39920 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 28, 2000 / Notices

freshwater marsh (1,366 acres), and

grassland (1,856 acres).

Should the Service approve the

Habitat Management Plan and issue an

incidental take permit to the City of

Carlsbad, the 5 percent limit on interim

loss of coastal sage scrub, imposed as

part of the Natural Community

Conservation Planning Program and the

special rule for the gnatcatcher, would

be replaced by the conditions of the

permit and the Implementation

Agreement. Carlsbad would then

exercise its land-use review and

approval powers in accordance with the

Implementation Agreement to

implement the Habitat Management

Plan and assemble its preserve. The City

would amend its zoning regulations to

reflect the preserve boundaries and to

achieve consistency with the Plan. In

addition, the Habitat Management Plan

includes guidelines for compatible land

uses in and adjacent to the preserve.

The City would incorporate these

guidelines into its General Plan, zoning

regulations, and approval process for

projects, including adoption of

appropriate mitigation guidelines.

Our Environmental Assessment

considers the proposed action and three

alternatives: the Habitat Management

Plan as proposed; an Expanded Preserve

System Alternative; an Offsite Regional

Conservation Alternative; and a No

Action Alternative. Under the Expanded

Preserve System Alternative, the Service

would issue a permit that would

authorize incidental take of 47 species

in the plan area. The City of Carlsbad

would require project-level impact

avoidance and minimization measures.

The expanded preserve of 7,310 acres

would conserve all extant natural

habitats in biological core and linkage

areas identified during the preserve

planning process. The acquisition of

lands within the core gnatcatcher areas

would be limited to the 240 acres

required as part of the approval of the

Fieldstone-La Costa Habitat

Conservation Plan. The conserved

habitat would include, at a minimum,

the following habitat types: coastal sage

scrub (2,991 acres), southern mixed/

chamise chaparral (887 acres), southern

maritime chaparral (431 acres), oak

woodland (29 acres), riparian (518

acres), coastal salt/freshwater marsh

(1,183 acres), and grassland (1,271

acres).

Under the Offsite Regional

Conservation Alternative, the Service

also would issue a permit for incidental

take of 47 species. The City of Carlsbad

would preserve 7,901 to 9,928 acres of

habitat through the management of

already preserved lands within the City,

implementation of project-level impact

avoidance and minimization measures,

and habitat conservation outside of the

City (with the exception of wetland,

riparian, and vernal pool resources) in

accordance with established mitigation

ratios. The majority of the preserve

could be outside of the City of Carlsbad

in portions of northern San Diego

County that are less developed than

Carlsbad. The preserve would include,

at a minimum, the following upland

habitat types: coastal sage scrub (3,315

to 5,342 acres), southern mixed/chamise

chaparral (968 acres), southern maritime

chaparral (666 acres), oak woodland (79

acres), and grassland (1,127 acres).

Under the No Action Alternative, the

Service would not issue a permit and

the City of Carlsbad would not

implement its Habitat Management

Plan. Projects would either be designed

to avoid take of listed species or project

proponents would apply for individual

permits under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the

Act. Existing hardline open space would

remain protected and approved habitat

conservation plans would be

implemented. Under this alternative, we

estimate that 3,850 acres of habitat

would be conserved.

This notice is provided pursuant to

section 10(a) of the Endangered Species

Act and regulations for implementing

the National Environmental Policy Act

of 1969 (40 CFR 1506.6). We will

evaluate the permit application,

Environmental Assessment, associated

documents, and comments submitted

thereon to determine whether the

application meets the requirements of

section 10(a) of the Endangered Species

Act. If we determine that the

requirements are met, we will issue a

permit for the incidental take of the 47

species covered by the Habitat

Management Plan. We will make a

decision on permit issuance no sooner

than 30 days from the date of this

notice.

Dated: June 20, 2000.

Elizabeth H. Stevens,

Deputy Manager, Region 1, California/Nevada

Operations Office, Sacramento, California.

[FR Doc. 00–16281 Filed 6–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

Preparation of an Environmental

Impact Statement/ Environmental

Impact Report for Federal and State

Actions Associated With the Coachella

Valley Multiple Species Habitat

Conservation Plan/Natural

Communities Conservation Plan

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior (Lead Agency).

COOPERATING AGENCIES: Bureau of Land

Management, Interior; National Park

Service, Interior; Forest Service,

Agriculture; California Resources

Agency; California Department of Fish

and Game; California Department of

Parks and Recreation; and Coachella

Valley Association of Governments.

ACTION: Notice of intent; notice of public

meeting.

SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service

and cooperating agencies are gathering

information necessary for the

preparation of an Environmental Impact

Statement/Environmental Impact Report

(Impact Statement/Report). This Impact

Statement/Report will consider the

actions of Federal, State, and local

agencies, as well as private interests,

associated with implementation of the

Coachella Valley Multiple Species

Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural

Communities Conservation

Plan(Multispecies Plan) and the

issuance of incidental take permits

pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the

Federal Endangered Species Act of

1973, as amended, and section 2081 of

the California Endangered Species Act.

The Impact Statement/Report also will

consider the Bureau of Land

Management’s proposed amendment of

the California Desert Conservation Plan

to conform with the Multispecies Plan.

In addition, the Impact Statement/

Report will consider any other actions

by other Federal or State agencies that

are necessary or appropriate to

implement the Multispecies Plan.

We encourage interested persons to

attend public meetings to identify and

discuss the scope of issues and

alternatives that should be addressed in

the Multispecies Plan and in the Impact

Statement/Report. We provide this

notice pursuant to the Council on

Environmental Quality regulations for

implementing the procedural provisions

of the National Environmental Policy

Act (40 CFR 1501.7 and 1508.22).

DATES: We must receive your written

comments by July 28, 2000. See

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for

meeting dates and locations.

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 28, 2000 / Notices 39921

ADDRESSES: Send comments regarding

the scope of the Impact Statement/

Report as it relates to the proposed

Multispecies Plan to the Field

Supervisor, Fish and Wildlife Service,

2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad,

California 92008; facsimile 760/431–

9624. Send comments regarding the

scope of the Impact Statement/Report as

it relates to the proposed amendment of

the Desert Conservation Plan to the

Field Manager, Bureau of Land

Management, Palm Springs-South Coast

Field Office, P.O. Box 1260, North Palm

Springs, California 92258–1260;

facsimile 760/251–4899.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.

Pete Sorensen, Supervisory Fish and

Wildlife Biologist, Carlsbad Fish and

Wildlife Office, Carlsbad, California;

telephone 760/431–9440; or Ms. Elena

Misquez, Planning and Environmental

Coordinator, Bureau of Land

Management, Palm Springs-South Coast

Field Office, North Palm Springs,

California; telephone 760/251–4810.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: All

comments that we receive will become

part of the administrative record and

may be released to the public. You may

view these comments during normal

business hours (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.,

Monday through Friday) at the above

offices (see ADDRESSES). Please call for

an appointment.

In addition, you may obtain specific

information regarding the location of

lands proposed for conservation from

Mr. Steve Nagle, Coachella Valley

Association of Governments, 73–710

Fred Waring Drive, Suite 200, Palm

Desert, California 92260; telephone 760/

346–1127; facsimile 760/340–5949.

Meetings

We will hold public meetings as

follows:

July 10, 2000, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.,

City Hall Council Chambers, 68–700

Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City,

California.

July 11, 2000, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.,

City Hall Council Chambers, 68–700

Avenida Lalo Guerrero, Cathedral City,

California.

July 12, 2000, 6:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.,

City Hall Council Chambers, 78–495

Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California.

The meetings on July 10 and 12

broadly focus on the scope and content

of the Impact Statement/Report as it

relates to the proposed Multispecies

Plan and to the proposed amendment of

the California Desert Conservation Plan.

The meeting on July 11 specifically

focuses on the trail component of these

plans.

Background

Section 9 of the Federal Endangered

Species Act and regulations prohibit the

‘‘take’’ of animal species listed as

endangered or threatened. That is, no

one may harass, harm, pursue, hunt,

shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture or

collect listed animal species, or attempt

to engage in such conduct (16 USC

1538). ‘‘Harm’’ is defined by regulation

to include significant habitat

modification or degradation that

actually kills or injures wildlife by

significantly impairing essential

behavioral patterns, including breeding,

feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3).

Under certain circumstances, the Fish

and Wildlife Service may issue permits

to authorize ‘‘incidental’’ take of listed

animal species (defined by the Act as

take that is incidental to, and not the

purpose of, the carrying out of an

otherwise lawful activity). Regulations

governing permits for federally-listed

threatened and endangered species,

respectively, are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 50

CFR 17.22. The California Department

of Fish and Game has similar provisions

for incidental take of species listed

under the California Endangered

Species Act.

