hydrologic Sub-area 

220320. Outlet(s) = Corte Madera Creek 

(Lat 37.9425, Long ¥122.5059) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Cascade 

Creek (37.9867, ¥122.6287); Corte 

Madera Creek (37.9859, ¥122.5842); 

Larkspur Creek (37.9305, ¥122.5514); 

Ross Creek (37.9558, ¥122.5752); San 

Anselmo Creek (37.9825, ¥122.6420); 

Sleepy Hollow Creek (38.0074, 

¥122.5794); Tamalpais Creek (37.9481, 

¥122.5674). 

(6) South Bay Hydrologic Unit 2204—

(i) Eastbay Cities Hydrologic Sub-area 

220420. Outlet(s) = Alameda Creek (Lat 

37.5942, Long ¥122.1422) upstream. 

(ii) Alameda Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220430. Outlet(s) = Alameda Creek 

(Lat 37.5812, Long ¥121.9644) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Alameda 

Creek (37.4569, ¥121.6996); Arroyo 

Honda (37.3661, ¥121.6684); Arroyo 

Mocho (37.5572, ¥121.5807); Arroyo de 

Laguna (37.6771, ¥121.9124); Arroyo 

del Valle (37.6141, ¥121.7466); Arroyo 

las Positias (37.7029, ¥121.7594); 

Calveras Creek (37.4642, ¥121.7766); 

Colorado Creek (37.4301, ¥121.5092); 

Sinbad Creek (37.6509, ¥121.9353); 

Stoneybrook Creek (37.6377, 

¥121.9608). 

(7) Santa Clara Hydrologic Unit 

2205—(i) Freemont Bayside Hydrologic 

Sub-area 220520. Outlet(s) = Alameda 

Creek (Lat 37.5777, Long ¥122.0251) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Alameda 

Creek (37.5812, ¥121.9644). 

(ii) Coyote Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

220530. Outlet(s) = Coyote Creek (Lat 

37.4629, Long ¥121.9894; 37.2275, 

¥121.7514) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Arroyo Aguague (37.3907, ¥121.7836); 

Coyote Creek (37.2778, ¥121.8033); 

Coyote Creek (37.1677, ¥121.6301); 

Upper Penitencia Creek (37.3969, 

¥121.7577). 

(iii) Palo Alto Hydrologic Sub-area 

220550. Outlet(s) = Guadalupe River 

(Lat 37.4614, Long ¥122.0240); San 

Francisquito Creek (37.4658, 

¥122.1152); Stevens Creek (37.4456, 

¥122.0641) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Bear Creek (37.4528, ¥122.3020); 

Guadalupe River (37.3499, ¥.121.9094); 

Los Trancos (37.3293, ¥122.1786); San 

Francisquito Creek (37.4098, 

¥122.2389); Stevens Creek (37.2990, 

¥122.0778).

(8) San Pablo Hydrologic Unit 2206—

(i) Petaluma River Hydrologic Sub-area 

220630. Outlet(s) = Petaluma River (Lat 

38.1111, Long ¥122.4944) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Adobe Creek (38.2940, 

¥122.5834); Lichau Creek (38.2848, 

¥122.6654); Lynch Creek (38.2748, 

¥122.6194); Petaluma River (38.3010, 

¥122.7149); Schultz Slough (38.1892, 

¥122.5953); San Antonio Creek 

(38.2049, ¥122.7408); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.3105, ¥122.6146); Willow 

Brook (38.3165, ¥122.6113). 

(ii) Sonoma Creek Hydrologic Subarea 220640. Outlet(s) = Sonoma Creek 

(Lat 38.1525, Long ¥122.4050) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Agua 

Caliente Creek (38.3368, ¥122.4518); 

Asbury Creek (38.3401, ¥122.5590); 

Bear Creek (38.4656, ¥122.5253); 

Calabazas Creek (38.4033, ¥122.4803); 

Carriger Creek (38.3031, ¥122.5336); 

Graham Creek (38.3474, ¥122.5607); 

Hooker Creek (38.3809, ¥122.4562); 

Mill Creek (38.3395, ¥122.5454); 

Nathanson Creek (38.3350, ¥122.4290); 

Rodgers Creek (38.2924, ¥122.5543); 

Schell Creek (38.2554, ¥122.4510); 

Sonoma Creek (38.4507, ¥122.4819); 

Stuart Creek (38.3936, ¥122.4708); 

Yulupa Creek (38.3986, ¥122.5934). 

(iii) Napa River Hydrologic Sub-area 

220650. Outlet(s) = Napa River (Lat 

38.0786, Long ¥122.2468) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bale Slough (38.4806, 

¥122.4578); Bear Canyon Creek 

(38.4512, ¥122.4415); Bell Canyon 

Creek (38.5551, ¥122.4827); Brown’s 

Valley Creek (38.3251, ¥122.3686); 

Carneros Creek (38.3108, ¥122.3914); 

Conn Creek (38.4843, ¥122.3824); 

Cyrus Creek (38.5776, ¥122.6032); 

Diamond Mountain Creek (38.5645, 

¥122.5903); Dry Creek (38.4334, 

¥122.4791); Dutch Henery Creek 

(38.6080, ¥122.5253); Garnett Creek 

(38.6236, ¥122.5860); Huichica Creek 

(38.2811, ¥122.3936); Jericho Canyon 

Creek (38.6219, ¥122.5933); Miliken 

Creek (38.3773, ¥122.2280); Mill Creek 

(38.5299, ¥122.5513); Murphy Creek 

71952 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(38.3155, ¥122.2111); Napa Creek 

(38.3047, ¥122.3134); Napa River 

(38.6210, ¥122.6129); Pickle Canyon 

Creek (38.3672, ¥122.4071); Rector 

Creek (38.4410, ¥122.3451); Redwood 

Creek (38.3765, ¥122.4466); Ritchie 

Creek (38.5369, ¥122.5652); Sarco 

Creek (38.3567, ¥122.2071); Soda Creek 

(38.4156, ¥122.2953); Spencer Creek 

(38.2729, ¥122.1909); Sulphur Creek 

(38.4839, ¥122.5161); Suscol Creek 

(38.2522, ¥122.2157); Tulucay Creek 

(38.2929, ¥122.2389); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.4248, ¥122.4935); York 

Creek (38.5128, ¥122.5023). 

(9) Suisun Hydrologic Unit 2207—

Suisun Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

220722. Outlet(s) = Suisun Creek (Lat 

38.2020, Long ¥122.1035) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Suisun Creek (38.3301, 

¥122.1371); Wooden Valley Creek 

(38.3749, ¥122.1830). 

(10) Big Basin Hydrologic Unit 3304—

(i) Davenport Hydrologic Sub-area 

330411 Outlet(s) = Baldwin Creek (Lat 

36.9669, ¥122.1232); Davenport 

Landing Creek (37.0231, ¥122.2153); 

Laguna Creek (36.9824, ¥122.1560); 

Liddell Creek (37.0001, ¥122.1816); 

Majors Creek (36.9762, ¥122.1423); 

Molino Creek (37.0368, ¥122.2292); 

San Vicente Creek (37.0093, 

¥122.1940); Scott Creek (37.0404, 

¥122.2307); Waddell Creek (37.0935, 

¥122.2762); Wilder Creek (36.9535, 

¥122.0775) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Baldwin Creek (37.0126, ¥122.1006); 

Bettencourt Creek (37.1081, 

¥122.2386); Big Creek (37.0832, 

¥122.2175); Davenport Landing Creek 

(37.0475, ¥122.1920); East Branch 

Waddell Creek (37.1482, ¥122.2531); 

East Fork Liddell Creek (37.0204, 

¥122.1521); Henry Creek (37.1695, 

¥122.2751); Laguna Creek (37.0185, 

¥122.1287); Liddell Creek (37.0030, 

¥122.1768); Little Creek (37.0688, 

¥122.2097); Majors Creek (36.9815, 

¥122.1374); Middle Fork East Fork 

Liddell Creek (37.0194, ¥122.1608); 

Mill Creek (37.1034, ¥122.2218); 

Molino Creek (37.0384, ¥122.2125); 

Peasley Gulch (36.9824, ¥122.0861); 

Queseria Creek (37.0521, ¥122.2042); 

San Vicente Creek (37.0417, 

¥122.1741); Scott Creek (37.1338, 

¥122.2306); Waddell Creek (37.1338, 

¥122.2677); West Branch Waddell 

Creek (37.1697, ¥122.2642); West Fork 

Liddell Creek (37.0117, ¥122.1763); 

Unnamed Tributary (37.0103, 

¥122.0701); Wilder Creek (37.0107, 

¥122.0770).

(ii) San Lorenzo Hydrologic Sub-area 

330412. Outlet(s) = Arana Gulch Creek 

(Lat 36.9676, Long ¥122.0028); San 

Lorenzo River (36.9641, ¥122.0125) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Arana Gulch 

Creek (37.0270, ¥121.9739); Bean Creek 

(37.0956, ¥122.0022); Bear Creek 

(37.1711, ¥122.0750); Boulder Creek 

(37.1952, ¥122.1892); Bracken Brae 

Creek (37.1441, ¥122.1459); Branciforte 

Creek (37.0701, ¥121.9749); Crystal 

Creek (37.0333, ¥121.9825); Carbonera 

Creek (37.0286, ¥122.0202); Central 

Branch Arana Gulch Creek (37.0170, 

¥121.9874); Deer Creek (37.2215, 

¥122.0799); Fall Creek (37.0705, 

¥122.1063); Gold Gulch Creek 

(37.0427, ¥122.1018); Granite Creek 

(37.0490, ¥121.9979); Hare Creek 

(37.1544, ¥122.1690); Jameson Creek 

(37.1485, ¥122.1904); Kings Creek 

(37.2262, ¥122.1059); Lompico Creek 

(37.1250, ¥122.0496); Mackenzie Creek 

(37.0866, ¥122.0176); Mountain Charlie 

Creek (37.1385, ¥121.9914); Newell 

Creek (37.1019, ¥122.0724); San 

Lorenzo River (37.2276, ¥122.1384); 

Two Bar Creek (37.1833, ¥122.0929); 

Unnamed Tributary (37.2106, 

¥122.0952); Unnamed Tributary 

(37.2032, ¥122.0699); Zayante Creek 

(37.1062, ¥122.0224). 

