48178 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

RIN 1018–AV24 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Designation of Critical 

Habitat for the Bay Checkerspot 

Butterfly (Euphydryas editha bayensis) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

revise currently designated critical 

habitat for the bay checkerspot butterfly 

(Euphydryas editha bayensis) under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). In total, approximately 

19,746 acres (ac) (7,990 hectares (ha)) 

fall within the boundaries of the 

proposed revised critical habitat 

designation. The proposed revision to 

critical habitat is located in San Mateo 

and Santa Clara Counties, California. 

DATES: We will accept comments from 

all interested parties until October 22, 

2007. We must receive requests for 

public hearings, in writing, at the 

address shown in the ADDRESSES section 

by October 9, 2007. 

ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment on 

this proposed rule, you may submit 

your comments and materials 

concerning this proposal by any one of 

several methods: 

1. You may mail or hand-deliver 

written comments and information to 

Susan Moore, Field Supervisor, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Sacramento 

Fish and Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage 

Way, Room W–2605, Sacramento, CA 

95825. 

2. You may send comments by 

electronic mail (e-mail) to 

bcb_pch@fws.gov. Please see the Public 

Comments Solicited section below for 

file format and other information about 

electronic filing. 

3. You may fax your comments to the 

attention of Susan Moore, Field 

Supervisor at 916–414–6712. 

4. You may go to the Federal 

Rulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

Comments and materials received, as 

well as supporting documentation used 

in the preparation of this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection, 

by appointment, during normal business 

hours at the Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, 

Room W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825 

(telephone 916–414–6600). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Field Supervisor, Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, 

Room W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825; 

telephone 916–414–6600; facsimile 

916–414–6712. Persons who use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD) may call the Federal Information 

Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments Solicited 

We intend that any final action 

resulting from this proposal to revise the 

critical habitat designation for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly will be as accurate 

and as effective as possible. Therefore, 

we request comments or suggestions 

from the public, other concerned 

governmental agencies, the scientific 

community, industry, or any other 

interested party on this proposed rule. 

We particularly seek comments 

concerning: 

(1) The reasons why we should or 

should not designate habitat as ‘‘critical 

habitat’’ under section 4 of the Act (16 

U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including whether 

there are areas we previously 

designated, but are not proposing for 

revised designation here, that should be 

designated as critical habitat. 

(2) Specific information on the 

amount and distribution of bay 

checkerspot butterfly habitat. 

(3) Specific information whether the 

features we have proposed as essential 

for the conservation of the species 

(Primary Constituent Elements) are 

adequate, and if not, what alternatives 

should be considered (see also item 

(13)). 

(4) The reason why any areas that 

were occupied at the time of listing and 

that contain the features that are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species should or should not be 

included in the designation. 

(5) The reason why any areas that 

were not occupied at the listing may be 

essential to the conservation of the 

species, and why such areas should or 

should not be designated as critical 

habitat. 

(6) Specific information on dispersal 

areas important for habitat connectivity, 

in particular areas between Units 1 and 

2 and between Unit 4 and the Santa 

Clara County Units, their role in the 

conservation and recovery of the 

species, and reasons why such areas 

should or should not be included in the 

critical habitat designation. 

(7) Land use designations and current 

or planned activities in the subject areas 

and their possible impacts on proposed 

revised critical habitat. 

(8) Any foreseeable economic, 

national security, or other potential 

impacts resulting from the proposed 

designation and, in particular, any 

impacts on small entities. 

(9) Whether our approach to 

designating critical habitat could be 

improved or modified in any way to 

provide for greater public participation 

and understanding, or to assist us in 

accommodating public concerns and 

comments. 

(10) Specific comments regarding 

occupancy and habitat quality of the 

proposed Pulgas Ridge Unit 2. 

(11) The relative benefits of 

designation or exclusion of any lands 

from proposed revised critical habitat 

such as Habitat Conservation Plans 

(HCPs), Safe Harbor Agreements (SHA), 

or other areas that have management 

plans in place that provide for bay 

checkerspot butterfly conservation. We 

especially seek specific comments 

regarding the potential exclusion of 

areas within the final San Bruno 

Mountain HCP (proposed Unit 1), and 

areas within the planned Stanford HCP 

(proposed Unit 4), and the Santa Clara 

County HCP (proposed Units 5–12). 

(12) Specific comments regarding 

population sizes of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly within those areas proposed 

for designation as revised critical 

habitat. 

(13) Specific documentation regarding 

the use of water sources by the bay 

checkerspot butterfly, particularly to 

support or refute our proposed primary 

constituent element of water features 

(Primary Constituent Element 4), and 

whether water sources are essential for 

the conservation of the subspecies. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposal by 

any one of several methods (see 

ADDRESSES). If you use e-mail to submit 

your comments, please include ‘‘Attn: 

[species]’’ in your e-mail subject header, 

preferably with, your name and return 

address in the body of your message. If 

you do not receive a confirmation from 

the system that we have received your 

e-mail, contact us directly by calling our 

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office at 

916–414–6600. Please note that we must 

receive comments by the date specified 

in the DATES section in order to consider 

them in our final determination and that 

the e-mail address bcb_pch@fws.gov 

will be closed out at the termination of 

the public comment period. 

Before including your address, phone 

number, e-mail address, or other 

personal identifying information in your 

comment, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

personal identifying information—may 

be made publicly available at any time. 

While you may ask us to withhold your 

personal identifying information from 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48179 

public review, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as supporting documentation we 

used in preparing this proposed rule, 

will be available for public inspection, 

by appointment, during normal business 

hours at the Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 2800 Cottage Way, 

Room W–2605, Sacramento, CA 95825 

(telephone 916–414–6600). 

Background 

It is our intent to discuss only those 

topics directly relevant to the 

designation of critical habitat in this 

proposed rule. For more information on 

the bay checkerspot butterfly, refer to 

the listing rule and previous 

determination of critical habitat 

published in the Federal Register on 

September 18, 1987 (52 FR 35366) and 

April 30, 2001 (66 FR 21450), 

respectively. 

The September 18, 1987, final listing 

rule (52 FR 35366) described the bay 

checkerspot butterfly as occupying 

seven areas in San Mateo and Santa 

Clara counties: (1) San Bruno Mountain; 

(2) Pulgas Ridge; (3) Edgewood Park; (4) 

Jasper Ridge; (5) Coyote Ridge (referred 

to in the listing rule as a portion of the 

east face of Coyote Creek Valley 

between Metcalf Road and the Anderson 

Lake outlet); (6) Calero Reservoir; and 

(7) San Martin. Subsequent to listing, 

five additional populations were 

identified: (1) Tulare Hill; (2) Santa 

Teresa Hills; (3) Kalana Hills; (4) 

Morgan Hill; and (5) Bear Ranch. Of 

these additional populations, four will 

be considered occupied at the time of 

listing because they were known from 

published literature at the time of 

listing, but they were not specifically 

mentioned in the listing rule. The fifth 

population (Bear Ranch) was mentioned 

in the listing rule as extirpated; 

however, in 1994 thousands of bay 

checkerspot butterflies were observed at 

this location (CNDDB 2006 p. 15). In 

addition to the locations known at the 

time of listing, the subspecies was 

historically known from near Berkeley, 

California; at Joaquin Miller Park in 

Alameda County; in San Francisco 

County from Twin Peaks and Mount 

Davidson; and in Contra Costa County 

near Morgan Territory Road (Murphy 

and Ehrlich 1980, p. 318). However, 

these populations disappeared as a 

result of a variety of factors including 

highway and subdivision construction, 

drought, overgrazing, and invasion of 

nonnative plants (Murphy and Ehrlich 

1980, p. 319). 

Distribution and Population Trends 

The population size of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly is primarily 

determined by the survival rate of 

prediapause larvae (Singer 1972, p. 77; 

Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1486). Prediapause 

larva experience mortality rates 

upwards of 95 percent (Murphy 1988, p. 

46; Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1487; Cushman 

et al. 1994, p. 198; Murphy et al. 2004, 

p. 26). Larval survivorship is dependent 

upon the timing of host plant 

senescence, which in turn is dependent 

on environmental conditions such as 

rainfall. Rainfall in the San Francisco 

Bay area is known to vary dramatically 

(Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1495). The further 

a particular location is from another, the 

greater the likelihood each will receive 

dramatically different rainfall, so plants 

in areas that experience the same 

environmental conditions (i.e., those in 

close proximity and on similar 

topography) would result in larvae in 

those locations likely experiencing the 

same fate. 

Since listing in 1987, the distribution 

and population size of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly has changed 

substantially. In San Mateo County, the 

subspecies’ population numbers have 

declined dramatically. The populations 

at San Bruno Mountain, Pulgas Ridge, 

and Jasper Ridge have not been detected 

in limited surveys, and reintroduction 

efforts were initiated at Edgewood Park 

to ensure the San Mateo County 

populations remain viable. 

Approximately 1,000 postdiapause 

larvae were reintroduced to Edgewood 

Park in February and March 2007. Prior 

to reintroductions between February 

and March 2007, the bay checkerspot 

butterfly had not been observed at 

Edgewood Park since 2002 (CNDDB 

2006). Limited surveys on a small 

southeastern portion of Pulgas Ridge, 

dated 1989–1993 and 1994, failed to 

detect any individual bay checkerspot 

butterflies (CNDDB 2007). However, 

these surveys covered only a small 

portion of the available habitat that was 

historically occupied. 

In Santa Clara County, population 

trends for the bay checkerspot butterfly 

are only available for portions of Coyote 

Ridge (identified as units 8, 10, 11, and 

12 in the 2001 designation (66 FR 

21450)), Tulare Hill, and Bear Ranch. 

On Coyote Ridge, south of Metcalf Road 

(2001 unit 8) bay checkerspot butterfly 

numbers increased from approximately 

20,000 individuals in 1997 to 700,000 

individuals in 2004, but fell to 

approximately 100,000 individuals in 

2005 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). On Coyote 

Ridge, north of Metcalf Road (2001 unit 

10), bay checkerspot butterfly numbers 

increased from approximately 200,000 

in 2000 to 400,000 in 2004, but then 

declined to 45,000 in 2006 (Weiss 2006, 

p. 1). 

Larval estimates from Silver Creek 

Hills (2001 unit 12), also on Coyote 

Ridge, increased from 75,000 in 1992 to 

128,000 in 1993, but then fell to an 

estimated 58,000 in 1994 following the 

removal of grazing from portions of the 

area (Weiss 1996, p. 93; Weiss 1999, p. 

1480), and no larvae or adults were 

observed in 1998 (Weiss 1999, p. 1480). 

Annual surveys at Silver Creek Hills 

since the construction of a residential 

subdivision and reintroduction of 

grazing over portions of the area in 

2000–2001, showed a slight increase 

from a low of 11 adults in 2001 to 51 

in 2005 (WRA 2006, p. 10). Forty adult 

bay checkerspot butterflies were 

observed in the Silver Creek Hills area 

in 2006, but no larvae were observed 

(WRA 2006, p. 10). 

Post-diapause larvae on Tulare Hill 

(2001 unit 15) numbered approximately 

2,000 individuals in 2002; the 

population declined significantly in 

2003, with only 1 post-diapause larvae 

observed (CH2M Hill 2004, p. 8–6). Five 

adult bay checkerspot butterflies were 

observed on Tulare Hill in 2004 (CH2M 

Hill 2005, p. 8–2). According to Weiss 

(2007, p. 1), based on the number of 

individuals observed on Tulare Hill in 

2004, the population size was estimated 

at approximately 100 individuals. Seven 

adult bay checkerspot butterflies were 

observed on Tulare Hill in 2005; 

however, no post-diapause larvae were 

observed (CH2M Hill 2006, p. 8–2). 

According to California Natural 

Diversity Database CNDDB (2006) 

records, thousands of adult bay 

checkerspot butterflies were observed at 

Bear Ranch in 1994, 6 adults were 

observed in 1997, and 1 adult was 

observed in 1999. The Service is 

unaware of any other surveys regarding 

the status of the subspecies within this 

unit. 