The Coachella Valley Association of

Governments and its member

jurisdictions (Riverside County and 9

municipalities) intend to apply for

incidental take permits from the Fish

and Wildlife Service and the California

Department of Fish and Game. As part

of the application process, the

Association is developing the

Multispecies Plan for an anticipated 31

target species and 24 habitat types

currently within their jurisdiction. We

anticipate that the permit applications

for incidental take will include 20

unlisted species and the following 11

federally-listed species: Peninsular

bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis), desert

tortoise (Gopherus agassizii), Southwest

arroyo toad (Bufo microscaphus

californicus), desert slender salamander

(Batrachoseps aridus), Coachella Valley

fringe-toed lizard (Uma inornata), desert

pupfish (Cyprinodon macularius), Yuma

clapper rail (Rallus longirostris

yumanensis), least Bell’s vireo (Vireo

bellii pusillus), Southwestern willow

flycatcher (Empidonax trailii extimus),

Coachella Valley milk-vetch (Astragalus

lentiginosus var. coachellae), and tripleribbed milk-vetch (Astragalus

tricarinatus).

The take prohibitions of the Federal

Endangered Species Act do not apply to

listed plants on private land unless their

destruction on private land is in

violation of State law. Nevertheless, we

expect that the Coachella Valley Council

of Governments and its member

jurisdictions will consider plants in the

Multispecies Plan and request permits

for them to the extent that State law

applies.

The 1,206,578-acre (1,885 squaremile) planning area for the Multispecies

Plan is located in the central portion of

Riverside County, California. It

generally is defined by the ridgelines of

the San Jacinto, Santa Rosa, and Little

San Bernardino Mountains, extending to

the Imperial and San Diego County lines

from the Cabazon/San Gorgonio Pass

area in the northwest to, and including,

portions of the Salton Sea in the

southeast.

Approximately 45 percent of the

planning area consists of lands under

the ownership and management of the

Bureau of Land Management, while

private lands total about 43 percent. The

remaining 12 percent includes native

American, State, and other public and

quasi-public lands.

The Multispecies Plan is being

designed to assure the conservation of

adequate habitat and ecological

processes for the protection and longterm viability of populations of the

target species that are either listed as

threatened or endangered, are proposed

for listing, or are believed to have a high

probability of being proposed for listing

in the future if they are not protected by

the Multispecies Plan. A critical

consideration of the Plan is allowing

key ecological processes, such as sand

movement by wind and water, to

support a shifting network of sand

dunes essential to the well being of the

target species. Plan developers are

considering conservation of core habitat

areas and linkages primarily through

protection and management of existing

public and quasi-public lands, and

through acquisition of additional lands

by cooperating Federal, State, and local

governments from willing sellers

throughout the planning area. The

linkage areas connecting core habitat

areas are intended to assure the longterm protection of movement or

migratory corridors through which

wildlife populations can mix and

perpetuate a healthy gene pool.

Project Alternatives

A range and mix of public and private

lands are under consideration and will

be analyzed as project alternatives in the

Impact Statement/Report, including a

‘‘No Project’’ alternative that assesses

the efficacy of species and habitat

protections, as well as associated

impacts. Each alternative is summarized

below.

No Project Alternative: Under this

alternative, an area-wide Multispecies

39922 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 125 / Wednesday, June 28, 2000 / Notices

Plan would not be adopted. Hence

Federal and State incidental take

permits would be issued incrementally

for individual projects. Assemblage of

an effective preserve system would be

unlikely. Over time, additional species

would likely become listed, further

complicating continued urban

development. The land development

permit process would continue to be

lengthy, costly, and uncertain.

Existing Conservation Lands

Alternative: Only existing reserves and

other public and private conservation

lands with habitat for target species

would be included in this alternative.

The type, amount and location of lands

conserved under this alternative would

be insufficient to obtain incidental take

permit coverage for most, if not all, of

the target species. This alternative

would not streamline development

permit processing.

Core Habitat, Ecological Processes

and Linkages Alternative: Developed by

the Scientific Advisory Committee for

the Multispecies Plan, this alternative

focuses on protecting core habitat areas

of sufficient size and long-term viability

for the protection of target species and

natural communities. This alternative

also includes protection of essential

ecological processes and wildlife

movement corridors.

Expanded Core Habitat, Ecological

Processes and Linkages Alternative:

Based upon the previous alternative,

this enhanced conservation alternative

would include additional habitat,

ecological processes and wildlife

corridors to further ensure functionality.

Avoid or Minimize Incidental Take

Alternative: Under this alternative, most

remaining viable habitat for target

species, and associated ecological

process and wildlife corridor lands in

the planning area would be

incorporated into the preserve system.