(iii) Aptos-Soquel Hydrologic Subarea 330413. Outlet(s)=Aptos Creek (Lat 

36.9692, Long ¥121.9065); Soquel 

Creek (36.9720, ¥121.9526) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Amaya Creek (37.0930, 

¥121.9297); Aptos Creek (37.0545, 

¥121.8568); Bates Creek (37.0099, 

¥121.9353); Bridge Creek (37.0464, 

¥121.8969); East Branch Soquel Creek 

(37.0690, ¥121.8297); Hester Creek 

(37.0967, ¥121.9458); Hinckley Creek 

(37.0671, ¥121.9069); Moores Gulch 

(37.0573, ¥121.9579); Soquel Creek 

(37.0443, ¥121.9404); Valencia Creek 

(37.0323, ¥121.8493); West Branch 

Soquel Creek (37.1095, ¥121.9606). 

(iv) Ano Nuevo Hydrologic Sub-area 

330420. Outlet(s)=Ano Nuevo Creek (Lat 

37.1163, Long ¥22.3060); Gazos Creek 

(37.1646, ¥122.3625); Whitehouse 

Creek (37.1457, ¥122.3469) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Ano Nuevo Creek 

(37.1269, ¥122.3039); Bear Gulch 

(37.1965, ¥122.2773); Gazos Creek 

(37.2088, ¥122.2868); Old Womans 

Creek (37.1829, ¥122.3033); 

Whitehouse Creek (37.1775, 

¥122.2900). 

(11) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the Central California Coast O. 

mykiss ESU follow:

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71953


EP10DE04.015</GPH>
71954 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.016</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71955


EP10DE04.017</GPH>
71956 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.018</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71957


EP10DE04.019</GPH>
71958 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.020</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71959


EP10DE04.021</GPH>
71960 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.022</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71961


EP10DE04.023</GPH>
71962 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (i) South-central California Coast O. 

mykiss (Oncorhynchus mykiss). Critical 

habitat is proposed to include the areas 

defined in the following units: 


EP10DE04.024</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71963

(1) Pajaro River Hydrologic Unit 

3305—(i) Watsonville Hydrologic Subarea 330510. Outlet(s) = Pajaro River 

(Lat 36.8506, Long ¥121.8101) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Banks 

Canyon Creek (36.9958, ¥121.7264); 

Browns Creek (37.0255, ¥121.7754); 

Casserly Creek (36.9902, ¥121.7359); 

Corralitos Creek (37.0666, ¥121.8359); 

Gaffey Creek (36.9905, ¥121.7132); 

Gamecock Canyon (37.0362, 

¥121.7587); Green Valley Creek 

(37.0073, ¥121.7256); Ramsey Gulch 

(37.0447, ¥121.7755); Redwood Canyon 

(37.0342, ¥121.7975); Salsipuedes 

Creek (36.9350, ¥121.7426); Shingle 

Mill Gulch (37.0446, ¥121.7971). 

(ii) Santa Cruz Mountains Hydrologic 

Sub-area 330520. Outlet(s) = Pajaro 

River (Lat 36.8963, Long ¥121.5620); 

Bodfish Creek (37.0020, ¥121.6715); 

Pescadero Creek (36.9125, ¥121.5882); 

Tar Creek (36.9304, ¥121.5520); Uvas 

Creek (37.0251, ¥121.6430) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Blackhawk Canyon 

(37.0168, ¥121.6912); Bodfish Creek 

(36.9985, ¥121.6859); Little Arthur 

Creek (37.0299, ¥121.6874); Pescadero 

Creek (36.9826, ¥121.6274); Tar Creek 

(36.9558, ¥121.6009); Uvas Creek 

(37.0660, ¥121.6912). 

(iii) South Santa Clara Valley 

Hydrologic Sub-area 330530. Outlet(s) = 

San Benito River (Lat 36.8961, Long 

¥121.5625); Pajaro River (36.9222, 

¥121.5388) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Arroyo Dos Picachos (36.8866, 

¥121.3184); Bird Creek (36.7837, 

¥121.3731); Bodfish Creek (37.0080, 

¥121.6652); Bodfish Creek (37.0041, 

¥121.6667); Carnadero Creek (36.9603, 

¥121.532); Llagas Creek (37.1159, 

¥121.6938); Miller Canal (36.9516, 

¥121.5115); San Felipe Lake (36.9835, 

¥121.4604); Tar Creek (36.9297, 

¥121.5419); Tequisquita Slough 

(36.9170, ¥121.3887); Uvas Creek 

(37.0146, ¥121.6314). 

(iv) Pacheco-Santa Ana Creek 

Hydrologic Sub-area 330540. Outlet(s) = 

Arroyo Dos Picachos (Lat 36.8866, Long 

¥121.3184); Pacheco Creek (37.0055, 

¥121.3598) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Arroyo Dos Picachos (36.8912, 

¥121.2305); Cedar Creek (37.0922, 

¥121.3641); North Fork Pacheco Creek 

(37.0514, ¥121.2911); Pacheco Creek 

(37.0445, ¥121.2662); South Fork 

Pacheco Creek (37.0227, ¥121.2603). 

(v) San Benito River Hyddrologic Subarea 330550. Outlet(s) = San Benito 

River (Lat 36.7838, Long ¥121.3731) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Bird Creek 

(36.7604, ¥121.4506); Pescadero Creek 

(36.7202, ¥121.4187); San Benito River 

(36.3324, ¥120.6316); Sawmill Creek 

(36.3593, ¥120.6284). 

(2) Carmel River Hydrologic Unit 

3307—Carmel River Hydrologic Subarea 330700. Outlet(s) = Carmel River 

(Lat36.5362, Long ¥121.9285) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Aqua Mojo Creek 

(36.4711, ¥121.5407); Big Creek 

(36.3935, ¥121.5419); Blue Creek 

(36.2796, ¥121.6530); Boronda Creek 

(36.3542, ¥121.6091); Bruce Fork 

(36.3221, ¥121.6385); Cachagua Creek 

(36.3909 , ¥121.5950); Carmel River 

(36.3701, ¥121.6621); Danish Creek 

(36.3730, ¥121.7590); Hitchcock 

Canyon Creek (36.4470, ¥121.7597); 

James Creek (36.3235, ¥121.5804); Las 

Garzas Creek (36.4607, ¥121.7944); 

Millers Fork (36.2961, ¥121.5697); 

Pinch Creek (36.3236, ¥121.5574); Pine 

Creek (36.3827, ¥121.7727); Potrero 

Creek (36.4801, ¥121.8258); Rana Creek 

(36.4877, ¥121.5840); Rattlesnake 

Creek (36.3442, ¥121.7080); Robertson 

Canyon Creek (36.4776, ¥121.8048); 

Robertson Creek (36.3658, ¥121.5165); 

San Clemente Creek (36.4227, 

¥121.8115); Tularcitos Creek (36.4369, 

¥121.5163); Ventana Mesa Creek 

(36.2977, ¥121.7116). 

(3) Santa Lucia Hydrologic Unit 

3308—Santa Lucia Hydrologic Sub-area 

330800. Outlet(s) = Alder Creek (Lat 

35.8578, Long ¥121.4165); Big Creek 

(36.0696, ¥121.6005); Big Sur River 

(36.2815, ¥121.8593); Bixby Creek 

(36.3713, ¥121.9029); Garrapata Creek 

(36.4176, ¥121.9157); Limekiln Creek 

(36.0084, ¥121.5196); Little Sur River 

(36.3327, ¥121.8853); Malpaso Creek 

(36.4814, ¥121.9384); Mill Creek 

(35.9825, ¥121.4917); Partington Creek 

(36.1753, ¥121.6973); Plaskett Creek 

(35.9195, ¥121.4717); Prewitt Creek 

(35.9353, ¥121.4760); Rocky Creek 

(36.3798, ¥121.9028); San Jose Creek 

(36.5259, ¥121.9253); Vicente Creek 

(36.0442, ¥121.5855); Villa Creek 

(35.8495, ¥121.4087); Willow Creek 

(35.8935, ¥121.4619) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Alder Creek (35.8685, 

¥121.3974); Big Creek (36.0830, 

¥121.5884); Bixby Creek (36.3715, 

¥121.8440); Devil’s Canyon Creek 

(36.0773, ¥121.5695); Garrapata Creek 

(36.4042, ¥121.8594); Joshua Creek 

(36.4182, ¥121.9000); Limekiln Creek 

(36.0154, ¥121.5146); Little Sur River 

(36.3327, ¥121.8853); Logwood Creek 

(36.2105, ¥121.6719); Malpaso Creek 

(36.4681, ¥121.8800); Mill Creek 

(35.9907, ¥121.4632); North Fork Big 

Sur River (36.2178, ¥121.5948); 

Partington Creek (36.1929, ¥121.6825); 

Plaskett Creek (35.9228, ¥121.4493); 

Prewitt Creek (35.9419, ¥121.4598); 

Redwood Creek (36.2825, ¥121.6745); 

Rocky Creek (36.3805, ¥121.84400); 

San Jose Creek (36.4662, ¥121.8118); 

South Fork Big Sur River (36.1903, 

¥121.6114); South Fork Little Sur River 

(36.3026, ¥121.8093); Unnamed 

Tributary (36.2045, ¥121.6075); Vicente 

Creek (36.0463, ¥121.5780); Villa Creek 

(35.8525, ¥121.3973); Wildcat Canyon 

Creek (36.4124, ¥121.8680); Williams 

Canyon Creek (36.4466, ¥121.8526); 

Willow Creek (35.9050, ¥121.3851). 

(4) Salinas River Hydrologic Unit 

3309—(i) Neponset Hydrologic Sub-area 

330911. Outlet(s) = Salinas River (Lat 

36.7498, Long ¥121.8055); Old Salinas 

River (36.8080, ¥121.7854) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Gabilan Creek (36.6923, 

¥121.6300); Old Salinas River (36.7728, 

¥121.7884); Tembladero Slough 

(36.6865, ¥121.6409).