Population Dynamics 

Studies of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly’s population dynamics 

characterize it as having a 

metapopulation dynamic. These studies 

were influential in the formulation of 

the metapopulation concept (Ehrlich et 

al. 1975, pp. 221–228; Harrison 1994, 

pp. 111–128). A metapopulation is a 

group of spatially distinct populations 

that can occasionally exchange 

dispersing individuals. The populations 

in a metapopulation are usually thought 

of as having interdependent extinction 

and colonization processes, where 

individual populations may be 

extirpated from a local area and later be 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48180 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

recolonized from another population 

that is still extant. The frequency of 

local extirpation and time until 

recolonization vary widely from 

population to population, depending on 

numerous demographic and 

environmental factors, such as the size 

and quality of the habitat, distance from 

other populations, size of other 

populations, mobility of the species, 

and weather. At the time of listing, two 

metapopulations were known to occur; 

one in San Mateo County and the other 

in Santa Clara County. 

The current bay checkerspot butterfly 

range is much reduced, and the butterfly 

is patchily distributed. Because it occurs 

as a metapopulation, the exact 

distribution of the butterfly varies 

through time: Sites that are unoccupied 

one year may be occupied the next, and 

vice versa (Wilcox and Murphy 1985, p. 

882; Harrison 1994, p. 114). 

Previous Federal Actions 

For information on previous Federal 

actions concerning the bay checkerspot 

butterfly, refer to the final listing rule 

published in the Federal Register on 

September 18, 1987 (52 FR 35366), and 

the designation of critical habitat 

published in the Federal Register on 

April 30, 2001 (66 FR 21450). On 

September 30, 1998, we published a 

recovery plan for Serpentine Soil 

Species of the San Francisco Bay Area 

that included the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. On April 30, 2001, we 

designated critical habitat on 

approximately 23,903 acres (9,673 

hectares) of land in San Mateo and 

Santa Clara Counties, California. On 

March 30, 2005, the Home Builders 

Association of Northern California filed 

suit against the Service challenging 

critical habitat for bay checkerspot 

butterfly and other species (Home 

Builders Association of Northern 

California v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service cv–01363–LKK–JFM.) On 

February 24, 2006, a settlement 

agreement was reached that requires the 

Service to reevaluate the final critical 

habitat rule in light of the standards for 

designating critical habitat set forth in 

Home Builders Association of Northern 

California v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 268 F. Supp. 2d 1197 (E.D. Cal 

2002) and any other applicable law. As 

a result, we propose revisions to the 

rule. The settlement stipulated that any 

proposed revisions to the bay 

checkerspot butterfly designation be 

submitted to the Federal Register for 

publication on or before August 14, 

2007. 

Critical Habitat 

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 

of the Act as: (i) The specific areas 

within the geographical area occupied 

by a species, at the time it is listed in 

accordance with the Act, on which are 

found those physical or biological 

features (I) essential to the conservation 

of the species and (II) that may require 

special management considerations or 

protection; and (ii) specific areas 

outside the geographical area occupied 

by a 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. 

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 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 government 

or public access to private lands. 

Section 7 of the Act is a purely 

protective measure and does not require 

implementation of restoration, recovery, 

or enhancement measures. 

For inclusion in a critical habitat 

designation, habitat within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species at time of listing must first have 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species. Critical 

habitat designations identify, to the 

extent known using the best scientific 

data available, habitat areas that provide 

essential life cycle needs of the species 

(areas on which are found the primary 

constituent elements, as defined at 50 

CFR 424.12(b)). 

Occupied habitat that contains the 

features essential to the conservation of 

the species meets the definition of 

critical habitat only if its essential 

features may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. 

We can designate unoccupied areas as 

critical habitat. However, when the best 

available scientific data do not 

demonstrate that the conservation needs 

of the species require additional areas, 

we will not designate critical habitat in 

areas outside the geographical area 

occupied by the species. 

Section 4 of the Act requires that we 

designate critical habitat on the basis of 

the best scientific and commercial data 

available. Further, our Policy on 

Information Standards Under the 

Endangered Species Act (published in 

the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 

FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act 

(section 515 of the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act for 

Fiscal Year 2001 (Pub. L. 106–554; H.R. 

5658) and our associated Information 

Quality Guidelines, provide criteria, 

establish procedures, and provide 

guidance to ensure that our designation 

represent 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 to propose as critical 

habitat, our primary source of 

information is generally the listing 

package 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. 

Habitat is often dynamic, and species 

may move from one area to another over 

time. Furthermore, we recognize that 

designation of critical habitat may not 

include all habitat areas that we may 

eventually 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. 

Areas that support populations of the 

bay checkerspot butterfly, but are 

outside the critical habitat designation, 

will continue to be subject to 

conservation actions we implement 

under section 7(a)(1) of the Act. They 

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 

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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48181 

plans (HCPs), or other species 

conservation planning efforts if new 

information available to these planning 

efforts calls for a different outcome. 

Methods 

As required by section 4(b) of the Act, 

we used the best scientific data 

available in determining areas that 

contain the features essential to the 

conservation of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly, and areas unoccupied at the 

time of listing that are essential to the 

conservation of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly or both. This includes 

information used to prepare the 2001 

designation of critical habitat (66 FR 

21450), the Recovery Plan for 

Serpentine Soil Species of the San 

Francisco Bay Area, the CNDDB, 

published and unpublished papers, 

reports, academic theses and surveys, 

Geographic Information System (GIS) 

data (such as species occurrence, soil 

data, land use, topography, and 

ownership maps), correspondence to the 

Service from recognized experts, and 

other information as available. 

We have also reviewed available 

information that pertains to the habitat 

requirements of this species including: 

• Data in reports submitted during 

section 7 consultations and submitted 

by biologists holding section 10(a)(1)(A) 

recovery permits; 

• Research published in peerreviewed articles and presented in 

academic theses and agency reports; 

• Information from species experts; 

and 

• Information gathered during site 

visits to bay checkerspot butterfly 

habitat in Santa Clara County. 

Primary Constituent Elements 

In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) 

of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12, in determining which areas to 

propose as revised critical habitat 

within areas occupied by the species at 

the time of listing, we consider the 

primary constituent elements (PCEs) to 

be those physical and biological features 

that are essential to the conservation of 

the species and that may require special 

management considerations and 

protection. These include, but are not 

limited to, space for individual and 

population growth and for normal 

behavior; food, water, air, light, 

minerals, or other nutritional or 

physiological requirements; cover or 

shelter; sites for breeding, reproduction, 

and rearing (or development) of 

offspring; and habitats that are protected 

from disturbance or are representative of 

the historic geographical and ecological 

distributions of a species. 

The specific PCEs required for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly are derived from 

the biological needs of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly as described in the 

Background sections of this proposal 

and in the final listing rule published in 

the Federal Register on September 18, 

1987 (52 FR 35366). 

Space for Individual and Population 

Growth and for Normal Behavior 

The bay checkerspot butterfly occurs 

in open grassland habitats of the San 

Francisco Bay in Santa Clara and San 

Mateo counties. Prior to European 

settlement, California grasslands are 

believed to have been comprised of 

perennial bunchgrasses with both 

annual and perennial forbs (Jackson 

1985, p. 349; Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 

478; Corbin and D’Antonio 2004, p. 

1273). Today, grassland habitats in 

California are almost entirely composed 

of Eurasian annual grasses and forbs 

(Jackson 1985, p. 349; Huenneke et al. 

1990, p. 478; Seabloom et al. 2003, p. 

13384; Malmstrom et al. 2005, p. 154) 

where classical succession does not 

occur (Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 478; Kie 

2005, p. 2). Plant density in nonnative 

grasslands is extremely high compared 

to plant density in native grasslands 

(Malmstrom et al. 2005, p. 154). Dyer 

and Rice (1997, pp. 484, 490) estimated 

that pre-settlement densities of some 

native species was between 1–7 mature 

individuals per square meter. This is in 

sharp contrast to densities of several 

nonnative grasses and forbs; a study by 

Biswell and Graham (1958, p. 116–117) 

found densities of some nonnative 

species, such as Bromus hordeaceus, 

Erodium botrys, and Festuca megalura, 

to be 20,000 to 78,000 mature 

individuals per square meter. Heady 

(1958, p. 405) observed somewhat lower 

densities than Biswell and Graham 

(1958) of the same species with 

densities ranging from 4,750 to 28,370 

mature individuals per square meter. 

This suggests that grasslands with 

nonnative species have large numbers of 

individuals, but few species (i.e., low 

diversity). According to Malmstrom et 

al. (2005, p. 154), California native 

grasslands, prior to the introduction of 

Eurasian vegetation, were likely a mix of 

forbs and grasses, but today these 

species are out-competed by nonnative 

grasses. 

Serpentine or serpentine-like soils are 

characterized as shallow, nutrient poor 

(typically lacking in nitrogen and 

calcium), containing high magnesium 

(and other heavy metals), and with low 

water holding capacity. All currently 

occupied habitats of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly occur on serpentine or 

serpentine-like grasslands that support 

at least two of the subspecies’ larval 

host plants. Due to poor nutrient 

availability, as well as other soil 

characteristics, serpentine and 

serpentine-like grasslands are, for the 

most part, inhospitable to the nonnative 

grasses and forbs that dominate other 

California grassland ecosystems; these 

areas are essentially isolated patches 

where native grassland vegetation is 

capable of persisting in a landscape, 

otherwise dominated by nonnative and 

invasive species. These soils support 

many rare plant species including 

populations of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly’s larval host plants Plantago 

erecta, Castilleja densiflora, and 

Castilleja exserta. However, these 

remnant native grasslands are being 

invaded and crowded out by nonnative 

species and are under increased 

pressure as a result of nitrogen 

deposition primarily caused by air 

pollution (Weiss 1999, p. 1477). The 

enrichment of these soils with nitrogen 

has allowed nonnative grasses to invade 

these traditionally nutrient poor 

habitats, and the result is a thick mat of 

standing vegetation (thatch). Dense 

thatch has been reported to inhibit the 

growth of native forbs (Huenneke et al. 

1990, p. 488). Huenneke et al. (1990, p. 

489) found that treatment areas that 

were fenced to prevent grazing resulted 

in an increase in native perennial and 

nonnative annual grasses, but in grazed 

treatments forbs continued to represent 

an important component. Low and 

moderate grazing regimes, 

approximately one cow per 10 acres, 

have been implemented on portions of 

Tulare Hill and Coyote Ridge. Because 

cattle tend to select nonnative grasses 

over native forbs (Weiss 1999, p. 1484), 

the result of these grazing regimes has 

been local increases of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly’s larval host 

plants. 

The bay checkerspot butterfly requires 

areas with topographic diversity (warm 

south and west slopes as well as cool 

north and east slopes), because some 

slopes become unfavorable depending 

on annual weather conditions and time 

of year. Fleishman et al. (2000, p. 34) 

defined warm and very warm slopes as 

south- and west-facing slopes with a tilt 

greater than 11 and 17 degrees, 

respectively, with cool and very cool 

slopes defined as those facing north or 

east with a tilt greater than 11 and 17 

degrees, respectively. Harrison et al. 

(1988, p. 365) defined warm slopes as 

those facing south, southwest, and 

southeast with a tilt greater than 7 

degrees and cool slopes as those facing 

north or northeast with a tilt greater 

than 7 and 12 degrees, respectively. In 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48182 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

hot, dry years, north- and east-facing 

slopes remain cool and moist longer and 

larval host plants tend to senesce (reach 

later maturity; grow old) later than those 

on other slopes (Weiss et al. 1988, p. 

1493; Fleishman et al. 2000, p. 33). The 

delayed senescence of plants on cool/ 

moist slopes allows larvae to reach their 

fourth instar (larval development stage/ 

molt) and enter diapause (dormancy) 

before host plants become inedible. 

Larvae that are not able to enter 

diapause prior to host plant senescence 

starve and die (Singer and Ehrlich 1979, 

p. 54; White 1987, p. 209; Weiss 1996, 

p. 6). Because host plants on cool slopes 

can flower and senesce three or more 

weeks after those on warmer slopes 

(Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1493), cool slopes 

are especially important during 

extremely dry years (i.e., droughts). 

However, larval feeding and growth 

tends to increase on warm slopes 

because they receive more solar 

exposure than other slopes; this allows 

post-diapause larvae to grow quickly 

and pupate earlier than those on cool 

slopes. Individuals that pupate earlier 

have a much greater chance of 

reproductive success (Weiss et al. 1988, 

pp. 1493–94). 

