[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 10, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 11010-11067]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4654]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0010]
[MO 92210-0-0009-B4]
RIN 1018-AV87


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of 
Critical Habitat for Oregon Chub (Oregonichthys crameri)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), designate 
critical habitat for the Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) under the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). In total, 
approximately 53 hectares (ha) (132 acres (ac)) located in Benton, 
Lane, Linn, and Marion Counties, Oregon, fall within the boundaries of 
the critical habitat designation.

DATES: This rule becomes effective on April 9, 2010.

ADDRESSES: This final rule, the economic analysis, comments and 
materials received, as well as supporting documentation we used in 
preparing this final rule, are available for viewing at http://regulations.govat Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2009-0010 and, by appointment, 
during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office, 2600 SE 98\th\ Ave., Portland, OR 
97266; telephone 503-231-6179; facsimile 503-231-6195.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson, State Supervisor, U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see 
ADDRESSES). If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD), 
call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    It is our intent to discuss only those topics directly relevant to 
the development and designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
in this final rule. For a more complete discussion of the ecology and 
life history of this species, please see the Oregon Chub 5-year Review 
Summary and Evaluation completed February 11, 2008, which is available 
at: http://www.fws.gov/pacific/ecoservices/endangered/recovery/Documents/Oregonchub.pdf and the March 10, 2009, proposed rule (74 FR 
10412).

Description and Taxonomy

    The Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) was first described in 
scientific literature in 1908 (Snyder 1908, pp. 181-182), but it wasn't 
until 1991 that it was identified as a unique species (Markle et al. 
1991, pp. 284-289). Oregon chub have an olive-colored back (dorsum) 
grading to silver on the sides and white on the belly. Scales are 
relatively large with fewer than 40 occurring along the lateral line; 
scales near the back are outlined with dark pigment (Markle et al. 
1991, pp. 286-288). While young of the year range in length from 7 to 
32 millimeters (mm) (0.3 to 1.3 inches (in)), adults can be up to 90 mm 
(3.5 in) in length (Pearsons 1989, p. 17). The species is distinguished 
from its closest relative, the Umpqua chub (Oregonichthys kalawatseti), 
by Oregon chub's longer caudal peduncle (the narrow part of a fish's 
body to which the tail is attached), mostly scaled breast, and more 
terminal mouth position (Markle et al. 1991, p. 290).

Distribution and Habitat

    Oregon chub are found in slack-water, off-channel habitats with 
little or no flow, silty and organic substrate, and considerable 
aquatic vegetative cover for hiding and spawning (Pearsons 1989, p.

[[Page 11011]]

10; Markle et al. 1991, p. 288; Scheerer and Jones 1997, p. 5; Scheerer 
et al. 2007, p. 3). The species' aquatic habitat is typically at depths 
of less than or equal to 2 meters (m) (6.6 feet (ft)), and has a C) 
(61Celsius (summer subsurface water temperature exceeding 15 F)) 
(Scheerer and Apke 1997, p. 45; Scheerer 2002, p. 1073; 
ScheererFahrenheit ( and McDonald 2003, p. 69). Optimal Oregon chub 
habitat provides 1 square meter (11 square feet) of aquatic surface 
area per adult, at depths between 0.5 m (1.6 ft) to 2 m (6.6 ft) 
(Scheerer 2008b). Oregon chub can be relatively long-lived with males 
living up to 7 years and females up to 9 years, although less than 10 
percent of fish in most Oregon chub populations are older than 3 years 
(Scheerer and McDonald 2003, p. 71). Outside of spawning season, the 
species is social and nonaggressive with fish of similar size classes 
schooling and feeding together (Pearsons 1989, pp. 16-17).
    The species is endemic to the Willamette River drainage of western 
Oregon (Markle et al. 1991, p. 288) and was formerly distributed 
throughout the Willamette River Valley in a dynamic network of off-
channel habitats such as beaver ponds, oxbows, side channels, backwater 
sloughs, low-gradient tributaries, and flooded marshes in the 
floodplain (Snyder 1908, p. 182). Records show Oregon chub were found 
as far downstream as Oregon City, as far upstream as Oakridge, and in 
various tributaries within the Willamette basin (Markle et al. 1991, p. 
288).
    Historically, Oregon chub would be dispersed and their habitat 
regularly altered, increased, or eliminated due to regular winter and 
spring flood events (Benner and Sedell 1997, pp. 27-28); this dispersal 
created opportunities for interbreeding between different populations. 
The installation of the flood control projects in the Willamette River 
basin altered the natural flow regime, and flooding no longer plays a 
positive role in creating Oregon chub habitat or providing 
opportunities for genetic mixing of populations. Flood events now 
threaten Oregon chub populations due to the dispersal of nonnative 
species that compete with or prey on Oregon chub. In the Santiam River 
basin, the two largest natural populations of Oregon chub declined 
substantially after nonnative fishes invaded these habitats during the 
1996 floods, and no new populations of Oregon chub were discovered in 
habitats located downstream of existing chub populations during 
thorough sampling in 1997-2000. This suggests that no successful 
colonization occurred as a result of the flooding event (Scheerer 2002, 
p. 1078).
    Currently, the largest populations of Oregon chub occur in 
locations with the highest diversity of native fish, amphibian, reptile 
and plant species (Scheerer and Apke 1998, p. 11). Beaver (Castor 
canadensis) appear to be especially important in creating and 
maintaining habitats that support these diverse native species 
assemblages (Scheerer and Apke 1998, p. 45). Conversely, the 
establishment and expansion of nonnative species in Oregon have 
contributed to the decline of the Oregon chub, limiting the species' 
ability to expand beyond its current range (Scheerer 2007, p. 92). Many 
sites formerly inhabited by the Oregon chub are now occupied by 
nonnative species (Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 9; Scheerer 2007a, p. 96). 
Sites with high connectivity to adjacent flowing water frequently 
contain nonnative predatory fishes and rarely contain Oregon chub 
(Scheerer 2007, p. 99). The presence of centrarchids (e.g., Micropterus 
spp. (largemouth bass, smallmouth bass, bluegill) and Pomoxis spp. 
(crappies)), and bullhead catfishes (Ameiurus spp.) is probably 
preventing Oregon chub from recolonizing suitable habitats throughout 
the basin (Markle et al. 1991, p. 291).
    Although surveys conducted by the Oregon Department of Fish and 
Wildlife (ODFW) prior to the 1993 listing of Oregon chub as endangered 
under the Act indicated the presence of the species at 17 different 
locations, the impacts of floodplain alteration and nonnative predators 
and competitors were clearly represented in the relatively small 
numbers of Oregon chub found at these sites. At the time of listing, 
these surveys were the best evidence of the then-current distribution 
of the species. Of these 17 sites, only 9 supported populations of 10 
or more Oregon chub, and all but 1 of those populations were found 
within a 30-kilometer (km) (19-mile (mi)) reach of the Middle Fork 
Willamette River in the vicinity of Dexter and Lookout Point Reservoirs 
in Lane County, Oregon; this reach represented just 2 percent of the 
species' historical range (58 FR 53800). Very small numbers of the 
species, between 1 and 7 individuals, were found at the remaining 8 of 
the 17 sites at the time of listing. Currently, the distribution of 
Oregon chub is limited to 25 known naturally occurring populations and 
11 reintroduced populations scattered throughout the Willamette Valley 
(Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 2; 2008a, p. 2).

Previous Federal Actions

     On October 18, 1993, we listed the Oregon chub as endangered under 
the Endangered Species Act (Act) (58 FR 53800), and concluded that the 
designation of critical habitat was prudent but not determinable. A 
recovery plan for the Oregon chub (Recovery Plan) was completed in 1998 
(USFWS 1998). The Recovery Plan established certain criteria for 
downlisting the species from endangered to threatened, which included 
establishing and managing 10 populations of at least 500 adults each 
that exhibit a stable or increasing trend for 5 years. The Recovery 
Plan states that for purposes of downlisting the species, at least 
three populations must be located in each of the three sub-basins of 
the Willamette River identified in the plan (Mainstem Willamette River, 
Middle Fork Willamette, and Santiam River). The Recovery Plan also 
established criteria for delisting the Oregon chub (i.e., removing it 
from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife). These criteria 
include establishing and managing 20 populations of at least 500 adults 
each, which demonstrate a stable or increasing trend for 7 years. In 
addition, at least four populations must be located in each of the 
three sub-basins (Mainstem Willamette River, Middle Fork Willamette, 
and Santiam River). The management of these populations must be assured 
in perpetuity.
    On June 17, 1999, we published a Safe Harbor Policy to encourage 
private and other non-Federal property owners to voluntarily undertake 
management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or 
maintain habitat to benefit federally listed species (62 FR 32717). 
Safe Harbor Agreements (SHAs) manage habitat for listed species, and 
provide assurances to landowners that additional land, water, and/or 
natural resource use restrictions will not be imposed as a result of 
their voluntary conservation actions to benefit covered species. In 
2001 and 2007, Safe Harbor Agreements (SHAs) for the Oregon chub were 
established in Lane County, Oregon (66 FR 30745, June 7, 2001; 72 FR 
50976, September 5, 2007). These two SHAs established new populations 
of Oregon chub in artificial ponds as refugia for natural populations, 
and contribute to the conservation of the species by reducing the risk 
of the complete loss of donor populations and any of their unique 
genetic material.
    On March 8, 2007, we issued a notice that we would begin a status 
review of the Oregon chub (72 FR 10547). On March 9, 2007, the 
Institute for Wildlife

[[Page 11012]]

Protection (IWP) filed suit in Federal district court, alleging that 
the Service and the Secretary of the Interior violated their statutory 
duties as mandated by the Act when they failed to designate critical 
habitat for the Oregon chub and failed to perform a 5-year status 
review (Institute for Wildlife Protection v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service). We completed the Oregon chub 5-Year Review on February 11, 
2008. In a settlement agreement with the Plaintiff, we agreed to submit 
a proposed critical habitat rule for Oregon chub to the Federal 
Register by March 1, 2009, and to submit a final critical habitat 
determination to the Federal Register by March 1, 2010.
     On March 10, 2009, we published a proposed rule in the Federal 
Register to designate critical habitat for the Oregon chub (74 FR 
10412), and accepted public comments for 60 days (March 10-May 10, 
2009). On September 22, 2009, we announced the reopening of the public 
comment period for 30 days (September 22-October 22, 2009); the 
availability of a draft economic analysis (DEA) and amended required 
determinations section of the proposal; and a public hearing to be held 
on October 5, 2009, in Corvallis, Oregon. The public was invited to 
review and comment on any of the above actions associated with the 
proposed critical habitat designation at the scheduled public hearing 
or in writing (74 FR 48211). For more information on previous Federal 
actions concerning the Oregon chub, refer to the Determination of 
Endangered Status for the Oregon Chub published in the Federal Register 
on October 18, 1993 (58 FR 53800), the Recovery Plan, or the May 15, 
2009, proposed rule to reclassify the Oregon chub from endangered to 
threatened status based on a thorough review of the best available 
scientific data, which indicated that the species' status has improved 
such that it is not currently in danger of extinction throughout all or 
a significant portion of its range (74 FR 22870).

Summary of Comments and Recommendations

    We requested written comments from the public on the proposed 
designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub during the March 
10-May 10, 2009, comment period. We also contacted appropriate Federal, 
State, and local agencies, scientific organizations, and other 
interested parties and invited them to comment on the proposed rule and 
the draft economic analysis. During the March 10-May 10, 2009, comment 
period, we received a request for a public hearing from the IWP. 
Section 4(b)(5)(E) of the Act requires that one public hearing be held 
on a proposed regulation if any person files a request for such a 
hearing within 45-days after the date of publication of a proposed 
rule. We held a public hearing in Corvallis, Oregon on October 5, 2009; 
however, no one attended. During the September 22-October 22, 2009, 
comment period, the IWP resubmitted their earlier comments and 
requested another public hearing, however, since we held a public 
hearing on October 5, 2009, a second public hearing was not required. 
Furthermore, given the lack of attendance at the October 5, 2009, 
hearing, we determined that a second hearing was not necessary.
    We received six comments in response to the proposed rule. Four 
comment letters were received during the March 10-May 10, 2009, comment 
period from two peer reviewers, the Oregon Department of Fish and 
Wildlife (ODFW), and the IWP. Two comment letters were received during 
the September 22-October 22, 2009, comment period from one peer 
reviewer and the IWP. No comments were received regarding the DEA. All 
substantive comments have been either incorporated into the final 
determination or are addressed below.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our policy published in the Federal Register on 
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we solicited expert opinions from three 
knowledgeable individuals with scientific expertise that included 
familiarity with the species, the geographic region in which the 
species occurs, and conservation biology principles. We received 
responses from each of the peer reviewers that we contacted. The peer 
reviewers generally agreed we relied on the best scientific information 
available, accurately described the species and its habitat 
requirements (primary constituent elements (PCEs)), accurately 
characterized the reasons for the species' decline and the threats to 
its habitat, and concurred with our critical habitat selection criteria 
and the use of the Recovery Plan as a foundation for the proposed 
designation. The peer reviewers provided additional information, 
clarifications, and suggestions to improve the final critical habitat 
rule. Recommended editorial revisions and clarifications have been 
incorporated into the final rule as appropriate. We respond to all 
substantive comments below.

Peer Reviewer Comments

    Comment 1: One peer reviewer commented that there was no discussion 
in the Primary Constituent Elements section of connectivity corridors 
for the maintenance of gene flow between populations, or to allow 
natural recolonization of additional habitat.
    Our Response: Connectivity corridors and periodic or seasonal 
connections were historically part of the Oregon chub's life history 
and were certainly the mechanism to provide for gene flow and natural 
colonization of new habitats. Now that most of the tributaries in the 
Willamette River basin have been impacted by dams and diversions, the 
Oregon chub's naturally connected habitat has been altered. Given the 
very serious risk of predation and competition from nonnative fish, 
connectivity now represents a threat to the Oregon chub in many 
locations. The Recovery Plan opts for a combination of approaches to 
recover the Oregon chub--from isolated, intensively managed ponds to 
more natural restored floodplain habitats. It is likely that 
populations will fall along this spectrum, and that Oregon chub 
recovery will be achieved through a variety of strategies (USFWS 1998, 
pp. 86-87). Establishing connectivity corridors may not be an optimal 
recovery strategy for many populations, given the nonnative species 
predation and competition threat. The species currently thrives in 
locations that are isolated and protected from that threat.
    Endangered Species Permit TE-818627-9 authorizes the ODFW to 
conduct Oregon chub population estimates, distribution surveys, collect 
life-history data, and conduct translocations or reintroductions 
following the guidelines presented in the Recovery Plan. Recovery Task 
2.3 in the Recovery Plan states that reintroduction stock should be 
taken from within the sub-basin that contains the new site, and that 
successive introductions within a sub-basin should come from a variety 
of source populations to ensure a diverse genetic makeup to the 
metapopulation within a sub-basin (USFWS 1998, p. 41). ODFW's 
authorized activities under the translocation and reintroduction 
guidelines are intended to address some of the concerns related to gene 
flow maintenance. The Recovery Plan acknowledges the need for a 
combination of approaches to recover Oregon chub, from isolated, 
intensively managed ponds to more natural restored floodplain habitats 
(USFWS 1998, pp. 85-86).

[[Page 11013]]

    Comment 2: One peer reviewer commented that PCE 3 (late spring and 
summer subsurface water temperatures between 15 and 25 C) is 
incomplete, stating that they would have included other water quality 
factors such as the absence or low level of contaminants.
    Our Response: In determining the PCEs for Oregon chub, we relied on 
the best scientific data available. Research has identified definitive 
temperature thresholds for the species for reproductive activity and 
other life-history needs, but has not explicitly defined 
characteristics of good water quality for the species beyond that 
attribute. We address several water quality characteristics in the 
Special Management Considerations or Protections section below, 
including protecting Oregon chub critical habitat areas from 
agricultural and forestry chemical runoff. Habitats that express the 
presence of PCE 2 (appropriate levels of aquatic vegetation that hosts 
abundant food for chub) would presumably be representative of habitats 
having good water quality characteristics.
    Comment 3: One peer reviewer suggested that PCE 4 (no or negligible 
levels of nonnative aquatic predatory or competitive species) is rather 
unspecific and that the term `negligible' may be difficult to 
characterize in practice.
    Our Response: We are unaware of any scientific data that presents a 
definitive numerical threshold of competitive and predatory nonnative 
fish species that would be detrimental to a population of Oregon chub. 
We use the term `negligible' to acknowledge the possibility that a 
population of Oregon chub may be able to persist in the presence of 
some level of nonnative competing species, which may depend on 
population ratios, the biology of the nonnative species involved, or 
other physical, biological, or hydrological factors. However, currently 
available scientific information indicates that Oregon chub and 
nonnative predators are not able to coexist at most sites, and where 
they do the Oregon chub populations remain at low levels.

Comments from States

    We received several recommendations for minor corrections to the 
critical habitat unit descriptions from the ODFW, which have been 
incorporated into this final rule. Other substantive comments received 
from the ODFW are addressed below.
    Comment 4: The context and importance of the population threshold 
of 500 adults was not explained in the Physical and Biological 
Features-Flow Velocities and Depth section of the proposed rule. The 
ODFW recommended that the final rule explain that this population 
threshold was based on delisting criteria identified in the Recovery 
Plan.
    Our Response: We have revised the section accordingly.
    Comment 5: Several sites with abundance levels of fewer than 500 
fish are capable of supporting large populations and are essential to 
the recovery of the species. The ODFW identified three sites that they 
believe contain all of the PCEs, and recommended that they be 
designated as critical habitat: (1) Pioneer Park backwater, Santiam 
sub-basin; (2) Sprick Pond, Coast Fork Willamette sub-basin; and (3) 
Haws Pond, Elijah Bristow South Slough and sites RM198.6 and RM199.5, 
Middle Fork Willamette sub-basin. The ODFW commented that several areas 
proposed as critical habitat for Oregon chub were at very low 
population levels for many years before increasing rapidly in 
abundance, including Unit 3J Buckhead Creek and Unit 3K Wicopee Pond.
    Our Response: In the critical habitat selection criteria of the 
proposed rule, we described the rule set used to identify proposed 
critical habitat areas. This critical habitat designation focuses on 
sites where we have the most confidence that the Oregon chub 
populations can achieve recovery criteria, based on the best available 
scientific information. The 2007 survey results for the Pioneer Park 
backwater site documented 420 fish; Sprick Pond is a new site that had 
19 Oregon chub introduced in 2008; and Oregon chub surveys in Hawes 
Pond documented 382 fish in 2007 and 277 in 2008. Each of the sites 
being designated as critical habitat in this final rule has been 
surveyed annually over several years, with the initial survey data for 
some critical habitat units conducted in the early 1990s (e.g., Shady 
Dell Pond (Unit 3I), Elijah Bristow State Park, Berry Slough (Unit 3B)) 
(Sheerer 2007a, p. 2). However, there is insufficient annual survey 
data to demonstrate whether the population trend is stable or 
increasing in any of the additional locations suggested by the ODFW. We 
have no survey data from the Elijah Bristow South Slough and RM 196.8 
and 199.5 sites, and are uncertain as to their specific location. 
However, based on the Recovery Plan, we have determined that 
designating critical habitat in 25 sites will be sufficient to meet 
recovery goals (see below discussion). Although the additional sites 
suggested by the ODFW may have an important role in Oregon chub 
conservation, they are not essential to the conservation of the 
species. Each of the sites designated in this final rule meet the 
definition of critical habitat under section 3(5)(a) of the Act, and is 
consistent with the criteria described in the Criteria Used to Identify 
Critical Habitat section below. Although the Recovery Plan calls for 
establishing and maintaining a minimum of 20 populations, we are 
designating critical habitat for 25 populations, to mitigate the 
potential that some units may become unable to support the species or 
primary constituent elements over time because of predation issues or 
other factors. Importantly, the designation of critical habitat does 
not imply that lands outside of critical habitat do not play an 
important role in the conservation of the Oregon chub. Federal 
activities undertaken in areas outside of critical habitat are subject 
to review under section 7 of the Act to ensure that they are not likely 
to jeopardize the continued existence of the Oregon chub. The 
prohibitions of section 9 against the take of listed species also 
apply, regardless of critical habitat designation.
    Comment 6: The ODFW suggested more unoccupied off-channel habitat 
in the Jasper to Dexter reach of the Middle Fork Willamette sub-basin 
should be designated as critical habitat. The ODFW commented that these 
habitats are essential for the conservation of the species and present 
the best opportunities to establish additional Oregon chub populations 
in connected habitats. They advised that habitats in this reach 
currently support several stable and abundant Oregon chub populations 
with minimal numbers of nonnative fishes, and that these habitats are 
necessary to recover the species.
    Our Response: The critical habitat selection criteria in the 
proposed rule identified sites that currently support at least 500 
adult Oregon chub, or those that currently express sufficient PCEs to 
support at least 500 adult Oregon chub and have done so in the past. We 
were not aware of the unoccupied off-channel habitat areas being 
suggested by ODFW when we developed the proposed rule, and did not have 
survey data for those locations. The ODFW has since clarified that the 
RM 196.8 and 199.5 sites and the Elijah Bristow South Slough sites 
referenced in their comments are within the Jasper to Dexter reach of 
the Middle Fork Willamette sub-basin. Although initially thought to be 
unoccupied, ODFW surveys conducted in 2008 documented one Oregon chub 
each in the RM 196.8 and RM 199.5 localities. Since the sites suggested 
are either unoccupied or currently support few Oregon chub, they would 
not satisfy the 500 adult fish or 5-year stability

[[Page 11014]]

thresholds identified in the critical habitat selection criteria. 
However, although these sites are inconsistent with the selection 
criteria, they may represent habitat that has potential conservation 
value. The fact that a particular area is not designated as critical 
habitat does not imply that it does not have an important role in the 
conservation of the Oregon chub.
    Comment 7: Runoff of forestry chemicals is a threat to several 
sites, which should be acknowledged in the Special Management 
Considerations or Protections section discussion.
    Our Response: The Special Management Considerations or Protections 
section has been revised accordingly.
    Comment 8: The ODFW identified additional Special Management 
Considerations or Protections needs for several of the units, 
including: (1) Units 3G East Fork Minnow Creek Pond and 3K Wicopee 
Pond, which require special management to prevent the introduction or 
further introduction of nonnative fishes; (2) Unit 3A Fall Creek 
Spillway Ponds, which require special management to prevent or set back 
vegetative succession; and (3) Units 1A Santiam I-5 Side Channels, 
2B(5) Finley Gray Creek Swamp and 3G East Fork Minnow Creek Road, which 
require special management to maintain water quality and reduce the 
incursion of potentially hazardous agricultural and forestry chemicals 
into Oregon chub critical habitat areas.
    Our Response: We have revised the Special Management Considerations 
or Protections discussion accordingly.