(ii) Chualar Hydrologic Sub-area 

330920. Outlet(s) = Gabilan Creek (Lat 

36.6923, Long ¥121.6300) upstream. 

(iii) Soledad Hydrologic Sub-area 

330930. Outlet(s) = Salinas River 

(Lat36.4878, Long ¥121.4688) upstream 

to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Seco River 

(36.2644, ¥121.3812); Reliz Creek 

(36.2438, ¥121.2881). 

(iv) Upper Salinas Valley Hydrologic 

Sub-area 330940. Outlet(s) = Salinas 

River (Lat 36.3183, Long ¥121.1837) 

upstream. 

(v) Arroyo Seco Hydrologic Sub-area 

330960. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Seco River 

(Lat 36.2644, Long ¥121.3812); Reliz 

Creek (36.2438, ¥121.2881); Vaqueros 

Creek (36.2642, ¥121.3369) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Seco River 

(36.2041, ¥121.5002); Calaboose Creek 

(36.2942, ¥121.5082); Church Creek 

(36.2762, ¥121.5877); Paloma Creek 

(36.3195, ¥121.4894); Piney Creek 

(36.3023, ¥121.5629); Reliz Creek 

(36.1935, ¥121.2777); Rocky Creek 

(36.2676, ¥121.5225); Santa Lucia 

Creek (36.1999, ¥121.4785); Tassajara 

Creek (36.2679, ¥121.6149); Vaqueros 

Creek (36.2479, ¥121.3369); Willow 

Creek (36.2059, ¥121.5642); Zigzag 

Creek (36.1763, ¥121.5475). 

(vi) Gabilan Range Hydrologic Subarea 330970. Outlet(s) = Gabilan Creek 

(Lat 36.7800, ¥121.5836) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Gabilan Creek (36.7335, 

¥121.4939). 

(vii) Paso Robles Hydrologic Sub-area 

330981. Outlet(s) = Salinas River (Lat 

35.9241, Long ¥120.8650) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Atascadero Creek 

(35.4468, ¥120.7010); Eagle Creek 

(35.4209, ¥120.6760); Graves Creek 

(35.4838, ¥120.7631); Hale Creek 

(35.3964, ¥120.6702); Jack Creek 

(35.5815, ¥120.8560); Nacimiento River 

(35.7610, ¥120.8853); Paso Robles 

Creek (35.5636, ¥120.8455); Salinas 

River (35.3886, ¥120.5582); San 

Antonio River (35.7991, ¥120.8849); 

San Marcos Creek (35.6734, 

¥120.8140); Santa Margarita Creek 

(35.3923, ¥120.6619); Santa Rita Creek 

(35.5262, ¥120.8396); Sheepcamp 

Creek (35.6145, ¥120.7795); Summit 

71964 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Creek (35.6441, ¥120.8046); Tassajera 

Creek (35.3895, ¥120.6926); Trout 

Creek (35.3394, ¥120.5881); Willow 

Creek (35.6107, ¥120.7720). 

(5) Estero Bay Hydrologic Unit 3310—

(i) San Carpoforo Hydrologic Sub-area 

331011. Outlet(s) = San Carpoforo Creek 

(Lat 35.7646, Long ¥121.3247) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Dutra Creek 

(¥121.3273, 35.8197); Estrada Creek 

(¥121.2661, 35.7710); San Carpoforo 

Creek (¥121.2745, 35.8202); Unnamed 

Tributary (¥121.2703, 35.7503); Wagner 

Creek (¥121.2387, 35.8166). 

(ii) Arroyo De La Cruz Hydrologic 

Sub-area 331012. Outlet(s) = Arroyo De 

La Cruz (Lat 35.7097, Long ¥121.3080) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo De 

La Cruz (¥121.1722, 35.6986); Burnett 

Creek (¥121.1920, 35.7520); Green 

Canyon Creek (¥121.2314, 35.7375); 

Marmolejo Creek (¥121.1082, 35.6774); 

Spanish Cabin Creek (¥121.1497, 

35.7234); Unnamed Tributary 

(¥121.1977, 35.7291); West Fork 

Burnett Creek (¥121.2075, 35.7516). 

(iii) San Simeon Hydrologic Sub-area 

331013. Outlet(s) = Arroyo del Corral 

(Lat 35.6838, Long ¥121.2875); Arroyo 

del Puerto (35.6432, ¥121.1889); Little 

Pico Creek (35.6336, ¥121.1639); Oak 

Knoll Creek (35.6512, ¥121.2197); Pico 

Creek (35.6155, ¥121.1495); San 

Simeon Creek (35.5950, ¥121.1272) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo 

Laguna (35.6895, ¥121.2337); Arroyo 

del Corral (35.6885, ¥121.2537); Arroyo 

del Puerto (35.6773, ¥121.1713); Little 

Pico Creek (35.6890, ¥121.1375); Oak 

Knoll Creek (35.6718, ¥121.2010); 

North Fork Pico Creek (35.6886, 

¥121.0861); Pico Creek (35.6640, 

¥121.0685); San Simeon Creek 

(35.6228, ¥121.0561); Steiner Creek 

(35.6032, ¥121.0640); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.6482, ¥121.1067); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.6616, 

¥121.0639); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.6741, ¥121.0981); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.6777, ¥121.1503); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.6604, 

¥121.1571); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.6579, ¥121.1356); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.6744, ¥121.1187); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.6460, 

¥121.1373); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.6839, ¥121.0955); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.6431, ¥121.0795); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.6820, 

¥121.2130); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.6977, ¥121.2613); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.6702, ¥121.1884); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.6817, 

¥121.0885); Van Gordon Creek 

(35.6286, ¥121.0942). 

(iv) Santa Rosa Hydrologic Sub-area 

331014. Outlet(s) = Santa Rosa Creek 

(Lat 35.5685, Long ¥121.1113) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Green 

Valley Creek (35.5511, ¥120.9471); 

Perry Creek (35.5323–121.0491); Santa 

Rosa Creek (35.5525, ¥120.9278); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.5965, 

¥120.9413); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.5684, ¥120.9211); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.5746, ¥120.9746). 

(v) Villa Hydrologic Sub-area 331015.

Outlet(s) = Villa Creek (Lat 35.4601, 

Long ¥120.9704) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Unnamed Tributary 

(35.4798, ¥120.9630); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.5080, ¥121.0171); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.5348, 

¥120.8878); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.5510, ¥120.9406); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.5151, ¥120.9497); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.4917, 

¥120.9584); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.5173, ¥120.0171); Villa Creek 

(35.5352, ¥120.8942). 

(vi) Cayucos Hydrologic Sub-area 

331016. Outlet(s) = Cayucos Creek (Lat 

35.4491, Long ¥120.9079) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cayucos Creek (35.4887, 

¥120.8968); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.5157, ¥120.9005); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.4943, ¥120.9513); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.5257, 

¥120.9271).

(vii) Old Hydrologic Sub-area 331017.

Outlet(s) = Old Creek (Lat 35.4345, Long 

¥120.8868) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Old Creek (35.4480, ¥120.8871) 

(viii) Toro Hydrologic Sub-area 

331018. Outlet(s) = Toro Creek (Lat 

35.4126, Long ¥120.8739) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Toro Creek (35.4945, 

¥120.7934); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.4917, ¥120.7983). 

(ix) Morro Hydrologic Sub-area 

331021. Outlet(s) = Morro Creek (Lat 

35.3762, Long ¥120.8642) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: East Fork Morro Creek 

(35.4218, ¥120.7282); Little Morro 

Creek (35.4155, ¥120.7532); Morro 

Creek (35.4280, ¥120.7518); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.4292, ¥120.8122); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.4458, 

¥120.7906); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.4122, ¥120.8335); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.4420, ¥120.7796). 

(x) Chorro Hydrologic Sub-area 

331022. Outlet(s) = Chorro Creek (Lat 

35.3413, Long ¥120.8388) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Chorro Creek (35.3340, 

¥120.6897); Dairy Creek (35.3699, 

¥120.6911); Pennington Creek 

(35.3655, ¥120.7144); San Bernardo 

Creek (35.3935, ¥120.7638); San Luisito 

(35.3755, ¥120.7100); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.3821, ¥120.7217); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.3815, 

¥120.7350). 

(xi) Los Osos Hydrologic Sub-area 

331023. Outlet(s) = Los Osos Creek (Lat 

35.3166, Long ¥120.8112) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Los Osos Creek (35.2727, 

¥120.7636). 

(xii) San Luis Obispo Creek 

Hydrologic Sub-area 331024. Outlet(s) = 

San Luis Obispo Creek (Lat 35.1822, 

Long ¥120.7303) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Brizziolari Creek 

(35.3236, ¥120.6411); Froom Creek 

(35.2525, ¥120.7144); Prefumo Creek 

(35.2615, ¥120.7081); San Luis Obispo 

Creek (35.3393, ¥120.6301); See 

Canyon Creek (35.2306, ¥120.7675); 

Stenner Creek (35.3447, ¥120.6584); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.2443, 

¥120.7655). 

(xiii) Point San Luis Hydrologic Subarea 331025. Outlet(s) = Coon Creek (Lat 

35.2590, Long ¥120.8951); Islay Creek 

(35.2753, ¥120.8884) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Coon Creek (35.2493, 

¥120.7774); Islay Creek (35.2574, 

¥120.7810); Unnamed Tributary 

(35.2753, ¥120.8146); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.2809, ¥120.8147); 

Unnamed Tributary (35.2648, 

¥120.7936). 

(xiv) Pismo Hydrologic Sub-area 

331026. Outlet(s) = Pismo Creek (Lat 

35.1336, Long ¥120.6408) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: East Corral de Piedra 

Creek (35.2343, ¥120.5571); Pismo 

Creek (35.1969, ¥120.6107); Unnamed 

Tributary (35.2462, ¥120.5856). 