In addition to weather, slope is 

important relative to the timing of egg 

laying. As the adult mating season 

(referred to as the flight season) 

progresses, females tend to lay more 

eggs on cool slopes than on warm slopes 

(Weiss et al. 1988, p. 1493). The timing 

of the adult flight season varies with 

weather, but can generally be described 

as occurring from late February to early 

May (Murphy et al. 2004, p. 25). Larvae 

that hatch late in the flight season have 

a greater chance of reaching diapause on 

cooler slopes than those laid at the same 

time on warm slopes, because host 

plants mature later on cool slopes. The 

pattern of larval survivorship across 

different slopes changes from one year 

to the next as well as within years; 

therefore, it becomes important that a 

variety of slopes and aspects are present 

to support the butterfly and its host 

plants. 

Food 

The primary larval host plant for the 

bay checkerspot butterfly is a small, 

annual, native plantain (Plantago 

erecta). The bay checkerspot butterfly 

also requires the presence of a 

secondary host plant, either purple 

owl’s-clover (Castilleja densiflora) or 

exserted paintbrush (Castilleja exserta) 

(Singer 1972, p. 76; Murphy and Ehrlick 

1980, p. 316; Fleishman et al. 1997, p. 

32; Weiss 1999, p. 1478; Hellman 2002, 

pp. 926, 931). The need for a secondary 

host plant is related to the timing of 

senescence of the primary host plant. In 

many years, the primary host plant dries 

up before larvae have reached their 

fourth instar and entered diapause. 

Because purple owl’s-clover and 

exserted paintbrush tend to senesce 

later than the plantain, larvae that 

switch to these plants may extend their 

feeding season long enough to reach 

their fourth instar. 

Adult bay checkerspot butterflies 

utilize nectar from a variety of plants 

associated with serpentine grasslands. 

Commonly used nectar plants include 

desert parsley (Lomatium spp.), 

California goldfields (Lasthenia 

californica), tidy-tips (Layia 

platyglossa), sea muilla (Muilla 

maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium 

falcifolium), false babystars (Linanthus 

androsaceus), and intermediate 

fiddleneck (Amsinckia intermedia). Egg 

production (both size of individual eggs 

and number of eggs) significantly 

increases with the intake of nutrients 

(Murphy et al. 1983, p. 261; Boggs 

1997a, pp. 181, 184). Murphy et al. 

(1983, p. 261) observed increased 

longevity and reduced weight loss in 

adult bay checkerspot butterflies that 

were fed sugar. Murphy et al. (1983, p. 

261) also observed that amino acid 

intake produced heavier eggs and that 

larvae from these eggs had an increased 

likelihood of survival. A study by 

O’Brien et al. (2004, p. 286), which 

examined egg production and adult diet 

in three species of butterflies in the 

family Nymphalidae, found the percent 

of carbon in eggs, derived from adult 

diets, increased with time (up to 80 

percent in one species). Currently there 

is no information regarding nectar usage 

on adult male longevity or reproduction. 

All of the host plants have ranges 

greater than that of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly and the larval plants may be 

found in areas that do not meet the lifehistory requirements of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. For example, 

Castilleja densiflora historically 

occurred throughout California, 

Plantago erecta occurred throughout 

California and Oregon, and Castilleja 

exserta occurred in California, Arizona, 

New Mexico, Hawaii, and 

Massachusetts (USDA 2007). In 

addition, the range of many of the nectar 

sources is also much greater than the 

geographic range of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. 

Water 

Launer et al. (1993, p. 45) observed 

large numbers (hundreds) of 

checkerspots, predominately females, 

‘‘puddling’’ at a creek in 1990. Puddling 

is a behavior observed in some butterfly 

species in which adults take up 

moisture from saturated soils. Launer et 

al. (1993, pp. 48–50) provided several 

alternative hypotheses for explaining 

the observed puddling behavior, since 

the bay checkerspot butterfly was not 

traditionally believed to be a puddling 

species. One hypothesis was that 

because the observation was made 

during an extremely dry period (third 

year of a drought), the creek was 

providing resources that were otherwise 

unavailable (or only in low quantities), 

and that moist areas may provide an 

increased chance of survival during 

drought periods (Launer et al. 1993, p. 

49). Murphy et al. (1983, p. 261) 

observed that under laboratory 

conditions female bay checkerspot 

butterflies lived longer when provided 

water. Checkerspots are not generally 

considered puddling butterflies, and 

some researchers consider it very 

unusual for members of the genus 

Euphydryas to exhibit puddling 

behavior (Emmel 2007, p. 1). However, 

the observation of large numbers of bay 

checkerspot butterflies taking water 

from the banks of a creek provides 

evidence for a need for aquatic features 

(i.e., water). 

Soils 

The bay checkerspot butterfly inhabits 

areas with soils derived from 

serpentinite ultramafic rock (Montara, 

Climara, Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo 

soil series) or similar non-serpentine 

soils (such as Inks, Candlestick, Los 

Gatos, Fagan, and Barnabe soil series). 

Serpentine soils are characterized as 

having low amounts of nutrients (such 

as nitrogen and calcium); high 

concentrations of magnesium; low 

water-holding capacity; and patches of 

heavy metals. These characteristics 

create a refuge for many rare native 

plants, because other plant species are 

not capable of surviving in these soils 

(nitrogen is often a limiting factor in 

plant growth). The nonserpentine soils 

mentioned above have characteristics 

that allow them to support grassland 

communities similar to those on 

serpentine soils, such as low waterholding capacity, slight to moderate 

acidity (pH 5.8), and varied topography 

(slopes ranging from 5 to 75 percent). 

Together, these soils provide the last 

remaining habitat within the geographic 

range of the bay checkerspot butterfly 

where the larval host plants are capable 

of persisting and not be outcompeted or 

crowded out by introduced annuals. 

Some researchers have hypothesized 

that the bay checkerspot butterfly once 

occurred widely in nonserpentine 

grasslands throughout the San Francisco 

Bay area prior to the invasion of 

nonnative invasive grasses and forbs 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48183 

(Murphy and Weiss 1988, p. 197), but 

have subsequently been relegated to 

these fragmented habitats due to plant 

competition. 

Cover 

Larval bay checkerspot butterflies 

enter diapause in order to survive the 

summer dry period, once their host 

plants senesce. Diapause is an 

obligatory dormancy period that begins 

once larvae reach their fourth instar, 

which takes approximately three weeks, 

but may vary considerably depending 

on abiotic factors (non-living 

components of the biosphere) 

(Kuussaari, et al. 2004, p. 140). Evidence 

suggests that larvae may be capable of 

entering diapause more than once 

(White and Levin 1981, p. 355; Harrison 

1989, p. 1242; Kuussaari et al. 2004, pp. 

139–140; Mattoni et al. 1997, p. 106). 

Diapause continues until the summer 

dry period is broken by the onset of the 

rainy season, generally some time in 

November-January (Weiss 1996, p. 6). 

The larvae pass through diapause in 

holes and cracks in the soil and under 

rocks (White 1987, p. 209; Weiss 1996, 

p. 7) that provide protection from 

weather, predation, and parasitism. 

White (1986, p. 58) observed that pupal 

mortality rates, as well as cause of 

mortality (i.e., predation, parasitism, 

crushing, or disease), varied 

significantly depending on location, 

with significant differences in mortality 

between microhabitat types. For 

example, crushing was most likely in 

areas of bare ground, whereas pupae in 

areas with dense vegetation had a higher 

rate of mortality due to mold and 

viruses. 

Primary Constituent Elements for the 

Bay Checkerspot Butterfly 

Within the geographical area we know 

to be occupied by the bay checkerspot 

butterfly, we must identify the PCEs that 

may require special management 

considerations or protections. 

Based on the above needs and our 

current knowledge of the life history, 

biology, and ecology of the species, we 

have determined that bay checkerspot 

butterfly PCEs are: 

(1) The presence of annual or 

perennial grasslands with little to no 

overstory that provide north/south and 

east/west slopes with a tilt of more than 

7 degrees for larval host plant survival 

during periods of atypical weather (e.g., 

drought). Common grassland species 

include wild oats (Avena fatua), soft 

chess (Bromus hordeaceus), California 

oatgrass (Danthonia californica), purple 

needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), and 

Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis); less 

abundant in these grasslands are annual 

and perennial forbs such as filaree 

(Erodium botrys), true clovers (Trifolium 

sp.), dwarf plantain (Plantago erecta), 

and turkey mullein (Croton setigerus). 

(2) The presence of the primary larval 

host plant, dwarf plantain (Plantago 

erecta) and at least one of the secondary 

host plants, purple owl’s-clover 

(Castilleja densiflora) or exserted 

paintbrush (Castilleja exserta), are 

required for reproduction, feeding, and 

larval development. 

(3) The presence of adult nectar 

sources for feeding. Common nectar 

sources include desertparsley 

(Lomatium spp.), California goldfields 

(Lasthenia californica), tidy-tips (Layia 

platyglossa), sea muilla (Muilla 

maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium 

falcifolium), false babystars (Linanthus 

androsaceus), and intermediate 

fiddleneck (Amsinckia intermedia). 

(4) Aquatic features such as wetlands, 

springs, seeps, streams, lakes, and 

ponds and their associated banks, that 

provide moisture during periods of 

spring drought; these features can be 

ephemeral, seasonal, or permanent. 

(5) Soils derived from serpentinite 

ultramafic rock (Montara, Climara, 

Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo soil 

series) or similar soils (Inks, 

Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and 

Barnabe soil series) that provide areas 

with fewer aggressive, nonnative plant 

species for larval host plant and adult 

nectar plant survival and reproduction. 

(6) The presence of stable holes and 

cracks in the soil, and surface rock 

outcrops that provide shelter for the 

larval stage of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly during summer diapause. 

We have designed this proposed 

revision to the critical habitat 

designation for the conservation of PCEs 

necessary to support the life-history 

functions that were the basis for our 

proposal and the areas containing those 

PCEs. Because not all life-history 

functions require all the PCEs, not all 

proposed critical habitat will contain all 

the PCEs. 

We propose units for designation 

based on sufficient PCEs being present 

to support one or more of the species’

life-history functions. Some units 

contain all PCEs and support multiple 

life processes, while some units contain 

only a portion of the PCEs necessary to 

support the species’ particular use of 

that habitat. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protections 

When designating critical habitat, we 

assess whether the areas determined to 

be occupied at the time of listing and 

contain the primary constituent 

elements may require special 

management considerations or 

protections. Threats to those features 

that define the PCEs for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly include habitat 

loss and fragmentation, invasion of 

exotic/invasive plants, nitrogen 

deposition (including NOX and 

ammonia), pesticide application 

(including drift), illegal collecting, fire, 

overgrazing, and gopher control. 

Critical habitat units 1, 2, and 5–10 

may require special management due to 

threats posed by habitat loss and 

fragmentation resulting from urban and 

suburban growth. Development pressure 

in Santa Clara County is likely to 

increase in the foreseeable future. The 

City of San Jose has developed a General 

Plan to guide development in the area 

into the year 2020 and is not part of the 

proposed Santa Clara County HCP. 

Portions of the general plan share 

boundaries with critical habitat units, 

including Units 5, 6, 7, and 9. Some 

currently or proposed projects include 

the Coyote Valley Specific Plan, which 

includes residential and industrial 

developments, the Coyote Valley 

Research Park, numerous projects 

currently proposed for inclusion under 

the Santa Clara Habitat Conservation 

Plan, as well as numerous single family 

residential units and road grading 

projects. In 1997, the California Court of 

Appeals 6th District found that the City 

of San Jose’s zoning did not have to be 

consistent with the City’s General Plan 

(Juarez et al. v. City of San Jose et al. 

(6th District, Case No. CV736436 

H014755)); this may result in areas not 

currently within the urban growth 

boundary still being proposed for 

development, including those areas that 

are environmentally sensitive such as 

critical habitat units. In addition, 

portions of Unit 10 are within the 

planning boundaries of the City of 

Morgan Hill’s General Plan. 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units would likely require special 

management due to the threats posed by 

the invasion of nonnative vegetation 

that result from air pollution (primarily 

nitrogen deposition) (Weiss 1999, p. 

1477). Nitrogen deposition enriches 

serpentine and serpentinelike soils that 

are usually nutrient poor. Increased 

nitrogen (typically a limiting factor in 

plant growth) in these areas has resulted 

in the accumulation of a thick carpet of 

vegetative material (thatch) each year. 