Public Comments

    Comment 9: Relying on absolute population size rather than 
effective population size to establish the criteria for selecting 
critical habitat is inadequate; relying on the Recovery Plan to develop 
the critical habitat selection criteria is invalid for the same reason.
    Our Response: We agree that using effective population size would 
be an optimal approach for monitoring the status of Oregon chub 
populations in the designated critical habitat units. Effective 
population size (the average number of individuals in a population that 
are assumed to contribute genes equally to the next generation) is a 
genetic concept used in conservation planning, and is generally a 
smaller number than the total number of individuals in the population. 
The sampling protocol used to count and estimate Oregon chub population 
size employs an adult fish mark-recapture approach using seines, baited 
minnow traps, dip nets, or gill net panels depending on specific 
habitat conditions. Sampling is conducted over a percentage of the 
surface area at each site and within each of the habitat types present 
(Sheerer 2002, p. 1071). However, based on the best scientific and 
commercial data available, we are unable to determine the effective 
population size for any of the Oregon chub populations for which we are 
designating critical habitat in this final rule.
    Each area designated as critical habitat in this final rule:
    (1) Is based on the best scientific information available;
    (2) has been informed by more than 20 years of research (including 
population monitoring);
    (3) contains the essential physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species;
    (4) is consistent with the Recovery Plan, which was peer reviewed 
and developed with help from knowledgeable individuals with scientific 
expertise and familiarity with the species; and
    (5) is consistent with the methodology used to identify critical 
habitat units. Using the Recovery Plan as the standard against which to 
measure Oregon chub recovery is appropriate and consistent with the 
best scientific data available standard we are required to apply under 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
    Comment 10: Global warming and climate change are certain to 
significantly degrade Oregon chub habitat in the future, but the 
proposal provided no analysis in this regard.
    Our Response: We agree that predicted global climate change appears 
likely to pose additional threats to the Oregon chub. In the proposed 
rule, we acknowledged that the designation of critical habitat may not 
include all areas that we may eventually determine are necessary for 
Oregon chub recovery. However, we currently do not have scientific data 
specific to the Oregon chub or its habitat that suggest what, if any, 
additional areas may be essential to the conservation of the species in 
light of climate change. The units being designated as critical habitat 
occur over a range of elevations and encompass large sites that provide 
for habitat heterogeneity and redundancy. We believe that this approach 
provides a buffer against environmental effects that may result from 
changing climate conditions in the Willamette Basin. Critical habitat 
designations are made on the basis of the best available information at 
the time of designation, and do not control the direction and substance 
of future recovery efforts if new information becomes available. If new 
scientific information related to climate change and its relation to 
sensitive habitats in the Willamette Valley becomes available in the 
future, we will fully consider that information in our recovery 
efforts. In addition, section 4(B)(2) of the Act provides for making 
revisions to critical habitat, based on the best scientific data 
available if a revision is appropriate.
    Comment 11: Several Clean Air Act nonattainment areas lie within or 
near the range of this species; the susceptibility of certain organisms 
such as lichens to acid precipitation is quite high; the susceptibility 
of oaks and ponderosa pine should be considered by the Service; use of 
herbicides, pesticides, and other chemical agents is known to have 
damaged animal populations, even though the phenomenon has been little 
studied; a variety of chemical herbicides have been used in habitat 
areas; pesticides have been used to kill various insects occurring in 
habitat areas; endocrine disrupters have been demonstrated in numerous 
species and are known to produce transgenerational effects.
    Our Response: Based on the general nature of the comment, we were 
unable to establish any particular relevance to the proposed 
designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub. See the response 
to comment 2 for a discussion of water quality considerations.
    Comment 12: The critical habitat being designated is not adequate 
for recovery of the species.
    Our Response: We disagree. The proposed designation is consistent 
with the delisting criteria identified in the Recovery Plan, which was 
peer reviewed and developed with help from knowledgeable individuals 
with scientific expertise and familiarity with the species. Moreover, 
the commenter did not identify any additional areas that might be 
essential for the recovery of the species.
    Comment 13: The Federal Register notice failed to adequately inform 
the public by not providing information on: (1) occupied habitat that 
was not proposed as critical habitat; (2) unoccupied but suitable 
habitat that was not proposed as critical habitat; (3) previously 
occupied or likely to have been occupied habitat that is currently 
unoccupied and not proposed as critical habitat; (4) whether the amount 
or quality of occupied habitat is increased by the designation of 
critical habitat; and (5), whether occupied habitat that has been 
adversely affected was not proposed as critical habitat for that 
reason.

[[Page 11015]]

    Our Response: We disagree that the above information was required 
to be included in the proposed rule. However, in the proposed rule we 
identified a point of contact for additional information in the FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. We also provided an opportunity 
for interested parties to obtain additional information during the 
informal session before the public hearing that was held in Corvallis, 
Oregon on October 5, 2009. In the Criteria Used to Identify Critical 
Habitat section of the proposed rule, we described the rule set we used 
to identify proposed critical habitat areas. Each of the sites 
designated in this final rule meets the definition of critical habitat 
under section 3(5)(a) of the Act, after applying the criterion 
described in the Criteria used to Identify Critical Habitat section 
below. The final designation does not increase the quantity or quality 
of any occupied habitat, but does specify those areas that are 
essential for the conservation of the species.

Summary of Changes from the Proposed Rule

    1. In response to a comment from the ODFW, we clarified the context 
and importance of the population threshold of 500 adults as discussed 
in the Recovery Plan in the Physical and Biological Features-Space for 
Individual and Population Growth and Normal Behavior, and in the 
Criteria Used to Identify Critical Habitat sections of the final rule.
    2. In response to a comment from the ODFW, we added forestry 
chemicals to the discussion of the threat of agricultural chemical 
runoff in the Special Management Considerations or Protections section 
of the final rule.
    3. In response to a comment from the ODFW, we revised the Special 
Management Considerations or Protections section of the final rule by 
adding the following information:
<bullet> Units 3G East Fork Minnow Creek Pond and 3K Wicopee Pond 
require special management to prevent the introduction or further 
introduction of nonnative fishes.
<bullet> Unit 3A Fall Creek Spillway Ponds requires special management 
to prevent or set back vegetative succession.
<bullet> Units 1A Santiam I-5 Side Channels, 2B(5) Finley Gray Creek 
Swamp, and 3G East Fork Minnow Creek Road require special management to 
reduce the incursion of potentially hazardous agricultural and forestry 
chemicals into Oregon chub habitats and to maintain water quality.
     4. We made the following revisions to the Critical Habitat 
Designation section:
<bullet> In Unit 3E Dexter Reservoir RV Alcove (DEX 3) we clarified 
that the connection to Dexter Reservoir is through a culvert.
<bullet> In Unit 3H Hospital Pond we clarified that the site is spring 
fed, rather than fed by Hospital Creek.
<bullet> In Unit 3K Wicopee Pond we clarified that although the site 
currently has no nonnative predatory or competitive species, a 
potential threat from the introduction of nonnative species exists.

Critical Habitat

Background

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as:
    1. The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the 
species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which 
are found those physical or biological features
    a. Essential to the conservation of the species, and
    b. Which may require special management considerations or 
protection; and
    2. Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time it is listed, upon a determination that such areas 
are essential for the conservation of the species.
    Conservation, as defined under section 3 of the Act, means the use 
of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring any 
endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the 
measures provided under the Act are no longer necessary. Such methods 
and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities 
associated with scientific resources management such as research, 
census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, 
propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the 
extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem 
cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking.
     Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the prohibition against Federal agencies carrying out, funding, 
or authorizing the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires consultation on Federal 
actions that may affect critical habitat. The designation of critical 
habitat does not affect land ownership or establish a refuge, 
wilderness, reserve, preserve, or other conservation area. Such 
designation does not allow the government or public to access private 
lands. Such designation does not require implementation of restoration, 
recovery, or enhancement measures by non-Federal landowners. Where a 
landowner seeks or requests Federal agency funding or authorization for 
an action that may affect a listed species or critical habitat, the 
consultation requirements of section 7(a)(2) of the Act would apply, 
but even in the event of a destruction or adverse modification finding, 
Federal action agency's and the applicant's obligation is not to 
restore or recover the species, but to implement reasonable and prudent 
alternatives to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat.
     For inclusion in a critical habitat designation, the habitat 
within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it was 
listed must contain the physical and biological features essential to 
the conservation of the species, and may be included only if those 
features may require special management considerations or protection. 
Critical habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the 
best scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that 
provide essential life-cycle needs of the species (areas on which are 
found the physical and biological features laid out in the appropriate 
quantity and spatial arrangement for the conservation of the species). 
Under the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, we can designate 
critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species at the time it is listed only when we determine that those 
areas are essential for the conservation of the species and that 
designation limited to those areas occupied at the time of listing 
would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species. When the 
best available scientific data do not demonstrate that the conservation 
needs of the species require such additional areas, we will not 
designate critical habitat in areas outside the geographical area 
occupied by the species at the time of listing. An area currently 
occupied by the species but that was not occupied at the time of 
listing may, however, be essential to the conservation of the species 
and may be included in the critical habitat designation.
     Section 4 of the Act requires that we designate critical habitat 
on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data available. 
Further, our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered 
Species Act (published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34271)), the Information Quality Act (section 515 of the Treasury and 
General Government Appropriations Act for

[[Page 11016]]

Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106-554; H.R. 5658)), and our associated 
Information Quality Guidelines provide criteria, establish procedures, 
and provide guidance to ensure that our decisions are based on the best 
scientific data available. They require our biologists, to the extent 
consistent with the Act and with the use of the best scientific data 
available, to use primary and original sources of information as the 
basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat.
     When we are determining which areas should be designated as 
critical habitat, our primary source of information is generally the 
information developed during the listing process for the species. 
Additional information sources may include the recovery plan for the 
species, articles in peer-reviewed journals, conservation plans 
developed by States and counties, scientific status surveys and 
studies, biological assessments, or other unpublished materials and 
expert opinion or personal knowledge. Substantive comments received in 
response to proposed critical habitat designations are also considered.
     Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to 
another over time. Furthermore, we recognize that critical habitat 
designated at a particular point in time may not include all of the 
habitat areas that we may later determine are necessary for the 
recovery of the species. For these reasons, a critical habitat 
designation does not signal that habitat outside the designated area is 
unimportant or may not be required for recovery of the species.
     Areas that support populations, but are outside the critical 
habitat designation, may continue to be subject to conservation actions 
we implement under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. Areas that support 
populations are also subject to the regulatory protections afforded by 
the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as determined on the basis of 
the best available scientific information at the time of the agency 
action. Federally funded or permitted projects affecting listed species 
outside their designated critical habitat areas may still result in 
jeopardy findings in some cases. Similarly, critical habitat 
designations made on the basis of the best available information at the 
time of designation will not control the direction and substance of 
future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans (HCPs), or other 
species conservation planning efforts if new information available at 
the time of these planning efforts calls for a different outcome.

Methods

    As required by section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we used the best 
scientific data available in determining areas that contain the 
features that are essential to the conservation of the Oregon chub. 
Data sources include research published in peer-reviewed articles; 
previous Service documents on the species, including the final listing 
determination (58 FR 53800; October 18, 1993), the Recovery Plan (USFWS 
1998), and annual surveys conducted by the ODFW from 1992 through 2008 
(summarized in Scheerer et al. 2007 and Scheerer 2008a). Additionally 
we utilized regional Geographic Information System (GIS) shape files 
for area calculations and mapping.

Physical and Biological Features

     In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations 
at 50 CFR 424.12(b), in determining which areas occupied at the time of 
listing to propose as critical habitat, we considered the physical and 
biological features that are essential to the conservation of the 
species and that may require special management considerations or 
protection. These features are the primary constituent elements (PCEs) 
laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement essential 
for the conservation of the species. These include, but are not limited 
to:
    1. Space for individual and population growth and for normal 
behavior;
    2. Food, water, air, light, minerals, or other nutritional or 
physiological requirements;
    3. Cover or shelter;
    4. Sites for breeding, reproduction, and rearing (or development) 
of offspring; and
    5. Habitats that are protected from disturbance or are 
representative of the historical geographical and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    We derived the specific PCEs required for the Oregon chub from the 
biological needs of the species as described in the Background section 
of this rule and the following information:
Space for Individual and Population Growth and Normal Behavior
    Oregon chub habitats are typically slack-water off-channel water 
bodies with little or no flow, such as beaver ponds, oxbows, side 
channels, backwater sloughs, low-gradient tributaries (less than 2.5 
percent gradient) and flooded marshes (Pearsons 1989, pp. 30-31; Markle 
et al. 1991, pp. 288-289; Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 3; Scheerer 2008e). 
The species' swimming ability has been described as poor, and it is 
believed that no- or low-flow velocity water optimizes the energy 
expenditure of these slow-moving fish (Pearsons 1989, pp. 30-31). 
Although Oregon chub habitat may contain water of somewhat greater 
depth, the species mainly occupies water depths between approximately 
0.5-2.0 m (1.6-6.6 ft). In order for a habitat to provide enough space 
to allow normal behavior for a population of 500 or more individuals, 
the water body needs to include approximately 500 square meters (0.12 
ac) or more of aquatic surface area between 0.5-2.0 m (1.6-6.6 ft) deep 
(Scheerer 2008b). Adequate aquatic surface area for 500 or more 
individuals is significant because the Recovery Plan identifies 
populations at or above the 500 adult threshold as one of the delisting 
criteria for the species (USFWS 1998, p. 28).
Food, Water, Air, Light, Minerals, or Other Requirements
    Known as obligatory sight feeders (Davis and Miller 1967, p. 32), 
Oregon chub feed throughout the day and stop feeding after dusk 
(Pearsons 1989, p. 23). The fish feed mostly on water column fauna, 
especially invertebrates that live in dense aquatic vegetation. Markle 
et al. (1991, p. 288) found that the diet of Oregon chub adults 
consisted primarily of minute crustaceans including copepods, 
cladocerans, and chironomid larvae. The diet of juveniles also consists 
of minute organisms such as rotifers, copepods, and cladocerans 
(Pearsons 1989, pp. 41-42).
    With respect to water quality, the temperature regime at a site may 
determine the productivity of Oregon chub at that location. Spawning 
activity for the species has been observed from May through early 
August when F)C (61 F) or 16 C (59 subsurface water temperatures exceed 
15 (Scheerer and Apke 1997, p. 22; Markle et al. 1991, p. 288; Scheerer 
and MacDonald 2003, p. 78). The species will display normal life-
history behavior at F).C (59 and 77 temperatures between approximately 
15 and 25 The upper lethal temperature for the fish F) in laboratory 
studies (Scheerer and ApkeC (88 was determined to be 31 1997, p. 22).
    Optimal Oregon chub habitat contains water with dissolved oxygen 
levels greater than 3 parts per million (ppm) and an absence of 
contaminants such as copper, arsenic, mercury, and cadmium; human and 
animal waste products; pesticides; nitrogen and phosphorous 
fertilizers; and gasoline or diesel fuels. However, the species habitat 
is also characterized by high primary

[[Page 11017]]

productivity and frequent algal blooms that might cause natural 
variability in water quality, especially dissolved oxygen levels 
(Scheerer and Apke 1997, p. 15). Optimal Oregon chub habitat includes 
water dominated by fine substrates, but protected from excessive 
sedimentation. When excessive sediment is deposited, surface area can 
be lost as the sediment begins to displace open water. The resulting 
succession of open water habitat to wet meadow is detrimental to Oregon 
chub populations (Scheerer 2008c).
    The water quality in the habitats of many known Oregon chub 
populations is threatened due to their proximity to areas of human 
activity. Many of the known populations occur near rail, highway, and 
power transmission corridors and within public park and campground 
facilities. These populations may be threatened by chemical spills from 
overturned truck or rail tankers; runoff or accidental spills of 
herbicides; overflow from chemical toilets in campgrounds; 
sedimentation of shallow habitats from construction activities; and 
changes in water level or flow conditions from construction, 
diversions, or natural desiccation. Oregon chub populations near 
agricultural areas are subject to poor water quality as a result of 
runoff laden with sediment, pesticides, and nutrients. Logging in the 
watershed can result in increased sedimentation and herbicide runoff 
(USFWS 1998, p. 14).
Cover or Shelter
    The species' habitat preference varies depending on lifestage and 
season, but all Oregon chub require considerable aquatic vegetation for 
hiding and spawning activities (Pearsons 1989, p. 22; Markle et al. 
1991, p. 290; Scheerer and Jones 1997, p. 5; Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 
3). Oregon chub in similar size classes school together. A minimum of 
250 square meters (0.06 ac) (or between approximately 25 and 100 
percent of the total surface area of the habitat) covered with aquatic 
vegetation is needed to provide for the life-history requirements for a 
population of 500 Oregon chub (Scheerer 2008e). Aquatic plant 
communities within Oregon chub habitat include, but are not limited to, 
both native and nonnative species, including:
    1. Emergent vegetation: Carex spp. (sedge), Eleocharis spp. 
(spikerush), Scirpus spp. (bulrush), Juncus spp. (rush), Alisma spp. 
(water plantain), Polygyonum spp. (knotweed), Ludwigia spp. (primrose-
willow), Salix spp. (willow), Sparganium spp. (bur-reed), and Typha 
spp. (cattail).
    2. Partly submerged/emergent vegetation: Ranunculus spp. 
(buttercup).
    3. Floating/submerged vegetation: Azolla spp. (mosquitofern), 
Callitriche sp. (water-starwort), Ceratophyllum sp. (hornwort), Elodea 
spp. (water weed), Fontinalis spp. (fontinalis moss), Lemna spp. 
(duckweed), Myriophyllum spp. (parrot feather), Nuphar spp. (pondlily), 
and Potamogeton spp. (pondweed) (Scheerer 2008c).
    Larval Oregon chub congregate in the upper layers of the water 
column, especially in shallow, near-shore areas. Juvenile Oregon chub 
venture farther from shore into deeper areas of the water column. Adult 
Oregon chub seek dense vegetation for cover and frequently travel in 
the mid-water column in beaver channels or along the margins of aquatic 
plant beds. In the early spring, Oregon chub are most active in the 
warmer, shallow areas of the ponds (Pearsons 1989, pp. 16-17; USFWS 
1998, p. 10). Because Oregon chub habitat is characterized by little or 
no water flow, resulting substrates are typically composed of silty and 
organic material. In winter months, Oregon chub of various life stages 
can be found buried in the detritus or concealed in aquatic vegetation 
(Pearsons 1989, p. 16).
Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, and Rearing (or Development) of 
Offspring
    Although most mature Oregon chub are found to be greater than or 
equal to 2 years old, maturity appears to be mainly size- rather than 
age-dependent (Scheerer and McDonald 2003, p. 78). Males over 35 mm 
(1.4 in) have been observed exhibiting spawning behavior. Oregon C 
(59chub spawn from April through September, when temperatures exceed 15 
F), with peak activity in July. Approximately 150 to 650 eggs will be 
released per spawning event, hatching within 10 to 14 days. Females 
prefer a highly organic, vegetative substrate for spawning and will lay 
their adhesive eggs directly on the submerged vegetation (Pearsons 
1989, pp. 17, 23; Markle et al. 1992, p. 290; Scheerer 2007b, p. 494). 
Larvae and juveniles seek dense cover in shallow, warmer regions of 
off-channel habitats (Pearsons 1989, p. 17; Scheerer 2007b, p. 494).
Habitats (Those protected from anthropogenic disturbance or that are 
representative of the historical and ecological distribution of a 
species.)
    Many species of nonnative fish that compete with or prey upon 
Oregon chub have been introduced and are common throughout the 
Willamette Valley, including largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), 
smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui), crappie (Pomoxis sp.), 
bluegill (Lepomis macrochirus), and western mosquitofish (Gambusia 
affinis). Of the 747 Willamette Valley sites sampled for Oregon chub by 
ODFW since the beginning of annual survey efforts by the agency in 
1991, 42 percent contained nonnative fish. Most of the surveyed 
habitats that supported large populations of Oregon chub had no 
evidence of nonnative fish presence (Scheerer 2002, p. 1078; Scheerer 
2007a, p. 96; Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 14). The presence of nonnative 
fish in the Willamette Valley, especially centrarchids (e.g., basses 
and crappie) and ictalurids (catfishes) is suspected to be a major 
factor in the decline of Oregon chub and the biggest threat to the 
species' recovery (Markle et al. 1991, p. 291; Scheerer 2002, p. 1078; 
Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 18).
    Specific interactions responsible for the exclusion of Oregon chub 
from habitats dominated by nonnative fish are not clear in all cases. 
While information confirming the presence of Oregon chub in stomach 
contents of predatory fish is lacking, many nonnative fish, 
particularly adult centrarchids and ictalurids, are documented 
piscivores (fish eaters) (Moyle 2002, pp. 397, 399, 403; Wydoski and 
Whitney 2003, pp. 125, 128, 130; Li et al. 1987, pp. 198-201). These 
fish are frequently the dominant inhabitants of ponds and sloughs 
within the Willamette River drainage and may constitute a major 
obstacle to Oregon chub recolonization efforts. Nonnative fish may also 
serve as sources of parasites and diseases; however, disease and 
parasite problems have not been studied in the Oregon chub.
    Observed feeding strategies and diet of introduced fish, 
particularly juvenile centrarchids and adult mosquitofish (Li et al. 
1987, pp. 198-201), often overlap with diet and feeding strategies 
described for Oregon chub (Pearsons 1989, pp. 34-35). This suggests 
that direct competition for food between Oregon chub and introduced 
species may further impede species survival as well as recovery 
efforts. The rarity of finding Oregon chub in waters also inhabited by 
mosquitofish may reflect many negative interactions, including but not 
limited to food-based competition, aggressive spatial exclusion, and 
predation on eggs and larvae (Meffe 1983, pp. 316, 319; Meffe 1984, pp. 
1,530-1,531). Because many remaining population sites are easily 
accessible, there continues to be a potential for unauthorized 
introductions of nonnative fish, particularly

[[Page 11018]]

mosquitofish and game fish such as bass and walleye (Stizostedion 
vitreurn).
    The bullfrog (Rana catesbiana), a nonnative amphibian, also occurs 
in the valley and breeds in habitats preferred by the Oregon chub (Bury 
and Whelan 1984, pp. 2-3; Scheerer 1999, p. 7). Adult bullfrogs prefer 
habitat similar in characteristics (i.e., little to no water velocity, 
abundant aquatic and emergent vegetation) to the preferred habitat for 
Oregon chub, and are known to consume small fish as part of their diet 
(Cohen and Howard 1958, p. 225; Bury and Whelan 1984, p. 3), but it is 
unclear if they have a negative impact on Oregon chub populations, as 
several sites that have large numbers of bullfrogs also maintain robust 
Oregon chub populations (Scheerer 2008d).
Flood Control
    Major alteration of the Willamette River for flood control and 
navigation improvements has eliminated most of the river's historical 
floodplain, impairing or eliminating the environmental conditions in 
which the Oregon chub evolved. The decline of Oregon chub has been 
correlated with the construction of these projects based on the date of 
last capture at a site (58 FR 53801; October 18, 1993). Pearsons (1989, 
pp. 32-33) estimated that the most severe decline occurred during the 
1950s and 1960s when 8 of 11 flood control projects in the Willamette 
River drainage were completed (USACE 1970, pp. 219-237). Other 
structural changes along the Willamette River corridor such as 
revetment and channelization, dike construction and drainage, and the 
removal of floodplain vegetation have eliminated or altered the slack 
water habitats of the Oregon chub (Willamette Basin Task Force 1969, 
pp. I9, II22-II24; Hjort et al. 1984, pp. 67-68, 73; Sedell and 
Froggatt 1984, pp. 1,832-1,833; Li et al. 1987, p. 201). Management of 
water bodies (such as reservoirs) adjacent to occupied Oregon chub 
habitat continues to impact the species by causing fluctuations in the 
water levels of their habitat such that it may exceed or drop below 
optimal water depths.