(xvi) Oceano Hydrologic Sub-area 

331031. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Grande 

Creek (Lat 35.1011, Long ¥120.6308) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo 

Grande Creek (35.1868, ¥120.4881); Los 

Berros Creek (35.0791, ¥120.4423). 

(6) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the South-central California Coast O. 

mykiss ESU follow: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71965


EP10DE04.025</GPH>
71966 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.026</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71967


EP10DE04.027</GPH>
71968 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.028</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71969

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (j) Southern California O. mykiss 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss). Critical habitat 

is proposed to include the areas defined 

in the following units: 


EP10DE04.029</GPH>
71970 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(1) Santa Maria River Hydrologic Unit 

3312—(i) Santa Maria Hydrologic Subarea 331210. Outlet(s) = Santa Maria 

River (Lat 34.9710, Long ¥120.6494); 

Sisquoc River (Lat 34.9042, Long 

¥120.3067); Cuyama River (Lat 

34.9042, Long ¥120.3067) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Santa Maria River (Lat 

34.9042, Long ¥120.3067); Cuyama 

River (Lat 34.9058, Long ¥120.3018). 

(ii) Sisquoc Hydrologic Sub-area 

331220. Outlet(s) = Sisquoc River (Lat 

34.8942, Long ¥120.3053) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: La Brea Creek (Lat 

34.8804, Long ¥120.1308); South Fork 

La Brea Creek (Lat 34.9543, Long 

¥119.9783); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.9342, Long ¥120.0579); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.9511, Long 

¥120.0130); North Fork La Brea Creek 

(Lat 34.9681, Long ¥120.0102); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.9687, Long 

¥120.1410); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.9626, Long ¥120.1490); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.9672, Long 

¥120.1184); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.9682, Long ¥120.0980); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.9973, Long 

¥120.0652); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.9922, Long ¥120.0284); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 35.0158, Long 

¥120.0328); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.9464, Long ¥120.0298); Horse Creek 

(Lat 34.8373, Long ¥120.0161); 

Manzana Creek (Lat 34.7082, Long 

¥119.8314); Davey Brown Creek (Lat 

34.7541, Long ¥119.9641); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.7544, Long 

¥119.9466); Fish Creek (Lat 34.7532, 

Long ¥119.9090); Unnamed Tributary 

(Lat 34.7466, Long ¥119.9038); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.7647, Long 

¥119.8664); Water Canyon (Lat 

34.8754, Long ¥119.9314); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.8726, Long 

¥119.9515); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.8884, Long ¥119.9315); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.8660, Long 

¥119.8972); Abel Canyon (Lat 34.8662, 

Long ¥119.8344); Unnamed Tributary 

(Lat 34.8677, Long ¥119.8503); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.8608, Long 

¥119.8531); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.8785, Long ¥119.8448); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.8615, Long 

¥119.8149); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.8694, Long ¥119.8220); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.7931, Long 

¥119.8475); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7846, Long ¥119.8327); Foresters 

Leap (Lat 34.8112, Long ¥119.7445); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.7873, Long 

¥119.7674); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7866, Long ¥119.7542); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.8129, Long 

¥119.7704); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7760, Long ¥119.7439); South Fork 

Sisquoc River (Lat 34.7300, Long 

¥119.7868); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7579, Long ¥119.7989); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.7510, Long 

¥119.7912); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7769, Long ¥119.7139); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.7617, Long 

¥119.6868); Judell Creek (Lat 34.7613, 

Long ¥119.6486); Unnamed Tributary 

(Lat 34.7680, Long ¥119.6494); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.7738, Long 

¥119.6483); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7333, Long ¥119.6277); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.7519, Long 

¥119.6199); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.7188, Long ¥119.6663); Sisquoc 

River (Lat 34.7087, Long ¥119.6399). 

(2) Santa Ynez Hydrologic Unit 

3314—(i) Mouth of Santa Ynez 

Hydrologic Sub-area 331410. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Ynez River (Lat 34.6930, Long 

¥120.6023) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

San Miguelito Creek (Lat 34.6310, Long 

¥120.4623). 

(ii) Santa Ynez, Salsipuedes 

Hydrologic Sub-area 331420. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Ynez River (Lat 34.6335, Long 

¥120.4116) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Salsipuedes Creek (Lat 34.5711, Long 

¥120.4066); El Jaro Cr (Lat 34.5327, 

Long ¥120.2851); Llanito Cr (Lat 

34.5500, Long ¥120.2752); El Callejon 

(Lat 34.5476, Long ¥120.2691). 

(iii) Santa Ynez, Zaca Hydrologic 

Sub-area 331430. Outlet(s) = Santa Ynez 

River (Lat 34.6172, Long ¥120.2352) 

upstream.

(iv) Santa Ynez to Bradbury 

Hydrologic Sub-area 331440. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Ynez River (Lat 34.5847, Long 

¥120.1435) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Alisal Creek (Lat 34.5465, Long 

¥120.1348); Alamo Pintado Creek (Lat 

34.7207, Long ¥120.1047); Quiota 

Creek (Lat 34.5370, Long ¥120.0311); 

Santa Agueda Creek (Lat 34.7288, Long 

¥119.9720); San Lucas Creek (Lat 

34.5558, Long ¥120.0109); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.5646, Long 

¥120.0033); Hilton Creek (Lat 34.5839, 

Long ¥119.9845); Santa Ynez River (Lat 

34.5829, Long ¥119.9795). 

(3) South Coast Hydrologic Unit 

3315—(i) Arroyo Hondo Hydrologic 

Sub-area 331510. Outlet(s) = Jalama 

Creek (Lat 34.5119, Long ¥120.5013); 

Cojo Creek (Lat 34.4531, Long 

¥120.4155); San Augustine Creek (Lat 

34.4588, Long ¥120.3532); Santa Anita 

Creek (Lat 34.4669, Long ¥120.3056); 

Sacate Creek (Lat 34.4935, Long 

¥120.2990); Alegria Creek (Lat 34.4688, 

Long ¥120.2710); Gaviota Creek (Lat 

34.4706, Long ¥120.2257); San Onofre 

Creek (Lat 34.4699, Long ¥120.1863); 

Arroyo Hondo Creek (Lat 34.4735, Long 

¥120.1405); Refugio Creek (Lat 34.4627, 

Long ¥120.0686); El Capitan Creek (Lat 

34.4577, Long ¥120.0215); Gato Creek 

(Lat 34.4498, Long ¥119.9876); Dos 

Pueblos Creek (Lat 34.4408, Long 

¥119.9636); Tecolote Creek (Lat 

34.4306, Long ¥119.9163) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Jalama Creek (Lat 

34.5031, Long ¥120.3605); Escondido 

Creek (Lat 34.5663, Long ¥120.4633); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.5527, Long 

¥120.4538); Cojo Creek (Lat 34.4840, 

Long ¥120.4096); La Olla (Lat 34.4836, 

Long ¥120.4061); San Augustine Creek 

(Lat 34.4598, Long ¥120.3551); Santa 

Anita Creek (Lat 34.4742, Long 

¥120.3075); Sacate Creek (Lat 34.4984, 

Long ¥120.2983); Unnamed Tributary 

(Lat 34.4972, Long ¥120.3016); Alegria 

Creek (Lat 34.4713, Long ¥120.2704); 

Gaviota Creek (Lat 34.5176, Long 

¥120.2170); San Onofre Creek (Lat 

34.4853, Long ¥120.1881); Arroyo 

Hondo Creek (Lat 34.5112, Long 

¥120.1694); Refugio Creek (Lat 34.5110, 

Long ¥120.0499); El Capitan Creek (Lat 

34.5238, Long ¥119.9796); Gato Creek 

(Lat 34.5204, Long ¥119.9748); Dos 

Pueblos Creek (Lat 34.5230, Long 

¥119.9239); Tecolote Creek (Lat 

34.5133, Long ¥119.9049). 

(ii) UCSB Slough Hydrologic Sub-area 

331531. Outlet(s) = Tecolito Creek (Lat 

34.4179, Long ¥119.8285); San Pedro 

Creek (Lat 34.4179, Long ¥119.8285) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Carneros 

Creek (Lat 34.4674, Long ¥119.8574); 

Tecolito Creek (Lat 34.4478, Long 

¥119.8754); Glen Annie Creek (Lat 

34.4985, Long ¥119.8657); Unnamed 

Tributary (Lat 34.4774, Long 

¥119.8836); Maria Ygnacio Creek (Lat 

34.4900, Long ¥119.7820); San Antonio 

Creek (Lat 34.4553, Long ¥119.7816); 

Atascadero Creek (Lat 34.4690, Long 

¥119.7555); San Jose Creek (Lat 

34.4919, Long ¥119.8023); San Pedro 

Creek (Lat 34.4774, Long ¥119.8349). 

(iii) Mission Hydrologic Sub-area 

331532. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Burro Creek 

(Lat 34.4023, Long ¥119.7420); Mission 

Creek (Lat 34.4124, Long ¥119.6866); 

Sycamore Creek (Lat 34.4166, Long 

¥119.6658) upsream to endpoint(s) in: 

San Roque Creek (Lat 34.4530, Long 

¥119.7314); Arroyo Burro Creek (Lat 

34.4620, Long ¥119.7451); Rattlesnake 

Creek (Lat 34.4633, Long ¥119.6893); 

Mission Creek (Lat 34.4482, Long 

¥119.7079); Sycamore Creek (Lat 

34.4609, Long ¥119.6832). 

(iv) San Ysidro Hydrologic Sub-area 

331533. Outlet(s) = Montecito Creek (Lat 

34.4167, Long ¥119.6334); San Ysidro 

Creek (Lat 34.4191, Long ¥119.6244); 

Romero Creek (Lat 34.4186, Long 

¥119.6198) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Montecito Creek (Lat 34.4594, Long 

¥119.6532); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.4753, Long ¥119.6428); Cold 

Springs Creek (Lat 34.4794, Long 

¥119.6594); San Ysidro Creek (Lat 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71971

34.4686, Long ¥119.6220); Romero 

Creek (Lat 34.4452, Long ¥119.5914). 