Dense thatch has been reported to 

inhibit the growth of native forbs 

(Huenneke et al. 1990, p. 488). The 

increased density of nonnative 

vegetation would negatively affect the 

bay checkerspot butterfly’s host plant 

through competition and crowding 

(Weiss 1999, p. 1481). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48184 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units may require special management 

due to the threats posed by pesticide 

use. Use of pesticides (i.e., insecticides, 

and herbicides) in or adjacent to critical 

habitat may affect populations of 

butterflies within these units. 

Populations adjacent to areas where 

there is intensive use of pesticides may 

be at risk as a result of drift and runoff. 

In at least one instance, larvae appeared 

to have survived a direct application of 

malathion by the California Department 

of Food and Agriculture; however, the 

application was conducted in the fall of 

1981 when larvae were still in diapause. 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units may require special management 

due to the threat posed by fire. No bay 

checkerspot butterflies were seen on 

San Bruno Mountain after a wildfire 

swept across portions of the mountain 

in 1986. However, only about 50 adult 

butterflies were observed on the 

mountain in 1984 (CNDDB 2006), so 

their subsequent disappearance may not 

have been solely related to the 1986 fire. 

The use of fire as a management regime 

in serpentine grasslands has not been 

well studied. Studies that have been 

conducted are primarily monitoring 

opportunities made possible after 

wildfires. 

Use of prescribed burns may be an 

effective management tool depending on 

timing, intensity, and size of the area 

burned. Prescribed burns are widely 

used as a land management tool to 

counter the invasion of nonnative and 

invasive plant species and to stimulate 

growth and reproduction of those 

species adapted to disturbance. An 

experimental prescribed burn was 

conducted over a small portion of 

Coyote Ridge in 2006, but the results are 

not yet known. 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units may require special management 

due to the threat posed by over or under 

grazing. Although grazing is frequently 

used as a management tool to reduce 

standing biomass of nonnative 

vegetation, overgrazing can be a 

potential threat if grazing densities are 

not appropriately managed. Huenneke 

et al. (1990, p. 489) and Weiss (1999, p. 

1480) found that areas that were fenced 

to prevent grazing or sites where grazing 

had been removed, resulted in an 

increase in annual grasses, which crowd 

out forbs including those that are 

essential to the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. Forbs continued to be an 

important component in areas that 

included limited grazing. Therefore, we 

consider a limited amount of grazing to 

be beneficial to bay checkerspot habitat. 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units may require special management 

due to the threats posed by gopher 

control. Larval host plants have been 

observed to stay green and edible longer 

when located on or near soils recently 

tilled by gophers (Thomomys bottae) 

(Singer 1972, p. 75; Murphy et al. 2004, 

p. 26). Huenneke et al. (1990, p. 490) 

hypothesized that soil disturbance by 

gophers may limit the performance of 

grasses similar to results caused by 

grazing, with grazers reducing the 

standing grass biomass in a system, 

which allowed the persistence of small 

forbs. Larval host plants that stay green 

longer into the dry season may allow 

prediapause larva to reach the fourth 

instar. 

Criteria Used To Identify Critical 

Habitat 

All proposed revised critical habitat 

units are within areas that we have 

determined were occupied at the time of 

listing or are currently occupied, and 

that contain sufficient PCEs to support 

life history functions essential for the 

conservation of the subspecies. Lands 

were proposed for designation based on 

sufficient PCEs being present to support 

the life processes. Some lands contain 

only a portion of the PCEs necessary to 

support the particular use of that 

habitat. 

We have defined occupied critical 

habitat as: (1) Those grasslands on 

serpentine or serpentine-like soils 

containing the PCEs that were occupied 

by the bay checkerspot butterfly at the 

time of listing in 1987 or (2) those 

grasslands on serpentine or serpentinelike soils containing the PCEs that have 

been occupied since the time of listing. 

Units did not have to contain all PCEs. 

We used information compiled for the 

proposed and final listing rules, reports 

prepared by San Mateo County Parks, 

Santa Clara County Parks, the CNDDB, 

researchers, consultants, and published 

and unpublished literature to identify 

the specific locations occupied by the 

bay checkerspot butterfly at the time of 

listing and currently occupied. 

The currently occupied habitat for the 

bay checkerspot butterfly is highly 

fragmented and isolated; the majority of 

all extant occurrences are within an 

approximate 9 mile (mi) (14.5 kilometer 

(km)) radius in Santa Clara County, 

California. The population estimates in 

San Mateo County are extremely small 

and those in Santa Clara County have 

declined significantly in recent years. 

As a result of population declines and 

fragmented habitats, all areas currently 

known to support the bay checkerspot 

butterfly are being proposed for 

designation. 

Several areas occupied by the bay 

checkerspot butterfly at the time of 

listing are not currently occupied. Some 

of these areas have been surveyed since 

listing and no bay checkerspot 

butterflies were observed; however, not 

all of the units have been recently 

surveyed and, due to the 

metapopulation dynamics of the 

subspecies, it is possible that the 

subspecies has recolonized some of 

these areas. The metapopulation 

dynamics of the subspecies has shown 

that population fluctuations occur and 

extirpation and recolonization is a 

normal occurrence for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Ehrlich et al. 

1975, pp. 221–228; 1980; Harrison 1994, 

pp. 111–128). The units that have been 

surveyed since the time of listing 

without observations of the subspecies 

include San Bruno Mountain, Pulgas 

Ridge, and Jasper Ridge Biological 

Preserve in San Mateo County, 

California. These areas are proposed for 

designation as critical habitat because 

they were all occupied at the time of 

listing and designation of these units 

will reduce the likelihood of extinction 

by providing source/sink (larger patches 

of high-quality habitat/small patches of 

marginal habitat/) areas and ‘‘stepping 

stone’’ (often smaller, unconnected 

areas that bridge the distance between 

larger blocks of suitable habitat) habitats 

for the subspecies. Since the bay 

checkerspot butterfly is susceptible to 

extreme weather events these additional 

units in San Mateo County will also 

reduce the risk of extinction from 

stochastic natural events, extreme 

weather conditions, and help to ensure 

survival of the subspecies by providing 

potential dispersal habitat for 

individuals that were reintroduced to 

Edgewood Park early in 2007. 

The distribution of proposed critical 

habitat areas (occupied and currently 

unoccupied) was selected to help 

reduce the level of habitat fragmentation 

within the geographic range of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly by providing 

dispersal and recolonization 

opportunities for the subspecies. The 

butterfly is considered relatively 

sedentary (Ehrlich 1965, p. 333; 

Harrison 1989, p. 50–51; Singer and 

Hanski 2004, p. 187) and reduced 

fragmentation should facilitate 

movements between habitat patches. 

McKechnie et al. (1975, p. 561) observed 

that out of several years of mark 

recapture studies only 1.7 percent of 

males and 4.8 percent of females moved 

a distance of approximately 1,600 feet 

(ft.) (500 meter (m)). These figures are 

consistent with observations made by 

Weiss (1996, p. 93) who reported that 

adult movement declined with 

increasing distance with only about 5 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48185 

percent moving between 656 to 984 ft 

(200 to 300 m). 

Although the butterfly is considered 

sedentary, long-distance movements 

have been documented. The longest 

documented movements observed by 

Harrison (1989, p. 1239) were 3.5 mi 

(5.6 km) for one male and 2 mi (3.2 km) 

for one female. Murphy (Service 2001, 

p. 21451) reported movement of bay 

checkerspot butterflies of 4.7 mi (7.6 

km). Harrison et al. (1988, p. 371) 

hypothesized that habitats greater than 

4.3 to 5.0 mi (7 to 8 km) from a source 

population (Coyote Ridge in the study) 

were unlikely to ever sustain 

populations of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. This hypothesis was based on 

the presence or absence of adult bay 

checkerspot butterflies in Santa Clara 

County in apparently suitable habitat 

and their relative distance from Coyote 

Ridge. The study was not designed to 

predict the bay checkerspot butterfly’s 

upper limit of dispersal. Harrison (1989, 

p. 371) hypothesized that the rate of 

colonization, relative to the rate of 

extinction, was too low to maintain 

populations of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly on distant habitat patches 

(distant from a source patch). Given the 

subspecies’ historical distribution, its 

metapopulation dynamics, and its 

sedentary tendencies, reducing habitat 

fragmentation, by designating occupied 

and currently unoccupied habitat that 

provide quality stepping stone habitat, 

will increase the likelihood of 

recolonization of more distant patches 

of suitable habitat. 

We have determined that, due to the 

limited availability of habitat for the 

subspecies, its limited distribution, and 

its generally low dispersal tendencies, 

the long-term conservation of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly is dependent upon 

the protection of habitat that was 

occupied at the time of listing as well 

as habitat that is currently occupied. 

The presence of all six PCEs was not a 

requirement to designating a unit as 

critical habitat; however, all twelve 

units currently support all six PCEs. 

Mapping 

Geospatial datasets were used within 

ArcGIS/ArcMap 9.2 (Environmental 

Systems Research Institute, Redlands, 

California) and analyzed to define the 

areas that best contain the features that 

are essential to the conservation of the 

bay checkerspot butterfly. To delineate 

the proposed units of occupied critical 

habitat, we plotted all occurrence 

records of bay checkerspot butterfly 

known at the time of listing or currently 

known on maps as polygons. We then 

examined whether these areas 

supported the PCEs. 

When determining the proposed 

revisions to critical habitat boundaries 

within this proposed rule, we made 

every effort to avoid including 

developed areas such as buildings, 

paved areas, and other structures that 

lack PCEs for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. The scale of the maps we 

prepared under the parameters for 

publication within the Code of Federal 

Regulations may not reflect the 

exclusion of such developed areas. Any 

such structures and the land under them 

inadvertently left inside critical habitat 

boundaries shown on the maps of this 

proposed revision to critical habitat 

have been excluded by text in this 

proposed rule and are not proposed for 

designation as critical habitat. 

Therefore, Federal actions limited to 

these areas would not trigger section 7 

consultation, unless they may affect the 

subspecies or primary constituent 

elements in adjacent critical habitat. 

We are proposing to revise the critical 

habitat designation on lands that we 

have determined were occupied at the 

time of listing or are currently occupied 

and contain sufficient primary 

constituent elements to support lifehistory functions essential for the 

conservation of the subspecies. 

The units being proposed for revised 

designation are based on sufficient PCEs 

being present to support bay 

checkerspot butterfly life processes. 

Some units contain all PCEs and 

support multiple life processes. Some 

units contain only a portion of the PCEs 

necessary to support the bay 

checkerspot butterfly particular use of 

that habitat. Where a subset of the PCEs 

is present (such as presence of larval 

host plants, adult nectar plants, and 

grasslands with varied topography), it 

has been noted that only PCEs present 

at designation would be protected. 

Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act 

authorizes us to issue permits for the 

take of listed animal species incidental 

to otherwise lawful activities. An 

incidental take permit application must 

be supported by a habitat conservation 

plan (HCP) that identifies conservation 

measures that the permittee agrees to 

implement to minimize and mitigate the 

impacts on the species by the requested 

incidental take. We often exclude nonFederal public lands and private lands 

that are covered by an existing operative 

HCP and executed implementation 

agreement (IA) under section 10(a)(1)(B) 

of the Act from designated critical 

habitat because the benefits of exclusion 

outweigh the benefits of inclusion as 

discussed in section 4(b)(2) of the Act. 

To date, Pacific Gas and Electric’s 

Metcalf Evendale/Monta Vista Line is 

the only HCP that has been completed 

that includes the bay checkerspot 

butterfly as a covered species. The HCP 

was issued in 1998 and was in effect for 

a period of 3 years, and covered 

approximately 4 ac (1.6 ha). Because the 

HCP has expired, we are not proposing 

to exclude lands once covered under 

this HCP. The San Bruno Mountain HCP 

(SBMHCP) Amendment 5 would add 

the Callippe silverspot butterfly 

(Speyeria callippe callippe) and the bay 

checkerspot butterfly to the existing 

HCP. The Callippe silverspot butterfly 

shares some habitat requirements 

similar to the bay checkerspot butterfly, 

specifically the use of open grasslands. 

We are proposing to exclude Unit 1 

from critical habitat based on the 

development of amendment 5 of the 

SBMHCP (See Application of Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act). Stanford University 

is in the process of developing an HCP 

for lands owned by Stanford University, 

which includes the Jasper Ridge 

Biological Preserve (Unit 4); however as 

currently proposed, this HCP would not 

include the bay checkerspot butterfly or 

any other butterfly species, so this HCP 

is not being proposed for exclusion. 

