31870 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 98 / Friday, May 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules

ACTION: Proposed rule; second extension

of comment period.

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service) gives notice that the

comment period on the proposed rule to

list the Santa Barbara distinct

population of the California tiger

salamander will be reopened to allow

for the inclusion of new information

regarding the presence of the California

tiger salamander in areas previously not

identified as known salamander sites.

The extension will allow all interested

parties to submit oral or written

comments on the proposal.

DATES: The reopened comment period

closes June 5, 1999. Comments must be

received by the closing date. Any

comments received after the closing

date may not be considered in the final

decision on the proposal.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should

be sent to Diane Noda, Field Supervisor,

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura

Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola

Road, Suite B, Ventura, California

93003. Comments and materials

received will be available for public

inspection, by appointment, during

normal business hours at the above

Service address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl

Benz, at the above Ventura, California

address, phone 805/644–1766, facsimile

805/644–3958.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On January 19, 2000, the Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service) proposed to

list the Santa Barbara County Distinct

Vertebrate Population Segment of the

California tiger salamander,

(Ambystoma californiense), as

endangered pursuant to the Endangered

Species Act (Act) of 1973, as amended

(Act). An emergency rule listing the

population was published concurrently

in the same issue of the Federal

Register. The Santa Barbara County

population segment of the California

tiger salamander is endemic to low

elevation (typically below 300 meters

(1,000 feet)) vernal pools and seasonal

ponds and the surrounding grasslands,

oak woodlands, and coastal scrub of

Santa Barbara County, California, and is

imperiled primarily by habitat loss from

conversion of natural habitat to

intensive agriculture and urban

development, habitat fragmentation, and

agricultural contaminants. The original

comment period closed March 20, 2000.

On March 24, 2000, the Service

reopened the comment period in

response to citizen requests that a

public hearing be held. The comment

period was extended until May 4, 2000,

during which a public hearing was held

on April 20, 2000, in Santa Maria,

California.

This second extension of the

comment period will enable the Service

to consider in its final rule the results

of surveys for California tiger

salamanders conducted during this

breeding season. Written comments may

be submitted until June 5, 2000, to the

Service office in the ADDRESSES section.

Author: The primary author of this

notice is Carl Benz (see ADDRESSES).

Authority: The authority for this action is

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531–1544).

Dated: May 15, 2000.

Elizabeth H. Stevens,

Acting Manager, California/Nevada

Operations.

[FR Doc. 00–12609 Filed 5–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–U

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018–AE30

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife

and Plants; Reopening of Comment

Period on Proposed Endangered

Status for the Southern California

Distinct Vertebrate Population

Segment of the Mountain YellowLegged Frog

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of

reopening of comment period.

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife

Service (Service), reopen the comment

period on the proposed rule to list the

southern California distinct vertebrate

population segment (DPS) of the

mountain yellow-legged frog (Rana

muscosa) as an endangered species,

pursuant to the Endangered Species Act

of 1973, as amended (Act). The

comment period is reopened in

response to a request from the California

Department of Fish and Game for

additional time to obtain biological

information regarding the mountain

yellow-legged frog and formulate

comments on the proposed rule. In

addition, reopening of the comment

period will allow further opportunity

for all interested parties to submit

comments on the proposal, which is

available (see ADDRESSES section). We

are seeking comments or suggestions

from the public, other concerned

governmental agencies, the scientific

community, industry, or any other

interested parties concerning the

proposed rule. Comments already

submitted on the proposed rule need

not be resubmitted as they will be fully

considered in the final determination.

DATES: The reopened comment period

closes June 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments and materials

concerning this proposal should be sent

to the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and

Wildlife Office, 2730 Loker Avenue

West, Carlsbad, California, 92008.

Comments and materials received will

be available for public inspection, by

appointment, during normal business

hours at the above address.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Glen

Knowles, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife

Office (see ADDRESSES section) at (760)

431–9440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

On December 22, 1999, the Service

published a rule proposing endangered

status for the southern California DPS of

the mountain yellow-legged frog (Rana

muscosa) in the Federal Register (64 FR

71714). The original comment period

closed on February 22, 2000. On March

20, 2000, the Service published a notice

reopening the comment period for 30

days (65 FR 14936). This reopened

comment period closed on April 19,

2000. The comment period now closes

on June 19, 2000. Written comments

should be submitted to the Service (see

ADDRESSES section).

The mountain yellow-legged frog is a

true frog in the family Ranidae. The

southern California mountain yellowlegged frog can still be found in small

streams in the San Gabriel mountains,

San Bernardino mountains, and the San

Jacinto mountains. In addition to

predation from trout and other

widespread factors, the few remaining

frogs are threatened by recreation (i.e.

suction dredging, campgrounds, day use

areas), the introduction of non-native

competitors and predators, and

demographics associated with small

populations. Comments from the public

regarding the accuracy of this proposed

rule are sought, especially regarding:

(1) Biological, commercial trade, or

other relevant data concerning any

threat (or lack thereof) to this species;

(2) The location and status of any

additional occurrences of this species

and the reasons why any habitat should

or should not be determined to be

critical habitat pursuant to section 4 of

the Act;

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 98 / Friday, May 19, 2000 / Proposed Rules 31871

(3) Additional information concerning

the range, distribution, and population

size of this species;

(4) Current or planned activities in the

subject area and their possible impacts

on the mountain yellow-legged frog or

its habitat.