(v) Carpinteria Hydrologic Sub-area 

331534. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Paredon (Lat 

34.4146, Long ¥119.5551); Carpenteria 

Salt Marsh (Santa Monica Creek) (Lat 

34.3961, Long ¥119.5365); Carpenteria 

Lagoon (Carpenteria Creek) (Lat 

34.3904, Long ¥119.5195); Rincon 

Lagoon (Rincon Creek) (Lat 34.3733, 

Long ¥119.4759) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Paredon (Lat 

34.4371, Long ¥119.5471); Carpenteria 

Salt Marsh (Santa Monica Creek) (Lat 

34.4003, Long ¥119.5289); Carpenteria 

Salt Marsh (Franklin Creek) (Lat 

34.3992, Long ¥119.5265); Carpinteria 

Creek (Lat 34.4429, Long ¥119.4955); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.4481, Long 

¥119.5102); Gobernador Creek (Lat 

34.4249, Long ¥119.4737); Steer Creek 

(Lat 34.4687, Long ¥119.4586); El 

Dorado Creek (Lat 34.4682, Long 

¥119.4800); Rincon Lagoon (Rincon 

Creek) (Lat 34.3757, Long ¥119.4767). 

(4) Ventura River Hydrologic Unit 

4402—(i) Ventura Hydrologic Sub-area 

440210. Outlet(s) = Ventura Estuary 

(Ventura River) (Lat 34.2742, Long 

¥119.3067) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Canada Larga (Lat 34.3675, Long 

¥119.2367); Sulphur Canyon (Lat 

34.3727, Long ¥119.2353); Hammond 

Canyon (Lat 34.3903, Long ¥119.2220); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.3344, Long 

¥119.2416); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.3901, Long ¥119.2737). 

(ii) Ventura Hydrologic Sub-area 

440220. Outlet(s) = Ventura River (Lat 

34.3517, Long ¥119.3059); San Antonio 

Creek (Lat 34.3797, Long ¥119.3063) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Ventura 

River (Lat 34.4852, Long ¥119.2985); 

Matilija Creek (Lat 34.4846, Long 

¥119.3076); North Fork Matilija Creek 

(Lat 34.5129, Long ¥119.2728); Coyote 

Creek (lower) (Lat 34.3735, Long 

¥119.3327). 

(iii) Lions Hydrologic Sub-area 

440231. Outlet(s) = Lion Creek (Lat 

34.4222, Long ¥119.2632) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Lion Creek (Lat 34.4331, 

Long ¥119.1995).

(iv) Thatcher Hydrologic Sub-area 

440232. Outlet(s) = San Antonio Creek 

(Lat 34.4224, Long ¥119.2635) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: San Antonio 

Creek (Lat 34.4674, Long ¥119.2029); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.4729, Long 

¥119.2250); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.4948, Long ¥119.1934); Thacher 

Creek (Lat 34.5016, Long ¥119.1863); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.4876, Long 

¥119.2127); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.4992, Long ¥119.2125); Thacher 

Creek (Lat 34.4876, Long ¥119.1675); 

Reeves Creek (Lat 34.4902, Long 

¥119.1426). 

(5) Santa Clara-Calleguas Hydrologic 

Unit 4403—(i) Mouth of Santa Clara 

Hydrologic Sub-area 440310. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Clara River (Lat 34.2348, Long 

¥119.2559) upstream. 

(ii) Santa Clara, Santa Paula 

Hydrologic Sub-area 440321. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Clara River (Lat 34.2731, Long 

¥119.1464) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Santa Paula Creek (Lat 34.4500, Long 

¥119.0554). 

(iii) Sisar Hydrologic Sub-area 

440322. Outlet(s) = Sisar Creek (Lat 

34.4271, Long ¥119.0900) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Sisar Creek (Lat 34.4615, 

Long ¥119.1303). 

(iv) Sespe, Santa Clara Hydrologic 

Sub-area 440331. Outlet(s) = Santa Clara 

River (Lat 34.3513, Long ¥119.0388); 

Sespe Creek (Lat 34.3774, Long 

¥118.9562) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Pole Creek (Lat 34.4384, Long 

¥118.8876). 

(v) Sespe Hydrologic Sub-area 

440332. Outlet(s) = Sespe Creek (Lat 

34.4509, Long ¥118.9249) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Little Sespe Creek (Lat 

34.4598, Long ¥118.8929); Fourfork 

Creek (Lat 34.4735, Long ¥118.8884); 

Pine Canyon Creek (Lat 34.4488, Long 

¥118.9651); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.5125, Long ¥118.9302); West Fork 

Sespe Creek (Lat 34.5106, Long 

¥119.0492); Alder Creek (Lat 34.5691, 

Long ¥118.9519); Unnamed Tributary 

(Lat 34.5537, Long ¥119.0039); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.5537, Long 

¥119.0078); Park Creek (Lat 34.5537, 

Long ¥119.0019); Red Reef Creek (Lat 

34.5344, Long ¥119.0432); Timber 

Creek (Lat 34.5184, Long ¥119.0688); 

Bear Creek (Lat 34.5314, Long 

¥119.1031); Trout Creek (Lat 34.5869, 

Long ¥119.1350); Piedra Blanca Creek 

(Lat 34.6109, Long ¥119.1828); Lion 

Creek (Lat 34.5047, Long ¥119.1092); 

Howard Creek (Lat 34.5459, Long 

¥119.2144); Rose Valley Creek (Lat 

34.5195, Long ¥119.1747); Tule Creek 

(Lat 34.5615, Long ¥119.2977); 

Unnamed Tributary (Lat 34.5757, Long 

¥119.3042); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.5988, Long ¥119.2726); Portrero 

John Creek (Lat 34.6010, Long 

¥119.2685); Munson Creek (Lat 

34.6152, Long ¥119.2954); Chorro 

Grande Creek (Lat 34.6285, Long 

¥119.3236); Unnamed Tributary (Lat 

34.5691, Long ¥119.3418); Lady Bug 

Creek (Lat 34.5724, Long ¥119.3163); 

Abadi Creek (Lat 34.6099, Long 

¥119.4213); Sespe Creek (Lat 34.6295, 

Long ¥119.4402). 

(vi) Santa Clara, Hopper Canyon, Piru 

Hydrologic Sub-area 440341. Outlet(s) = 

Santa Clara River (Lat 34.3860, Long 

¥118.8702) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Hopper Creek (Lat 34.4264, Long 

¥118.8299); Santa Clara River (Lat 

34.3996, Long ¥118.7828); Piru Creek 

(Lat 34.4613, Long ¥118.7528). 

(6) Santa Monica Bay Hydrologic Unit 

4404—(i) Topanga Hydrologic Sub-area 

440411. Outlet(s) = Topanga Creek (Lat 

34.0397, Long ¥118.5821) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Topanga Creek (Lat 

34.0838, Long ¥118.5971). 

(ii) Malibu Hydrologic Sub-area 

440421. Outlet(s) = Malibu Creek (Lat 

34.0322, Long ¥118.6787) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Malibu Creek (Lat 

34.0648, Long ¥118.6978).

(iii) Arroyo Sequit Hydrologic Subarea 440444. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Sequit 

(Lat 34.0445, Long ¥118.9329) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo 

Sequit (Lat 34.0834, Long ¥118.9178); 

West Fork Arroyo Sequit (Lat 34.0909, 

Long ¥118.9225). 

(7) Calleguas Hydrologic Unit 4408—

Calleguas Estuary Hydrologic Sub-area 

440813. Outlet(s) = Mugu Lagoon 

(Calleguas Creek) (Lat 34.1093, Long 

¥119.0917) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Mugu Lagoon (Calleguas Creek) (Lat 

34.1125, Long ¥119.0816). 

(8) San Juan Hydrologic Unit 4901—

(i) Trabuco Hydrologic Sub-area 490121.

Outlet(s) = Trabuco Creek (Lat 33.5164, 

Long ¥117.6718); upstream. 

(ii) Upper Trabuco Hydrologic Subarea 490122. Outlet(s) = Trabuco Creek 

(Lat 33.6619, Long ¥117.5789) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Trabuco 

Creek (Lat 33.6827, Long ¥117.4572). 

(iii) Middle Trabuco Hydrologic Subarea 490123. Outlet(s) = Trabuco Creek 

(Lat 33.5185, Long ¥117.6718) 

upstream. 

(iv) Middle San Juan Hydrologic Subarea 490124. Outlet(s) = San Juan Creek 

(Lat 33.5238, Long ¥117.6127) 

upstream. 

(v) Upper San Juan Hydrologic Subarea 490125. Outlet(s) = San Juan Creek 

(Lat 33.5199, Long ¥117.5605) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: San Juan 

Creek (Lat 33.6092, Long ¥117.4387). 

(vi) Mid-upper San Juan Hydrologic 

Sub-area 490126. Outlet(s) = San Juan 

Creek (Lat 33.5241, Long ¥117.6124) 

upstream. 

(vii) Lower San Juan Hydrologic Subarea 490127. Outlet(s) = San Juan Creek 

(Lat 33.4621, Long ¥117.6833); Trabuco 

Creek (Lat 33.5164, Long ¥117.6718) 

upstream. 

(viii) Middle San Juan Hydrologic 

Sub-area 490128. Outlet(s) = San Juan 

Creek (Lat 33.4969, Long ¥117.6551) 

upstream. 

(ix) San Mateo Hydrologic Sub-area 

490140. Outlet(s) = San Mateo Creek 

(Lat 33.3851, Long ¥117.5924) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: San Mateo 

Creek (Lat 33.4827, Long ¥117.3692); 

San Mateo Canyon (Lat 33.4957, Long 

¥117.4513). 