Primary Constituent Elements (PCEs) for the Oregon Chub

     Pursuant to our regulations, we are required to identify the known 
physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the 
Oregon chub and which may require special management considerations or 
protection. These features are the primary constituent elements (PCEs) 
laid out in the appropriate quantity and spatial arrangement essential 
for the conservation of the species. The PCEs are listed below. All 
areas designated as critical habitat for Oregon chub are either 
occupied or within the species' historical geographic range.
    Based on the above needs and our current knowledge of the life 
history, biology, and ecology of the species and the characteristics of 
the habitat necessary to sustain the essential life-history functions 
of the species, we have identified four PCEs for Oregon chub critical 
habitat:
    1. Off-channel water bodies such as beaver ponds, oxbows, side-
channels, stable backwater sloughs, low-gradient tributaries, and 
flooded marshes, including at least 500 continuous square meters (0.12 
ac) of aquatic surface area at depths between approximately 0.5 and 2.0 
m (1.6 and 6.6 ft).
    2. Aquatic vegetation covering a minimum of 250 square meters (0.06 
ac) (or between approximately 25 and 100 percent) of the total surface 
area of the habitat. This vegetation is primarily submergent for 
purposes of spawning, but also includes emergent and floating 
vegetation and algae, which are important for cover throughout the 
year. Areas with sufficient vegetation are likely to also have the 
following characteristics:
<bullet> Gradient less than 2.5 percent;
<bullet> No or very low water velocity in late spring and summer;
<bullet> Silty, organic substrate; and
<bullet> Abundant minute organisms such as rotifers, copepods, 
cladocerans, and chironomid larvae.
    3. Late spring and summer subsurface water F), with natural diurnal 
andC (59 and 78 temperatures between 15 and 25 seasonal variation.
    4. No or negligible levels of nonnative aquatic predatory or 
competitive species. Negligible is defined for the purpose of this rule 
as a minimal level of nonnative species that will still allow the 
Oregon chub to continue to survive and recover.
    The need for space for individual and population growth and normal 
behavior is met by PCE (1); areas for reproduction, shelter, food, and 
habitat for prey are provided by PCE (2); optimal physiological 
processes for spawning and survival are ensured by PCE (3); habitat 
free from disturbance and, therefore, sufficient reproduction and 
survival opportunities are provided by PCE (4).
    This final critical habitat designation is designed for the 
conservation of PCEs necessary to support the life-history functions 
that were the basis for the proposal. Each of the areas designated in 
this rule has been determined to contain sufficient PCEs to provide for 
one or more of the life-history functions of the Oregon chub. 
Specifically, these areas fall into two groups: areas occupied at time 
of listing containing PCEs sufficient for one or more life-history 
functions, and areas not occupied at time of listing but essential to 
the conservation of the species and that also contain PCEs for one or 
more life-history functions.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

    As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we used the best 
scientific data available in determining areas that contain the 
features that are essential to the conservation of the Oregon chub. We 
only designated areas outside the geographical area occupied by the 
species when a designation limited to its present range would be 
inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species (50 CFR 
424.12(e)). The steps we followed in identifying critical habitat were:
    1. Our initial step in identifying critical habitat was to 
determine, in accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and 
regulations at 50 CFR 424.12, the physical and biological habitat 
features (PCEs) that are essential to the conservation of the species 
as explained in the previous section.
    2. We then identified areas occupied by the Oregon chub at the time 
of listing. Of the 5 occupied sites known at the time of the 1993 
listing (58 FR 53801), and the 12 additional sites confirmed by post-
listing survey data to be occupied with one or more Oregon chub at the 
time of listing, 10 still support Oregon chub (Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 
2; Scheerer 2008a, p. 2) and contain at least one PCE.
    3. Because we found that areas occupied at time of listing were not 
sufficient to conserve the species, we then identified any additional 
sites that were not occupied at the time of listing but are currently 
occupied and contain PCEs, and which may be essential for the 
conservation of the species. Surveys conducted in 2007 and 2008 
indicate that 15 additional sites are currently occupied with one or 
more Oregon chub (Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 2; Scheerer 2008a, p. 2).
    4. Next we identified sites that support introduced populations of 
Oregon chub that also contain the PCEs, and which may be essential for 
the conservation of the species, which resulted in 11 additional sites 
being identified (Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 2; Scheerer 2008a, p. 2). 
Collectively, the above efforts resulted in the identification of 36 
occupied sites.

[[Page 11019]]

    5. Our final step was to evaluate the 36 occupied sites within the 
context of the Recovery Plan, to determine which areas contained the 
physical and biological features in the amount and spatial 
configuration essential to the conservation of the species. This step 
involved the application of the following selection criteria:
    A. Sites that support large, stable populations.
    From the list of occupied sites that contain PCEs, we selected 
sites that support populations meeting the delisting population 
criteria outlined in the 1998 Recovery Plan (i.e., establishing 20 
populations of at least 500 adults with a stable or increasing trend 
over 7 years (USFWS 1998, p. 28)), and also sites that were likely to 
meet the delisting criteria in the near future. Eighteen sites had at 
least 500 adults and were likely to have a stable or increasing trend 
over 7 years in the near future. Of the 18 sites meeting this selection 
criterion, 9 sites were occupied at the time of listing:
<bullet> Unit 2B(5), Finley Gray Creek Swamp
<bullet> Unit 3B, Elijah Bristow State Park-- Berry Slough
<bullet> Unit 3E, Dexter Reservoir RV Alcove--DEX3
<bullet> Unit 3F, Dexter Reservoir Alcove PIT 1
<bullet> Unit 3G, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond Unit
<bullet> Unit 3H, Hospital Pond
<bullet> Unit 3I, Shady Dell Pond
<bullet> Unit 3J, Buckhead Creek, and
<bullet> Unit 3K, Wicopee Pond.
    Three other sites supported naturally occurring populations but 
were not occupied at the time of listing:
<bullet> Unit 1B(1), Geren Island North Channel
<bullet> Unit 1B(4), Gray Slough, and
<bullet> Unit 3D, Elijah Bristow State Park Island Pond.
    In addition, six sites supported introduced populations:
<bullet> Unit 1C, Foster Pullout Pond
<bullet> Unit 2A(1), Russell Pond
<bullet> Unit 2B(1), Ankeny Willow Marsh
<bullet> Unit 2B(2), Dunn Wetland
<bullet> Unit 2B(4), Finley Cheadle Pond, and
<bullet> Unit 3A, Fall Creek Spillway Ponds.
    B. Sites that are capable of supporting large populations.
    Because the Recovery Plan calls for establishing and maintaining a 
minimum of 20 populations that meet the recovery criteria, we 
identified seven currently occupied sites that did not meet the first 
criterion (above) but have the greatest potential to contribute to the 
long-term conservation and recovery of the species. Sites meeting this 
selection criterion include five sites that support naturally occurring 
populations:
<bullet> Unit 1A, Santiam I-5 Side Channels
<bullet> Unit 1B(2), Stayton Public Works Pond
<bullet> Unit 2A(2), Shetzline Pond
<bullet> Unit 2A(3), Big Island, and
<bullet> Unit 3C, Elijah Bristow State Park Northeast Slough.
    In addition two sites that support introduced populations met this 
criterion:
<bullet> Unit 1B(3), South Stayton Pond, and
<bullet> Unit 2B(3), Finley Display Pond.
    Each of these sites either currently, or in the past, has supported 
populations of over 500 adults.
    C. Sites representative of the geographic distribution of Oregon 
chub.
    The delisting criteria outlined in the Recovery Plan require that 
at least four populations be located in each of three sub-basins. We 
determined that the 25 sites selected under the preceding critical 
habitat criteria also met this objective (USFWS 1998, p. 28). Six units 
are being designated as critical habitat in the Santiam River 
watershed, 8 sites are being designated as critical habitat in the 
Mainstem Willamette River watershed, and 11 sites are being designated 
as critical habitat in the Middle Fork Willamette River watershed. By 
protecting a variety of habitats throughout the species' historical 
range, we increase the probability that the species can adjust in the 
future to various limiting factors that may affect the population, such 
as predators, disease, and flood events exceeding annual high water 
levels. Based on this analysis, we are designating 25 units as critical 
habitat. Although the Recovery Plan calls for establishing and 
maintaining a minimum of 20 populations, we believe that establishing 
additional populations will allow the Service to mitigate the potential 
that some units may become unable to support the species or primary 
constituent elements over time because of predation pressures or other 
factors.
    After applying the above criteria, we mapped the critical habitat 
unit boundaries at each of the 25 sites. Mapping was completed using 
GIS shape files, which involved several steps. Critical habitat unit 
boundaries were delineated to encompass the extent of habitat 
containing the physical and biological features essential to the 
conservation of the species that may require special management 
considerations or protection. Polygon vertices (points where two lines 
meet) were collected along the annual high-water mark at least every 30 
m (98 ft) around the perimeter of the site, and at a greater frequency 
in areas of complexity or where higher resolution was necessary. The 
full extent of each pond or slough was mapped; islands were mapped with 
the same method as the perimeter of the site. At sites where 
tributaries or channels entered or exited a site, only the extent of 
suitable Oregon chub habitat was mapped. The extent of Oregon chub use 
in open systems was defined by habitat features and by previous 
experience sampling in those areas. Habitat features that defined the 
limit of Oregon chub use in a channel included increased gradient, the 
absence of aquatic vegetation, and areas where gravel, cobble, or other 
large substrate was present. We combined the polygon data with 
information from aerial photos to determine the designated critical 
habitat unit boundaries of each site.

Special Management Considerations or Protections

    The term critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the Act, 
in part, as geographic areas on which are found those physical or 
biological features essential to the conservation of the species and 
``which may require special management considerations or protections.'' 
Accordingly, in identifying critical habitat in occupied areas, we 
assess whether the primary constituent elements within the areas 
determined to be occupied at the time of listing may require any 
special management considerations or protections. Although the 
determination that special management may be required is not a 
prerequisite to designating critical habitat in areas essential to the 
conservation of the species that were unoccupied at the time of 
listing, all areas being designated as critical habitat require some 
level of management to address current and future threats to the Oregon 
chub, to maintain or enhance the physical and biological features 
essential to its conservation, and to ensure the recovery and survival 
of the species.
    The primary threats impacting the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the Oregon chub that may require 
special management considerations within the designated critical 
habitat units include: competition and predation by nonnative fish; the 
potential for initial or further introduction of nonnative fish; 
vegetative succession of shallow aquatic habitats; possible 
agricultural or forestry chemical runoff; possible excessive siltation 
from logging in the watershed; other threats to water quality 
(including threat of toxic spills, low dissolved oxygen); and 
fluctuations in water level due to regulated flow management at flood 
control dams, as well as low summer water levels.

[[Page 11020]]

    Some additional threats to the continued survival and recovery of 
the Oregon chub, such as the potential for reduced genetic diversity 
due to the low level of mixing between populations, will likely be 
addressed by direct management of populations (e.g., translocation of 
individuals) rather than by management of the physical and biological 
features of the habitat. Such threats, therefore, are not addressed in 
this section specific to the special management required of the 
physical and biological features of the designated critical habitat 
areas.
    Special management considerations or protections are needed in most 
of the units to address the impacts of competition and predation by 
nonnative fishes in Oregon chub habitat or to avoid the potential 
introduction of nonnative fishes into areas occupied by Oregon chub. 
Predatory nonnative fishes are considered the greatest current threat 
to the recovery of the Oregon chub. Management for the Oregon chub has 
focused on establishing secure, isolated habitats free of nonnative 
fishes. Nonnative fishes are abundant and ubiquitous in the Willamette 
River Basin. Monitoring and management are required to remove nonnative 
fishes from Oregon chub habitat when possible and to protect Oregon 
chub populations that have not yet been affected by nonnative fishes 
from invasion. Table 1 identifies units that may require special 
management to reduce or eradicate the threat posed by nonnative fishes 
already present and units that may require special management to 
prevent the introduction of nonnative fish.
    Although Oregon chub require a mixture of submergent, emergent, and 
floating aquatic vegetation (including algae) for cover and spawning 
(see PCE 2), some areas of Oregon chub habitat are threatened by 
succession to wet meadow systems due to a lack of natural disturbance 
(such as floods) or excessive siltation. If vegetation completely fills 
in the open water areas of Oregon chub habitat, these areas are no 
longer suitable for the Oregon chub. Table 1 identifies units that may 
require special management to prevent or set back vegetative succession 
before that habitat is no longer suitable for Oregon chub.
    Some units require special management to avoid the degradation of 
water quality in Oregon chub habitats due to agricultural and forestry 
chemical runoff, and their close proximity to roads and railroads. 
Elevated levels of nutrients and pesticides have been found in some 
Oregon chub habitats (Materna and Buck 2007, p. 67). The source of the 
contamination is likely agricultural runoff from adjacent farm fields 
(Materna and Buck 2007, p. 68). Table 1 identifies units that may 
require special management to reduce the incursion of potentially 
hazardous agricultural and forestry chemicals into Oregon chub habitats 
and to maintain water quality.
    Although Oregon chub utilize fine silty substrates, excessive 
siltation resulting from activities such as logging poses a threat to 
Oregon chub habitat by filling in the shallow aquatic areas utilized by 
the species. Excessive sedimentation can also lead to the succession of 
open water habitats to wet meadow, as has been discussed above. Table 1 
identifies units that may require special management to alleviate the 
threat posed by excess watershed siltation due to logging and other 
activities.
    Special management is required in several of the designated 
critical habitat units to maintain the water quality required by Oregon 
chub and protect against the impacts of several potential water quality 
threats. Many Oregon chub populations occur near rail, highway, and 
power transmission corridors, agricultural fields, and within public 
park and campground facilities, and there is concern that these 
populations could be threatened by chemical spills, runoff, or changes 
in water level or flow conditions caused by construction, diversions, 
or natural desiccation (58 FR 53800; USFWS 1998, p. 14). Water quality 
investigations at sites in the Middle Fork and mainstem Willamette sub-
basins have found some adverse effects to Oregon chub habitats caused 
by changes in nutrient levels. Elevated nutrient levels at some Oregon 
chub locations, particularly increased nitrogen and phosphorus, may 
result in eutrophication and associated anoxic (absence of oxygen) 
conditions unsuitable for chub, or increased plant and algal growth 
that severely reduce habitat availability because of succession. Table 
1 identifies units that may require monitoring and special management 
to ameliorate the effects of excessive nutrient levels in Oregon chub 
habitats, and to provide protection against accidental sources of 
contamination.
    Although the Oregon chub evolved in a dynamic environment in which 
frequent flooding continually created and reconnected habitat for the 
species, currently most populations of Oregon chub are isolated from 
each other due to the reduced frequency and magnitude of flood events 
and the presence of migration barriers such as impassable culverts and 
beaver dams (Scheerer et al. 2007, p. 9). Historically, regulated flow 
management of flood control dams eliminated many of the slough and side 
channel habitats utilized by Oregon chub by reducing the magnitude, 
extent, and frequency of flood events in the Willamette River Basin. 
Currently, flow management activities impact Oregon chub in many of 
their remaining habitats by inadvertently raising or lowering the depth 
of water bodies to levels above or below the optimum for the species. 
Water depths in the summer may be reduced to levels that threaten the 
survival of Oregon chub due to flow management in adjacent reservoirs 
or rivers, or from natural drought cycles. Table 1 identifies units 
that may require special management to ameliorate the effects of 
fluctuating or reduced water levels for the Oregon chub.
    In summary, we find that each of the areas we are designating as 
critical habitat contains features essential to the conservation of the 
Oregon chub, and that these features may require special management 
considerations or protection. These special management considerations 
and protections are required to eliminate, or reduce to a negligible 
level, the threats affecting each unit and to preserve and maintain the 
essential features that the designated critical habitat units provide 
to the Oregon chub. A more comprehensive discussion of threats facing 
individual sites is in the individual unit descriptions.



                           Table 1--Special management needs or considerations in critical habitat units for the Oregon chub.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                       Manage to Reduce or      Manage to Prevent      Manage to Prevent                             Manage to Maintain
                Unit                  Eradicate  Nonnative       Nonnative Fish            Excessive          Manage to Maintain     Appropriate Water
                                              Fish                Introduction           Sedimentation          Water Quality              Levels
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A Santiam I-5 Side Channels         X                       X                                              X                      X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 11021]]

 
1B(1) Geren Island North Channel     X                                               X                                             X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(2) Stayton Public Works Pond      X                       X                                                                     X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(3) South Stayton Pond                                     X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(4) Gray Slough                    X                       X                                                                     X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1C Foster Pullout Pond                                       X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(1) Russell Pond                                                                   X                                             .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(2) Shetzline Pond                                         X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(3) Big Island                                             X                                                                     X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(1) Ankeny Willow Marsh                                    X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(2) Dunn Wetland                                                                                          X                      .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(3) Finley Display Pond                                    X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(4) Finley Cheadle Pond                                    X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(5) Finley Gray Creek Swamp                                X                       X                      X                      X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A Fall Creek Spillway Ponds                                 X                       X                                             X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B Elijah Bristow SP Barry Slough                            X                                                                     .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3C Elijah Bristow SP Northeast       X                       X                                                                     X
 Slough
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3D Elijah Bristow SP Island Pond     X                       X                                                                     X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3E Dexter Reservoir RV Alcove (DEX                           X                                              X                      X
 3)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3F Dexter Reservoir Alcove (PIT 1)   X                       X                                              X                      X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3G East Fork Minnow Creek Pond                               X                       X                      X                      .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3H Hospital Pond                                             X                                              X                      X
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3I Shady Dell Pond                                           X                                              X                      .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3J Buckhead Creek                                            X                       X                      X                      .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3K Wicopee Pond                                              X                       X                                             .....................
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The designation of critical habitat does not imply that lands 
outside of critical habitat do not play an important role in the 
conservation of the Oregon chub. Federal activities that may affect 
those unprotected areas outside of critical habitat are still subject 
to review under section 7 of the Act if they may affect Oregon chub. 
The prohibitions of section 9 against the take of listed species also 
continue to apply both inside and outside of designated critical 
habitat. Take is broadly defined in the Act as to harass, harm, wound, 
kill, trap, capture, or collect a listed species, or to attempt to 
engage in any such conduct.

Final Critical Habitat Designation

     We are designating 25 units totaling approximately 53 ha (132 
acres), including land under State, Federal, other government, and 
private ownership. The areas we describe below constitute our best 
assessment at this time of areas that meet the definition of critical 
habitat for the Oregon chub. The units are those areas most likely to 
substantially contribute to conservation of the Oregon chub, and when 
combined with future management of certain habitats suitable for 
restoration efforts, will contribute to the long-term survival and 
recovery of the species.

[[Page 11022]]

Table 2 shows the occupied unit, land ownership, and approximate area.



Table 2--Critical habitat units designated for the Oregon chub (Totals in table and in unit descriptions may not
         sum due to rounding; area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries.).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Critical Habitat Unit               Land Ownership              Hectares                  Acres
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1A                                     State of Oregon, ODOT    1.4                      3.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(1)                                  City of Salem            0.8                      1.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(2)                                  City of Stayton          0.4                      1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(3)                                  State Of Oregon, ODFW    0.1                      0.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1B(4)                                  Private                  2.5                      6.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1C                                     USACE                    0.4                      1.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(1)                                  Private                  0.1                      0.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(2)                                  Private                  0.1                      0.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2A(3)                                  Private                  3.3                      8.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(1)                                  USFWS                    14.0                     34.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(2)                                  Private                  6.1                      15.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(3)                                  USFWS                    1.0                      2.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(4)                                  USFWS                    0.9                      2.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2B(5)                                  USFWS & Private          3.0                      7.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3A                                     USACE                    1.5                      3.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3B                                     State of Oregon, OPRD    5.2                      12.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3C                                     State of Oregon, OPRD    2.2                      5.4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3D                                     State of Oregon, OPRD    2.1                      5.2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3E                                     USACE                    0.4                      0.9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3F                                     USACE                    0.1                      0.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3G                                     State of Oregon, ODOT    1.3                      3.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3H                                     USACE                    0.5                      1.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3I                                     USFS                     1.1                      2.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3J                                     USFS                     3.8                      9.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3K                                     USFS                     1.4                      3.3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                                           53.5                     132.1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Each of the critical habitat units below takes into account the 
results of population abundance estimates reported in the Oregon 
Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW) Oregon Chub Investigations 
Progress Reports (Sheerer 2007 a, p. 2; 2008a). The ODFW initiated 
Oregon chub population abundance surveys in the early 1990's, and each 
of the units being designated has abundance and trend data reflecting 
capability of achieving the recovery criteria in the Recovery Plan. We 
present a brief description of each unit, and reasons why it meets the 
definition of critical habitat for the Oregon chub, below:
Area 1: Santiam River Basin--Linn and Marion Counties, Oregon
A. Mainstem Santiam River
    Unit 1A, the Santiam I-5 Side Channels: This site consists of three 
ponds totaling 1.4 ha (3.3 ac), located on a 27 ha (66 ac) property on 
the south side of the Santiam River upstream of the Interstate Highway 
5 bridge crossing in Linn County, Oregon. The areas containing Oregon 
chub include a small backwater pool, a gravel pit, and a side channel 
pond. This unit is owned by the Oregon Department of Transportation 
(ODOT) and Oregon chub were first observed here in 1997. Although only 
22 Oregon chub were counted at the site in 2007, the habitat contains 3 
of the 4 PCEs and has exhibited capability of supporting a substantial 
population of the species based on past survey population estimates of 
over 500 individuals. The substrate is composed

[[Page 11023]]

of 80 percent silt and organic material, and there is a variety of 
emergent and submergent vegetation covering 65 percent of the surface 
area. The maximum water depth is approximately 3 m (9.8 ft), averaging 
1.5 m (4.9 ft), and the temperature was recorded at F) on July 30, 
2008.C (60 and 67 between 19.5 and 21 Beaver have been observed at this 
location. This site is at risk of vegetative cover reaching levels 
detrimental to Oregon chub habitat through succession. The site is 
periodically connected to the Santiam River, and its water levels can 
be affected by hydrologic changes in the river, particularly the low 
summer levels common in the drainage. Competing and predatory nonnative 
species have been observed; nonnative predators are suspected to be a 
major factor in the drop in Oregon chub population estimates at this 
site between the 2006 and 2007 surveys (Scheerer 2008d).
B. North Santiam River
    Unit 1B(1), Geren Island North Channel: This site totals 
approximately 0.8 ha (1.9 ac) and is located on the grounds of a water 
treatment facility owned by the City of Salem in Marion County, Oregon. 
The species was first observed at this site in 1996. Although only 207 
Oregon chub were counted at the site in 2008, the habitat contains 3 of 
the 4 PCEs and has exhibited capability of supporting a substantial 
population of the species based on past survey population estimates of 
over 500 individuals. The substrate is composed of 90 percent silt and 
organic material, and there is a variety of emergent and submergent 
vegetation covering 65 percent of the surface area. The maximum water 
depth is 2.2 m (7.2 Cft), averaging 1.8 m (5.9 ft), and the temperature 
was recorded at 26 F) on July 10, 2008.(79 Beaver have been observed at 
this location. The site is screened and isolated from other water 
bodies, but water levels are influenced through water releases at 
Detroit and Big Cliff Dams. Competing and predatory nonnative species 
have been observed at the site. There is also a risk of excessive 
sedimentation due to logging in the watershed.
    Unit 1B(2), Stayton Public Works Pond: This site totals 
approximately 0.4 ha (1.0 ac) and is located in and owned by the City 
of Stayton, in Marion County, Oregon. The species was first observed at 
this location in 1998. Although only 68 Oregon chub were counted at the 
site in 2008, the habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs and has exhibited 
capability of supporting a substantial population of the species based 
on past survey population estimates of over 500 individuals. The 
substrate is composed of 90 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent and submergent vegetation covering 100 
percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 2 m (6.6 ft) 
deep, C (77.9averaging 1.2 m (3.9 ft), and the temperature was recorded 
at 25.5 F) on July 9, 2008. Beaver have also been observed at this 
location. The site is periodically connected to the North Santiam River 
and is therefore at risk of low summer water levels and nonnative fish 
introduction. Competing and predatory nonnative species have been 
observed at this site.
    Unit 1B(3), South Stayton Pond: This site totals approximately 0.1 
ha (0.2 ac), is located in Linn County, Oregon, and is owned by the 
Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). This site was the 
location of a 2006 introduction of 54 Oregon chub and a supplemental 
2007 introduction of 67 additional individuals. The population is 
currently estimated at 1,700 individuals and appears to be stable or 
increasing. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is 
composed of 90 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of emergent and submergent vegetation covering 100 percent of 
the surface area. The maximum water depth is 1.6 m (5.3 C (76.1ft), 
averaging 0.9 m (3 ft), and the temperature was recorded at 24.5 F) on 
July 9, 2008. The site is isolated from other water bodies and 
currently has no competing or predatory nonnative species. Because of 
the easy public access to the site, it may be at risk of illegal 
introduction of nonnative fish.
    Unit 1B(4), Gray Slough: This privately owned site totals 
approximately 2.5 ha (6.2 ac) and is in Marion County, Oregon. The 
species was first observed at this site in 1995. The population is 
currently estimated at 655 individuals, has been stable for 5 years, 
and the habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs. The substrate is composed of 
100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a variety of 
emergent and submergent vegetation covering 55 percent of the surface 
area. The maximum water depth is 2.5 m (8.2 ft), averaging 1.2 m (3.9 
ft), and the F) on July 31, 2008.C (74.3 temperature was recorded at 
23.5 Beaver, and also competing or predatory nonnative fish species, 
have been observed at this location. The site is periodically connected 
to the North Santiam River and is therefore at risk of low summer water 
levels and additional nonnative fish invasion. The site's location on a 
property with agricultural activity places it at risk of chemical 
runoff.
C. South Santiam River
    Unit 1C, Foster Pullout Pond: This site totals 0.4 ha (1.0 ac), and 
is owned by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The pond 
is located in Linn County, Oregon, on the north shore of Foster 
Reservoir in the South Santiam River drainage. The pond is perched 
several meters above the reservoir full pool level, is spring-fed, and 
the water level is maintained by a beaver dam at the outflow. This site 
was the location of a 1999 introduction of 85 Oregon chub, and the 
population is currently estimated at 2,600 individuals. The population 
has been stable for 5 years, and the habitat contains all of the PCEs. 
The substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent and submergent vegetation covering 100 
percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 2.0 m (6.6 ft), 
averaging 1.2 m (3.9 ft), and the F) on July 23, 2008.C (70 temperature 
was recorded at 21 Beaver have been observed at this location. The site 
is isolated from other water bodies and has no competing or predatory 
nonnative species, but the site's accessibility to the public raises 
the risk of illegal introduction of nonnative fish.
Area 2: Mainstem Willamette River Basin--Benton, Lane and Marion 
Counties, Oregon
A. McKenzie River
    Unit 2A(1), Russell Pond: This privately owned site totals 
approximately 0.1 ha (0.1 ac) and is located in the Mohawk River 
drainage, Lane County, Oregon. In 2001, 350 Oregon chub were introduced 
into the pond, followed by an additional introduction of 150 
individuals in 2002 as part of a Safe Harbor Agreement with the 
Service. The population is currently estimated at 651 individuals, has 
been stable for 5 years, and the habitat contains all of the PCEs. The 
substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation 
covering 40 percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 2 m 
(6.6 ft), averaging 1.5 m (4.9 ft), and the temperature was recorded F) 
on July 23, 2008.C (65.3 at 18.5 The site is isolated from other water 
bodies, and has no competing or predatory nonnative species. Threats to 
the site include possible excessive sedimentation resulting from 
logging in the watershed.