Santa Clara County is currently in the 

early stages of developing a regional 

HCP that would encompass the majority 

of Santa Clara County, including all 

proposed critical habitat units in the 

county (Units 5 through 12); this HCP is 

still in the early stages of development, 

but as proposed would include the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. However, the 

Santa Clara County HCP is not expected 

to be finalized for several years. We are 

seeking comments regarding areas that 

have management plans or HCPs that 

may potentially be excluded from the 

critical habitat designation (see Public 

Comments Solicited section above). 

Summary of Changes From Previously 

Designated Critical Habitat 

The areas identified in this proposed 

rule constitute a proposed revision from 

the areas we designated as critical 

habitat for bay checkerspot butterfly on 

April 30, 2001 (66 FR 21450). The 

primary differences include the 

following: 

(1) The 2001 critical habitat rule (66 

FR 21450) consisted of 15 units 

comprising a total of 23,903 ac (9,673 

ha). This proposed revision includes 12 

units comprising a total of 19,746 ac 

(7,990 ha). The majority of the proposed 

units correspond to those in the 2001 

designation. However, we have refined 

the units to eliminate areas that are 

unlikely to support the PCEs such as 

areas that are forested or have since 

been developed. The unit formerly 

designated as Communications Hill 

(2001 unit 6) is not included in this 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48186 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

proposed rule because that unit has 

since been developed to a large degree 

and the remaining habitat has been 

degraded by the invasion of nonnative 

and invasive grasses and is unlikely to 

support sufficient PCEs to meet one or 

more of the life-history requirements of 

the subspecies. In addition, the Pulgas 

Ridge unit (proposed unit 2) is new in 

this proposed designation and is 

included because it represents an area 

that was historically known to support 

the subspecies, is currently 

undeveloped, is expected to serve as a 

‘‘stepping stone’’ between the two 

southern units in San Mateo County 

(proposed units 4 and 5) and the San 

Bruno Mountain unit (proposed Unit 1), 

and can provide additional habitat to 

support a core population in San Mateo 

County. Currently the distance between 

proposed Unit 1 and proposed Unit 2 is 

greater than the published dispersal 

distance of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly; however, a number of small 

and fragmented patches of intervening 

grasslands occur along the Interstate 280 

corridor between proposed Unit 1 and 2 

that would be expected to serve as 

additional stepping stones to potentially 

allow for movement between these two 

units. The numerous small patches of 

grassland habitat between units are not 

proposed to be designated as critical 

habitat because the Service has no 

information regarding the presence of 

sufficient PCEs within these areas. 

(2) We propose to revise the PCEs and 

exclude ‘‘pollinators of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly’s food and nectar 

plants’’ because the specific pollinators 

of each host and nectar plant are not 

known and the presence of the plants 

themselves implies their successful 

reproduction. We clarify ‘‘topography 

with varied slopes and aspects’’ by 

defining those slope aspects that were 

important as well as defining warm 

versus cool slopes. We expand the 

previous PCE regarding ‘‘wetlands that 

provide moisture’’ to reflect the range of 

water sources that may be used by the 

subspecies, such as the banks of streams 

and lakes. To provide for greater 

specificity we remove ‘‘space for 

dispersal between habitable areas’’ and 

include ‘‘annual and perennial 

grasslands’’ along with a description of 

that habitat type and plant species 

commonly found in them. We replace 

‘‘stands of’’ the larval host plants with 

‘‘presence of’’ because the density of 

host plants needed to support the 

subspecies has not been widely 

researched and does not appear in the 

literature, and thus is difficult to 

quantify at this time. Finally, to provide 

for greater specificity, we expand the 

previous PCE regarding soils to include 

a list of soils that are associated with 

serpentine or serpentine-like habitats. 

(3) We updated areas that are 

currently known to support populations 

of the bay checkerspot butterfly, as well 

as areas where the subspecies has since 

become extirpated. The number of 

known occurrences has continued to 

decline since the 2001 designation of 

critical habitat. 

Proposed Revisions to the Critical 

Habitat Designation 

We are proposing 12 units as critical 

habitat for the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

These units, which generally 

correspond to those units in the 2001 

designation, if finalized, would entirely 

replace the current critical habitat 

designation for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly in 50 CFR 17.95(i). The critical 

habitat areas we describe below 

constitute our current best assessment of 

areas that meet the definition of critical 

habitat for the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

The 12 areas designated as critical 

habitat are: (1) San Bruno Mountain, (2) 

Pulgas Ridge, (3) Edgewood Park, and 

(4) Jasper Ridge in San Mateo County; 

and (5) Coyote Ridge (A and B), (6) 

Tulare Hill, (7) Santa Teresa Hills, (8) 

Calero Reservoir, (9) Kalana Hills (A and 

B), (10) Morgan Hill, (11) Bear Ranch, 

and (12) San Martin in Santa Clara 

County. The approximate area 

encompassed within each proposed 

critical habitat unit is shown in Table 2. 

Of the 19,746 ac (7,990 ha) being 

proposed as revised critical habitat, we 

are proposing to exclude approximately 

775 ac (314 ha) from the final critical 

habitat designation under section 4(b)(2) 

of the Act. See Exclusions Under 

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act section for a 

detailed discussion. 

The approximate area (ac, ha) 

encompassed within each proposed 

revised critical habitat unit, land 

ownership, areas proposed for exclusion 

from the final critical habitat 

designation, and occupancy of units are 

shown in Tables 1, 2, and 3. 

TABLE 1.—OCCUPANCY OF PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS FOR THE BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY

Unit 

Occupied 

at time of 

listing 

Currently 

occupied 

Acres 

(hectares) 

Unit 1: San Bruno Mt ....................................................................................................................... Yes .......... No ............ 775 (314) 

Unit 2: Pulgas Ridge ........................................................................................................................ Yes .......... No ............ 179 (72) 

Unit 3: Edgewood Park .................................................................................................................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 409 (166) 

Unit 4: Jasper Ridge ........................................................................................................................ Yes .......... No ............ 329 (133) 

Unit 5: Coyote Ridge ....................................................................................................................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 10,148 (4,107) 

Unit 6: Tulare Hill ............................................................................................................................. Yes .......... Yes .......... 747 (302) 

Unit 7: Santa Teresa Hills ............................................................................................................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 3,987 (1,613) 

Unit 8: Calero Reservoir .................................................................................................................. Yes .......... Yes .......... 1,543 (624) 

Unit 9: Kalana Hills: 

Subunit 9A ................................................................................................................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... 170 (69) 

Subunit 9B ................................................................................................................................ Yes .......... Yes .......... 56 (23) 

Unit 10: Morgan Hill ......................................................................................................................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 507 (205) 

Unit 11: Bear Ranch ........................................................................................................................ No ............ Yes .......... 393 (159) 

Unit 12: San Martin .......................................................................................................................... Yes .......... Yes .......... 502 (203) 

Total .......................................................................................................................................... .................. .................. 19,746 (7,990) 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48187 

TABLE 2.—CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS PROPOSED FOR THE BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY

[Area estimates reflect all land within critical habitat unit boundaries (in acres and hectares)] 

Unit Federal State/local Private Total 

Unit 1: San Bruno Mt ................................................................................. 0 .......... 577 (234) 198 (80) 775 (314) 

Unit 2: Pulgas Ridge .................................................................................. 0 .......... 179 (72) 0 179 (72) 

Unit 3: Edgewood Park .............................................................................. 0 .......... 303 (123) 106 (43) 409 (166) 

Unit 4: Jasper Ridge .................................................................................. 0 .......... 0 329 (133) 329 (133) 

Unit 5: Coyote Ridge .................................................................................. 0 .......... 110 (45) 10,148 (4,107) 10,148 (4,107) 

Unit 6: Tulare Hill ....................................................................................... 0 .......... 102 (41) 645 (261) 747 (302) 

Unit 7: Santa Teresa Hills .......................................................................... 0 .......... 1,100 (445) 2,888 (1,169) 3,987 (1,613) 

Unit 8: Calero Reservoir ............................................................................. 0 .......... 1,543 (624) 0 1,543 (624) 

Unit 9: Kalana Hills: 

Subunit 9A ........................................................................................... 0 .......... 0 170 (69) 170 (69) 

Subunit 9B ........................................................................................... 0 .......... 0 56 (23) 56 (23) 

Unit 10: Morgan Hill ................................................................................... 0 .......... 0 507 (205) 507 (205) 

Unit 11: Bear Ranch ................................................................................... 0 .......... 393 (159) 0 393 (159) 

Unit 12: San Martin .................................................................................... 0 .......... 0 502 (203) 502 (203) 

Total .................................................................................................... 0 .......... 4,308 (1,743) 15,438 (6,248) 19,746 (7,990) 

We present brief descriptions of all 

units, and reasons why they meet the 

definition of critical habitat for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly, below. 

Unit 1: San Bruno Mountain 

Unit 1 consists of 775 ac (314 ha) in 

San Mateo County. The unit is primarily 

within San Bruno Mountain State and 

County Park, and is inside the 

boundaries of the San Bruno Mountain 

Area Habitat Conservation Plan. This 

unit was occupied at the time of listing 

and contains all the features essential 

for the conservation of the subspecies; 

however, the bay checkerspot butterfly 

has not been observed in this unit since 

a wildfire in 1986 and is currently 

unoccupied. Unit 1 represents the most 

northerly part of the subspecies’ range 

on the San Francisco peninsula. Unit 1 

is necessary as a supporting element of 

the San Mateo metapopulation because 

it represents the largest area of 

contiguous native grassland habitat that 

can support the bay checkerspot 

butterfly’s host and nectar plants within 

San Mateo County. This unit currently 

supports populations of the federally 

endangered Callippe silverspot butterfly 

(Speyeria callippe callippe), endangered 

San Bruno elfin butterfly (Callophrys 

mossii bayensis), and endangered 

Mission blue butterfly (Icaricia 

icarioides missionensis), which all share 

similar habitat requirements as the bay 

checkerspot butterfly (including native 

grasslands). The majority of this unit, 

approximately 577 ac (233 ha), is within 

the boundaries of the San Bruno 

Mountain State and County Park, while 

the rest of the unit is privately owned 

(198 ac (80 ha)). As stated above, the 

distance between Unit 1 and the most 

proximate Unit 2 is greater than the 

published dispersal distance of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly; however, 

numerous small patches of intervening 

grasslands would be expected to serve 

as additional stepping stones to 

potentially allow for movement between 

these two units. These patches of 

grassland habitat are not proposed to be 

designated as critical habitat because 

the Service has no information 

regarding the presence of sufficient 

PCEs within these areas. 

Unit 2: Pulgas Ridge 

Unit 2 consists of 179 ac (72 ha) in 

San Mateo County. The unit is located 

north of the intersection of Interstate 

280 and Highway 92, east of Crystal 

Springs Reservoir. This unit was 

occupied at the time of listing and 

contains all the features essential for the 

conservation of the subspecies. Since 

listing, bay checkerspot butterflies in 

this unit have been extirpated, and the 

unit is currently unoccupied. However, 

the bay checkerspot butterfly formerly 

inhabited this unit, and the unit still 

contains all the PCEs. The land within 

this unit is owned by San Francisco 

Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) 

and is part of the Peninsula watershed 

and not subject to development. This 

unit provides habitat for the subspecies, 

especially in years with particularly 

favorable weather conditions that 

support expanding populations of the 

bay checkerspot butterflies; represents a 

stepping stone location to nearby units; 

and secures the metapopulation 

dynamics of the subspecies by 

providing adjacent or dispersal habitat 

for the subspecies. According to the 

Peninsula watershed management plan 

(SFPUC 2002, p. 2–11), portions of the 

watershed currently support 

populations of the endangered San 

Bruno elfin butterfly and the 

endangered Mission blue butterfly that 

share similar habitat requirements as the 

bay checkerspot butterfly (including 

native grasslands). In addition, 

according to the environmental impact 

statement for the Peninsula watershed 

management plan (SFPD 2001, p. XLB–

7), portions of the watershed have a 

high probability of supporting the bay 

checkerspot butterfly and is designated 

as being serpentine grassland habitat. 