71972 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

(9) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the Southern California O. mykiss

ESU follow: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71973


EP10DE04.030</GPH>
71974 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.031</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71975


EP10DE04.032</GPH>
71976 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.033</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71977


EP10DE04.034</GPH>
71978 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10DE04.035</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71979


EP10DE04.036</GPH>
71980 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (k) Central Valley spring-run chinook 

(Oncorhynchus tshawytscha). Critical 

habitat is proposed to include the areas 

defined in the following units: 


EP10DE04.037</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71981

(1) Tehama Hydrologic Unit 5504—(i) 

Lower Stony Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550410. Outlet(s) = Glenn-Colusa Canal 

(Lat 39.6762, Long ¥122.0151); Stony 

Creek (39.7122, ¥122.0072) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Glenn¥Colusa Canal 

(39.7122, ¥122.0072); Stony Creek 

(39.8178, ¥122.3253). 

(ii) Red Bluff Hydrologic Sub-area 

550420. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 39.6998, Long ¥121.9419) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Antelope 

Creek (40.2023, ¥122.1275); Big Chico 

Creek (39.7757, ¥121.7525); Blue Tent 

Creek (40.2284, ¥122.2551); Burch 

Creek (39.8526, ¥122.1502); Coyote 

Creek (40.0929, ¥122.1621); Craig 

Creek (40.1617, ¥122.1350); Deer Creek 

(40.0144, ¥121.9481); Dibble Creek 

(40.2003, ¥122.2420); Dye Creek 

(40.0904, ¥122.0767); Elder Creek 

(40.0526, ¥122.1717); Jewet Creek 

(39.8913, ¥122.1005); Kusal Slough 

(39.7577, ¥121.9699); Lindo Channel 

(39.7623, ¥121.7923); McClure Creek 

(40.0074, ¥122.1729); Mill Creek 

(40.0550, ¥122.0317); Mud Creek 

(39.7931, ¥121.8865); New Creek 

(40.1873, ¥122.1350); Oat Creek 

(40.0847, ¥122.1658); Pine Creek 

(39.8760, ¥121.9777); Red Bank Creek 

(40.1391, ¥122.2157); Reeds Creek 

(40.1687, ¥122.2377); Rice Creek 

(39.8495, ¥122.1626); Rock Creek 

(39.8189, ¥121.9124); Salt Creek 

(40.1869, ¥122.1845); Singer Creek 

(39.9200, ¥121.9612); Thomes Creek 

(39.8822, ¥122.5527); Toomes Creek 

(39.9808, ¥122.0642); Unnamed 

Tributary (39.8532, ¥122.1627); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.1682, 

¥122.1459). 

(2) Whitmore Hydrologic Unit 5507—

(i) Inks Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550711. Outlet(s) = Inks Creek (Lat 

40.3305, Long ¥122.1520) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Inks Creek (40.3418, 

¥122.1332). 

(ii) Battle Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550712. Outlet(s) = Battle Creek (Lat 

40.4083, Long ¥122.1102) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Battle Creek (40.4228, 

¥121.9975); North Fork Battle Creek 

(40.4746, ¥121.8436); South Fork Battle 

Creek (40.3549, ¥121.6861). 

(iii) Inwood Hydrologic Sub-area 

550722. Outlet(s) = Bear Creek (Lat 

40.4352, Long ¥122.2039) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.4859, 

¥122.1529); Dry Creek (40.4574, 

¥122.1993). 

(3) Redding Hydrologic Unit 5508—(i) 

Enterprise Flat Hydrologic Sub-area 

550810. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 40.2526, Long ¥122.1707) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Anderson 

Creek (40.3910, ¥122.1984); Ash Creek 

(40.4451, ¥122.1815); Battle Creek 

(40.4083, ¥122.1102); Churn Creek 

(40.5431, ¥122.3395); Clear Creek 

(40.5158, ¥122.5256); Cow Creek 

(40.5438, ¥122.1318); Olney Creek 

(40.5262, ¥122.3783); Paynes Creek 

(40.2810, ¥122.1587); South Cow Creek 

(40.5440, ¥122.1314); Stillwater Creek 

(40.4789, ¥122.2597). 

(ii) Lower Cottonwood Hydrologic 

Sub-area 550820. Outlet(s) = 

Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3777, Long 

¥122.1991) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Cottonwood Creek (40.3943, 

¥122.5254); Middle Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.3314, ¥122.6663); South Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (40.1578, 

¥122.5809). 

(4) Eastern Tehama Hydrologic Unit 

5509—(i) Big Chico Creek Hydrologic 

Sub-area 550914. Outlet(s) = Big Chico 

Creek (Lat 39.7777, Long ¥121.7495) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Big Chico 

Creek (39.8873, ¥121.6979). 

(ii) Deer Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550920. Outlet(s) = Deer Creek (Lat 

40.0144, Long ¥121.9481) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Deer Creek (40.2019, 

¥121.5130). 

(iii) Upper Mill Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550942. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat 

40.0550, Long ¥122.0317) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Mill Creek (40.3997, 

¥121.5135). 

(iv) Antelope Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550963. Outlet(s) = Antelope Creek 

(Lat 40.2023, Long ¥122.1272) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Antelope 

Creek (40.2416, ¥121.8630); North Fork 

Antelope Creek (40.2691, ¥121.8226); 

South Fork Antelope Creek (40.2309, 

¥121.8325). 

(5) Sacramento Delta Hydrologic Unit 

5510—Sacramento Delta Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551000. Outlet(s) = 

Sacramento River (Lat 38.0612, Long 

¥121.7948) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Cache Slough (38.3078, ¥121.7592); 

Delta Cross Channel (38.2433, 

¥121.4964); Elk Slough (38.4140, 

¥121.5212); Elkhorn Slough (38.2898, 

¥121.6271); Georgiana Slough (38.2401, 

¥121.5172); Miners Slough (38.2864, 

¥121.6051); Prospect Slough (38.1477, 

¥121.6641); Sevenmile Slough 

(38.1171, ¥121.6298); Steamboat 

Slough (38.1123, ¥121.5966); Sutter 

Slough (38.3321, ¥121.5838); 

Threemile Slough (38.1155, 

¥121.6835); Yolo Bypass (38.5800, 

¥121.5838). 

(6) Valley-Putah-Cache Hydrologic 

Unit 5511—Lower Putah Creek 

Hydrologic Sub-area 551120. Outlet(s) = 

Yolo Bypass (Lat 38.5800, Long 

¥121.5838) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Sacramento Bypass (38.6057, 

¥121.5563); Yolo Bypass (38.7627, 

¥121.6325). 

(7) Marysville Hydrologic Unit 5515—

(i) Lower Yuba River Hydrologic Subarea 551530. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat 

39.1270, Long ¥121.5981) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2203, 

¥121.3314). 

(ii) Lower Feather River Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551540. Outlet(s) = Feather 

River (Lat 39.1270, Long ¥121.5981) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather 

River (39.5203, ¥121.5475).

(8) Yuba River Hydrologic Unit 

5517—(i) Browns Valley Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551712. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek 

(Lat 39.2207, Long ¥121.4088); Yuba 

River (39.2203, ¥121.3314) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Dry Creek (39.3201, 

¥121.3117); Yuba River (39.2305, 

¥121.2813). 

(ii) Englebright Hydrologic Sub-area 

551714. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat 

39.2305, Long ¥121.2813) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2388, 

¥121.2698). 

(iii) Nevada City Hydrologic Sub-area 

551720. Outlet(s) = Deer Creek (Lat 

39.2303, Long ¥121.2813) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Deer Creek (39.2354, 

¥121.2192). 

(9) Valley-American Hydrologic Unit 

5519—Pleasant Grove Hydrologic Subarea 551922. Outlet(s) = Sacramento 

River (Lat 38.5965, Long ¥121.5086) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather 

River (39.1264, ¥121.5984). 

(10) Colusa Basin Hydrologic Unit 

5520—(i) Sycamore-Sutter Hydrologic 

Sub-area 552010. Outlet(s) = 

Sacramento River (Lat 38.7604, Long 

¥121.6767) upstream. 

(ii) Sutter Bypass Hydrologic Sub-area 

552030. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 38.7851, Long ¥121.6238) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek 

(39.1987, ¥121.9285); Butte Slough 

(39.1987, ¥121.9285); Nelson Slough 

(38.8901, ¥121.6352); Sacramento 

Slough (38.7843, ¥121.6544); Sutter 

Bypass (39.1417, ¥121.8196; 39.1484, 

¥121.8386); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.1586, ¥121.8747). 

(iii) Butte Basin Hydrologic Sub-area 

552040. Outlet(s) = Butte Creek (Lat 

39.1990, Long ¥121.9286); Sacramento 

River (39.4141, ¥122.0087) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Butte creek (39.1949, 

¥121.9361); Colusa Bypass (39.2276, 

¥121.9402); Unnamed Tributary 

(39.6762, ¥122.0151). 

(11) Butte Creek Hydrologic Unit 

5521—Upper Little Chico Hydrologic 

Sub-area 552130. Outlet(s) = Butte 

Creek (Lat 39.7096, ¥121.7504) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in Butte Creek 

3(9.8665, ¥121.6344). 

(12) Shasta Bally Hydrologic Unit 

5524—(i) Platina Hydrologic Sub-area 

552436. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3314, 

¥122.6663) upstream to endpoint(s) in 

Beegum Creek (40.3066, ¥122.9205); 

71982 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek 

(40.3655, ¥122.7451). 

(ii) Spring Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

552440. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 40.5943, Long ¥122.4343) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Sacramento 

River (40.6116, ¥122.4462) 

(iii) Kanaka Peak Hydrologic Sub-area 

552462. Outlet(s) = Clear Creek (Lat 

40.5158, Long ¥122.5256) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Clear Creek (40.5992, 

¥122.5394). 

(13) Maps of proposed critical habitat 

for the Central Valley spring¥run 

chinook salmon ESU follow: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71983


EP10de04.038</GPH>
71984 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.039</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71985


EP10de04.040</GPH>
71986 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.041</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71987


EP10de04.042</GPH>
71988 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.043</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71989


EP10de04.044</GPH>
71990 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.045</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71991


EP10de04.046</GPH>
71992 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.047</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71993


EP10de04.048</GPH>
71994 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C (l) Central Valley O. mykiss 

(Oncorhynchus mykiss). Critical habitat 

is proposed to include the areas defined 

in the following units: 


EP10de04.049</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71995

(1) Tehama Hydrologic Unit 5504—(i) 

Lower Stony Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550410. Outlet(s) = Stony Creek (Lat 

39.6760, Long ¥121.9732) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Stony Creek (39.8199, 

¥122.3391). 