[[Page 11024]]

    Unit 2A(2), Shetzline Pond: This privately owned site totals 
approximately 0.1 ha (0.3 ac), and is in the Mohawk River drainage, 
Lane County, Oregon. The species was first observed at this site in 
2002. The site originally consisted of three manmade ponds, one of 
which (the south pond) contained Oregon chub. A restoration project was 
conducted in 2006 in the north and middle ponds to connect the ponds 
and create a more natural wetland. Nonnative fish in these ponds were 
removed with a rotenone treatment. To date the restored wetland has not 
been connected to the Oregon chub pond, although the site has a small 
inflow channel connecting it to Drury Creek (a tributary of the Mohawk 
River). Although only 130 Oregon chub were counted at the site in 2008, 
the habitat contains all of the PCEs and has exhibited capability of 
supporting a substantial population of the species, based on past 
survey population estimates of over 500 individuals. The substrate is 
composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of emergent, submergent, and floating aquatic vegetation 
covering 100 percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 
2.5 m (8.2 F)C (68 ft), averaging 2 m (6.6 ft), and the temperature was 
recorded at 20 on July 23, 2008. The site currently has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species but, because of previous fishing for 
nonnative species that was allowed in the ponds, the site is at risk of 
illegal introduction of nonnative fish.
    Unit 2A(3), Big Island: This site totals 3.3 ha (8.2 ac), is owned 
by the McKenzie River Trust, and is located along the McKenzie River in 
Lane County, Oregon. The species was first observed at this location in 
2002. Although only 200 Oregon chub were counted at the site in 2008, 
the habitat contains all of the PCEs and has exhibited capability of 
supporting a substantial population of Oregon chub based on past survey 
population estimates of over 500 individuals. The substrate is composed 
of 90 percent silt and organic material, and there is a variety of 
emergent, submergent, and floating aquatic vegetation covering 72 
percent of the surface area. The maximum depth is 1.5 m (4.9 ft) deep, 
F)C (66 averaging 0.6 m (2.0 ft), and the temperature was recorded at 
19 on July 23, 2008. Beaver have been observed at this location. 
Because the site has annual connectivity to the McKenzie River, its 
water levels can be affected by hydrologic changes in the river and it 
is at risk of the introduction of nonnative fish. No competing or 
predatory nonnative species have been observed to date.
B. Willamette River Mainstem
    Unit 2B(1), Ankeny Willow Marsh: This site totals 14.0 ha (34.5 
ac), and is located in Marion County, Oregon, at the Ankeny National 
Wildlife Refuge where an introduction of 500 Oregon chub took place in 
2004. The population is currently estimated at 36,500 individuals and 
has been increasing. The habitat also contains all of the PCEs. The 
substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of aquatic vegetation including emergent, 
submergent, floating and algae covering 100 percent of the surface 
area. The maximum depth is 2 m (6.6 ft), averaging 0.7 m (2.3 ft), and 
the temperature at the site was recorded at 25 F) on July 8, 2008.C (77 
Beaver and turtles have been observed at this location. Water is 
supplied to the pond from Sidney Ditch, which contains nonnative fish. 
The pump is screened, and the site currently has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species, although a high-water event could 
facilitate the introduction of nonnative fish.
    Unit 2B(2), Dunn Wetland: This privately owned site in Benton 
County, Oregon, totals 6.1 ha (15.2 ac). In 1997, 200 Oregon chub were 
introduced to the site, followed by the introduction of 373 additional 
individuals in 1998 as part of a Safe Harbor Agreement with the 
Service. The owners restored the wetland in 1994 when a permanent 
(year-round) spring-fed pond was constructed. Two additional permanent 
ponds were constructed in 1997 and 1999. The entire wetland floods 
during the winter, and the ponds are interconnected. The population is 
currently estimated at 34,500 individuals and has been stable for 5 
years. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is composed 
of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a variety of 
emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation covering 100 percent of the 
surface area. The maximum depth is 1 m (3.3 ft), F)C (73 averaging 0.6 
m (2.0 ft), and the temperature was recorded at 23 on July 28, 2008. 
Beaver have been observed at this location. The site is isolated from 
other water bodies and has no competing or predatory nonnative species, 
but it is at risk of chemical runoff from agricultural activities.
    Unit 2B(3), Finley Display Pond: This site totals 1.0 ha (2.4 ac) 
and is located in Benton County, Oregon, on the William L. Finley 
National Wildlife Refuge. This unit was the subject of several 
introductions of Oregon chub: 60 in 1998, 45 in 1999, 49 in 2001, and 
75 in 2007. The current population estimate of 832 individuals along 
with past survey population estimates of over 500 individuals establish 
the site's capability of supporting a substantial population of the 
species. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is 
composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation covering 75 
percent of the surface area. The maximum depth is 2.5 m (8.2 ft), 
averaging 1.5 m (4.9 ft), and the temperature was recorded F) on June 
20, 2008.C (66 at 19 While this pond currently has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species, easy public access makes it vulnerable to 
illegal introductions of nonnative fish. Beaver have been observed at 
this location.
    Unit 2B(4), Finley Cheadle Pond: This site totals 0.9 ha (2.3 ac) 
and is located in Benton County, Oregon, on the William L. Finley 
National Wildlife Refuge. In 2002, 50 Oregon chub were introduced to 
this unit, followed by the introduction of 53 additional individuals in 
2007. The population is currently estimated at 3,519 individuals, has 
been stable or increasing for 5 years, and the habitat contains all of 
the PCEs. The substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic 
material, and there is a variety of emergent and submergent aquatic 
vegetation covering 86 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth 
is 3.3 m (10.8 ft), averaging 1.5 m (4.9 ft), and F) on June 20, 2008.C 
(65.3 the temperature was recorded at 18.5 The site is isolated from 
other water bodies and has no competing or predatory nonnative species. 
Beaver have been observed at this location. The pond's proximity to 
agricultural areas puts it at risk of chemical runoff and easy public 
access makes it vulnerable to illegal introductions of nonnative fish.
    Unit 2B(5), Finley Gray Creek Swamp: This site totals 3.0 ha (7.4 
ac) and is located in Benton County, Oregon. Most of the unit is 
located on the southwest corner of the William L. Finley National 
Wildlife Refuge, however, a small portion of the unit is located on 
private property. The site was occupied by Oregon chub at the time of 
listing and the population is currently estimated at 2,141 individuals 
and has been stable for 5 years. The habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs. 
The substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation 
covering 100 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth is 2.2 m 
(7.2 ft), F)C (72 averaging 1 m (3.3 ft), and the temperature was 
recorded at 22 on July

[[Page 11025]]

28, 2008. Beaver have also been observed at this location.
    The site is periodically connected to other water bodies, and 
competing and predatory nonnative species have been observed. Gray 
Creek originates on the slopes west of Bellfountain Road, an area owned 
by private timber companies. The creek flows under Bellfountain Road 
onto Finley NWR where three dikes have been constructed to form Beaver 
Pond, Cattail Pond, and Cabell Marsh. The waters of Gray Creek empty 
into Muddy Creek, which drains into the Willamette River south of 
Corvallis. Extensive damming by beavers occurs between Bellfountain 
Road and the first dike at Beaver Pond, creating a narrow band of marsh 
habitat less than 1 mile in length, with a silty, detritus-laden 
substrate. The refuge boundary in this area is irregular, and portions 
of the marsh are within the refuge boundary while other portions are 
located on private land. Steep, forested slopes rise up on either side 
of the marsh; the north slope is refuge land, while a large portion of 
the southern slope is private land. The creek's location put the 
habitat at risk of excess sedimentation from logging activities and 
other water quality issues, including threat of spills and low 
dissolved oxygen.
Area 3: Middle Fork Willamette River Basin--Lane County, Oregon
    Unit 3A, Fall Creek Spillway Ponds: This site totals 1.5 ha (3.8 
ac), is owned by the USACE, and is the location of a 1996 introduction 
of 500 Oregon chub. The ponds, located in the overflow channel below 
Fall Creek Dam, were formed by beaver dams that blocked the spillway 
overflow channel. The current Oregon chub population estimate of 3,052 
individuals along with past survey population estimates of over 500 
individuals establish the site's capability of supporting a substantial 
population of the species. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The 
substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation 
covering 89 percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 1.8 
m (5.9 Cft), averaging 0.7 m (2.3 ft), and the temperature was recorded 
at 23.5 F) on July 2, 2008.(74.3 Because the site is supplied with 
water from seepage out of Fall Creek Reservoir spillway and flows into 
Fall Creek, it is at risk of impacts from flow management for flood 
control and low summer water levels. Although the site currently has no 
competing or predatory nonnative species, it is at risk of nonnative 
fish introduction if flood control measures at the Dam cause reservoir 
water to infiltrate the ponds.
    Unit 3B, Elijah Bristow State Park Berry Slough: This site totals 
5.2 ha (12.7 ac) measured at the annual high-water elevation, is owned 
by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department (OPRD), and was occupied 
by Oregon chub at the time of listing. Berry Slough appears to be an 
abandoned river channel consisting of a chain of shallow ponds 
connected by a spring-fed flow of several cubic feet per second, 
entering the Middle Fork Willamette River about 4.0 kilometers (km) 
(2.5 mi)) below Dexter Dam. Almost the entire 1.6-km (1mi) length of 
the slough lies within Elijah Bristow State Park. The population is 
currently estimated at 5,459 individuals, and has been stable for 5 
years, and the habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is 
composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation covering 100 
percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 2.5 m (8.2 ft), 
averaging 1.2 m (3.9 ft), and the temperature was recorded at between 
F) on July 16, 17, and 29, 2008.C (68 and 77 20 and 25 The upper 
portion (beaver pond) at the site is isolated from other water bodies 
during most high-water events by a beaver dam and has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species. The site's connection to the Middle Fork 
Willamette River creates the risk of nonnative fish introduction and 
fluctuations in the site's water level due to hydrologic changes in the 
river.
    Unit 3C, Elijah Bristow State Park Northeast Slough: This site 
totals 2.2 ha (5.4 ac), is owned by the OPRD, and Oregon chub were 
first observed here in 1999. Although only 230 Oregon chub were counted 
at the site in 2008, the habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs and has 
exhibited capability of supporting a substantial population of the 
species based on past survey population estimates of over 500 
individuals. The substrate is composed of 10 percent silt and organic 
material, and there is a variety of emergent, submergent, and floating 
aquatic vegetation covering 100 percent of the surface area. The 
maximum depth is 2 m (6.6 ft), averaging F) on JulyC (72 0.8 m (2.6 
ft), and the temperature was recorded at 22 22, 2008. Beaver have also 
been observed at this location. Competing and predatory nonnative 
species have also been observed. Because of its connection to the 
Middle Fork Willamette River, the water levels at this site can be 
affected by hydrologic changes in the river and the site is at risk of 
infiltration by additional nonnative fish.
    Unit 3D, Elijah Bristow State Park Island Pond: This site totals 
2.1 ha (5.2 ac), is owned by the OPRD, and Oregon chub were first 
observed here in 2003. The population is currently estimated at 1,619 
individuals and has been stable for 5 years. The habitat contains 3 of 
the 4 PCEs. The substrate is composed of 96 percent silt and organic 
material, and there is a variety of emergent and submergent aquatic 
vegetation covering 92 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth 
is 2 m (6.6 ft), averaging 1.2 m (3.9 ft), and the temperature was F) 
at various locations within theC (64 and 77 recorded at 18 and 25 site 
on July 17, 2008. Competing and predatory nonnative species have been 
observed at this location. Because of its connection to the Middle Fork 
Willamette River, the water levels at this site can be affected by 
hydrologic changes in the river and the site is at risk of infiltration 
by additional nonnative fish.
    Unit 3E, Dexter Reservoir RV Alcove (DEX 3): This site totals 0.4 
ha (0.9 ac) and is owned by the USACE. The site is located on the south 
side of Highway 58 off Dexter Reservoir next to a recreational vehicle 
(RV) park, and was occupied by Oregon chub at the time of listing. The 
population is currently estimated at 4,024 individuals, and has been 
stable for 5 years, and the habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs. The 
substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent, submergent and floating aquatic 
vegetation covering 87 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth 
is 1 m (3.3 ft), averaging 0.7 m (2.3 ft), and the temperature was 
recorded F) on July 1, 2008.C (72.5 at 22.5 Competing and predatory 
nonnative species have been observed at this location. The site is 
connected to Dexter Reservoir via a culvert and is therefore subject to 
impacts from regulated flow management, as well as low summer water 
levels, and the risk of infiltration by additional nonnative fish. 
Because of the site's close proximity to both the RV park and the 
highway, the water quality is at risk of contamination by spills and 
garbage.
    Unit 3F, Dexter Reservoir Alcove (PIT1): This site totals 0.1 ha 
(0.3 ac) measured at the annual high-water elevation and is owned by 
the USACE. The site is located on the south side of Highway 58 off 
Dexter Reservoir, and was occupied by Oregon chub at the time of 
listing. PIT1 is an embayment adjacent to the south shoulder of State 
Hwy 58 and connected by culvert beneath the highway to Dexter 
Reservoir. The area is owned by the State of Oregon but under USACE

[[Page 11026]]

jurisdiction via a flowage easement. The site has gradually sloping 
banks, woody debris, and supports shrubs, emergent and submergent 
vegetation. There is also a large boulder riprap revetment on the 
highway side. A small, intermittent stream enters from the south. The 
population is currently estimated at 684 individuals and has been 
stable for 5 years. The habitat contains 3 of the 4 PCEs. The substrate 
is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of aquatic vegetation including emergent, submergent, and algae 
covering 100 percent of the surface area. The maximum water depth is 1 
m (3.3 ft), averaging 0.5 m (1.6 ft), and the temperature was F) on 
July 2, 2008.C (64 recorded at 18 Competing and predatory nonnative 
species have been observed at this location. Because of its connection 
to Dexter Reservoir, the site is subject to impacts from regulated flow 
management, as well as low summer water levels, and the risk of 
infiltration by additional nonnative fish. Because of the site's close 
proximity to the highway, the water quality is at risk of contamination 
by spills.
    Unit 3G, East Fork Minnow Creek Pond: This site totals 1.3 ha (3.3 
ac), is owned by the ODOT, and was occupied by Oregon chub at the time 
of listing. East Minnow Creek Pond is a large beaver pond on a small 
tributary to Minnow Creek that drains into Lookout Point Reservoir. The 
pond enters Minnow Creek just south of Highway 58, after which the 
creek flows under the highway through a large box culvert. The 
population is currently estimated at 2,156 individuals and has been 
stable for 5 years. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate 
is composed of 100 percent silt and organic material, and there is a 
variety of emergent, submergent, and floating aquatic vegetation 
covering 100 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth is 1.2 m 
(3.9 ft), F)C (66 averaging 0.5 m (1.6 ft), and the temperature was 
recorded at 19 on July 2, 2008. The site is isolated from other water 
bodies and has no competing or predatory nonnative species but is 
vulnerable to excessive sedimentation resulting from timber harvest in 
the watershed, resultant vegetative succession of open water habitat, 
and contamination-related water quality threats due to the site's 
proximity to the highway. The ODOT is in the process of implementing a 
conservation bank for Oregon chub at this site; the bank includes the 
restoration, construction, and enhancement of Oregon chub habitat and 
other regionally significant habitats.
    Unit 3H, Hospital Pond: This site totals 0.5 ha (1.1 ac), is owned 
by the USACE, and was occupied by Oregon chub at the time of listing. 
The pond is located on the north side of the gravel road on the north 
shore of Lookout Point Reservoir and fed by a spring that flows into 
the east end of the pond. The population is currently estimated at 
3,682 individuals and has been stable for 5 years. The habitat contains 
all of the PCEs. The substrate is composed of 100 percent silt and 
organic material, and there is a variety of emergent, submergent, and 
floating aquatic vegetation covering 100 percent of the surface area. 
The maximum water depth is 3 m (9.8 ft), averaging 2 m (6.6 ft), and 
the temperature on the flooded terrace was F) on July 1, 2008.C (59 
recorded at 15 Although the site currently has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species, its connection to the reservoir puts it at 
risk of nonnative fish introduction. Beaver activity is evident in the 
pond. A culvert and gate at the outflow culvert maintains the high 
water level of the pond, but water levels in the pond can fluctuate due 
to its connection with the reservoir. Contamination-related water 
quality issues are also of concern due to the site's close proximity to 
the road.
    Unit 3I, Shady Dell Pond: This site totals 1.1 ha (2.8 ac), is 
owned by the United States Forest Service (USFS), and was occupied by 
Oregon chub at the time of listing. Shady Dell Pond is located in the 
far southeast end of Lookout Point Reservoir along the south side of 
State Highway 58 in a USFS campground. The pond was a former slough 
that was partially isolated from the Middle Fork Willamette River 
during highway construction. The site has gradually sloping banks, 
slightly turbid water, moderately abundant aquatic vegetation, and a 
substrate mix of detritus, silt, and boulders. The pond was fed only by 
rainfall and seepage, with no obvious outlet, but the USFS installed a 
diversion pipe from Dell Creek to Shady Dell Pond to maintain adequate 
summer water levels and counteract the surface area shrinkage caused by 
evaporation, leakage, or both. The population is currently estimated at 
7,249 individuals, has been stable for 5 years, and the habitat 
contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is 100 percent silt and organic 
material, and there is a variety of emergent, submergent, and floating 
aquatic vegetation covering 82 percent of the surface area. The maximum 
depth is 1.1 m (3.6 ft), averaging 0.5 m (1.6 ft), and the temperature 
F) on July 22, 2008.C (70 was recorded at 21 The site is isolated from 
other water bodies and has no competing or predatory nonnative species. 
Beaver have been observed at this location. Because of its proximity to 
the campground and its connection to Dell Creek, the site is at risk 
from nonnative fish introduction and contamination-related water 
quality issues.
    Unit 3J, Buckhead Creek: This site totals 3.8 ha (9.3 ac), is owned 
by the USFS, and was occupied by Oregon chub at the time of listing. 
Buckhead Creek is a tributary flowing into the Middle Fork Willamette 
River at the northeast end of Lookout Point Reservoir. Access to the 
site is via a Lane County gravel road and USFS Road 5821 that skirts 
the east side of the river. The channel varies from a few to over 16 m 
(50 ft) wide with both sloping and undercut banks, a bottom composed of 
silt, boulders, gravel and detritus, with some woody debris and aquatic 
vegetation. The lower 2.4 km (1.5 mi) of the creek flows through a 
slough-like, abandoned channel of the Middle Fork Willamette River and 
is wide, shallow, slightly turbid and low gradient, with marshy 
habitat. The population is currently estimated at 1,258 individuals and 
has been stable for 5 years. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The 
substrate is composed of 98 percent silt and organic material, and 
there is a variety of emergent, submergent, and floating aquatic 
vegetation covering 80 percent of the surface area. The maximum depth 
is 1.5 m (4.9 ft), averaging 0.8 m (2.6 ft), and the temperature was 
recorded at between 18 F) on July 15 and July 21, 2008.C (64 and 75 and 
24 Beaver frequent the area and Oregon chub are often found in beaver 
ponds on the lower 2.4 km (1.5 mi) of the creek. Although the site 
currently has no competing or predatory nonnative species, its 
connection to the river puts it at risk of nonnative fish introduction. 
Other threats include excessive sedimentation from logging in the 
watershed as well as contamination-related water quality issues due to 
the site's close proximity to the railroad.
    Unit 3K, Wicopee Pond: This site totals 1.4 ha (3.3 ac), is owned 
by the USFS, and was occupied at the time of listing as a result of a 
1988 introduction of 50 Oregon chub. The pond, a former borrow pit 
adjacent to Salt Creek in the upper Middle Fork Willamette River 
drainage, was created when a bridge crossing was constructed on a small 
logging road that crosses Salt Creek, along Highway 58. The population 
is currently estimated at 5,431 individuals and has been stable for 5 
years. The habitat contains all of the PCEs. The substrate is 100 
percent silt and organic material, and there is a variety of emergent, 
submergent, and floating

[[Page 11027]]

aquatic vegetation and algae covering 100 percent of the surface area. 
The maximum depth is 2 m (6.6 ft), averaging 1.2 m (3.9 ft), and the 
temperature F) on June 30, 2008.C (63 was recorded at 17 Beaver have 
been observed at this location and the site has no competing or 
predatory nonnative species, although the site remains at risk of the 
introduction of nonnative fishes. The site is at risk of excessive 
sedimentation resulting from logging in the watershed.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation

     Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including 
the Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out 
are not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. 
Decisions by the Fifth and Ninth Circuits Court of Appeals have 
invalidated our definition of destruction or adverse modification (50 
CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir. 2004) and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 442 (5th Cir. 2001)), and we do 
not rely on this regulatory definition when analyzing whether an action 
is likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. Under the 
statutory provisions of the Act, we determine destruction or adverse 
modification on the basis of whether, with implementation of the 
proposed Federal action, the affected critical habitat would remain 
functional (or retain those physical and biological features that 
relate to the ability of the area to periodically support the species) 
to serve its intended conservation role for the species.
     If a species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section 
7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies to ensure that activities 
they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of the species or to destroy or adversely modify 
its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a listed species 
or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) 
must enter into consultation with us. As a result of this consultation, 
we document compliance with the requirements of section 7(a)(2) through 
our issuance of:
    1. A concurrence letter for Federal actions that may affect, but 
are not likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat; 
or
    2. A biological opinion for Federal actions that may affect, and 
are likely to adversely affect, listed species or critical habitat.
    When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is 
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or 
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat, we also provide 
reasonable and prudent alternatives to the project, if any are 
identifiable. We define reasonable and prudent alternatives at 50 CFR 
402.02 as alternative actions identified during consultation that:
    1. Can be implemented in a manner consistent with the intended 
purpose of the action;
    2. Can be implemented consistent with the scope of the Federal 
agency's legal authority and jurisdiction;
    3.Are economically and technologically feasible; and
    4.Would, in the Director's opinion, avoid jeopardizing the 
continued existence of the listed species or destroying or adversely 
modifying critical habitat.
    Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project 
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs 
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are 
similarly variable.
     Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to 
reinitiate consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances 
where we have listed a new species or subsequently designated critical 
habitat that may be affected and the Federal agency has retained 
discretionary involvement or control over the action (or the agency's 
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law). 
Consequently, Federal agencies may sometimes need to request 
reinitiation of consultation with us on actions for which formal 
consultation has been completed, if those actions with discretionary 
involvement or control may affect subsequently listed species or 
designated critical habitat.
    Federal activities that may affect the Oregon chub or its 
designated critical habitat require section 7 consultation under the 
Act. Activities on State, Tribal, local, or private lands requiring a 
Federal permit (such as a permit from the USACE under section 404 of 
the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from us under 
section 10 of the Act) or involving some other Federal action (such as 
funding from the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Aviation 
Administration, or the Federal Emergency Management Agency) are subject 
to the section 7 consultation process. Federal actions not affecting 
listed species or critical habitat, and actions on State, Tribal, 
local, or private lands that are not Federally funded, authorized, or 
permitted, do not require section 7 consultations.