Unit 3: Edgewood Park 

Unit 3 consists of 409 ac (166 ha) in 

San Mateo County. This unit is 

comprised primarily of the Edgewood 

Park and Natural Preserve, a San Mateo 

County park located east of the junction 

of Edgewood Road and Interstate 280. A 

portion of the unit, approximately 66 ac 

(27 ha), is owned by the San Francisco 

Public Utilities Commission and is part 

of the Peninsula watershed. This unit 

was occupied at the time of listing, is 

currently occupied, and contains all the 

features essential to the conservation of 

the subspecies. Until recently, this unit 

supported the main population of bay 

checkerspot butterflies within the San 

Mateo metapopulation. However, the 

subspecies was last observed here in 

2002, after a steady decline beginning in 

the late 1990s. Larval bay checkerspot 

butterflies were reintroduced to this 

unit in early 2007. The population of 

bay checkerspot butterflies within this 

unit has been described as the only core 

population in San Mateo County, and 

without bay checkerspot butterflies in 

this unit, the subspecies in San Mateo 

is unlikely to persist, which would 

leave only the one metapopulation in 

Santa Clara County and would 

constitute a significant range reduction 

for the subspecies. 

Unit 4: Jasper Ridge 

Unit 4 consists of 329 ac (133 ha) in 

San Mateo County. The unit is entirely 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48188 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

contained within Stanford University’s 

Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve. The 

unit is 4 mi (7 km) southeast of Unit 3 

and 23 mi (37 km) west-northwest of 

Unit 5, and represents the closest 

connection to the Santa Clara County 

metapopulation. This unit was occupied 

at the time of listing and contains all the 

features essential to the conservation of 

the subspecies. Decades of data and 

dozens of published scientific papers 

about the Jasper Ridge population of the 

bay checkerspot butterfly exist. The 

population was almost extirpated by 

prolonged drought in the late 1970s and 

again in the late 1980s. The unit was 

occupied at the time of listing; however 

the last known observation of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly in this unit was in 

1997; the unit is currently unoccupied. 

The unit is managed as a biological 

preserve by Stanford University and 

suitable habitat, containing all the PCEs, 

continues to be present. Unit 4 is the 

closest unit in San Mateo County to 

populations of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly in Santa Clara County. While 

currently not known to be occupied, 

metapopulation dynamics may allow for 

natural recolonization to occur by bay 

checkerspot butterflies from Santa Clara 

County through the stepping stones of 

grassland habitat. There are numerous 

small patches of grassland habitat 

(potential stepping stones) between the 

units in San Mateo and Santa Clara 

Counties, although Unit 4 is the closest 

known area with sufficient PCEs. The 

numerous small patches of grassland 

habitat between units are not proposed 

to be designated as critical habitat 

because the Service has no information 

regarding the presence of sufficient 

PCEs within these areas. Unit 4 is also 

the closest suitable habitat with 

sufficient PCEs to the recently 

reintroduced Edgewood Park population 

and is necessary to support and 

maintain the Edgewood Park population 

(Unit 3), which in turn support the 

metapopulation dynamics of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly in San Mateo 

County by providing the necessary 

dispersal habitat and connectivity 

between the San Mateo and Santa Clara 

County populations. 

Unit 5: Coyote Ridge 

This unit consists of 10,149 ac (4,107 

ha) in Santa Clara County. The unit 

encompasses Units 8, 10, 11, and 12 as 

identified in the 2001 designation. The 

unit is comprised almost entirely of the 

ridgeline known as Coyote Ridge, the 

majority of which is in private 

ownership, although approximately 110 

ac (45 ha) are owned by Santa Clara 

County Parks for off-road vehicle 

recreation. To the north the unit is 

bordered by Yerba Buena Road near its 

intersection with U.S. Highway 101 and 

Metcalf Road divides the unit almost in 

half. The unit was occupied at the time 

of listing and contains all the features 

essential to the conservation of the 

subspecies represents the only 

remaining core population of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. Other units in 

Santa Clara County depend on this core 

population as a source for 

recolonization. The unit represents the 

largest, most contiguous, and highest 

quality habitat containing the largest 

population of bay checkerspot 

butterflies. 

Researchers historically referred to 

the bay checkerspot butterflies within 

this unit as four populations: Kirby, 

Metcalf, San Felipe, and Silver Creek 

Hills and our previous designation 

identified them as separate units. The 

Kirby population is the southernmost of 

the four and has consistently had the 

largest numbers of bay checkerspot 

butterflies. The Kirby area had an 

estimated 700,000 individuals in 2004, 

but declined to 100,000 individuals in 

2005 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). Although still 

under private ownership, approximately 

291 ac (118 ha) of the Kirby area is 

under some form of protection or 

management for special status species, 

including the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

In addition, a 250-ac (101-ha) butterfly 

preserve is being managed by Waste 

Management Incorporated (WMI) as 

compensation for adverse effects to the 

bay checkerspot butterfly in association 

with its landfill. However, the 

protection afforded the butterfly 

preserve is not permanent, and the land 

the preserve is on is not owned by WMI. 

The Metcalf population supported an 

estimated 400,000 individuals in 2004, 

but has suffered a significant decline 

down to an estimated 45,000 

individuals in 2006 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). 

The Metcalf population is within the 

limits of the City of San Jose and is 

located on private land. The San Felipe 

population is also located on private 

lands and within the limits of the City 

of San Jose. The Service is unaware of 

any recent surveys of the San Felipe 

population; however, the population 

was estimated at 100,000 individuals in 

1999 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). The Silver 

Creek Hills population is the last of the 

four populations within the Coyote 

Ridge unit. The population was 

considered relatively large, with 

approximately 115,000 individuals in 

1993 (Weiss 2006, p. 1). This population 

was significantly affected by the 

development of a residential area and 

associated golf course (Ranch on Silver 

Creek) in the late 1990s. As a result of 

formal consultation on the Ranch on 

Silver Creek, approximately 473 ac (191 

ha) owned by William Lyon Homes 

were preserved and are being managed 

for the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

Approximately 40 adults were observed 

at the Silver Creek Preserve in 2006 

(WRA 2006, p. i). 

Unit 6: Tulare Hill 

Unit 6 consists of 747 ac (302 ha) in 

Santa Clara County. The unit is located 

in the middle of the Santa Clara Valley, 

south of San Jose, and west of the 

crossing of Metcalf Road and Highway 

101. The unit was occupied by the bay 

checkerspot butterfly at the time of 

listing and is noted as one of the 

locations occupied in Harrison et al. 

(1988, p. 362). The unit is currently 

occupied, contains all the features 

essential to the conservation of the 

subspecies, and is essential to the 

conservation of the subspecies because 

it acts as a population center and 

because it provides a dispersal corridor 

across Coyote Valley. This unit is the 

closest suitable intervening habitat 

between the Coyote Ridge core 

population and most of the other 

populations in Santa Clara County, 

primarily those on the western side of 

Coyote Valley. Hundreds of butterflies 

have been observed on the southern half 

of the unit from 2001–2006 (Weiss 2006, 

p. 1). We have determined that the longterm viability of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly in Santa Clara County depends 

on the presence of corridors for 

dispersal of adults between Coyote 

Ridge and the other units in Santa Clara 

County. Tulare Hill is an ideal location 

for such a corridor because of the 

narrowness of the valley at this location, 

the limited amount of development 

currently present, the presence of high 

elevations on the hill that may attract 

butterflies over the highways and 

developed areas, and the presence of 

suitable habitat on Tulare Hill itself. 

Migrant butterflies from either Santa 

Teresa Hills or Coyote Ridge may settle 

on Tulare Hill, contributing individuals 

to the population within this unit, and 

adults from Tulare Hill may migrate to 

the adjacent habitat areas. Public lands 

within this unit include parts of Coyote 

Creek Park, Metcalf Park, and Santa 

Teresa County Park. Roughly half of 

Tulare Hill itself is within the limits of 

the City of San Jose; the remainder is on 

private lands in unincorporated Santa 

Clara County. Approximately 114 ac (46 

ha) of the unit is currently protected 

under a conservation easement and is 

managed for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly by the Land Trust for Santa 

Clara County. The unit is bisected by 

transmission lines from Pacific Gas & 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48189 

Electric (PG&E), and the operations and 

maintenance of these lines are the 

subject of a proposed Safe Harbor 

Agreement and Habitat Conservation 

Agreement for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. 

Unit 7: Santa Teresa Hills 

Unit 7 consists of 3,987 ac (1,613 ha) 

in Santa Clara County. The unit lies 

north of Bailey Avenue, McKean Road, 

and Almaden Road; south of developed 

areas of the city of Santa Clara; and west 

of Santa Teresa Boulevard. The unit 

abuts Unit 6. This unit was not 

specifically mentioned in the listing 

rule, but an unspecified number of bay 

checkerspot butterflies were observed in 

this unit in 1988 (CNDDB 2006, p. 26). 

The unit is currently occupied (Arnold 

2007, p. 1; and H.T. Harvey and 

Associates 1998, p. 11), and contains the 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

subspecies. Further, it includes the 

largest block of undeveloped habitat 

containing all the PCEs west of U.S. 

Route 101 in Santa Clara County. In 

addition, due to the prevailing winds, 

Unit 7 may experience less air pollution 

(i.e., nitrogen and ammonia deposition) 

than the units on the east side of Coyote 

Valley. 

Unit 8: Calero Reservoir 

Unit 8 consists of 1,543 ac (624 ha) in 

Santa Clara County. The unit is south of 

McKean Road and east of the town of 

New Almaden, Almaden Road, and 

Alamitos Creek. This unit was occupied 

at the time of listing (CNDDB 2006, p. 

26), is currently occupied, and contains 

all the features essential for the 

conservation of the subspecies. The unit 

is less than 0.5 mi (0.8 km) south of Unit 

7 and 1 mi (1.6 km) east of Unit 9. It 

is also 3.3 mi (5.3 km) southwest of the 

core population in Unit 5, and this 

distance is well within the dispersal 

capabilities of the subspecies; therefore, 

Unit 8 is an important component of the 

species’ Santa Clara County 

metapopulation. The unit is comprised 

of over 1,400 ac (567 ha) of mapped 

serpentine soils on public land. The 

majority of the unit is within the Calero 

County Park and managed by Santa 

Clara County Department of Parks and 

Recreation. The remainder is owned and 

managed by the Santa Clara Valley 

Water District. 

Unit 9: Kalana Hills 

Unit 9 consists of two separate 

subunits: Subunit 9A (170 ac (69 ha)) 

and Subunit 9B (56 ac (22 ha)), totaling 

226 ac (91 ha) in Santa Clara County. 

The unit is located on the southwest 

side of the Santa Clara Valley between 

Laguna Avenue and San Bruno Avenue. 

The unit (both 9A and 9B) was occupied 

by the bay checkerspot butterfly at the 

time of listing and is noted as one of the 

locations occupied in Harrison et al. 

(1988, p. 362), and adults were again 

observed during the last survey of the 

unit in 1997 (CNDDB 2006, p. 23). The 

two subunits include four hilltop, 

serpentine outcrops, which contain all 

the features essential for the 

conservation of the species, and some 

intervening grassland. The intervening 

grassland does not contain the larval 

host plants or serpentine or similar 

soils, but does contain PCEs 1, 3, and 4 

and connects the four serpentine 

outcrops. Unit 5 lies about 2.1 mi (3.2 

km) to the northeast, Unit 7 is 1 mi (1.6 

km) to the northwest, the Unit 8 is 1 mi 

(1.6 km) to the west, and Unit 10 about 

2.2 mi (3.5 km) to the southeast. The 

essential physical and biological 

features in Unit 9 assist in maintaining 

the metapopulation dynamics of the 

subspecies by providing habitat for the 

subspecies within dispersal distance of 

adjacent or nearby critical habitat units. 

Because of its proximity to several other 

large population centers for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly, we expect the 

Kalana Hills subunits to be regularly 

occupied by the subspecies and assist in 

maintaining the metapopulation 

dynamics for the subspecies. If, as is 

possible given the bay checkerspot 

butterfly’s large population swings, the 

butterfly’s population in these subunits 

were to become extirpated, it is likely to 

be reestablished by bay checkerspot 

butterflies immigrating from adjacent 

sites. These subunits act as a ‘‘stepping 

stone’’ to adjacent or nearby units. A 

portion of the largest and northernmost 

serpentine outcrop within subunit 9A is 

within the limits of the City of San Jose; 

the remainder of the subunit is on 

private lands in unincorporated Santa 

Clara County. Subunit 9A’s northeast 

boundaries are bordered by the 

proposed Coyote Valley Specific Plan. 