(ii) Red Bluff Hydrologic Sub-area 

550420. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 39.6998, Long ¥121.9419) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Antelope 

Creek (40.2023, ¥122.1272); Big Chico 

Creek (39.7757,¥121.7525); Blue Tent 

Creek (40.2166, ¥122.2362); Burch 

Creek (39.8495, ¥122.1615); Butler 

Slough (40.1579, ¥122.1320); Craig 

Creek (40.1617, ¥122.1350); Deer Creek 

(40.0144, ¥121.9481); Dibble Creek 

(40.2002, ¥122.2421); Dye Creek 

(40.0910, ¥122.0719); Elder Creek 

(40.0438, ¥122.2133); Lindo Channel 

(39.7623, ¥121.7923); McClure Creek 

(40.0074, ¥122.1723); Mill Creek 

(40.0550, ¥122.0317); Mud Creek 

(39.7985, ¥121.8803); New Creek 

(40.1873, ¥122.1350); Oat Creek 

(40.0769, ¥122.2168); Red Bank Creek 

(40.1421, ¥122.2399); Rice Creek 

(39.8484, ¥122.1252); Rock Creek 

(39.8034, ¥121.9403); Salt Creek 

(40.1572, ¥122.1646); Thomes Creek 

(39.8822, ¥122.5527); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.1867, ¥122.1353); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.1682, 

¥122.1459); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.1143, ¥122.1259); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.0151, ¥122.1148); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.0403, 

¥122.1009); Unnamed Tributary 

(40.0514, ¥122.0851); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.0530, ¥122.0769). 

(2) Whitmore Hydrologic Unit 5507—

(i) Inks Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550711. Outlet(s) = Inks Creek (Lat 

40.3305, Long ¥122.1520) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Inks Creek (40.3418, 

¥122.1332). 

(ii) Battle Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550712. Outlet(s) = Battle Creek (Lat 

40.4083, Long ¥122.1102) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Baldwin Creek (40.4369, 

¥121.9885); Battle Creek (40.4228, 

¥121.9975); Brush Creek (40.4913, 

¥121.8664); Millseat Creek (40.4808, 

¥121.8526); Morgan Creek (40.3654, 

¥121.9132); North Fork Battle Creek 

(40.4877, ¥121.8185); Panther Creek 

(40.3897, ¥121.6106); South Ditch 

(40.3997, ¥121.9223); Ripley Creek 

(40.4099, ¥121.8683); Soap Creek 

(40.3904, ¥121.7569); South Fork Battle 

Creek (40.3531, ¥121.6682); Unnamed 

Tributary (40.3567, ¥121.8293); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.4592, 

¥121.8671). 

(iii) Ash Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550721. Outlet(s) = Ash Creek (Lat 

40.4401, Long ¥122.1375) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (40.4628, 

¥122.0066). 

(iv) Inwood Hydrologic Sub-area 

550722. Outlet(s) = Ash Creek (Lat 

40.4628, Long ¥122.0066); Bear Creek 

(40.4352, ¥122.2039) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (40.4859, 

¥121.8993); Bear Creek (40.5368, 

¥121.9560); North Fork Bear Creek 

(40.5736, ¥121.8683). 

(v) South Cow Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550731. Outlet(s) = South Cow 

Creek (Lat 40.5438, Long ¥122.1318) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: South Cow 

Creek (40.6023, ¥121.8623). 

(vi) Old Cow Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550732. Outlet(s) = Clover Creek 

(Lat 40.5788, Long ¥122.1252); Old 

Cow Creek (40.5438, ¥122.1318) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Clover Creek 

(40.6305, ¥122.0304); Old Cow Creek 

(40.5442, ¥122.1317). 

(vii) Little Cow Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550733. Outlet(s) = Little Cow 

Creek (Lat 40.6148, ¥122.2271); Oak 

Run Creek (40.6171, ¥122.1225) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Little Cow 

Creek (40.7114, ¥122.0850); Oak Run 

Creek (40.6379, ¥122.0856). 

(3) Redding Hydrologic Unit 5508—(i) 

Enterprise Flat Hydrologic Sub-area 

550810. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 40.2526, Long ¥122.1707) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek 

(40.4401, ¥122.1375); Battle Creek 

(40.4083, ¥122.1102); Bear Creek 

(40.4360, ¥122.2036); Churn Creek 

(40.5986, ¥122.3418); Clear Creek 

(40.5158, ¥122.5256); Clover Creek 

(40.5788, ¥122.1252); Cottonwood 

Creek (40.3777, ¥122.1991); Cow Creek 

(40.5437, ¥122.1318); East Fork 

Stillwater Creek (40.6495, ¥122.2934); 

Inks Creek (40.3305, ¥122.1520); Little 

Cow Creek (40.6148, ¥122.2271); Oak 

Run (40.6171, ¥122.1225); Old Cow 

Creek (40.5442, ¥122.1317); Olney 

Creek (40.5439, ¥122.4687); Paynes 

Creek (40.3024, ¥122.1012); Stillwater 

Creek (40.6264, ¥122.3056); Sulphur 

Creek (40.6164, ¥122.4077). 

(ii) Lower Cottonwood Hydrologic 

Sub-area 550820. Outlet(s) = Creek (Lat 

40.3777, Long ¥122.1991) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cold Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.2060, ¥122.6608); 

Cottonwood Creek (40.3943, 

¥122.5254); Middle Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.3314, ¥122.6663); North Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (40.4539, 

¥122.5610); South Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.1578, ¥122.5809). 

(4) Eastern Tehama Hydrologic Unit 

5509—(i) Big Chico Creek Hydrologic 

Sub-area 550914. Outlet(s) = Big Chico 

Creek (Lat 39.7757, Long ¥121.7525) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Big Chico 

Creek (39.8898, ¥121.6952). 

(ii) Deer Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550920. Outlet(s) = Deer Creek (Lat 

40.0142, Long ¥121.9476) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Deer Creek (40.2025, 

¥121.5130). 

(iii) Upper Mill Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550942. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat 

40.0550, Long ¥122.0317) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Mill Creek (40.3766, 

¥121.5098); Rocky Gulch Creek 

(40.2888, ¥121.5997).

(iv) Dye Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550962. Outlet(s) = Dye Creek (Lat 

40.0910, Long ¥122.0719) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Dye Creek (40.0996, 

¥121.9612). 

(v) Antelope Creek Hydrologic Subarea 550963. Outlet(s) = Antelope Creek 

(Lat 40.2023, Long ¥122.1272) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Antelope 

Creek (40.2416, ¥121.8630); Middle 

Fork Antelope Creek (40.2673, 

¥121.7744); North Fork Antelope Creek 

(40.2807, ¥121.7645); South Fork 

Antelope Creek (40.2521, ¥121.7575). 

(vi) Paynes Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

550964. Outlet(s) = Paynes Creek (Lat 

40.3024, Long ¥122.1012) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Paynes Creek (40.3357, 

¥121.8300). 

(5) Sacramento Delta Hydrologic Unit 

5510—Sacramento Delta Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551000. Outlet(s) = 

Sacramento River (Lat 38.0653, Long 

¥121.8418) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Cache Slough (38.2984, ¥121.7490); Elk 

Slough (38.4140, ¥121.5212); Elkhorn 

Slough (38.2898, ¥121.6271); Georgiana 

Slough (38.2401, ¥121.5172); 

Horseshoe Bend (38.1078, ¥121.7117); 

Lindsey Slough (38.2592, ¥121.7580); 

Miners Slough (38.2864, ¥121.6051); 

Prospect Slough (38.2830, ¥121.6641); 

Putah Creek (38.5155, ¥121.5885); 

Sevenmile Slough (38.1171, 

¥121.6298); Streamboat Slough 

(38.3052, ¥121.5737); Sutter Slough 

(38.3321, ¥121.5838); Threemile 

Slough (38.1155, ¥121.6835); Ulatis 

Creek (38.2961, ¥121.7835); Unnamed 

Tributary (38.2937, ¥121.7803); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.2937, 

¥121.7804); Yolo Bypass (38.5800, 

¥121.5838). 

(6) Valley¥Putah¥Cache Hydrologic 

Unit 5511—Lower Putah Creek 

Hydrologic Sub-area 551120. Outlet(s) = 

Sacramento Bypass (Lat 38.6057, Long 

¥121.5563); Yolo Bypass (38.5800, 

¥121.5838) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Sacramento Bypass (38.5969, 

¥121.5888); Yolo Bypass (38.7627, 

¥121.6325). 

(7) American River Hydrologic Unit 

5514—Auburn Hydrologic Sub-area 

551422. Outlet(s) = Aubourn Ravine (Lat 

38.8921, Long ¥121.2181); Coon Creek 

(38.9891, ¥121.2556); Doty Creek 

(38.9401, ¥121.2434) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Auburn Ravine (38.8888, 

¥121.1151); Coon Creek (38.9659, 

71996 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 

¥121.1781); Doty Creek (38.9105, 

¥121.1244). 

(8) Marysville Hydrologic Unit 5515—

(i) Lower Yuba River Hydrologic Subarea 551530. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat 

39.1270, Long ¥121.5981) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Bear River (39.2203, 

¥121.3314). 

(ii) Lower Feather River Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551540. Outlet(s) = Feather 

River (Lat 39.1264, Long ¥121.5984) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather 

River (39.5205, ¥121.5475). 

(9) Yuba River Hydrologic Unit 

5517—(i) Browns Valley Hydrologic 

Sub-area 551712. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek 

(Lat 39.2215, Long ¥121.4082); Yuba 

River (39.2203, ¥121.3314) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Dry Creek (39.3232, Long 

¥121.3155); Yuba River (39.2305, 

¥121.2813). 

(ii) Englebright Hydrologic Sub-area 

551714. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat 

39.2305, Long ¥121.2813) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2399, 

¥121.2689). 