Application of the Jeopardy and Adverse Modification Standards

Jeopardy Standard
    Currently, the Service applies an analytical framework for Oregon 
chub jeopardy analyses that relies heavily on the importance of known 
populations to the species' survival and recovery. The analysis 
required by section 7(a)(2) of the Act is focused not only on these 
populations but also on the habitat conditions necessary to support 
them.
    The jeopardy analysis usually expresses the survival and recovery 
needs of the Oregon chub in a qualitative fashion without making 
distinctions between what is necessary for survival and what is 
necessary for recovery. Generally, the jeopardy analysis focuses on the 
range-wide status of the Oregon chub, the factors responsible for that 
condition, and what is necessary for this species to survive and 
recover. An emphasis is also placed on characterizing the condition of 
the Oregon chub in the area affected by the proposed Federal action and 
the role of affected populations in the survival and recovery of the 
Oregon chub. That context is then used to determine the significance of 
adverse and beneficial effects of the proposed Federal action and any 
cumulative effects for purposes of making the jeopardy determination.
Adverse Modification Standard
     The key factor related to the adverse modification determination 
is whether, with implementation of the proposed Federal action, the 
affected critical habitat would continue to serve its intended 
conservation role for the species, or retain those PCEs that relate to 
the ability of the area to periodically support the species. Activities 
that may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat are those that 
alter the PCEs to an extent that appreciably reduces the conservation 
value of critical habitat for the Oregon chub. As discussed above, the 
role of critical habitat is to support the life-history needs of the 
species and provide for the conservation of the species.
    Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to briefly evaluate and 
describe, in any proposed or final regulation that designates critical 
habitat, activities involving a Federal action that may destroy or 
adversely modify such habitat, or that may be affected by such 
designation. Activities that, when carried out, funded, or authorized 
by a Federal agency, may affect critical habitat and therefore result 
in

[[Page 11028]]

consultation for the Oregon chub include, but are not limited to:
    1. Actions that would adversely affect the Oregon chub's space for 
individual and population growth and normal behavior. These include 
altering the flow, gradient, or depth of the water channel by way of 
activities such as channelization, impoundment, road and bridge 
construction, mining, dredging, and destruction of riparian vegetation. 
These activities may lead to changes in water flows and levels that 
would degrade, reduce, or eliminate the habitat necessary for the 
growth and reproduction of Oregon chub.
    2. Actions that would significantly alter areas for reproduction, 
shelter, and food (habitat for prey). These include:
<bullet> Reducing or eliminating vegetative cover of the water column 
by activities such as release of contaminants into the surface water or 
connected groundwater at a point source or by dispersed release (non-
point source). These activities can result in loss of the vegetative 
cover that is vital to the Oregon chub's ability to spawn and hide from 
predators.
<bullet> Altering the substrate within the critical habitat unit 
through sediment deposition from livestock grazing, road construction, 
channel alteration, timber harvest, off-road vehicle use, and other 
watershed and floodplain disturbances. When these activities increase 
the sediment deposition to levels that begin to change open-water 
habitat to emergent wetland, the habitat necessary for the growth and 
reproduction of these fish is reduced or eliminated.
<bullet> Significantly decreasing the populations of minute organisms 
in the water channel that make up the food base of the Oregon chub 
through activities that negatively affect flows, water temperature, 
water quality, or other requirements.
    3. Actions that would significantly alter water temperature, 
thereby negatively affecting the Oregon chub's physiological processes 
for normal spawning and survival. Such activities could include, but 
are not limited to, release of chemicals, biological pollutants, or 
heated effluents into the surface water or connected groundwater at a 
point source or by dispersed release (non-point source). These 
activities could alter water quality to conditions that are beyond the 
tolerances of Oregon chub and result in direct or cumulative adverse 
effects to these individuals and their life cycles.
    4. Actions that would disturb the habitat of Oregon chub by 
introducing, spreading, or augmenting nonnative competitive or 
predatory aquatic species into any of the designated units. Such 
activities may include, but are not limited to, stocking for sport, 
aesthetics, biological control, or other purposes; the illegal use of 
live bait fish, aquaculture, or dumping of aquarium fish or other 
species; and connection of a designated critical habitat unit to 
another water body known to contain nonnative aquatic species. These 
activities could cause Oregon chub fatalities, displace Oregon chub 
from their habitat, and/or cause Oregon chub to spend a 
disproportionate amount of time hiding at the expense of foraging.
    We consider all of the units designated as critical habitat to 
contain features essential to the conservation of the Oregon chub and 
which require special management. All of the units are within the 
geographic range of the species, and they are currently occupied. To 
ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of 
the Oregon chub, Federal agencies already consult with us on activities 
in areas currently occupied by the Oregon chub, or in unoccupied areas 
if the species may be affected by the action.

Exemptions

Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act

    The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a) 
required each military installation that includes land and water 
suitable for the conservation and management of natural resources to 
complete an integrated natural resource management plan (INRMP) by 
November 17, 2001. An INRMP integrates implementation of the military 
mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural resources 
found on the base. Each INRMP includes:
<bullet> An assessment of the ecological needs on the installation, 
including the need to provide for the conservation of listed species;
<bullet> A statement of goals and priorities;
<bullet> A detailed description of management actions to be implemented 
to provide for these ecological needs; and
<bullet> A monitoring and adaptive management plan.
    Among other things, each INRMP must, to the extent appropriate and 
applicable, provide for fish and wildlife management; fish and wildlife 
habitat enhancement or modification; wetland protection, enhancement, 
and restoration where necessary to support fish and wildlife; and 
enforcement of applicable natural resource laws.
    The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. 
L. 108-136) amended the Act to limit areas eligible for designation as 
critical habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act (16 
U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) now provides: ``The Secretary shall not 
designate as critical habitat any lands or other geographical areas 
owned or 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.''
    There are no Department of Defense lands with a completed INRMP 
within the proposed critical habitat designation. Therefore, we are not 
exempting lands from this final designation of critical habitat for the 
Oregon chub pursuant to section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act.

Exclusions

Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act

     Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that the Secretary must 
designate and revise critical habitat on the basis of the best 
available scientific data after taking into consideration the economic 
impact, national security impact, and any other relevant impact of 
specifying any particular area as critical habitat. The Secretary may 
exclude an area from critical habitat if he determines that the 
benefits of such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such 
area as part of the critical habitat, unless he determines, based on 
the best scientific data available, that the failure to designate such 
area as critical habitat will result in the extinction of the species. 
In making that determination, the statute on its face, as well as the 
legislative history, are clear that the Secretary has broad discretion 
regarding which factor(s) to use and how much weight to give to any 
factor.
    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we may exclude an area from 
designated critical habitat based on economic impacts, impacts on 
national security, or any other relevant impacts. In considering 
whether to exclude a particular area from the designation, we must 
identify the benefits of including the area in the designation, 
identify the benefits of excluding the area from the designation, and 
determine whether the benefits of exclusion outweigh the benefits of 
inclusion. If based on this analysis, we make this determination,

[[Page 11029]]

we can exclude the area only if such exclusion would not result in the 
extinction of the species.
Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts
     Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider the economic impacts 
of specifying any particular area as critical habitat. In order to 
consider economic impacts, we prepared a draft economic analysis (DEA), 
which we made available for public review on September 22, 2009 (74 FR 
48211), based on the March 10, 2009, proposed rule (74 FR 10412). We 
opened a comment period on the DEA until October 22, 2009; however, we 
received no comments. Following the close of the comment period, a 
final analysis of the potential economic effects of the designation was 
developed, taking into consideration any new information.
     The intent of the final economic analysis (FEA) is to quantify the 
economic impacts of all potential conservation efforts for the Oregon 
chub. Some of these costs will likely be incurred regardless of whether 
we designate critical habitat (baseline). The economic impact of the 
final critical habitat designation is analyzed by comparing scenarios 
both ``with critical habitat'' and ``without critical habitat.'' The 
``without critical habitat'' scenario represents the baseline for the 
analysis, considering protections already in place for the species 
(e.g., under the Federal listing and other Federal, State, and local 
regulations). The baseline, therefore, represents the costs incurred 
regardless of whether critical habitat is designated. The ``with 
critical habitat'' scenario describes the incremental impacts 
associated specifically with the designation of critical habitat for 
the species. The incremental conservation efforts and associated 
impacts are those not expected to occur absent the designation of 
critical habitat for the species. In other words, the incremental costs 
are those attributable solely to the designation of critical habitat 
above and beyond the baseline costs; these are the costs we consider in 
the final designation of critical habitat. The analysis looks 
retrospectively at baseline impacts incurred since the species was 
listed, and forecasts both baseline and incremental impacts likely to 
occur with the designation of critical habitat.
    The FEA also addresses how potential economic impacts are likely to 
be distributed, including an assessment of any local or regional 
impacts of habitat conservation and the potential effects of 
conservation activities on government agencies, private businesses, and 
individuals. The FEA measures lost economic efficiency associated with 
residential and commercial development and public projects and 
activities, such as economic impacts on water management and 
transportation projects, Federal lands, small entities, and the energy 
industry. Decision-makers can use this information to assess whether 
the effects of the designation might unduly burden a particular group 
or economic sector. Finally, the FEA looks retrospectively at costs 
that have been incurred since 1993, when the Oregon chub was listed 
under the Act (58 FR 53800), and considers those costs that may occur 
in the 20 years following the designation of critical habitat, which 
was determined to be the appropriate period for analysis because 
limited planning information was available for most activities to 
forecast activity levels for projects beyond a 20-year timeframe. The 
FEA quantifies economic impacts of Oregon chub conservation efforts 
associated with the following categories of activity: water management, 
activities that impact water quality, dredging activities and other 
impacts (e.g., bridge replacement, management plans, and natural gas 
pipelines).
    Total baseline impacts are estimated to be $3.33 million to $13.2 
million, and incremental impacts are estimated to be $108,000 between 
2010 and 2029, assuming a 7 percent discount rate. The majority of 
estimated baseline costs arise from anticipated mitigation for future 
transportation projects, impacts to recreational activities and 
hydropower generation resulting from changes in flows, and ongoing 
habitat management efforts, which account for over 95 percent of the 
high-end costs estimated in the analysis. Incremental impacts are 
forecast to be entirely administrative costs of section 7 
consultations.
    Our economic analysis did not identify any disproportionate costs 
that are likely to result from the designation. Consequently, the 
Secretary has determined not to exert his discretion to exclude any 
areas from this designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
based on economic impacts. A copy of the FEA with supporting documents 
may be obtained by contacting the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Field Office 
(see ADDRESSES) or for downloading from the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov.
Exclusions Based on National Security Impacts
     Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider whether there are 
lands owned or managed by the Department of Defense (DOD) where the 
designation of critical habitat might present an impact to national 
security. In preparing this final rule, we have determined that the 
lands within the designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
are not owned or managed by the DOD, and, therefore, we anticipate no 
impact to national security. The Secretary has determined not to exert 
his discretion to exclude any areas from this final designation based 
on impacts on national security.
Exclusions Based on Other Relevant Impacts
    Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we consider other relevant 
impacts, in addition to economic impacts and impacts on national 
security. We consider a number of factors, including whether landowners 
have developed any habitat conservation plans (HCPs) or other resource 
management plans for the areas proposed for designation, or whether 
there are conservation partnerships that would be encouraged by 
designation of, or exclusion from, critical habitat. In addition, we 
look at any Tribal issues, and consider the government-to-government 
relationship of the United States with Tribal entities. We also 
consider any social impacts that might occur because of the 
designation.
    In preparing this final rule, we have determined that there are 
currently no HCPs for the Oregon chub. In 2001 and 2007, two Safe 
Harbor Agreements (SHAs) for the Oregon chub were finalized in Lane 
County, Oregon, to establish new populations of Oregon chub in 
artificial ponds as refugia for natural populations. These SHAs will 
contribute to the conservation of the species by reducing the risk of 
the complete loss of donor populations and any of their unique genetic 
material. We are unaware of any relevant impacts that would result from 
designating critical habitat in the areas subject to the SHAs and are 
including them in the final designation. The final designation does not 
include any Tribal lands or trust resources. Accordingly, the Secretary 
has determined not to exercise his discretion to exclude any areas 
under section 4(B)(2) of the Act based on other relevant impacts.

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review--Executive Order 12866

     The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has determined that this 
rule is not significant and has not reviewed this rule under Executive 
Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its determination upon the 
following four criteria:

[[Page 11030]]

    1. Whether the rule will have an annual effect of $100 million or 
more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector, 
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
    2. Whether the rule will create inconsistencies with other Federal 
agencies' actions.
    3. Whether the rule will materially affect entitlements, grants, 
user fees, loan programs or the rights and obligations of their 
recipients.
    4. Whether the rule raises novel legal or policy issues.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

     Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), 
as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act 
(SBREFA) of 1996 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), whenever an agency must 
publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must 
prepare and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility 
analysis that describes the effects of the rule on small entities 
(small businesses, small organizations, and small government 
jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required 
if the head of an agency certifies the rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The SBREFA 
amended the RFA to require Federal agencies to provide a certification 
statement of the factual basis for certifying that the rule will not 
have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. In this final rule, we are certifying that the critical 
habitat designation for the Oregon chub will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The 
following discussion explains our rationale.
     According to the Small Business Administration, small entities 
include small organizations, such as independent nonprofit 
organizations; small governmental jurisdictions, including school 
boards and city and town governments that serve fewer than 50,000 
residents; as well as small businesses. Small businesses include 
manufacturing and mining concerns with fewer than 500 employees, 
wholesale trade entities with fewer than 100 employees, retail and 
service businesses with less than $5 million in annual sales, general 
and heavy construction businesses with less than $27.5 million in 
annual business, special trade contractors doing less than $11.5 
million in annual business, and agricultural businesses with annual 
sales less than $750,000. To determine if potential economic impacts to 
these small entities are significant, we consider the types of 
activities that might trigger regulatory impacts under this rule, as 
well as the types of project modifications that may result. In general, 
the term significant economic impact is meant to apply to a typical 
small business firm's business operations.
     To determine if the rule could significantly affect a substantial 
number of small entities, we consider the number of small entities 
affected within particular types of economic activities (e.g., water 
management, water quality, dredging, and other activities). We apply 
the substantial number test individually to each industry to determine 
if certification is appropriate. However, the SBREFA does not 
explicitly define substantial number or significant economic impact. 
Consequently, to assess whether a substantial number of small entities 
is affected by this designation, this analysis considers the relative 
number of small entities likely to be impacted in an area. In some 
circumstances, especially with critical habitat designations of limited 
extent, we may aggregate across all industries and consider whether the 
total number of small entities affected is substantial. In estimating 
the number of small entities potentially affected, we also consider 
whether their activities have any Federal involvement.
     Designation of critical habitat only affects activities 
authorized, funded, or carried out by Federal agencies. Some kinds of 
activities are unlikely to have any Federal involvement and so will not 
be affected by critical habitat designation. In areas where the species 
is present, Federal agencies already are required to consult with us 
under section 7 of the Act on activities they authorize, fund, or carry 
out that may affect the Oregon chub. Federal agencies also must consult 
with us if their activities may affect critical habitat. Designation of 
critical habitat, therefore, could result in an additional economic 
impact on small entities due to the requirement to reinitiate 
consultation for ongoing Federal activities (see Application of the 
Adverse Modification Standard section).
    In our final economic analysis of the critical habitat designation, 
we evaluated the potential economic effects on small business entities 
resulting from implementation of conservation actions related to the 
proposed designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub. The 
analysis is based on the estimated impacts associated with the 
rulemaking as described in sections 3 through 7 of the analysis, and 
evaluated the potential for economic impacts related to activity 
categories including water management, agriculture, forestry, 
transportation, and habitat management.
    As discussed in Appendix A of the economic analysis, of the 
activities addressed in the analysis, only forestry activities are 
expected to experience incremental, administrative consultation costs 
that may be borne by small businesses. These costs may arise when the 
U.S. Forest Service consults on Federal timber sales, with small 
logging and timber tract companies as third parties. In Lane and Benton 
Counties, there are 178 logging operations and 98 timber tract 
operations that are considered small, representing between 98 and 100 
percent of all businesses in the affected industry sector within these 
two counties. Conservatively, assuming a single business is associated 
with all of the forecasted impacts to forestry activities, the present 
value, 20-year impact of $1,440 to a single small business is 
approximately 0.02 percent of annual sales. The annualized impacts to 
timber tract operations is estimated at $136, or approximately 0.002 
percent of annual sales. Therefore, while assuming that each small 
business has annual sales just under its SBA industry small business 
threshold ($7.0 million in annual revenues for timber tract operations; 
500 employees for logging operations) may underestimate impacts as a 
percentage of annual sales, forecast impacts still are likely to be 
relatively small in comparison to annual revenues. Please refer to our 
economic analysis of the critical habitat designation for a more 
detailed discussion of potential economic impacts.
    In summary, we have considered whether the designation would result 
in a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small 
entities. Based on the above reasoning and currently available 
information, we concluded that this rule will not have a significant 
economic impact on a substantial number of small business entities. 
Therefore, we are certifying that the designation of critical habitat 
for the Oregon chub will not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, and a regulatory flexibility 
analysis is not required.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use--Executive Order 13211

     Under Executive Order 13211 (E.O. 13211, Actions Concerning 
Regulations That Significantly Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 
Use), Federal agencies must prepare Statements of Energy

[[Page 11031]]

Effects when undertaking certain actions. OMB has provided guidance for 
implementing this Executive Order that outlines nine outcomes that may 
constitute a significant adverse effect when compared to not taking the 
regulatory action under consideration. The economic analysis finds that 
none of these criteria are relevant to this analysis. Thus, based on 
information in the economic analysis, energy-related impacts associated 
with the Oregon chub conservation activities within critical habitat 
are not expected. As such, the designation of critical habitat is not 
expected to significantly affect energy supplies, distribution, or use. 
Therefore, this action is not a significant energy action, and no 
Statement of Energy Effects is required.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)

     In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
et seq.), we make the following findings:
    1. This rule will not produce a Federal mandate. In general, a 
Federal mandate is a provision in legislation, statute, or regulation 
that would impose an enforceable duty upon State, local, or Tribal 
governments, or the private sector, and includes both ``Federal 
intergovernmental mandates'' and ``Federal private sector mandates.'' 
These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 658(5)-(7). ``Federal 
intergovernmental mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would impose 
an enforceable duty upon State, local, or [T]ribal governments,'' with 
two exceptions. It excludes ``a condition of Federal assistance.'' It 
also excludes ``a duty arising from participation in a voluntary 
Federal program,'' unless the regulation ``relates to a then-existing 
Federal program under which $500,000,000 or more is provided annually 
to State, local, and Tribal governments under entitlement authority,'' 
if the provision would ``increase the stringency of conditions of 
assistance'' or ``place caps upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal 
Government's responsibility to provide funding,'' and the State, local, 
or Tribal governments ``lack authority'' to adjust accordingly. At the 
time of enactment, these entitlement programs were: Medicaid; Aid to 
Families with Dependent Children work programs; Child Nutrition; Food 
Stamps; Social Services Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation State 
Grants; Foster Care, Adoption Assistance, and Independent Living; 
Family Support Welfare Services; and Child Support Enforcement. 
``Federal private sector mandate'' includes a regulation that ``would 
impose an enforceable duty upon the private sector, except (i) a 
condition of Federal assistance, or (ii) a duty arising from 
participation in a voluntary Federal program.''
    The designation of critical habitat does not impose a legally 
binding duty on non-Federal Government entities or private parties. 
Under the Act, the only regulatory effect is that Federal agencies must 
ensure that their actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical 
habitat under section 7. While non-Federal entities that receive 
Federal funding, assistance, or permits, or that otherwise require 
approval or authorization from a Federal agency for an action, may be 
indirectly impacted by the designation of critical habitat, the legally 
binding duty to avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat rests squarely on the Federal agency. Furthermore, to the 
extent that non-Federal entities are indirectly impacted because they 
receive Federal assistance or participate in a voluntary Federal aid 
program, the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would not apply, nor would 
critical habitat shift the costs of the large entitlement programs 
listed above onto State governments.
    2. We do not believe that this rule will significantly or uniquely 
affect small governments, because it will not produce a Federal mandate 
of $100 million or greater in any year; that is, it is not a 
significant regulatory action under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 
The designation of critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or 
local governments. By definition, Federal agencies are not considered 
small entities, although the activities they fund or permit may be 
proposed or carried out by small entities. As such, a Small Government 
Agency Plan is not required.

Takings--Executive Order 12630

     In accordance with E.O. 12630 (Government Actions and Interference 
with Constitutionally Protected Private Property Rights), we have 
analyzed the potential takings implications of designating critical 
habitat for the Oregon chub in a takings implications assessment. 
Critical habitat designation does not affect landowner actions that do 
not require Federal funding or permits, nor does it preclude 
development of habitat conservation programs or issuance of incidental 
take permits to permit actions that do require Federal funding or 
permits to go forward. The takings implications assessment concludes 
that this designation of critical habitat for the Oregon chub does not 
pose significant takings implications for lands within or affected by 
the designation.

Federalism--Executive Order 13132

     In accordance with E.O. 13132 (Federalism), this rule does not 
have significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not 
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior and Department of 
Commerce policy, we requested information from, and coordinated 
development of this critical habitat designation with, appropriate 
State resource agencies in Oregon. We received comments from the State 
of Oregon and the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, which have 
been addressed in the Summary of Comments and Recommendations section 
of the rule. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently 
occupied by the Oregon chub may impose nominal additional regulatory 
restrictions to those currently in place and, therefore, may have 
little incremental impact on State and local governments and their 
activities. The designation may have some benefit to these governments, 
in that the areas that contain the physical and biological features 
essential to the conservation of the species are more clearly defined, 
and the PCEs of the habitat necessary to the conservation of the 
species are specifically identified. This information does not alter 
where and what federally sponsored activities may occur. However, it 
may assist local governments in long-range planning (rather than having 
them wait for case-by-case section 7 consultations to occur).

Civil Justice Reform--Executive Order 12988

     In accordance with E.O. 12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the 
regulation meets the applicable standards set forth in sections 3(a) 
and 3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating critical habitat in 
accordance with the provisions of the Act. This final rule uses 
standard property descriptions and identifies the physical and 
biological features essential to the conservation of the subspecies 
within the designated areas to assist the public in understanding the 
habitat needs of the Oregon chub.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

     This rule does not contain any new collections of information that 
require approval by OMB under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.). This rule will not impose recordkeeping or 
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals, 
businesses, or

[[Page 11032]]

organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is 
not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it 
displays a currently valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)

     It is our position that, outside the jurisdiction of the U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to prepare 
environmental analyses as defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) in 
connection with designating critical habitat under the Act. We 
published a notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the 
Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This position was 
upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Douglas 
County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied 516 U.S. 
1042 (1996)).

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

     In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments (59 FR 22951), E.O. 13175, and the Department of the 
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal 
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with 
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997, American Indian Tribal Rights, 
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act, 
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with 
Tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge 
that Tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal 
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make 
information available to Tribes. We determined that there are no Tribal 
lands occupied at the time of listing that contain the features 
essential for the conservation of the Oregon chub, and no unoccupied 
Tribal lands that are essential for the conservation of the Oregon 
chub. Therefore, we are not designating critical habitat for the Oregon 
chub on Tribal lands.