Author: The primary author of this

notice is Glen Knowles (see ADDRESSES

section).

Authority: The authority for this action is

the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

Dated: May 15, 2000.

Elizabeth H. Stevens,

Acting Manager, California/Nevada

Operations Office.

[FR Doc. 00–12608 Filed 5–18–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–U

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[Docket No. 000504124–0124–01; I.D.

011900B]

RIN 0648–AK11

Fisheries off West Coast States and in

the Western Pacific; Pacific Coast

Groundfish Fishery; Prohibition on the

Use of Set Net Fishing Gear

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes regulations to

prohibit the use of set net (gillnet and

trammel nets) fishing gear to take

groundfish species in portions of the

exclusive economic zone (EEZ) (also

known as the fishery management area)

adjacent to state waters at four areas off

California. Groundfish fisheries in the

fishery management area are managed

under the Fishery Management Plan for

Groundfish Fisheries off the West Coast

(Groundfish FMP). California has

jurisdiction over fishing for groundfish

and other species both within State

waters and, with respect to State

registered vessels, in the EEZ off

California as long as State regulations

are not in conflict with Federal

regulations. This action would achieve

consistency between regulations in

waters under California jurisdiction and

those in the EEZ. This action is

intended to promote effective and

consistent conservation of groundfish

stocks and California managed species

throughout their range and to avoid

unnecessary bycatch of Californiamanaged species that might otherwise

be harvested in the closed areas but

discarded.

DATES: Comments must be submitted by

June 19, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments on the proposed

rule should be sent to Rodney R.

McInnis, Acting Regional

Administrator, Southwest Region,

NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard,

Suite 4200, Long Beach, CA 90802.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Svein Fougner, Sustainable Fisheries

Division, Southwest Region, NMFS,

562–980–4040.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) authorizes

regional fishery management councils to

prepare and submit fishery management

plans (FMPs) to the Secretary of

Commerce (Secretary) for approval and

implementation. An FMP may

incorporate the relevant fishery

conservation and management measures

of the coastal states, to the extent they

are consistent with the National

Standards, the other provisions of the

Magnuson-Stevens Act, and any other

applicable law.

The Groundfish FMP was prepared by

the Pacific Fishery Management Council

(Council) and approved by the Secretary

of Commerce in 1982. The FMP covers

fisheries for over 80 species, including

species that are taken in the EEZ and in

State waters off California, Oregon and

Washington. In the absence of Federal

regulations under the MagnusonStevens Act a state may continue to

apply its own regulations to fishers

registered under the laws of that State

even if they are fishing in the EEZ.

Further, even for a fishery managed

under an FMP, a state’s regulations that

affect fishing for managed species may

remain in force as long as they do not

conflict with the Federal regulations

governing that fishery.

The Council recognized that there

could be instances in which it might be

desirable or necessary to adjust Federal

regulations (pertaining to) fishing for

species under the FMP to be consistent

with state regulations to achieve

effective conservation of groundfish as

well as non-groundfish stocks that occur

in both the EEZ and state waters.

Therefore, the FMP contains procedures

whereby state regulations can be

reviewed by the Council to determine

that state regulations are consistent with

the FMP. The Council, after making

such a determination, may request that

Federal regulations be promulgated to

ensure consistency in letter and effect.

This is the case with this proposed

rule. As provided by the FMP, the

Council reviewed for consistency with

the goals and objectives of the FMP,

California regulations prohibiting the

use of set nets in certain EEZ waters

adjacent to California waters. In

deference to California’s historical

management of halibut and white

croaker and in the interest of sound and

consistent fishery management, the

Council recommended that NMFS

implement regulations to prohibit set

net fishing for groundfish species in the

portions of the EEZ in the areas

currently closed under California law.

There are four California closures that

would be affected by this proposed rule:

(1) The portion of the fishery

management area in an area between a

line extending 245° magnetic from the

most westerly point of the west point of

the Point Reyes headlands in Marin

County and the westerly extension of

the California-Oregon boundary; (2) any

waters in the fishery management area

which are 40 fathom (fm) or less deep

at mean lower low tide between a line

extending 245° magnetic from the most

westerly point of the west point of the

Point Reyes headlands in Marin County

and a line extending 225° magnetic from

Pillar Point at half Moon Bay in San

Mateo County, and 60 fm or less deep

at mean lower low tide between a line

extending 225° magnetic from Pillar

Point at Half Moon Bay in San Mateo

County to a line extending 220°

magnetic from the mouth of Waddell

Creek in Santa Cruz County; (3) any

waters in the fishery management area

that are 30 fm or less deep at mean

lower low tide within the portion of

California District 18 north of a line

extending due west from Point Sal in

Santa Barbara County; and (4) any

waters in the fishery management area

that are less than 35 fm deep in the area

between a line running 180° true from

Point Fermin and a line running 270°

true from the south jetty of Newport

Harbor. This last area is called

Huntington Flats.

The primary goal of closures (1)

through (3) was to minimize

entanglement and drowning of

protected birds and marine mammals off

central California. Federal studies

confirm that the take of sea otters and

harbor porpoises has decreased

significantly since California established

set net closures in coastal waters.

Closure (4) was the result of the Marine

Resources Protection Act (MRPA),

which was adopted through voters’

approval of a ballot initiative

(Proposition 132) in 1990. As in central

California, several set net prohibitions

in southern California were motivated