Unit 10: Morgan Hill 

Unit 10 consists of 507 ac (205 ha) in 

Santa Clara County. The unit is 

northwest of the City of Morgan Hill, 

east of Willow Springs Road, and south 

of Hale Avenue. This unit was 

historically occupied in the late 1980s 

and is described in the CNDDB as an 

‘‘active site’’ (CNDDB 2006) for the 

subspecies. The unit was occupied at 

the time of listing and is noted as one 

of the locations occupied in Harrison et 

al. (1988, p. 362); adult butterflies were 

observed in the unit in 1997 (CNDDB 

2006). Unit 10 is essential to the 

conservation of the subspecies because 

it has large areas of serpentine soils and 

grassland with a variety of slope 

exposures, contains all the PCE’s, and 

serves as a ‘‘stepping stone’’ between 

the southernmost occurrences of the 

subspecies (Unit 12) and the 

populations to the north. The unit is 1.5 

mi (2.4 km) southwest Unit 5 and 2.2 mi 

(3.5 km) southeast of the Unit 9, 

provides dispersal habitat from adjacent 

critical habitat units, and provides 

habitat during years with particularly 

favorable weather conditions that 

support expanding populations of the 

bay checkerspot butterfly. This unit is 

comprised mostly of private property, a 

portion of which is within the limits of 

the City of Morgan Hill and the rest in 

unincorporated Santa Clara County. 

Murphy Springs Park, a small city park, 

is within this unit. 

Unit 11: Bear Ranch 

Unit 11 consists of 393 ac (159 ha) in 

Santa Clara County. The unit is adjacent 

to Coyote Reservoir and is entirely 

contained within the Coyote Lake—

Harvey Bear Ranch County Park. The 

bay checkerspot butterfly was known to 

occur within this unit in the mid-1970s, 

but was considered extirpated in the 

listing rule; however, bay checkerspot 

butterflies were observed in this unit in 

1994, 1997, and 1999 (CNDDB 2006, p. 

15; Launer 2000, p. 1). This unit is 

currently occupied and is the most 

southern occurrence of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly on the east side of 

Coyote Valley. Unit 11 is essential for 

the conservation of the subspecies 

because it assists in maintaining the 

metapopulation dynamics of the 

subspecies by providing adjacent or 

nearby habitat for bay checkerspot 

butterflies to disperse to or use as 

foraging or resting habitat during longer 

dispersal events. The unit contains all 

the features essential for the 

conservation of the species. This unit is 

underlined by both serpentine and 

serpentine-like soils. There are two 

patches of serpentine soils separated 

north/south by intermittent woody 

vegetation; these patches are 

surrounded by grasslands underlined by 

serpentine-like soils that provide 

adequate dispersal corridors between 

the two patches. 

Unit 12: San Martin 

Unit 12 consists of 502 ac (203 ha) in 

Santa Clara County. The unit is located 

in the western foothills of the Santa 

Clara Valley. This unit was occupied at 

the time of listing, is currently 

occupied, and contains all the features 

essential for the conservation of the 

subspecies. The unit has extensive areas 

of serpentine soils interspersed with 

grasslands that have PCEs 1, 3, 4, and 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48190 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

5. These areas are important for 

dispersal between higher-quality 

habitats within the unit that contain all 

the necessary features essential for 

conservation. The unit lies entirely on 

private lands in unincorporated Santa 

Clara County, about 4 mi (6.4 km) westsouthwest of Unit 11, 4 mi (6.4 km) 

southeast of Unit 10, and 6 mi (9.6 km) 

south of Unit 5’s core area. This unit is 

the southernmost occurrence of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. The adjacent 

Cordevalle Golf Club has purchased 

approximately 298 ac (121 ha) of 

property within the unit and has 

developed a management plan for the 

property and are currently working to 

establish a conservation easement for 

preservation as open space. A portion of 

the proposed open space, approximately 

42.3 ac (17.1 ha) will be managed to 

benefit serpentine species including the 

bay checkerspot butterfly. 

Table 3 below provides approximate 

areas (ac, ha) of lands that meet the 

definition of critical habitat but that we 

are proposing to exclude from the final 

critical habitat rule. Table 3 also 

provides our reasons for the proposed 

exclusion. 

TABLE 3.—AREA (IN ACRES (AC), HECTARES (HA)) BEING PROPOSED FOR EXCLUSION FROM THE FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT

DESIGNATION FOR THE BAY CHECKERSPOT BUTTERFLY IN SAN MATEO AND SANTA CLARA COUNTIES, CALIFORNIA

[Area estimates reflect all land within proposed critical habitat unit boundaries] 

Critical habitat unit Specific reason Land ownership Areas meeting the 

definition of critical habitat 

Area proposed for 

exclusion 

1. San Bruno Mountain, 

San Mateo County.

HCP; Amendment 5 will 

add the bay checkerspot.

Local ..................................

Private ...............................

577 ac (234 ha) ................

198 ac (80 ha) ..................

577 ac (234 ha). 

198 ac (80 ha). 

Total ........................... ........................................... ........................................... 775 ac (314 ha) ................ 775 ac (314 ha). 

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 5th and 9th 

Circuit 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, 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 the current ability for the PCEs to 

be functionally established) to serve its 

intended conservation role for the 

species. 

Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires 

Federal agencies to confer with the 

Service on any action that is likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a 

species proposed for listing or result in 

destruction or adverse modification of 

proposed critical habitat. This is a 

procedural requirement only, as any 

conservation recommendations in a 

conference report or opinion are strictly 

advisory. However, once a species 

proposed for listing becomes listed, or 

proposed critical habitat is designated 

as final, the full prohibitions of section 

7(a)(2) apply to any discretionary 

Federal action. 

The primary utility of the conference 

procedures is to allow a Federal agency 

to maximize its opportunity to 

adequately consider species proposed 

for listing and proposed critical habitat 

and to avoid potential delays in 

implementing their proposed action 

because of the section 7(a)(2) 

consultation process, if we list those 

species or designate critical habitat. We 

may conduct conferences either 

informally or formally. We typically use 

informal conferences as a means of 

providing advisory conservation 

recommendations to assist the agency in 

eliminating conflicts that the proposed 

action may cause. We typically use 

formal conferences when we or the 

Federal agency believes the proposed 

action is likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of the species 

proposed for listing or adversely modify 

proposed critical habitat. 

We generally provide the results of an 

informal conference in a conference 

report, while we provide the results of 

a formal conference in a conference 

opinion. We typically prepare 

conference opinions on proposed 

species or critical habitat in accordance 

with procedures contained at 50 CFR 

402.14, as if the proposed species were 

already listed or the proposed critical 

habitat was already designated. We may 

adopt the conference opinion as the 

biological opinion when the species is 

listed or the critical habitat is 

designated, if no substantial new 

information or changes in the proposed 

action alter the content of the opinion 

(see 50 CFR 402.10(d)). 

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 

procedural 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: 

• Can be implemented in a manner 

consistent with the intended purpose of 

the action, 

• Can be implemented consistent 

with the scope of the Federal agency’s 

legal authority and jurisdiction, 

• Are economically and 

technologically feasible, and 

• 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 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48191 

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, some 

Federal agencies may request 

reinitiation of consultation with us on 

actions for which formal consultation 

has been completed, if those actions 

may affect subsequently listed species 

or designated critical habitat. 

Federal activities that may affect the 

bay checkerspot butterfly 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 U.S. Army 

Corps of Engineers under section 404 of 

the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251 et 

seq.) or a permit from us under section 

10 of the Act) or involving some other 

Federal action (such as funding from the 

Federal Highway Administration, 

Federal Aviation Administration, or the 

Federal Emergency Management 

Agency) are also 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 ‘‘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 would retain its current 

ability for the primary constituent 

elements to be functionally established 

and maintained. 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 bay checkerspot butterfly. 

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 should result in consultation 

for the bay checkerspot butterfly 

include, but are not limited to: 

(1) Actions that would cause ground 

disturbance, including, but not limited 

to, trenching, grading, and discing. 

Ground disturbance would likely result 

in the loss of larval and adult food 

plants and in an increased mortality of 

larvae as a result of starvation. 

Individual bay checkerspot butterfly 

larvae, pupae, and eggs could be 

crushed during any of these activities. A 

reduction in adult nectar sources could 

result in reduced fecundity and 

longevity of females, and possibly 

reduced longevity of males. Ground 

disturbance may also result in a 

reduction in the number of stable holes 

and cracks that larvae use during 

diapause, which would result in an 

increased risk of predation. 

(2) Actions which would remove, 

destroy, or alter vegetation, including, 

but not limited to, changes in grazing 

regimes, prescribed burns, or other 

vegetation management strategies. These 

actions would have similar effects as 

those associated with ground 

disturbance, such as loss of larval and 

adult food plants. Prescribed burns may 

also result in direct injury or mortality 

to larvae, pupae, and eggs if conducted 

during the fall or early spring. Grazing 

is likely to result in some individual 

larvae, eggs, and pupae being trampled 

or inadvertently eaten. 

(3) Construction activities that 

destroy, degrade, or fragment critical 

habitat, such as urban and suburban 

development (i.e., subdivisions, road 

building, placement of utilities, golf 

courses, trail construction, off-road 

vehicle use, etc.) These activities could 

result in the permanent loss of habitat 

or create barriers to movement between 

patches of habitat. Construction 

activities could result in crushing of 

both larval and adult food plants as well 

as larvae, pupae, and eggs. Adults may 

be injured or killed as a result of 

collisions with vehicles. In addition, 

larvae crossing open areas of 

construction sites in search of edible 

host plants could be trampled. Urban 

development could also cause changes 

in hydrology of bay checkerspot 

butterfly habitat. The presence of 

unseasonal water could result in an 

alteration in the life cycle of larval and 

adult food plants, such that plant 

growth and blooming are out of phase 

with the life cycle of the subspecies, 

resulting in increased mortality of both 

larvae and adults. Artificially wet 

conditions may also result in an 

increase in parasites or diseases that 

could reduce larval and adult survival. 

In addition, changes in hydrology that 

result in reduced water levels in nearby 

creeks could result in increased 

mortality of adults during periods of 

prolonged spring drought. Activities 

that result in direct loss of habitat 

would also result in direct loss of 

individuals of all life stages of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. Loss of habitat 

patches that are ‘‘stepping stone’’

habitats would result in increased 

distances between other patches of 

suitable habitat and reduce the 

likelihood of distant patches being 

colonized, thus disrupting the 

metapopulation dynamics of the 

subspecies, resulting in a decrease in 

the stability of core populations and 

possible extinction of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. 

(4) Direct application on, or drift onto, 

critical habitat of pesticides, herbicides, 

fertilizers, or other chemicals or 

biological agents. Drift or runoff of 

chemicals, pesticides, and other 

biological agents could kill or injure bay 

checkerspot butterflies through direct 

toxicity or by harming their food plants. 

(5) Deposition or release onto critical 

habitat of nitrogen compounds, such as 

NOX and ammonia. Nitrogen deposition 

(i.e., NOX and ammonia), in and around 

bay checkerspot butterfly habitat would 

result in nutrient enrichment of 

serpentine and serpentine-like soils. 

This enrichment allows for the 

successful invasion of exotic and 

invasive plants, which out-compete 

native forbs and grasses, into serpentine 

grasslands, resulting in lower densities 

of larval and adult food plants. Lower 

densities of both larval and adult food 

plants would result in fewer larval and 

adult bay checkerspot butterflies. 

We consider all of the units proposed 

as revised critical habitat, as well as 

those that have been proposed for 

exclusion, to contain features essential 

to the conservation of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. All units are 

within the geographic range of the 

species, all were occupied by the 

species at the time of listing or are 

currently occupied (based on most 

recent observations made), and are 

likely to be used by the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. Federal agencies already 

consult with us on activities in areas 

currently occupied by the bay 

checkerspot butterfly, as well as 

unoccupied critical habitat units to 

ensure that their actions do not 

jeopardize the continued existence of 

the bay checkerspot butterfly or result in 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48192 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Exemptions or 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 Congressional record is clear that 

the Secretary has broad discretion 

regarding which factor(s) to use and 

how much weight to give to any factor. 

Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, 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 we consider an 

exclusion then we must determine 

whether excluding the area would result 

in the extinction of the species. 