References Cited

     A complete list of all references cited is available upon request 
from the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Field Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Author(s)

     The primary authors of this package are the staff members of the 
Oregon Fish and Wildlife Field Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

     Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Regulation Promulgation

0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of 
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:

PART 17-[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

0
2. Amend Sec.  17.11(h) by revising the entry for ``Chub, Oregon'' 
under ``Fishes'' in the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife to 
read as follows:


Sec.  17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
     (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                    Species                                           Vertebrate
------------------------------------------------                   population where                                         Critical
                                                  Historic range     endangered or        Status         When listed        habitat       Special rules
         Common name            Scientific name                       threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         FISHES
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chub, Oregon                   Oregonichthys     U.S.A. (OR)       Entire            E                 520              Sec.  17.95(e)   NA
                                crameri
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      * * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0
3. In Sec.  17.95, amend paragraph (e) by adding an entry for ``Oregon 
Chub (Oregonichthys crameri)'' in the same order that the species 
appears in the table at Sec.  17.11(h), to read as follows:


Sec.  17.95  Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.

* * * * *
    (e) Fishes.
* * * * *
Oregon Chub (Oregonichthys crameri)
    (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Benton, Lane, Linn, and 
Marion Counties, Oregon, on the maps below.
    (2) The primary constituent elements of critical habitat for the 
Oregon chub are the habitat components that provide:
    (i) Off-channel water bodies such as beaver ponds, oxbows, side-
channels, stable backwater sloughs, low-gradient tributaries, and 
flooded marshes, including at least 500 continuous square meters (0.12 
ac) of aquatic surface area at depths between approximately 0.5-2.0 m 
(1.6-6.6 ft).
    (ii) Aquatic vegetation covering a minimum of 250 square meters 
(.06 ac) (or between approximately 25 and 100 percent of the total 
surface area of the habitat). This vegetation is primarily submergent 
for purposes of spawning, but also includes emergent and floating 
vegetation and algae, which are important for cover throughout the 
year. Areas with sufficient vegetation are likely to also have the 
following characteristics:
    (A) Gradient less than 2.5 percent;
    (B) No or very low water velocity in late spring and summer;
    (C) Silty, organic substrate; and
    (D) Abundant minute organisms such as rotifers, copepods, 
cladocerans, and chironomid larvae.
    (iii) Late spring and summer F), withC (59 and 78 subsurface water 
temperatures between 15 and 25 natural diurnal and seasonal variation.
    (iv) No or negligible levels of nonnative aquatic predatory or 
competitive species. Negligible is defined for the purpose of this rule 
as

[[Page 11033]]

a minimal level of nonnative species that will still allow the Oregon 
chub to continue to survive and recover.
    (3) Critical habitat does not include manmade structures 
(including, but not limited to, docks, seawalls, pipelines, runways, or 
other structures or paved areas) and the land or waterway on which they 
are located that exist within the legal boundaries on the effective 
date of this rule.
    (4) Critical Habitat Map Units. The data layer defining critical 
habitat was created using a Trimble GeoXT GPS unit. These critical 
habitat units were mapped using Universal Transverse Mercator, Zone 10, 
North American Datum 1983 (UTM NAD 83) coordinates. These coordinates 
establish the vertices and endpoints of the boundaries of the units. 
From USGS 1:24,000 scale quadrangle Albany.
    (5) Note: Index map for critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11034]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.000

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11035]]

    (6) Unit 1A: Santiam I-5 Side Channels, Linn County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit consists of three ponds totaling 1.4 ha (3.3 ac), 
located on a 27-ha (66-ac) property on the south side of the Santiam 
River, upstream of the Interstate Highway 5 bridge crossing in Linn 
County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 495981, 4953649; 495990, 4953647; 496000, 4953645; 496010, 
4953645; 496012, 4953644; 496012, 4953642; 496010, 4953640; 496001, 
4953639; 495992, 4953638; 495980, 4953640; 495975, 4953641; 495966, 
4953644; 495959, 4953647; 495954, 4953648; 495941, 4953649; 495933, 
4953648; 495926, 4953649; 495907, 4953654; 495897, 4953656; 495888, 
4953658; 495879, 4953660; 495862, 4953661; 495864, 4953676; 495876, 
4953675; 495889, 4953673; 495900, 4953671; 495912, 4953667; 495922, 
4953664; 495930, 4953660; 495941, 4953660; 495945, 4953659; 495955, 
4953658; 495962, 4953656; 495973, 4953653; 495981, 4953649;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
496146, 4953619; 496158, 4953612; 496173, 4953605; 496182, 4953598; 
496191, 4953592; 496202, 4953587; 496212, 4953583; 496220, 4953581; 
496225, 4953579; 496229, 4953582; 496232, 4953576; 496229, 4953573; 
496231, 4953570; 496238, 4953564; 496242, 4953559; 496247, 4953555; 
496249, 4953550; 496246, 4953547; 496243, 4953547; 496237, 4953552; 
496230, 4953556; 496225, 4953562; 496221, 4953567; 496216, 4953569; 
496214, 4953571; 496209, 4953568; 496202, 4953570; 496196, 4953573; 
496186, 4953578; 496182, 4953575; 496190, 4953567; 496199, 4953563; 
496206, 4953558; 496205, 4953547; 496193, 4953540; 496179, 4953540; 
496168, 4953539; 496161, 4953529; 496147, 4953530; 496139, 4953538; 
496131, 4953549; 496120, 4953561; 496114, 4953571; 496109, 4953580; 
496108, 4953587; 496106, 4953594; 496098, 4953604; 496090, 4953611; 
496082, 4953619; 496084, 4953627; 496077, 4953635; 496068, 4953641; 
496056, 4953649; 496045, 4953656; 496030, 4953662; 496017, 4953668; 
496002, 4953671; 495979, 4953676; 495969, 4953678; 495957, 4953681; 
495947, 4953683; 495935, 4953687; 495925, 4953688; 495917, 4953692; 
495917, 4953699; 495925, 4953705; 495932, 4953707; 495947, 4953708; 
495960, 4953708; 495978, 4953710; 495993, 4953707; 496009, 4953700; 
496024, 4953694; 496038, 4953690; 496051, 4953685; 496061, 4953678; 
496070, 4953672; 496078, 4953665; 496089, 4953655; 496100, 4953646; 
496117, 4953634; 496126, 4953627; 496136, 4953624; 496146, 4953619; and 
excluding land bound by 496163, 4953570; 496160, 4953566; 496153, 
4953567; 496151, 4953564; 496151, 4953561; 496156, 4953559; 496162, 
4953562; 496167, 4953565; 496172, 4953564; 496176, 4953564; 496181, 
4953566; 496176, 4953573; 496173, 4953582; 496167, 4953587; 496161, 
4953586; 496156, 4953588; 496153, 4953592; 496146, 4953596; 496137, 
4953599; 496131, 4953601; 496123, 4953606; 496115, 4953611; 496109, 
4953615; 496104, 4953619; 496109, 4953611; 496110, 4953603; 496117, 
4953598; 496121, 4953592; 496129, 4953587; 496136, 4953580; 496143, 
4953577; 496150, 4953576; 496163, 4953570; and excluding land bound by 
496137, 4953566; 496135, 4953569; 496131, 4953569; 496131, 4953565; 
496134, 4953562; 496136, 4953564; 496137, 4953566;
    (iii) Map of Unit 1A of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11036]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.001

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11037]]

    (7) Unit 1B(1): Geren Island North Channel, Marion County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 0.8 ha (1.9 ac) and is located 
on the grounds of a water treatment facility owned by the City of Salem 
in Marion County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bound by the following coordinates (EN): 519305, 4960118; 
519312, 4960112; 519322, 4960112; 519338, 4960110; 519360, 4960109; 
519367, 4960111; 519380, 4960106; 519387, 4960105; 519405, 4960103; 
519427, 4960100; 519439, 4960098; 519446, 4960097; 519461, 4960094; 
519468, 4960092; 519490, 4960089; 519511, 4960081; 519526, 4960079; 
519540, 4960073; 519553, 4960069; 519560, 4960068; 519564, 4960067; 
519576, 4960062; 519593, 4960056; 519616, 4960047; 519628, 4960039; 
519633, 4960033; 519634, 4960019; 519627, 4960014; 519615, 4960018; 
519606, 4960023; 519595, 4960031; 519590, 4960035; 519581, 4960040; 
519568, 4960045; 519547, 4960053; 519533, 4960057; 519520, 4960062; 
519497, 4960065; 519474, 4960073; 519464, 4960074; 519442, 4960077; 
519413, 4960083; 519381, 4960088; 519366, 4960091; 519355, 4960093; 
519340, 4960091; 519322, 4960089; 519311, 4960089; 519298, 4960090; 
519290, 4960091; 519281, 4960105; 519278, 4960114; 519289, 4960131; 
519293, 4960137; 519299, 4960134; 519301, 4960124; 519305, 4960118;
    (iii) Map of Unit 1B(1) of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11038]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.002

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11039]]

    (8) Unit 1B(2): Stayton Public Works Pond, Marion County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 0.4 ha (1.0 ac) and is located 
in and owned by the City of Stayton, in Marion County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 516606, 4960109; 516603, 4960102; 516607, 4960099; 516611, 
4960101; 516614, 4960101; 516622, 4960100; 516623, 4960098; 516622, 
4960095; 516614, 4960093; 516608, 4960091; 516606, 4960088; 516603, 
4960084; 516605, 4960079; 516607, 4960077; 516610, 4960080; 516614, 
4960084; 516616, 4960085; 516618, 4960083; 516616, 4960078; 516613, 
4960074; 516610, 4960074; 516608, 4960073; 516605, 4960072; 516605, 
4960067; 516604, 4960064; 516603, 4960058; 516600, 4960051; 516593, 
4960046; 516592, 4960043; 516595, 4960040; 516598, 4960033; 516594, 
4960027; 516590, 4960023; 516583, 4960023; 516574, 4960020; 516568, 
4960017; 516560, 4960012; 516555, 4960010; 516549, 4960011; 516546, 
4960011; 516543, 4960013; 516540, 4960018; 516535, 4960020; 516534, 
4960021; 516533, 4960028; 516535, 4960038; 516540, 4960043; 516544, 
4960055; 516547, 4960061; 516547, 4960066; 516547, 4960077; 516550, 
4960087; 516552, 4960092; 516552, 4960100; 516552, 4960101; 516554, 
4960100; 516555, 4960097; 516554, 4960092; 516553, 4960082; 516550, 
4960071; 516551, 4960067; 516554, 4960067; 516559, 4960070; 516563, 
4960072; 516568, 4960070; 516569, 4960071; 516572, 4960071; 516575, 
4960068; 516578, 4960064; 516583, 4960064; 516589, 4960066; 516589, 
4960068; 516590, 4960072; 516590, 4960080; 516588, 4960086; 516587, 
4960086; 516585, 4960088; 516583, 4960092; 516584, 4960095; 516589, 
4960096; 516594, 4960099; 516598, 4960102; 516599, 4960104; 516602, 
4960104; 516604, 4960110; 516604, 4960114; 516607, 4960114; 516606, 
4960109; and excluding land bound by 516585, 4960037; 516586, 4960036; 
516587, 4960038; 516586, 4960040; 516585, 4960041; 516583, 4960040; 
516584, 4960039; 516585, 4960037; and excluding land bound by 516558, 
4960022; 516561, 4960022; 516562, 4960023; 516562, 4960025; 516559, 
4960025; 516557, 4960024; 516558, 4960022;
    (iii) See paragraph (10)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 1B(2).
    (9) Unit 1B(3): South Stayton Pond, Linn County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 0.1 ha (0.2 ac), is located in 
Linn County, Oregon, and is owned by the Oregon Department of Fish and 
Wildlife (ODFW).
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 515540, 4959144; 515536, 4959144; 515529, 4959146; 515522, 
4959149; 515513, 4959153; 515509, 4959158; 515507, 4959161; 515511, 
4959166; 515515, 4959169; 515522, 4959173; 515530, 4959177; 515536, 
4959180; 515540, 4959182; 515545, 4959180; 515546, 4959173; 515544, 
4959162; 515543, 4959153; 515543, 4959149; 515542, 4959147; 515540, 
4959144;
    (iii) See paragraph (10)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 1B(3).
    (10) Unit 1B(4): Gray Slough, Marion County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 2.5 ha (6.2 ac), is privately 
owned, and is located in Marion County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 513857, 4957787; 513859, 4957785; 513856, 4957783; 513839, 
4957783; 513822, 4957784; 513807, 4957784; 513791, 4957786; 513775, 
4957786; 513772, 4957784; 513764, 4957785; 513748, 4957780; 513731, 
4957773; 513711, 4957767; 513689, 4957761; 513654, 4957755; 513630, 
4957749; 513605, 4957746; 513585, 4957742; 513558, 4957736; 513532, 
4957730; 513503, 4957727; 513480, 4957723; 513473, 4957717; 513468, 
4957712; 513460, 4957708; 513455, 4957707; 513443, 4957708; 513435, 
4957711; 513424, 4957713; 513415, 4957713; 513406, 4957709; 513397, 
4957703; 513378, 4957700; 513362, 4957696; 513353, 4957691; 513342, 
4957684; 513333, 4957683; 513324, 4957680; 513312, 4957678; 513300, 
4957674; 513286, 4957674; 513279, 4957671; 513270, 4957666; 513264, 
4957660; 513255, 4957658; 513247, 4957663; 513241, 4957662; 513237, 
4957651; 513229, 4957650; 513214, 4957648; 513202, 4957645; 513195, 
4957644; 513188, 4957644; 513181, 4957643; 513172, 4957640; 513161, 
4957637; 513152, 4957634; 513141, 4957631; 513132, 4957630; 513127, 
4957626; 513119, 4957623; 513111, 4957629; 513102, 4957630; 513094, 
4957626; 513084, 4957625; 513074, 4957622; 513066, 4957621; 513062, 
4957613; 513059, 4957610; 513053, 4957605; 513048, 4957598; 513044, 
4957601; 513043, 4957608; 513039, 4957613; 513035, 4957613; 513029, 
4957613; 513025, 4957609; 513021, 4957603; 513016, 4957599; 513011, 
4957591; 513004, 4957580; 512996, 4957571; 512989, 4957558; 512980, 
4957550; 512976, 4957539; 512972, 4957529; 512962, 4957517; 512955, 
4957514; 512948, 4957516; 512944, 4957524; 512948, 4957533; 512954, 
4957540; 512966, 4957547; 512969, 4957553; 512972, 4957564; 512977, 
4957573; 512980, 4957580; 512983, 4957587; 512991, 4957598; 513002, 
4957608; 513011, 4957616; 513022, 4957624; 513036, 4957633; 513045, 
4957636; 513052, 4957639; 513059, 4957645; 513067, 4957648; 513081, 
4957655; 513097, 4957664; 513108, 4957669; 513118, 4957673; 513133, 
4957679; 513148, 4957685; 513161, 4957690; 513178, 4957697; 513184, 
4957699; 513197, 4957703; 513214, 4957707; 513220, 4957709; 513233, 
4957712; 513247, 4957714; 513259, 4957717; 513268, 4957719; 513282, 
4957722; 513298, 4957725; 513310, 4957727; 513319, 4957727; 513332, 
4957730; 513350, 4957734; 513366, 4957734; 513379, 4957735; 513389, 
4957735; 513400, 4957735; 513418, 4957736; 513436, 4957737; 513449, 
4957738; 513461, 4957739; 513468, 4957739; 513497, 4957743; 513519, 
4957748; 513531, 4957752; 513539, 4957753; 513541, 4957752; 513540, 
4957750; 513533, 4957749; 513524, 4957746; 513508, 4957742; 513503, 
4957741; 513501, 4957738; 513505, 4957738; 513513, 4957740; 513522, 
4957742; 513531, 4957744; 513544, 4957748; 513556, 4957750; 513569, 
4957751; 513585, 4957754; 513599, 4957757; 513611, 4957757; 513627, 
4957759; 513639, 4957760; 513668, 4957768; 513700, 4957773; 513727, 
4957780; 513747, 4957787; 513769, 4957793; 513788, 4957791; 513801, 
4957791; 513814, 4957789; 513839, 4957788; 513857, 4957787;
    (iii) Map of Units 1B(2), 1B(3), and 1B(4) of critical habitat for 
the Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11040]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.003

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11041]]

    (11) Unit 1C: Foster Pullout Pond, Linn County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 0.4 ha (1.0 ac), and is owned by the United 
States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). The pond is located in Linn 
County, Oregon, on the north shore of Foster Reservoir in the South 
Santiam River drainage.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 529130, 4918726; 529115, 4918723; 529101, 4918725; 529089, 
4918735; 529094, 4918745; 529106, 4918755; 529122, 4918771; 529142, 
4918788; 529159, 4918805; 529175, 4918821; 529175, 4918820; 529179, 
4918819; 529180, 4918805; 529177, 4918789; 529183, 4918787; 529183, 
4918784; 529177, 4918778; 529172, 4918767; 529168, 4918759; 529162, 
4918746; 529153, 4918738; 529145, 4918734; 529130, 4918726;
    (iii) Map of Unit 1C of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11042]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.004

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11043]]

    (12) Unit 2A(1): Russell Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 0.1 ha (0.1 ac), is privately 
owned, and is located in the Mohawk River drainage, Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 514905, 4897668; 514916, 4897667; 514929, 4897668; 514939, 
4897667; 514952, 4897667; 514956, 4897667; 514959, 4897666; 514961, 
4897662; 514964, 4897661; 514969, 4897661; 514975, 4897662; 514976, 
4897659; 514970, 4897657; 514963, 4897656; 514960, 4897654; 514960, 
4897651; 514955, 4897650; 514945, 4897650; 514932, 4897650; 514917, 
4897650; 514908, 4897651; 514900, 4897651; 514898, 4897651; 514897, 
4897653; 514896, 4897656; 514895, 4897663; 514891, 4897663; 514884, 
4897662; 514878, 4897659; 514877, 4897660; 514883, 4897664; 514891, 
4897665; 514895, 4897666; 514897, 4897666; 514905, 4897668;
    (iii) See paragraph (13)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 2A(1).
    (13) Unit 2A(2): Shetzline Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals approximately 0.1 ha (0.3 ac), is privately 
owned, and is located in the Mohawk River drainage, Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 515484, 4897250; 515477, 4897249; 515469, 4897250; 515464, 
4897252; 515461, 4897254; 515460, 4897259; 515462, 4897263; 515466, 
4897266; 515476, 4897267; 515485, 4897266; 515489, 4897265; 515493, 
4897262; 515494, 4897258; 515492, 4897254; 515489, 4897251; 515484, 
4897250;
    (iii) Map of Units 2A(1) and 2A(2) of critical habitat for the 
Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11044]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.005

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11045]]

    (14) Unit 2A(3): Big Island, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 3.3 ha (8.2 ac), is owned by the McKenzie 
River Trust, and is located along the McKenzie River in Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 507093, 4879404; 507095, 4879401; 507097, 4879400; 507099, 
4879398; 507099, 4879396; 507096, 4879397; 507091, 4879401; 507089, 
4879403; 507079, 4879395; 507071, 4879390; 507077, 4879388; 507081, 
4879386; 507085, 4879384; 507091, 4879381; 507097, 4879378; 507099, 
4879376; 507104, 4879373; 507107, 4879371; 507112, 4879369; 507116, 
4879368; 507121, 4879365; 507127, 4879363; 507131, 4879360; 507136, 
4879357; 507131, 4879349; 507125, 4879353; 507120, 4879356; 507115, 
4879358; 507110, 4879360; 507103, 4879362; 507098, 4879366; 507092, 
4879370; 507087, 4879373; 507082, 4879375; 507078, 4879377; 507073, 
4879380; 507069, 4879381; 507064, 4879383; 507047, 4879368; 507030, 
4879355; 507010, 4879343; 507001, 4879338; 506986, 4879326; 506974, 
4879317; 506961, 4879310; 506960, 4879307; 506963, 4879303; 506970, 
4879300; 506974, 4879297; 506971, 4879293; 506965, 4879296; 506955, 
4879303; 506946, 4879298; 506943, 4879287; 506945, 4879279; 506949, 
4879278; 506953, 4879279; 506960, 4879276; 506961, 4879271; 506956, 
4879265; 506944, 4879261; 506929, 4879258; 506913, 4879255; 506902, 
4879248; 506892, 4879241; 506885, 4879236; 506891, 4879226; 506906, 
4879239; 506922, 4879240; 506930, 4879245; 506944, 4879252; 506955, 
4879254; 506966, 4879261; 506973, 4879275; 506982, 4879280; 506990, 
4879284; 506999, 4879289; 507009, 4879288; 507026, 4879290; 507042, 
4879291; 507061, 4879296; 507076, 4879295; 507081, 4879287; 507075, 
4879279; 507053, 4879277; 507035, 4879269; 507020, 4879267; 507013, 
4879268; 506997, 4879265; 506990, 4879259; 506998, 4879253; 507007, 
4879251; 507015, 4879247; 507031, 4879250; 507046, 4879252; 507062, 
4879251; 507070, 4879259; 507078, 4879257; 507084, 4879251; 507100, 
4879247; 507111, 4879242; 507120, 4879245; 507133, 4879246; 507145, 
4879245; 507156, 4879241; 507166, 4879239; 507171, 4879237; 507178, 
4879231; 507184, 4879222; 507190, 4879215; 507202, 4879194; 507202, 
4879185; 507208, 4879174; 507209, 4879156; 507212, 4879135; 507213, 
4879127; 507211, 4879118; 507206, 4879125; 507206, 4879135; 507203, 
4879147; 507202, 4879161; 507199, 4879175; 507193, 4879180; 507190, 
4879172; 507189, 4879166; 507186, 4879148; 507181, 4879137; 507171, 
4879126; 507160, 4879117; 507150, 4879110; 507138, 4879106; 507126, 
4879110; 507125, 4879117; 507133, 4879122; 507140, 4879122; 507147, 
4879125; 507151, 4879132; 507159, 4879140; 507166, 4879150; 507172, 
4879157; 507173, 4879166; 507173, 4879183; 507168, 4879192; 507161, 
4879206; 507157, 4879215; 507152, 4879226; 507145, 4879238; 507143, 
4879242; 507136, 4879243; 507126, 4879242; 507117, 4879241; 507111, 
4879239; 507108, 4879240; 507099, 4879244; 507094, 4879246; 507083, 
4879248; 507081, 4879250; 507077, 4879251; 507073, 4879250; 507068, 
4879251; 507065, 4879249; 507061, 4879247; 507049, 4879248; 507038, 
4879247; 507025, 4879244; 507019, 4879243; 507010, 4879243; 507001, 
4879244; 506992, 4879245; 506982, 4879245; 506983, 4879241; 506989, 
4879241; 506999, 4879237; 507007, 4879236; 507014, 4879233; 507021, 
4879232; 507027, 4879230; 507032, 4879230; 507042, 4879228; 507044, 
4879226; 507042, 4879224; 507033, 4879226; 507025, 4879227; 507018, 
4879229; 507008, 4879232; 506999, 4879233; 506989, 4879235; 506973, 
4879236; 506961, 4879233; 506940, 4879225; 506924, 4879221; 506903, 
4879215; 506894, 4879212; 506883, 4879212; 506869, 4879216; 506857, 
4879229; 506843, 4879242; 506830, 4879242; 506810, 4879244; 506792, 
4879240; 506784, 4879227; 506787, 4879205; 506795, 4879179; 506805, 
4879165; 506816, 4879148; 506817, 4879134; 506812, 4879116; 506826, 
4879084; 506843, 4879058; 506856, 4879043; 506846, 4879034; 506829, 
4879053; 506821, 4879069; 506813, 4879081; 506803, 4879105; 506795, 
4879118; 506795, 4879133; 506797, 4879145; 506796, 4879157; 506794, 
4879165; 506790, 4879173; 506787, 4879177; 506787, 4879174; 506789, 
4879170; 506789, 4879166; 506785, 4879164; 506783, 4879167; 506782, 
4879173; 506781, 4879177; 506780, 4879188; 506777, 4879197; 506774, 
4879207; 506766, 4879226; 506759, 4879234; 506750, 4879245; 506740, 
4879250; 506722, 4879253; 506707, 4879253; 506703, 4879258; 506703, 
4879264; 506704, 4879274; 506701, 4879282; 506699, 4879292; 506696, 
4879293; 506688, 4879290; 506677, 4879287; 506662, 4879284; 506651, 
4879278; 506639, 4879273; 506626, 4879266; 506618, 4879277; 506626, 
4879282; 506637, 4879288; 506649, 4879296; 506658, 4879300; 506669, 
4879307; 506681, 4879313; 506693, 4879320; 506707, 4879328; 506720, 
4879335; 506731, 4879339; 506740, 4879339; 506745, 4879338; 506748, 
4879338; 506751, 4879339; 506754, 4879341; 506756, 4879338; 506752, 
4879336; 506749, 4879332; 506745, 4879325; 506736, 4879319; 506728, 
4879315; 506722, 4879312; 506718, 4879307; 506710, 4879301; 506710, 
4879296; 506719, 4879287; 506730, 4879279; 506744, 4879278; 506755, 
4879276; 506767, 4879274; 506789, 4879276; 506804, 4879274; 506816, 
4879274; 506826, 4879273; 506834, 4879271; 506845, 4879272; 506853, 
4879274; 506859, 4879275; 506864, 4879279; 506869, 4879285; 506876, 
4879290; 506884, 4879296; 506892, 4879301; 506900, 4879307; 506910, 
4879315; 506917, 4879320; 506927, 4879328; 506936, 4879336; 506940, 
4879340; 506946, 4879344; 506953, 4879347; 506959, 4879348; 506957, 
4879352; 506956, 4879355; 506958, 4879357; 506961, 4879360; 506966, 
4879360; 506970, 4879356; 506973, 4879357; 506982, 4879361; 506991, 
4879366; 507004, 4879374; 507012, 4879378; 507020, 4879381; 507028, 
4879385; 507044, 4879392; 507055, 4879398; 507066, 4879405; 507075, 
4879413; 507087, 4879421; 507099, 4879426; 507107, 4879429; 507118, 
4879430; 507122, 4879430; 507121, 4879412; 507119, 4879411; 507111, 
4879411; 507102, 4879409; 507093, 4879406; 507093, 4879404; and 
excluding land bound by 506890, 4879274; 506883, 4879269; 506872, 
4879263; 506861, 4879256; 506859, 4879253; 506869, 4879254; 506879, 
4879260; 506890, 4879266; 506902, 4879272; 506907, 4879278; 506907, 
4879278; 506900, 4879277; 506890, 4879274;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
507017, 4879310; 507023, 4879306; 507028, 4879308; 507030, 4879307; 
507028, 4879305; 507015, 4879299; 507008, 4879297; 507002, 4879296; 
506994, 4879293; 506981, 4879288; 506973, 4879286; 506968, 4879288; 
506970, 4879292; 506971, 4879293; 506974, 4879297; 506974, 4879298; 
506983, 4879301; 506991, 4879305; 506999, 4879310; 507009, 4879311; 
507017, 4879310;
    (iii) Map of Unit 2A(3) of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11046]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.006

BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11047]]

    (15) Unit 2B(1): Ankeny Willow Marsh , Marion County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 14.0 ha (34.5 ac), and is located in Marion 
County, Oregon, at the Ankeny National Wildlife Refuge.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 494301, 4959127; 494318, 4959124; 494328, 4959126; 494338, 
4959131; 494348, 4959134; 494359, 4959134; 494373, 4959127; 494386, 
4959104; 494396, 4959076; 494413, 4959050; 494434, 4959017; 494451, 
4958983; 494466, 4958953; 494479, 4958932; 494498, 4958911; 494512, 
4958896; 494530, 4958884; 494528, 4958885; 494551, 4958869; 494585, 
4958866; 494603, 4958867; 494618, 4958861; 494628, 4958854; 494642, 
4958838; 494675, 4958818; 494703, 4958792; 494711, 4958776; 494719, 
4958752; 494713, 4958732; 494698, 4958720; 494693, 4958709; 494693, 
4958703; 494698, 4958689; 494705, 4958673; 494716, 4958660; 494718, 
4958654; 494714, 4958642; 494711, 4958623; 494710, 4958612; 494711, 
4958605; 494720, 4958591; 494718, 4958581; 494726, 4958576; 494732, 
4958564; 494720, 4958547; 494708, 4958530; 494696, 4958519; 494684, 
4958527; 494670, 4958544; 494652, 4958566; 494634, 4958589; 494619, 
4958606; 494592, 4958636; 494565, 4958665; 494541, 4958693; 494518, 
4958718; 494498, 4958738; 494465, 4958772; 494447, 4958788; 494420, 
4958812; 494397, 4958835; 494377, 4958859; 494360, 4958882; 494347, 
4958900; 494326, 4958927; 494310, 4958946; 494271, 4958996; 494234, 
4959040; 494212, 4959066; 494168, 4959117; 494144, 4959145; 494127, 
4959161; 494091, 4959202; 494073, 4959226; 494064, 4959244; 494056, 
4959257; 494051, 4959284; 494056, 4959320; 494056, 4959331; 494066, 
4959344; 494080, 4959353; 494094, 4959362; 494112, 4959373; 494123, 
4959380; 494137, 4959388; 494144, 4959387; 494153, 4959369; 494169, 
4959341; 494182, 4959326; 494200, 4959303; 494208, 4959293; 494242, 
4959260; 494255, 4959217; 494262, 4959174; 494278, 4959150; 494283, 
4959143; 494301, 4959127;
    (iii) Map of Unit 2B(1) of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11048]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.007

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11049]]

    (16) Unit 2B(2): Dunn Wetland, Benton County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 6.1 ha (15.2 ac), is privately owned, and is 
located in Benton County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 470225, 4922333; 470235, 4922324; 470236, 4922329; 470238, 
4922344; 470241, 4922357; 470250, 4922355; 470246, 4922340; 470247, 
4922320; 470247, 4922297; 470249, 4922269; 470238, 4922250; 470261, 
4922225; 470284, 4922196; 470294, 4922183; 470307, 4922160; 470331, 
4922148; 470348, 4922122; 470353, 4922112; 470369, 4922092; 470366, 
4922064; 470362, 4922042; 470372, 4922042; 470382, 4922035; 470385, 
4922023; 470379, 4922013; 470370, 4922010; 470364, 4922017; 470358, 
4922021; 470350, 4922017; 470349, 4921978; 470346, 4921960; 470347, 
4921943; 470345, 4921932; 470341, 4921931; 470335, 4921934; 470297, 
4921958; 470272, 4921977; 470247, 4921994; 470230, 4922005; 470217, 
4922012; 470202, 4922022; 470188, 4922033; 470179, 4922048; 470170, 
4922062; 470170, 4922073; 470171, 4922088; 470171, 4922100; 470164, 
4922104; 470159, 4922102; 470145, 4922085; 470137, 4922078; 470132, 
4922078; 470129, 4922081; 470125, 4922088; 470122, 4922098; 470115, 
4922121; 470113, 4922135; 470115, 4922143; 470110, 4922148; 470095, 
4922149; 470078, 4922157; 470065, 4922171; 470054, 4922186; 470056, 
4922199; 470063, 4922207; 470082, 4922221; 470099, 4922232; 470123, 
4922248; 470154, 4922273; 470166, 4922283; 470190, 4922305; 470205, 
4922329; 470194, 4922349; 470204, 4922362; 470212, 4922360; 470225, 
4922333;
    (iii) Map of Unit 2B(2) of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11050]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.008

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11051]]

    (17) Unit 2B(3): Finley Display Pond, Benton County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 1.0 ha (2.4 ac) and is located in Benton 
County, Oregon, on the William L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 473297, 4917434; 473299, 4917431; 473303, 4917433; 473308, 
4917433; 473313, 4917430; 473317, 4917425; 473322, 4917418; 473323, 
4917413; 473320, 4917406; 473316, 4917390; 473310, 4917375; 473302, 
4917356; 473297, 4917346; 473294, 4917333; 473287, 4917319; 473278, 
4917310; 473273, 4917315; 473266, 4917321; 473262, 4917328; 473257, 
4917337; 473252, 4917345; 473248, 4917354; 473244, 4917364; 473239, 
4917372; 473237, 4917380; 473232, 4917389; 473228, 4917397; 473226, 
4917404; 473225, 4917412; 473224, 4917424; 473223, 4917431; 473221, 
4917445; 473222, 4917459; 473226, 4917469; 473234, 4917475; 473240, 
4917478; 473244, 4917477; 473251, 4917474; 473260, 4917468; 473265, 
4917467; 473274, 4917462; 473284, 4917451; 473291, 4917445; 473296, 
4917440; 473296, 4917436; 473297, 4917434; and excluding land bound by 
473238, 4917400; 473246, 4917395; 473249, 4917396; 473252, 4917394; 
473255, 4917393; 473258, 4917392; 473260, 4917394; 473258, 4917397; 
473258, 4917401; 473254, 4917409; 473252, 4917413; 473245, 4917423; 
473245, 4917425; 473243, 4917428; 473242, 4917431; 473240, 4917433; 
473238, 4917430; 473236, 4917425; 473234, 4917419; 473233, 4917413; 
473234, 4917406; 473238, 4917400;
    (iii) See paragraph (19)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 2B(3).
    (18) Unit 2B(4): Finley Cheadle Pond, Benton County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 0.9 ha (2.3 ac) and is located in Benton 
County, Oregon, on the William L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 475672, 4916089; 475679, 4916070; 475684, 4916056; 475685, 
4916053; 475690, 4916045; 475694, 4916035; 475699, 4916025; 475706, 
4916017; 475714, 4916012; 475725, 4916006; 475730, 4916004; 475735, 
4916003; 475741, 4916001; 475747, 4916003; 475752, 4916002; 475760, 
4916003; 475765, 4916001; 475766, 4915998; 475769, 4915995; 475768, 
4915987; 475768, 4915970; 475766, 4915960; 475763, 4915956; 475762, 
4915951; 475764, 4915947; 475765, 4915940; 475766, 4915931; 475766, 
4915917; 475761, 4915909; 475760, 4915904; 475757, 4915902; 475751, 
4915905; 475747, 4915910; 475741, 4915915; 475732, 4915925; 475721, 
4915937; 475708, 4915950; 475699, 4915960; 475699, 4915963; 475681, 
4915977; 475681, 4915982; 475674, 4915989; 475670, 4915996; 475669, 
4916001; 475666, 4916008; 475663, 4916019; 475661, 4916030; 475660, 
4916035; 475658, 4916041; 475653, 4916051; 475649, 4916056; 475642, 
4916055; 475638, 4916064; 475632, 4916075; 475636, 4916078; 475643, 
4916078; 475649, 4916080; 475654, 4916080; 475658, 4916080; 475657, 
4916087; 475654, 4916099; 475653, 4916104; 475661, 4916105; 475672, 
4916089;
    (iii) See paragraph (19)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 2B(4).
    (19) Unit 2B(5): Finley Gray Creek Swamp, Benton County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 3.0 ha (7.4 ac) and is located in Benton 
County, Oregon. Most of the unit is located on the southwest corner of 
the William L. Finley National Wildlife Refuge; however, a small 
portion of the unit is located on private property.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 472786, 4916068; 472780, 4916056; 472772, 4916045; 472756, 
4916036; 472735, 4916028; 472717, 4916022; 472704, 4916028; 472697, 
4916038; 472685, 4916041; 472670, 4916051; 472659, 4916056; 472650, 
4916059; 472641, 4916058; 472634, 4916052; 472627, 4916042; 472618, 
4916033; 472614, 4916026; 472608, 4916021; 472598, 4916017; 472581, 
4916015; 472564, 4916015; 472538, 4916017; 472514, 4916018; 472494, 
4916020; 472487, 4916013; 472474, 4916021; 472450, 4916023; 472428, 
4916026; 472408, 4916029; 472382, 4916034; 472353, 4916038; 472333, 
4916040; 472314, 4916045; 472306, 4916054; 472300, 4916065; 472293, 
4916072; 472282, 4916084; 472270, 4916086; 472259, 4916092; 472246, 
4916094; 472233, 4916092; 472223, 4916085; 472213, 4916085; 472212, 
4916094; 472218, 4916095; 472225, 4916100; 472232, 4916102; 472240, 
4916104; 472250, 4916105; 472255, 4916109; 472261, 4916109; 472266, 
4916105; 472266, 4916098; 472271, 4916096; 472277, 4916094; 472282, 
4916100; 472289, 4916102; 472300, 4916102; 472302, 4916104; 472307, 
4916108; 472312, 4916108; 472318, 4916104; 472323, 4916096; 472329, 
4916086; 472336, 4916074; 472339, 4916071; 472352, 4916068; 472377, 
4916065; 472388, 4916054; 472397, 4916050; 472408, 4916046; 472420, 
4916044; 472430, 4916044; 472440, 4916043; 472447, 4916044; 472460, 
4916046; 472467, 4916048; 472477, 4916050; 472489, 4916050; 472500, 
4916054; 472508, 4916054; 472515, 4916051; 472523, 4916052; 472536, 
4916060; 472545, 4916071; 472551, 4916078; 472559, 4916083; 472566, 
4916096; 472575, 4916098; 472587, 4916100; 472596, 4916113; 472611, 
4916123; 472631, 4916130; 472652, 4916133; 472670, 4916134; 472694, 
4916139; 472717, 4916139; 472738, 4916138; 472759, 4916136; 472763, 
4916133; 472770, 4916126; 472773, 4916124; 472772, 4916112; 472771, 
4916099; 472772, 4916077; 472780, 4916073; 472786, 4916068;
    (iii) Map of Units 2B(3), 2B(4), and 2B(5) of critical habitat for 
the Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11052]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.009

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11053]]

    (20) Unit 3A: Fall Creek Spillway Ponds, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 1.5 ha (3.8 ac), is owned by the USACE, and is 
located in the overflow channel below Fall Creek Dam in Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 519284, 4865517; 519298, 4865515; 519305, 4865515; 519311, 
4865508; 519313, 4865502; 519312, 4865488; 519309, 4865483; 519302, 
4865482; 519288, 4865486; 519270, 4865487; 519253, 4865487; 519243, 
4865488; 519236, 4865490; 519225, 4865492; 519211, 4865494; 519193, 
4865495; 519166, 4865501; 519142, 4865506; 519112, 4865514; 519084, 
4865520; 519069, 4865524; 519057, 4865528; 519032, 4865534; 519009, 
4865541; 518998, 4865545; 518977, 4865553; 518959, 4865557; 518950, 
4865560; 518928, 4865565; 518911, 4865570; 518893, 4865575; 518875, 
4865582; 518858, 4865588; 518840, 4865594; 518833, 4865601; 518832, 
4865607; 518834, 4865612; 518841, 4865617; 518851, 4865619; 518874, 
4865614; 518889, 4865613; 518920, 4865605; 518956, 4865589; 518985, 
4865579; 519034, 4865569; 519074, 4865556; 519092, 4865547; 519129, 
4865540; 519151, 4865538; 519170, 4865530; 519195, 4865526; 519231, 
4865523; 519243, 4865519; 519284, 4865517;
    (iii) Map of Unit 3A of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11054]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.010

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11055]]

    (21) Unit 3B: Elijah Bristow State Park Berry Slough, Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 5.2 ha (12.7 ac) measured at the annual high-
water elevation, is owned by the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department 
(OPRD), and is located in Elijah Bristow State Park in Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 513039, 4865406; 513039, 4865403; 513044, 4865400; 513049, 
4865395; 513057, 4865390; 513064, 4865385; 513074, 4865379; 513081, 
4865378; 513089, 4865378; 513099, 4865380; 513104, 4865383; 513105, 
4865388; 513107, 4865393; 513109, 4865396; 513113, 4865398; 513117, 
4865398; 513121, 4865396; 513123, 4865391; 513122, 4865387; 513117, 
4865377; 513106, 4865366; 513088, 4865355; 513080, 4865345; 513075, 
4865334; 513078, 4865315; 513080, 4865307; 513088, 4865290; 513090, 
4865267; 513098, 4865252; 513110, 4865242; 513123, 4865230; 513132, 
4865222; 513135, 4865219; 513146, 4865215; 513155, 4865213; 513155, 
4865218; 513154, 4865224; 513155, 4865226; 513158, 4865225; 513160, 
4865222; 513160, 4865215; 513159, 4865210; 513170, 4865206; 513190, 
4865204; 513229, 4865204; 513260, 4865194; 513281, 4865200; 513297, 
4865201; 513312, 4865204; 513329, 4865207; 513351, 4865210; 513363, 
4865214; 513371, 4865211; 513370, 4865207; 513365, 4865205; 513357, 
4865203; 513349, 4865201; 513337, 4865200; 513325, 4865199; 513312, 
4865196; 513298, 4865194; 513282, 4865188; 513261, 4865186; 513236, 
4865185; 513218, 4865181; 513193, 4865183; 513181, 4865190; 513163, 
4865196; 513137, 4865203; 513120, 4865211; 513113, 4865220; 513107, 
4865230; 513100, 4865225; 513100, 4865221; 513102, 4865215; 513109, 
4865205; 513118, 4865197; 513137, 4865183; 513160, 4865165; 513171, 
4865159; 513193, 4865152; 513205, 4865141; 513206, 4865125; 513210, 
4865118; 513209, 4865113; 513208, 4865095; 513206, 4865089; 513201, 
4865089; 513198, 4865102; 513196, 4865113; 513189, 4865123; 513182, 
4865135; 513173, 4865143; 513157, 4865151; 513143, 4865154; 513129, 
4865162; 513123, 4865168; 513106, 4865182; 513095, 4865192; 513088, 
4865204; 513084, 4865213; 513081, 4865223; 513073, 4865246; 513065, 
4865266; 513062, 4865273; 513055, 4865273; 513057, 4865265; 513057, 
4865258; 513052, 4865241; 513054, 4865232; 513057, 4865225; 513062, 
4865215; 513075, 4865198; 513083, 4865187; 513090, 4865177; 513091, 
4865171; 513083, 4865175; 513079, 4865180; 513072, 4865189; 513066, 
4865199; 513059, 4865209; 513051, 4865220; 513044, 4865231; 513037, 
4865223; 513030, 4865209; 513024, 4865198; 513016, 4865188; 513007, 
4865176; 513001, 4865169; 512994, 4865152; 512993, 4865124; 512993, 
4865117; 512996, 4865111; 512998, 4865104; 512998, 4865078; 513003, 
4865061; 513008, 4865048; 513001, 4865046; 512997, 4865056; 512989, 
4865066; 512983, 4865081; 512979, 4865105; 512979, 4865129; 512982, 
4865153; 512986, 4865165; 512995, 4865184; 513008, 4865202; 513023, 
4865226; 513031, 4865236; 513034, 4865248; 513035, 4865255; 513037, 
4865271; 513039, 4865286; 513042, 4865297; 513045, 4865307; 513049, 
4865314; 513051, 4865319; 513049, 4865330; 513040, 4865336; 513029, 
4865339; 513022, 4865342; 513015, 4865354; 513009, 4865367; 513000, 
4865383; 513001, 4865389; 513010, 4865399; 513023, 4865406; 513030, 
4865406; 513035, 4865405; 513035, 4865406; 513036, 4865408; 513037, 
4865409; 513039, 4865409; 513039, 4865408; 513039, 4865406; and 
excluding land bound by 513049, 4865347; 513054, 4865346; 513058, 
4865348; 513058, 4865353; 513058, 4865356; 513056, 4865362; 513051, 
4865366; 513043, 4865376; 513035, 4865387; 513029, 4865391; 513022, 
4865391; 513019, 4865386; 513022, 4865380; 513024, 4865375; 513030, 
4865369; 513035, 4865364; 513040, 4865358; 513044, 4865349; 513049, 
4865347;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
512811, 4865560; 512814, 4865555; 512827, 4865553; 512827, 4865554; 
512837, 4865553; 512857, 4865551; 512875, 4865548; 512890, 4865545; 
512908, 4865541; 512923, 4865533; 512932, 4865529; 512945, 4865526; 
512952, 4865527; 512958, 4865527; 512961, 4865529; 512963, 4865532; 
512966, 4865534; 512970, 4865533; 512970, 4865530; 512968, 4865527; 
512960, 4865523; 512947, 4865522; 512938, 4865523; 512926, 4865525; 
512929, 4865522; 512938, 4865520; 512949, 4865517; 512963, 4865512; 
512976, 4865510; 512989, 4865513; 513003, 4865515; 513019, 4865518; 
513034, 4865520; 513048, 4865524; 513060, 4865526; 513079, 4865532; 
513089, 4865531; 513110, 4865536; 513124, 4865542; 513125, 4865536; 
513119, 4865534; 513101, 4865528; 513087, 4865523; 513073, 4865520; 
513057, 4865517; 513032, 4865515; 513009, 4865511; 512993, 4865508; 
512982, 4865504; 512966, 4865503; 512956, 4865506; 512946, 4865510; 
512940, 4865513; 512936, 4865512; 512945, 4865505; 512958, 4865496; 
512977, 4865477; 512986, 4865467; 513007, 4865442; 513015, 4865429; 
513016, 4865423; 513006, 4865412; 512998, 4865404; 512995, 4865407; 
512997, 4865416; 512999, 4865422; 512984, 4865439; 512976, 4865453; 
512958, 4865467; 512940, 4865487; 512923, 4865500; 512905, 4865513; 
512889, 4865520; 512871, 4865522; 512851, 4865523; 512835, 4865523; 
512817, 4865524; 512801, 4865527; 512774, 4865532; 512756, 4865536; 
512741, 4865537; 512736, 4865537; 512730, 4865534; 512726, 4865534; 
512725, 4865533; 512726, 4865528; 512723, 4865528; 512723, 4865532; 
512722, 4865533; 512719, 4865534; 512718, 4865539; 512719, 4865543; 
512717, 4865547; 512706, 4865552; 512697, 4865559; 512702, 4865563; 
512706, 4865566; 512710, 4865565; 512715, 4865562; 512723, 4865559; 
512730, 4865557; 512735, 4865555; 512737, 4865557; 512737, 4865559; 
512733, 4865560; 512731, 4865565; 512735, 4865570; 512750, 4865573; 
512764, 4865573; 512790, 4865567; 512798, 4865565; 512811, 4865560; and 
excluding land bound by 512752, 4865557; 512753, 4865553; 512772, 
4865551; 512786, 4865548; 512793, 4865548; 512792, 4865553; 512782, 
4865556; 512769, 4865557; 512762, 4865558; 512756, 4865559; 512752, 
4865557;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
512517, 4866094; 512512, 4866079; 512511, 4866074; 512512, 4866071; 
512513, 4866068; 512512, 4866067; 512510, 4866069; 512509, 4866072; 
512506, 4866070; 512498, 4866067; 512489, 4866066; 512488, 4866055; 
512495, 4866045; 512506, 4866032; 512515, 4866022; 512524, 4866009; 
512534, 4865998; 512545, 4865989; 512553, 4865977; 512559, 4865964; 
512562, 4865956; 512567, 4865938; 512567, 4865930; 512568, 4865921; 
512572, 4865911; 512578, 4865902; 512580, 4865891; 512580, 4865878; 
512580, 4865864; 512582, 4865850; 512583, 4865827; 512584, 4865806; 
512593, 4865792; 512599, 4865783; 512602, 4865775; 512607, 4865764; 
512610, 4865755; 512612, 4865748; 512623, 4865738; 512629, 4865727; 
512635, 4865720; 512642, 4865712; 512645, 4865707; 512642, 4865701; 
512635, 4865699; 512632, 4865696; 512633, 4865695; 512636, 4865696; 
512641, 4865696; 512644, 4865694; 512651, 4865696; 512657, 4865703; 
512667, 4865715; 512676, 4865727; 512681, 4865731; 512686, 4865732; 
512683, 4865725; 512673, 4865713;

[[Page 11056]]