(10) Valley¥American Hydrologic 

Unit 5519—(i) Lower American 

Hydrologic Sub-area 551921. Outlet(s) = 

American River (Lat 38.5971, 

¥121.5088) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

American River (38.6373, ¥121.2202); 

Dry Creek (38.7554, ¥121.2676); 

Miner’s Ravine (38.8429, ¥121.1178); 

Natomas East Main Canal (38.6646, 

¥121.4770); Secret Ravine(38.8541, 

¥121.1223). 

(ii) Pleasant Grove Hydrologic Subarea 551922. Outlet(s) = Sacramento 

River (Lat 38.6026, Long ¥121.5155) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Auburn 

Ravine (38.8913, ¥121.2424); Coon 

Creek (38.9883, ¥121.2609); Doty Creek 

(38.9392, ¥121.2475); Feather River 

(39.1264, ¥121.5984). 

(11) Colusa Basin Hydrologic Unit 

5520—(i) Sycamore¥Sutter Hydrologic 

Sub-area 552010. Outlet(s) = 

Sacramento River (Lat 38.7604, Long 

¥121.6767) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Tisdale Bypass (39.0261, ¥121.7456). 

(ii) Sutter Bypass Hydrologic Sub-area 

552030. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 38.7851, Long ¥121.6238) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek 

(39.1990, ¥121.9286); Butte Slough 

(39.1987, ¥121.9285); Nelson Slough 

(38.8956, ¥121.6180); Sacramento 

Slough (38.7844, ¥121.6544); Sutter 

Bypass (39.1586, ¥121.8747). 

(iii) Butte Basin Hydrologic Sub-area 

552040. Outlet(s) = Butte Creek (Lat 

39.1990, Long ¥121.9286); Sacramento 

River (39.4141, ¥122.0087) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek (39.1949, 

¥121.9361); Colusa Bypass (39.2276, 

¥121.9402); Little Chico Creek 

(39.7380, ¥121.7490); Little Dry Creek 

(39.6781, ¥121.6580). 

(12) Butte Creek Hydrologic Unit 

5521—(i) Upper Butte Creek Hydrologic 

Sub-area 552120. Outlet(s) = Little 

Chico Creek (Lat 39.7380, Long 

¥121.7490) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Little Chico Creek (39.8680, 

¥121.6660). 

(ii) Upper Little Chico Hydrologic 

Sub-area 552130. Outlet(s) = Butte 

Creek (Lat 39.7097, Long ¥121.7503) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek 

(39.8215, ¥121.6468); Little Butte Creek 

(39.8159, ¥121.5819).

(13) Ball Mountain Hydrologic Unit 

5523—Thomes Creek Hydrologic Subarea 552310. Outlet(s) = Thomes Creek 

(39.8822, ¥122.5527) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Doll Creek (39.8941, 

¥122.9209); Fish Creek (40.0176, 

¥122.8142); Snake Creek (39.9945, 

¥122.7788); Thomes Creek (39.9455, 

¥122.8491); Willow Creek (39.8930, 

¥122.9051). 

(14) Shasta Bally Hydrologic Unit 

5524—(i) South Fork Hydrologic Subarea 552433. Outlet(s) = Cold Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.2060, Long 

¥122.6608); South Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.1578, ¥122.5809) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Cold Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (40.1881, ¥122.8690); South Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (40.1232, 

¥122.8761). 

(ii) Ono Hydrologic Sub-area 552435.

Outlet(s) = North Fork Cottonwood 

Creek (Lat 40.4539, Long ¥122.5610) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: North Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (40.5005, 

¥122.6972). 

(iii) Platina Hydrologic Sub-area 

552436. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork 

Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3314, Long 

¥122.6663) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Beegum Creek (40.3149, ¥122.9776): 

Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek 

(40.3512, ¥122.9629). 

(iv) Spring Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

552440. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River 

(Lat 40.5943, Long ¥122.4343) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Middle 

Creek (40.5904, ¥121.04825); Rock 

Creek (40.6137, ¥122.5180); 

Sacramento River (40.6116, ¥122.4462); 

Salt Creek (40.5830, ¥122.4586); 

Unnamed Tributary (40.5734, 

¥122.4844). 

(v) Kanaka Peak Hydrologic Sub-area 

552462. Outlet(s) = Clear Creek (Lat 

40.5158, Long ¥122.5256) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Clear Creek (40.5998, 

122.5399). 

(15) North Valley Floor Hydrologic 

Unit 5531—(i) Lower Mokelumne 

Hydrologic Sub-area 553120. Outlet(s) = 

Mokelumne River (Lat 38.2104, Long 

¥121.3804) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Mokelumne River (38.2263, 

¥121.0241); Murphy Creek (38.2491, 

¥121.0119). 

(ii) Lower Calaveras Hydrologic Subarea 553130. Outlet(s) = Calaveras River 

(Lat 37.9836, Long ¥121.3110); 

Mormon Slough (37.9456, ¥121.2907) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Calaveras 

River (38.1025, ¥120.8503); Mormon 

Slough (38.0532, ¥121.0102); Stockton 

Diverting Canal (37.9594, ¥121.2024). 

(16) Upper Calaveras Hydrologic Unit 

5533—New Hogan Reservoir Hydrologic 

Sub-area 553310. Outlet(s) = Calaveras 

River (Lat 38.1025, Long ¥120.8503) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Calaveras 

River (38.1502, ¥120.8143). 

(17) Stanislaus River Hydrologic Unit 

5534—Table Mountain Hydrologic Subarea 553410. Outlet(s) = Stanislaus 

River (Lat 37.8355, Long ¥120.6513) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Stanislaus 

River (37.8631, ¥120.6298). 

(18) San Joaquin Valley Floor 

Hydrologic Unit 5535—(i) Riverbank 

Hydrologic Sub-area 553530. Outlet(s) = 

Stanislaus River (Lat 37.6648, Long 

¥121.2414) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Stanislaus River (37.8355, ¥120.6513). 

(ii) Turlock Hydrologic Sub-area 

553550. Outlet(s) = Tuolumne River (Lat 

37.6059, Long ¥121.1739) upstream. 

(iii) Montpelier Hydrologic Sub-area 

553560. Outlet(s) = Tuolumne River (Lat 

37.6401, Long ¥120.6526) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Tuolumne River 

(37.6721, ¥120.4445). 

(iv) El Nido-Stevinson Hydrologic 

Sub-area 553570. Outlet(s) = Merced 

River (Lat 37.3505, Long ¥120.9619) 

upstream to endpoint(s) in: Merced 

River (37.3620, ¥120.8507).

(v) Merced Hydrologic Sub-area 

553580. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat 

37.3620, Long ¥120.8507) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.4982, 

¥120.4612). 

(vi) Fahr Creek Hydrologic Sub-area 

553590. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat 

37.4982, Long ¥120.4612) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.5081, 

¥120.3581). 

(19) Delta-Mendota Canal Hydrologic 

Unit 5541—(i) Patterson Hydrologic 

Sub-area 554110. Outlet(s) = San 

Joaquin River (Lat 37.6763, Long 

¥121.2653) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

San Joaquin River (37.3491, 

¥120.9759). 

(ii) Los Banos Hydrologic Sub-area 

554120. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat 

37.3490, Long ¥120.9756) upstream to 

endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.3505, 

¥120.9619). 

(20) San Joaquin Delta Hydrologic 

Unit 5544—San Joaquin Delta 

Hydrologic Sub-area 554400. Outlet(s) = 

San Joaquin River (Lat 38.0246, Long 

¥121.7471) upstream to endpoint(s) in: 

Big Break (38.0160, ¥121.6849); Bishop 

Cut (38.0870, ¥121.4158); Calaveras 

River (37.9836, ¥121.3110); Cosumnes 

Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71997

River (38.2538, ¥121.4074); 

Disappointment Slough (38.0439, 

¥121.4201); Dutch Slough (38.0088, 

¥121.6281); Empire Cut (37.9714, 

¥121.4762); False River (38.0479, 

¥121.6232); Frank’s Tract (38.0220, 

¥121.5997); Frank’s Tract (38.0300, 

¥121.5830); Holland Cut (37.9939, 

¥121.5757); Honker Cut (38.0680, 

¥121.4589); Kellog Creek (37.9158, 

¥121.6051); Latham Slough (37.9716, 

¥121.5122); Middle River (37.8216, 

¥121.3747); Mokelumne River 

(38.2104, ¥121.3804); Mormon Slough 

(37.9456,¥121.2907); Mosher Creek 

(38.0327, ¥121.3650); North 

Mokelumne River (38.2274, 

¥121.4918); Old River (37.8086, 

¥121.3274); Orwood Slough (37.9409, 

¥121.5332); Paradise Cut (37.7605, 

¥121.3085); Pixley Slough (38.0443, 

¥121.3868); Potato Slough (38.0440, 

¥121.4997); Rock Slough (37.9754, 

¥121.5795); Sand Mound Slough 

(38.0220, ¥121.5997); Stockton Deep 

Water Channel (37.9957, ¥121.4201); 

Turner Cut (37.9972, ¥121.4434); 

Unnamed Tributary (38.1165, 

¥121.4976); Victoria Canal (37.8891, 

¥121.4895); White Slough (38.0818, 

¥121.4156); Woodward Canal (37.9037, 

¥121.4973). 

(21) Maps of the proposed critical 

habitat for the Central Valley O. mykiss

ESU follow: 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–P

71998 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.050</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 71999


EP10de04.051</GPH>
72000 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.052</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72001


EP10de04.053</GPH>
72002 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.054</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72003


EP10de04.055</GPH>
72004 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.056</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72005


EP10de04.057</GPH>
72006 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.058</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72007


EP10de04.059</GPH>
72008 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.060</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72009


EP10de04.061</GPH>
72010 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.062</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72011


EP10de04.063</GPH>
72012 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.064</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72013


EP10de04.065</GPH>
72014 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.066</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72015


EP10de04.067</GPH>
72016 Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 


EP10de04.068</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 69, No. 237 / Friday, December 10, 2004 / Proposed Rules 72017

[FR Doc. 04–26681 Filed 12–9–04; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3510–22–C


EP10de04.069</GPH>