Conservation would focus on all large

habitat blocks within the composite

range of target species and would allow

development of all isolated habitat

fragments. Little economic incentive for

private land-owner participation would

be available and immediate land

acquisition would likely be required to

address the resulting take of private

lands.

Alternative Funding and

Implementation Mechanisms

Estimates of the costs associated with

the dedication, acquisition, and

management of lands to be protected in

perpetuity under the Multispecies Plan

have not yet been completed.

Substantial Federal and State assets are

currently proposed for inclusion in the

Plan, as are county, local, and private

lands. Several alternative approaches

are under consideration.

Tool Box Approach: This

implementation mechanism may take

the form of zoning overlays, General

Plan policies, ordinances, development

fees, and mitigation ratios. Tools that

may be used include: (a) Conservation

easements, (b) density transfer and

cluster development, (c) conservation

banks, (d) donation of lands for tax

benefits, and (e) inclusion of land in a

habitat transaction system with preassigned habitat values or credits.

Immediate Purchase of All At-Risk

Lands: This alternative represents the

optimum implementation mechanism

but would require the immediate or

short-term availability of substantial

funding for purchase of land and

conservation easements. Potential

funding sources may include biological

resource impact-fees assessed to future

development, State and Federal grants,

government loan guarantees, landfill

tipping fees, and local sales tax.

Combined Public Funds/Mitigation

Fee for Land Acquisition and

Management: This approach includes

the combined use of State and Federal

grants, as well as the payment of a

standardized impact mitigation fees for

development of lands outside

conservation areas. Revenues from

existing or new tax streams, bond

issues, landfill tipping fees, and other

sources are also being explored.

Continued private contributions are

expected to be available for habitat

acquisition.

In addition, the Forest Service,

pursuant to the National Forest

Management Act of 1976, and the

Bureau of Land Management, pursuant

to the Federal Land Policy and

Management Act of 1976, have authority

to acquire, excess, exchange and transfer

Federal lands, and will be the agencies

primarily responsible for furthering the

Federal realty actions. The State of

California also acquires lands for

conservation purposes through the

Wildlife Conservation Board, the

Department of Parks and Recreation,

and the Coachella Valley Mountains

Conservancy.

Proposed Amendment of the California

Desert Conservation Plan

The Bureau of Land Management is

participating as a responsible agency in

the planning process. To ensure that its

land use decisions are in conformance

with the Multispecies Plan, the Bureau

proposes to amend the California Desert

Conservation Area Plan in compliance

with the National Environmental Policy

Act, the Federal Land Policy

Management Act of 1976, and the Code

of Federal Regulations (40 CFR part

1500 and 43 CFR part 1610).

The Bureau will use the Impact

Statement/Report prepared for the

Multispecies Plan as the Environmental

Impact Statement for its proposed

amendment to the Desert Conservation

Plan. The Bureau will prepare a Record

of Decision separate from that of the

Fish and Wildlife Service. The proposed

plan amendment will address changes

in Bureau land use classifications,

identify public lands for exchange to

augment the multi-species reserve

system, and designate new Areas of

Critical Environmental Concern. The

proposed plan amendment will take

into consideration biological, botanical,

cultural, wilderness, mineral and other

natural resources, as well as use of the

public lands for recreation, mineral

extraction, utility corridors and other

uses. Nothing in this proposed plan

amendment shall have the effect of

terminating any validly issued rights-ofway or customary operation,

maintenance, repair, and replacement

activities in such rights-of-ways in

accordance with Sections 509(a) and

701(a) of the Federal Land Policy

Management Act of 1976.

Dated: June 21, 2000.

Elizabeth H. Stevens,

Deputy Manager, California/Nevada

Operations Office, Region 1, Sacramento,

California.

[FR Doc. 00–16383 Filed 6–27–00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[CA–680–99–2822–00–D889]

Closure and Restriction Orders

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,

(BLM), Interior.

ACTION: Amend emergency closure of

certain public lands in the Juniper Flats

area, San Bernardino County, California.

SUMMARY: In previous Federal Register

Notice, Public lands in the Juniper Flats

area were closed to human entry.

Approximately 16,000 acres burned in

the Willow fire were closed from

October 17, 1999 to July 1, 2000. You

are not to enter the closed area by any

means of access. This amendment

exempts human access on the trail

leading from the southern most portion

of the Bowen Ranch property (across

BLM land referred to as the ‘‘upper

parking lot’’ to the Forest Service ‘‘lower

parking lot’’) and trail known as the

‘‘Goat Trail’’ leading to the Deep Creek

Springs.