512661, 4865698; 512655, 4865689; 512641, 4865681; 512630, 4865677; 
512622, 4865670; 512621, 4865666; 512623, 4865662; 512628, 4865661; 
512635, 4865660; 512644, 4865658; 512647, 4865655; 512646, 4865652; 
512638, 4865653; 512626, 4865655; 512621, 4865653; 512623, 4865645; 
512629, 4865639; 512635, 4865630; 512642, 4865625; 512651, 4865619; 
512659, 4865610; 512667, 4865602; 512674, 4865596; 512683, 4865590; 
512692, 4865582; 512700, 4865574; 512701, 4865572; 512698, 4865570; 
512693, 4865565; 512689, 4865568; 512678, 4865576; 512662, 4865586; 
512653, 4865595; 512642, 4865606; 512636, 4865610; 512626, 4865616; 
512618, 4865623; 512609, 4865635; 512600, 4865647; 512584, 4865649; 
512571, 4865658; 512570, 4865673; 512580, 4865682; 512579, 4865690; 
512572, 4865706; 512555, 4865727; 512543, 4865737; 512526, 4865749; 
512512, 4865758; 512501, 4865768; 512500, 4865773; 512504, 4865772; 
512515, 4865764; 512525, 4865756; 512539, 4865747; 512549, 4865739; 
512550, 4865739; 512563, 4865733; 512579, 4865724; 512589, 4865721; 
512594, 4865726; 512592, 4865735; 512589, 4865741; 512586, 4865748; 
512579, 4865754; 512572, 4865760; 512565, 4865770; 512557, 4865784; 
512553, 4865793; 512549, 4865816; 512550, 4865834; 512549, 4865851; 
512550, 4865873; 512552, 4865895; 512554, 4865899; 512555, 4865907; 
512555, 4865913; 512550, 4865924; 512541, 4865936; 512533, 4865951; 
512527, 4865963; 512522, 4865972; 512517, 4865981; 512509, 4865989; 
512501, 4866000; 512496, 4866005; 512490, 4866017; 512484, 4866027; 
512475, 4866039; 512468, 4866052; 512465, 4866067; 512420, 4866107; 
512388, 4866124; 512348, 4866132; 512319, 4866134; 512319, 4866146; 
512345, 4866144; 512388, 4866135; 512419, 4866125; 512445, 4866104; 
512465, 4866085; 512479, 4866085; 512496, 4866089; 512504, 4866099; 
512513, 4866123; 512523, 4866135; 512535, 4866144; 512541, 4866154; 
512541, 4866156; 512554, 4866153; 512551, 4866147; 512544, 4866138; 
512536, 4866131; 512531, 4866126; 512525, 4866119; 512523, 4866115; 
512518, 4866102; 512517, 4866094;
    (iii) See paragraph (23)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 3B.
    (22) Unit 3C; Elijah Bristow State Park Northeast Slough, Lane 
County Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 2.2 ha (5.4 ac), is owned by the OPRD, and is 
located in Elijah Bristow State Park in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 514970, 4864567; 514987, 4864557; 514999, 4864551; 515023, 
4864537; 515036, 4864528; 515054, 4864524; 515069, 4864515; 515092, 
4864496; 515116, 4864475; 515137, 4864447; 515154, 4864412; 515168, 
4864385; 515179, 4864364; 515191, 4864344; 515202, 4864316; 515216, 
4864293; 515229, 4864277; 515239, 4864261; 515245, 4864248; 515244, 
4864243; 515235, 4864243; 515219, 4864260; 515202, 4864285; 515185, 
4864311; 515175, 4864338; 515160, 4864364; 515147, 4864389; 515138, 
4864411; 515124, 4864438; 515108, 4864461; 515095, 4864474; 515081, 
4864487; 515063, 4864492; 515064, 4864482; 515066, 4864470; 515074, 
4864465; 515081, 4864461; 515088, 4864451; 515080, 4864455; 515069, 
4864461; 515057, 4864472; 515049, 4864483; 515044, 4864499; 515035, 
4864514; 515015, 4864525; 514990, 4864540; 514971, 4864551; 514955, 
4864559; 514947, 4864566; 514943, 4864559; 514947, 4864546; 514953, 
4864520; 514962, 4864502; 514983, 4864484; 514988, 4864475; 514997, 
4864459; 515007, 4864442; 515015, 4864432; 515025, 4864416; 515038, 
4864404; 515054, 4864391; 515064, 4864373; 515070, 4864353; 515075, 
4864332; 515079, 4864311; 515093, 4864315; 515105, 4864318; 515120, 
4864321; 515123, 4864317; 515116, 4864316; 515106, 4864314; 515098, 
4864311; 515088, 4864303; 515081, 4864299; 515085, 4864290; 515093, 
4864270; 515102, 4864250; 515108, 4864241; 515113, 4864232; 515119, 
4864213; 515125, 4864200; 515142, 4864194; 515156, 4864181; 515153, 
4864175; 515136, 4864189; 515126, 4864191; 515126, 4864188; 515129, 
4864174; 515136, 4864158; 515130, 4864155; 515126, 4864159; 515125, 
4864167; 515120, 4864181; 515113, 4864195; 515107, 4864211; 515099, 
4864235; 515093, 4864241; 515084, 4864263; 515074, 4864285; 515063, 
4864295; 515056, 4864314; 515054, 4864334; 515052, 4864338; 515046, 
4864354; 515044, 4864369; 515028, 4864384; 515012, 4864394; 515002, 
4864409; 514992, 4864422; 514986, 4864433; 514977, 4864442; 514967, 
4864461; 514956, 4864471; 514959, 4864474; 514944, 4864493; 514939, 
4864507; 514934, 4864522; 514927, 4864546; 514921, 4864559; 514909, 
4864572; 514902, 4864582; 514884, 4864597; 514879, 4864607; 514859, 
4864619; 514851, 4864630; 514837, 4864636; 514821, 4864648; 514813, 
4864656; 514799, 4864660; 514797, 4864675; 514809, 4864672; 514821, 
4864668; 514834, 4864666; 514845, 4864665; 514857, 4864664; 514873, 
4864650; 514886, 4864641; 514898, 4864625; 514909, 4864612; 514924, 
4864600; 514939, 4864590; 514959, 4864575; 514970, 4864567;
    (iii) See paragraph (23)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 3C.
    (23) Unit 3D: Elijah Bristow Island Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 2.1 ha (5.2 ac), is owned by the OPRD, and is 
located in Elijah Bristow State Park in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 513941, 4864549; 513945, 4864542; 513958, 4864547; 513962, 
4864552; 513966, 4864555; 513973, 4864557; 513978, 4864556; 513982, 
4864554; 513989, 4864549; 513994, 4864543; 513996, 4864536; 513998, 
4864532; 514001, 4864519; 514004, 4864514; 514006, 4864512; 514019, 
4864508; 514030, 4864499; 514037, 4864494; 514047, 4864488; 514060, 
4864481; 514065, 4864482; 514067, 4864486; 514069, 4864489; 514071, 
4864491; 514075, 4864488; 514074, 4864485; 514072, 4864481; 514072, 
4864477; 514075, 4864470; 514082, 4864459; 514083, 4864448; 514080, 
4864429; 514075, 4864408; 514073, 4864391; 514072, 4864374; 514071, 
4864364; 514083, 4864365; 514084, 4864361; 514083, 4864349; 514081, 
4864341; 514072, 4864327; 514064, 4864318; 514055, 4864310; 514043, 
4864307; 514036, 4864310; 514021, 4864322; 514013, 4864327; 514008, 
4864340; 513999, 4864350; 513988, 4864362; 513979, 4864371; 513972, 
4864380; 513970, 4864388; 513974, 4864396; 513982, 4864404; 513991, 
4864414; 514006, 4864432; 514017, 4864442; 514020, 4864458; 514007, 
4864468; 513999, 4864466; 513993, 4864461; 513985, 4864465; 513986, 
4864475; 513985, 4864488; 513973, 4864496; 513963, 4864499; 513952, 
4864495; 513954, 4864489; 513963, 4864481; 513968, 4864475; 513978, 
4864466; 513982, 4864460; 513981, 4864455; 513976, 4864451; 513969, 
4864452; 513957, 4864458; 513953, 4864460; 513950, 4864466; 513950, 
4864473; 513945, 4864483; 513942, 4864493; 513937, 4864504; 513932, 
4864517; 513929, 4864519; 513920, 4864519; 513913, 4864518; 513904, 
4864523; 513892, 4864533; 513898, 4864552; 513907, 4864564; 513921, 
4864566; 513929, 4864576; 513936, 4864578; 513938, 4864556; 513941, 
4864549;
    (iii) Map of Units 3B, 3C, and 3D of critical habitat for the 
Oregon chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11057]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.011

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11058]]

    (24) Unit 3E: Dexter Reservoir RV Alcove DEX3, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 0.4 ha (0.9 ac) and is owned by the USACE. The 
unit is located on the south side of Highway 58 off Dexter Reservoir 
next to a recreational vehicle (RV) park, in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 515412, 4862223; 515408, 4862221; 515405, 4862216; 515404, 
4862217; 515403, 4862220; 515402, 4862222; 515400, 4862223; 515392, 
4862221; 515388, 4862222; 515378, 4862227; 515374, 4862237; 515364, 
4862250; 515358, 4862257; 515352, 4862262; 515344, 4862272; 515334, 
4862285; 515323, 4862300; 515314, 4862311; 515304, 4862315; 515297, 
4862329; 515292, 4862335; 515285, 4862340; 515286, 4862342; 515293, 
4862339; 515299, 4862333; 515303, 4862327; 515313, 4862322; 515320, 
4862314; 515329, 4862311; 515335, 4862306; 515346, 4862295; 515353, 
4862291; 515364, 4862282; 515376, 4862274; 515388, 4862267; 515399, 
4862261; 515410, 4862255; 515420, 4862250; 515427, 4862248; 515434, 
4862246; 515436, 4862243; 515433, 4862239; 515429, 4862235; 515425, 
4862230; 515422, 4862226; 515419, 4862223; 515412, 4862223;
    (iii) See paragraph (25)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 3E.
    (25) Unit 3F: Dexter Reservoir Alcove PIT1, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 0.1 ha (0.3 ac) measured at the annual high-
water elevation, and is owned by the USACE. The unit is located on the 
south side of Highway 58 off Dexter Reservoir, in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 517131, 4861681; 517127, 4861680; 517127, 4861680; 517128, 
4861683; 517130, 4861693; 517128, 4861699; 517128, 4861703; 517127, 
4861711; 517123, 4861719; 517123, 4861722; 517123, 4861722; 517126, 
4861721; 517129, 4861719; 517135, 4861717; 517145, 4861712; 517153, 
4861708; 517158, 4861705; 517164, 4861702; 517173, 4861699; 517179, 
4861695; 517182, 4861692; 517182, 4861689; 517181, 4861689; 517171, 
4861688; 517165, 4861686; 517159, 4861685; 517154, 4861684; 517138, 
4861684; 517131, 4861681;
    (iii) Map of Units 3E and 3F of critical habitat for the Oregon 
chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11059]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.012

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11060]]

    (26) Unit 3G: East Fork Minnow Creek Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 1.3 ha (3.3 ac), is owned by the ODOT, and is 
a large beaver pond located on a small tributary to Minnow Creek that 
drains into Lookout Point Reservoir in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 521267, 4859872; 521270, 4859868; 521272, 4859872; 521279, 
4859877; 521283, 4859872; 521287, 4859862; 521293, 4859852; 521305, 
4859841; 521312, 4859841; 521329, 4859825; 521340, 4859819; 521345, 
4859817; 521350, 4859811; 521354, 4859800; 521347, 4859790; 521337, 
4859797; 521330, 4859794; 521326, 4859791; 521324, 4859781; 521320, 
4859757; 521303, 4859756; 521296, 4859770; 521292, 4859784; 521283, 
4859789; 521262, 4859789; 521243, 4859788; 521224, 4859785; 521210, 
4859776; 521193, 4859770; 521181, 4859777; 521169, 4859784; 521152, 
4859792; 521134, 4859800; 521139, 4859809; 521149, 4859814; 521161, 
4859812; 521165, 4859821; 521173, 4859824; 521177, 4859826; 521189, 
4859838; 521197, 4859843; 521208, 4859850; 521218, 4859851; 521225, 
4859850; 521232, 4859850; 521234, 4859850; 521234, 4859855; 521231, 
4859857; 521226, 4859864; 521223, 4859870; 521227, 4859875; 521237, 
4859876; 521248, 4859866; 521254, 4859873; 521259, 4859874; 521253, 
4859879; 521250, 4859887; 521246, 4859895; 521250, 4859899; 521254, 
4859890; 521258, 4859888; 521260, 4859882; 521267, 4859872;
    (iii) Map of Unit 3G of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11061]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.013

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11062]]

    (27) Unit 3H: Hospital Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 0.5 ha (1.1 ac), is owned by the USACE, and is 
located on the north side of the gravel road on the north shore of 
Lookout Point Reservoir in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 533030, 4851782; 533047, 4851779; 533065, 4851779; 533078, 
4851772; 533093, 4851767; 533109, 4851767; 533120, 4851766; 533135, 
4851762; 533147, 4851755; 533157, 4851743; 533164, 4851732; 533169, 
4851722; 533173, 4851709; 533175, 4851702; 533174, 4851698; 533167, 
4851699; 533163, 4851705; 533150, 4851705; 533139, 4851715; 533130, 
4851720; 533117, 4851725; 533105, 4851732; 533096, 4851735; 533079, 
4851748; 533067, 4851753; 533050, 4851760; 533027, 4851769; 533017, 
4851777; 533022, 4851781; 533030, 4851782;
    (iii) Map of Unit 3H of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11063]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.014

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11064]]

    (28) Unit 3I: Shady Dell Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 1.1 ha (2.8 ac), is owned by the United States 
Forest Service (USFS), and is located in a USFS campground at the far 
southeast end of Lookout Point Reservoir along the south side of State 
Highway 58 in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 536587, 4848720; 536593, 4848709; 536589, 4848707; 536583, 
4848718; 536580, 4848713; 536581, 4848701; 536587, 4848687; 536597, 
4848678; 536612, 4848659; 536628, 4848646; 536647, 4848637; 536649, 
4848637; 536670, 4848619; 536685, 4848593; 536697, 4848576; 536699, 
4848573; 536706, 4848563; 536716, 4848550; 536722, 4848532; 536730, 
4848513; 536726, 4848496; 536727, 4848475; 536718, 4848472; 536725, 
4848456; 536732, 4848443; 536746, 4848432; 536762, 4848423; 536778, 
4848418; 536799, 4848397; 536797, 4848392; 536786, 4848395; 536766, 
4848401; 536746, 4848410; 536732, 4848424; 536720, 4848433; 536706, 
4848439; 536691, 4848455; 536687, 4848463; 536684, 4848474; 536680, 
4848493; 536681, 4848515; 536684, 4848529; 536685, 4848543; 536683, 
4848563; 536673, 4848570; 536653, 4848574; 536626, 4848570; 536612, 
4848573; 536612, 4848580; 536618, 4848579; 536625, 4848578; 536632, 
4848579; 536641, 4848580; 536638, 4848589; 536634, 4848601; 536630, 
4848611; 536624, 4848619; 536607, 4848638; 536591, 4848651; 536573, 
4848674; 536562, 4848694; 536560, 4848716; 536562, 4848735; 536563, 
4848747; 536567, 4848753; 536572, 4848743; 536576, 4848736; 536587, 
4848720; and excluding land bound by 536675, 4848580; 536681, 4848577; 
536687, 4848573; 536685, 4848579; 536683, 4848582; 536679, 4848588; 
536675, 4848593; 536672, 4848598; 536669, 4848602; 536666, 4848607; 
536662, 4848614; 536658, 4848617; 536654, 4848622; 536650, 4848625; 
536645, 4848628; 536640, 4848626; 536638, 4848623; 536640, 4848618; 
536643, 4848613; 536647, 4848605; 536652, 4848596; 536655, 4848590; 
536657, 4848586; 536663, 4848584; 536669, 4848582; 536675, 4848580;
    (iii) See paragraph (29)(iii) for a map showing critical habitat 
unit 3I.
    (29) Unit 3J: Buckhead Creek, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 3.8 ha (9.3 ac) and is owned by the USFS. 
Buckhead Creek is a tributary flowing into the Middle Fork Willamette 
River at the northeast end of Lookout Point Reservoir in Lane County, 
Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 538138, 4847044; 538137, 4847035; 538128, 4847039; 538122, 
4847041; 538118, 4847040; 538109, 4847040; 538105, 4847038; 538106, 
4847032; 538113, 4847031; 538119, 4847032; 538126, 4847029; 538129, 
4847025; 538128, 4847013; 538123, 4847001; 538120, 4846985; 538113, 
4846970; 538108, 4846947; 538102, 4846919; 538092, 4846888; 538081, 
4846854; 538071, 4846816; 538061, 4846782; 538055, 4846782; 538052, 
4846787; 538055, 4846802; 538053, 4846821; 538047, 4846811; 538041, 
4846802; 538044, 4846781; 538049, 4846775; 538046, 4846764; 538037, 
4846768; 538031, 4846763; 538033, 4846775; 538033, 4846793; 538033, 
4846807; 538038, 4846822; 538041, 4846834; 538049, 4846855; 538056, 
4846894; 538051, 4846903; 538053, 4846916; 538058, 4846927; 538065, 
4846941; 538066, 4846946; 538061, 4846944; 538056, 4846942; 538048, 
4846936; 538038, 4846933; 538033, 4846933; 538022, 4846937; 538016, 
4846936; 538011, 4846935; 538007, 4846937; 538003, 4846941; 538004, 
4846947; 538007, 4846951; 538011, 4846954; 538015, 4846953; 538022, 
4846950; 538028, 4846952; 538036, 4846955; 538045, 4846958; 538053, 
4846959; 538061, 4846963; 538067, 4846970; 538072, 4846980; 538077, 
4846990; 538080, 4847000; 538080, 4847013; 538081, 4847018; 538082, 
4847040; 538082, 4847055; 538099, 4847055; 538112, 4847055; 538120, 
4847055; 538134, 4847048; 538138, 4847044;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
537853, 4848143; 537863, 4848139; 537873, 4848135; 537889, 4848129; 
537907, 4848123; 537925, 4848116; 537946, 4848106; 537968, 4848096; 
537985, 4848085; 537996, 4848080; 538021, 4848066; 538035, 4848057; 
538048, 4848049; 538058, 4848042; 538068, 4848035; 538078, 4848030; 
538089, 4848023; 538102, 4848014; 538112, 4848007; 538120, 4847996; 
538124, 4847987; 538133, 4847973; 538147, 4847961; 538159, 4847947; 
538168, 4847928; 538179, 4847913; 538194, 4847901; 538208, 4847884; 
538215, 4847877; 538237, 4847852; 538253, 4847837; 538266, 4847827; 
538281, 4847806; 538297, 4847786; 538308, 4847767; 538311, 4847761; 
538305, 4847754; 538281, 4847743; 538264, 4847737; 538251, 4847756; 
538229, 4847789; 538198, 4847830; 538185, 4847854; 538178, 4847877; 
538171, 4847890; 538160, 4847902; 538149, 4847918; 538139, 4847935; 
538129, 4847948; 538118, 4847956; 538109, 4847971; 538102, 4847984; 
538096, 4847990; 538083, 4848000; 538064, 4848010; 538045, 4848021; 
538040, 4848031; 538032, 4848038; 538023, 4848044; 538013, 4848051; 
538003, 4848048; 537985, 4848058; 537966, 4848067; 537959, 4848065; 
537948, 4848069; 537936, 4848076; 537921, 4848083; 537903, 4848092; 
537885, 4848098; 537872, 4848103; 537859, 4848107; 537846, 4848114; 
537837, 4848120; 537827, 4848126; 537820, 4848134; 537822, 4848142; 
537827, 4848146; 537833, 4848143; 537840, 4848140; 537842, 4848142; 
537841, 4848146; 537837, 4848149; 537839, 4848152; 537845, 4848149; 
537849, 4848147; 537853, 4848143;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
537076, 4848628; 537077, 4848624; 537075, 4848621; 537064, 4848624; 
537055, 4848627; 537050, 4848626; 537047, 4848623; 537041, 4848625; 
537036, 4848629; 537031, 4848631; 537025, 4848638; 537030, 4848648; 
537037, 4848649; 537048, 4848647; 537056, 4848643; 537063, 4848638; 
537076, 4848628;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
537131, 4848537; 537127, 4848528; 537121, 4848532; 537119, 4848556; 
537116, 4848587; 537112, 4848619; 537111, 4848643; 537102, 4848662; 
537091, 4848676; 537068, 4848696; 537045, 4848721; 537022, 4848739; 
537013, 4848747; 537000, 4848763; 536993, 4848769; 536999, 4848773; 
537010, 4848767; 537024, 4848761; 537067, 4848723; 537103, 4848689; 
537116, 4848670; 537127, 4848647; 537128, 4848621; 537131, 4848596; 
537131, 4848576; 537131, 4848537;
    Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates (E,N): 
536751, 4848812; 536749, 4848809; 536747, 4848809; 536732, 4848812; 
536719, 4848818; 536712, 4848820; 536695, 4848827; 536692, 4848831; 
536694, 4848834; 536704, 4848839; 536714, 4848838; 536727, 4848837; 
536734, 4848831; 536739, 4848830; 536747, 4848821; 536749, 4848817; 
536751, 4848812;
    (iii) Map of Units 3I and 3J of critical habitat for the Oregon 
chub (Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S

[[Page 11065]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.015

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 11066]]

    (30) Unit 3K: Wicopee Pond, Lane County, Oregon.
    (i) This unit totals 1.4 ha (3.3 ac) and is owned by the USFS. The 
pond, a former borrow pit adjacent to Salt Creek in the upper Middle 
Fork Willamette River drainage, was created when a bridge crossing was 
constructed on a small logging road that crosses Salt Creek, along 
Highway 58 in Lane County, Oregon.
    (ii) Land bounded by the following UTM Zone 10, NAD83 coordinates 
(E,N): 557923, 4838857; 557919, 4838854; 557919, 4838854; 557926, 
4838841; 557935, 4838835; 557951, 4838829; 557948, 4838819; 557955, 
4838814; 557958, 4838820; 557963, 4838824; 557971, 4838825; 557977, 
4838824; 557982, 4838823; 557984, 4838817; 557978, 4838822; 557972, 
4838823; 557970, 4838823; 557966, 4838816; 557963, 4838813; 557968, 
4838803; 557970, 4838793; 557978, 4838789; 557977, 4838786; 557983, 
4838780; 557994, 4838777; 557996, 4838772; 557997, 4838771; 558006, 
4838770; 558018, 4838760; 558021, 4838741; 558026, 4838725; 558037, 
4838714; 558041, 4838701; 558040, 4838682; 558058, 4838684; 558080, 
4838674; 558079, 4838673; 558077, 4838674; 558068, 4838675; 558058, 
4838674; 558049, 4838677; 558038, 4838677; 558037, 4838684; 558032, 
4838695; 558022, 4838698; 558019, 4838705; 558006, 4838709; 558004, 
4838715; 557997, 4838708; 557990, 4838708; 557986, 4838710; 557978, 
4838715; 557976, 4838722; 557971, 4838727; 557965, 4838732; 557959, 
4838742; 557954, 4838754; 557952, 4838763; 557956, 4838770; 557951, 
4838778; 557947, 4838769; 557948, 4838766; 557935, 4838767; 557924, 
4838776; 557918, 4838781; 557904, 4838782; 557898, 4838786; 557890, 
4838791; 557877, 4838800; 557865, 4838811; 557859, 4838814; 557851, 
4838819; 557846, 4838827; 557840, 4838832; 557834, 4838837; 557833, 
4838844; 557834, 4838850; 557842, 4838858; 557854, 4838868; 557869, 
4838875; 557878, 4838880; 557887, 4838885; 557902, 4838897; 557913, 
4838905; 557919, 4838906; 557922, 4838902; 557923, 4838891; 557918, 
4838889; 557920, 4838884; 557926, 4838876; 557923, 4838863; 557923, 
4838857; and excluding land bound by 557921, 4838792; 557923, 4838788; 
557932, 4838789; 557932, 4838793; 557931, 4838796; 557933, 4838803; 
557929, 4838808; 557925, 4838805; 557922, 4838800; 557922, 4838796; 
557922, 4838793; 557921, 4838792; and excluding land bound by 557990, 
4838734; 557995, 4838729; 558006, 4838731; 558006, 4838730; 558009, 
4838724; 558014, 4838720; 558022, 4838721; 558018, 4838722; 558015, 
4838728; 558012, 4838742; 558007, 4838749; 557993, 4838754; 557987, 
4838754; 557984, 4838747; 557986, 4838741; 557990, 4838734;
    (iii) Map of Unit 3K of critical habitat for the Oregon chub 
(Oregonichthys crameri) follows:
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 11067]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR10MR10.016

* * * * *

    Dated: February 22, 2010.
Thomas L. Strickland.
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2010-4654 Filed 3-9- 10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C