In the following sections, we address 

a number of general issues that are 

relevant to the exclusions we have 

considered. In addition, we are 

conducting an economic analysis of the 

impacts of the proposed revised critical 

habitat designation and related factors, 

which will be available for public 

review and comment when it is 

complete. Based on public comment on 

that document, the proposed revised 

designation itself, and the information 

in the final economic analysis, the 

Secretary may exclude from critical 

habitat additional areas beyond those 

identified in this assessment under the 

provisions of section 4(b)(2) of the Act. 

This is also addressed in our 

implementing regulations at 50 CFR 

424.19. 

Portions of proposed Units 5, 6, and 

12 are currently protected or proposed 

for protection under conservation 

easements (see unit descriptions above 

for acreages). Some easements were 

established for the protection of the 

California red-legged frog (Rana aurora 

draytonii) or the California tiger 

salamander (Ambystoma californiense), 

while others were established for the 

bay checkerspot butterfly. These areas 

were considered for exclusion, but not 

proposed because some of them do not 

have management plans and some only 

provide management plans for the tiger 

salamander or the California red-legged 

frog. Those areas with conservation 

easements that specifically provide 

protection for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly were not considered for 

exclusion because the easements are not 

believed to be sufficiently funded to 

adequately deal with nonnative invasive 

plants, such as the recent invasion of 

barbed goat grass (Aegilops triuncialis). 

A conservation easement that has been 

proposed for a portion of Unit 12 has 

not been finalized and is therefore also 

not proposed for exclusion. 

Benefits of Designating Critical Habitat 

Regulatory Benefits 

The consultation provisions under 

section 7(a) of the Act constitute the 

regulatory benefits of critical habitat. As 

discussed above, Federal agencies must 

consult with us on actions that may 

affect critical habitat and must avoid 

destroying or adversely modifying 

critical habitat. Prior to our designation 

of critical habitat, Federal agencies 

consult with us on actions that may 

affect a listed species and must refrain 

from undertaking actions that are likely 

to jeopardize the continued existence of 

the species. Thus, the analysis of effects 

to critical habitat is a separate and 

different analysis from that of the effects 

to the species. Therefore, the difference 

in outcomes of these two analyses 

represents the regulatory benefit of 

critical habitat. For some species, and in 

some locations, the outcome of these 

analyses will be similar, because effects 

on habitat will often result in effects on 

the species. However, the regulatory 

standard is different: The jeopardy 

analysis looks at the action’s impact on 

survival and recovery of the species, 

while the adverse modification analysis 

looks at the action’s effects on the 

designated critical habitat’s contribution 

to the species’ conservation. This will, 

in many instances, lead to different 

results and different regulatory 

requirements. 

For 30 years prior to the Ninth Circuit 

court’s decision in Gifford Pinchot, we 

combined the jeopardy standard with 

the standard for destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat when 

evaluating Federal actions that affected 

currently occupied critical habitat. 

However, the court ruled that the two 

standards are distinct and that adverse 

modification evaluations require 

consideration of impacts on species 

recovery. Thus, critical habitat 

designations may provide greater 

benefits to the recovery of a species than 

would listing alone. 

There are two limitations to the 

regulatory effect of critical habitat. First, 

a consultation is required only where 

there is a Federal nexus (an action 

authorized, funded, or carried out by 

any Federal agency)—if there is no 

Federal nexus, designation itself does 

not restrict actions that destroy or 

adversely modify critical habitat. 

Second, the designation only limits 

destruction or adverse modification. By 

its nature, the prohibition on adverse 

modification is designed to ensure no 

degradation of those areas that contain 

the physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species or of unoccupied areas that are 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. Critical habitat designation 

alone, however, does not require 

specific steps toward recovery. 

Once an agency determines that 

consultation under section 7 of the Act 

is necessary, the process may conclude 

informally when we concur in writing 

that the proposed Federal action is not 

likely to adversely affect critical habitat. 

However, if we determine through 

informal consultation that adverse 

impacts are likely to occur, then we 

would initiate formal consultation, 

which would conclude when we issue 

a biological opinion on whether the 

proposed Federal action is likely to 

result in destruction or adverse 

modification of critical habitat. 

For critical habitat, a biological 

opinion that concludes in a 

determination of no destruction or 

adverse modification may contain 

discretionary conservation 

recommendations to minimize adverse 

effects to primary constituent elements, 

but it would not suggest the 

implementation of any reasonable and 

prudent alternative. We suggest 

reasonable and prudent alternatives to 

the proposed Federal action only when 

our biological opinion results in an 

adverse modification conclusion. 

We believe that in many instances the 

regulatory benefit of critical habitat is 

low when compared to voluntary 

conservation efforts or management 

plans. The conservation achieved 

through implementing HCPs or other 

habitat management plans can be greater 

than what we achieve through multiple 

site-by-site, project-by-project, section 7 

consultations involving consideration of 

critical habitat. Such habitat 

management plans may commit 

resources to implement long-term 

management and protection to 

particular habitat for at least one and 

possibly additional listed or sensitive 

species. Section 7 consultations commit 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48193 

Federal agencies to preventing adverse 

modification of critical habitat caused 

by the particular project only, and not 

to providing conservation or long-term 

benefits to areas not affected by the 

proposed project. Thus, any HCP or 

other habitat management plan that 

considers enhancement or recovery as 

the management standard may often 

provide as much or more benefit than a 

consultation for critical habitat 

designation conducted under the 

standards required by the Ninth Circuit 

in the Gifford Pinchot decision. 

In providing the framework for the 

consultation process, the previous 

section applies to all the following 

discussions of benefits of inclusion or 

exclusion of critical habitat. 

Educational Benefits 

A benefit of including lands in critical 

habitat is that designation of critical 

habitat serves to educate landowners, 

state and local governments, and the 

public regarding the potential 

conservation value of an area. This 

helps focus and promote conservation 

efforts by other parties by clearly 

delineating areas of high conservation 

value for the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

In general, critical habitat designation 

always has educational benefits; 

however, in some cases, they may be 

redundant with other educational 

efforts. For example, HCPs have 

significant public input and may largely 

duplicate the educational benefits of a 

critical habitat designation. A second 

benefit of including lands in critical 

habitat is that the designation of critical 

habitat would inform state agencies and 

local governments about areas that 

could be conserved under state laws or 

local ordinances. 

The information provided in the 

previous section applies to all the 

following discussions of benefits of 

inclusion or exclusion of critical habitat. 

Recovery Benefits 

The process of designating critical 

habitat as described in the Act requires 

that the Service identify those lands on 

which are found the physical or 

biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection. In 

identifying those lands, the Service 

must consider the recovery needs of the 

species, such that the habitat that is 

identified, if managed, could provide for 

the survival and recovery of the species. 

Furthermore, once critical habitat has 

been designated, Federal agencies must 

consult with the Service under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act to ensure that their 

actions will not adversely modify 

designated critical habitat or jeopardize 

the continued existence of the species. 

As noted in the Ninth Circuit’s Gifford 

Pinchot decision, the Court ruled that 

the jeopardy and adverse modification 

standards are distinct, and that adverse 

modification evaluations require 

consideration of impacts to the recovery 

of species. Thus, through the section 

7(a)(2) consultation process, critical 

habitat designations provide recovery 

benefits to species by ensuring that 

Federal actions will not destroy or 

adversely modify designated critical 

habitat. 

It is beneficial to identify those lands 

that are necessary for the conservation 

of the species and that, if properly 

managed, would further recovery 

measures for the species, which is 

beneficial. The process of proposing and 

finalizing a critical habitat rule provides 

the Service with the opportunity to 

determine which lands are essential for 

conservation of the species, as well as 

allowing for the identification of the 

primary constituent elements or features 

essential for conservation of the species 

on those lands. The designation process 

includes peer review and public 

comment on the identified features and 

lands proposed for designation and/or 

exclusion. This process is valuable to 

land owners and managers in 

developing conservation management 

plans for identified lands, as well as any 

other occupied habitat or other suitable 

habitat that may not have been included 

in the Service’s determination of 

essential habitat. 

However, the designation of critical 

habitat does not require that any 

management or recovery actions take 

place on the lands included in the 

designation. Even in cases where 

consultation has been initiated under 

section 7(a)(2) of the Act, the end result 

of consultation is to avoid jeopardy to 

the species and/or adverse modification 

of its critical habitat, but not per se to 

manage remaining lands or institute 

recovery actions on remaining lands. 

Conversely, management plans institute 

proactive actions over the lands they 

encompass and are put in place to 

remove or reduce known threats to a 

species or its habitat and therefore 

implement recovery actions. We believe 

that the movement towards the 

conservation of a species and/or its 

habitat that could be achieved through 

the designation of critical habitat, in 

some cases, is less than the movement 

towards conservation that could be 

achieved through the implementation of 

a management plan, which includes 

species-specific provisions and 

considers enhancement or recovery of 

listed species as the management 

standard over the same lands. 

Consequently, implementation of any 

HCP or management plan that considers 

enhancement or recovery as the 

management standard will often provide 

as much or more benefit than a 

consultation for critical habitat 

designation conducted under the 

standards required by the Ninth Circuit 

in the Gifford Pinchot decision. 

The information provided in the 

previous section applies to all the 

following discussions of benefits of 

inclusion or exclusion of critical habitat. 

Conservation Partnerships on NonFederal Lands 

Most federally listed species in the 

United States will not recover without 

the cooperation of non-Federal 

landowners. More than 60 percent of the 

United States is privately owned 

(National Wilderness Institute 1995, p. 

2), and at least 80 percent of endangered 

or threatened species occur either 

partially or solely on private lands 

(Crouse et al. 2002, p. 720). Stein et al. 

(1995, p. 400) found that only about 12 

percent of listed species were found 

almost exclusively on Federal lands (90 

to 100 percent of their known 

occurrences restricted to Federal lands) 

and that 50 percent of federally listed 

species are not known to occur on 

Federal lands at all. 

Given the distribution of listed 

species with respect to land ownership, 

conservation of listed species in many 

parts of the United States is dependent 

upon working partnerships with a wide 

variety of entities and the voluntary 

cooperation of many non-Federal 

landowners (Wilcove and Chen 1998, p. 

1407; Crouse et al. 2002, p. 720; James 

2002, p. 271). Building partnerships and 

promoting voluntary cooperation of 

landowners are essential to our 

understanding the status of species on 

non-Federal lands, and necessary for us 

to implement recovery actions such as 

reintroducing listed species and 

restoring and protecting habitat. 

Many non-Federal landowners derive 

satisfaction from contributing to 

endangered species recovery. We 

promote these private-sector efforts 

through the Department of the Interior’s 

Cooperative Conservation philosophy. 

Conservation agreements with nonFederal landowners (HCPs, safe harbor 

agreements, other conservation 

agreements, easements, and State and 

local regulations) enhance species 

conservation by extending species 

protections beyond those available 

through section 7 consultations. In the 

past decade, we have encouraged nonFederal landowners to enter into 

conservation agreements, based on the 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48194 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

view that we can achieve greater species 

conservation on non-Federal land 

through such partnerships than we can 

through regulatory methods (61 FR 

63854; December 2, 1996). 

Many private landowners, however, 

are wary of the possible consequences of 

attracting endangered species to their 

property. Mounting evidence suggests 

that some regulatory actions by the 

Federal Government, while wellintentioned and required by law, can 

(under certain circumstances) have 

unintended negative consequences for 

the conservation of species on private 

lands (Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 5–6; 

Bean 2002, pp. 2–3; Conner and 

Mathews 2002, pp. 1–2; James 2002, pp. 

270–271; Koch 2002, pp. 2–3; Brook et 

al. 2003, pp. 1639–1643). Many 

landowners fear a decline in their 

property value due to real or perceived 

restrictions on land-use options where 

threatened or endangered species are 

found. Consequently, harboring 

endangered species is viewed by many 

landowners as a liability. This 

perception results in anti-conservation 

incentives because maintaining habitats 

that harbor endangered species 

represents a risk to future economic 

opportunities (Main et al. 1999, pp. 

1264–1265; Brook et al. 2003, pp. 1644–

1648). 

According to some researchers, the 

designation of critical habitat on private 

lands significantly reduces the 

likelihood that landowners will support 

and carry out conservation actions 

(Main et al. 1999, p. 1263; Bean 2002, 

p. 2; Brook et al. 2003, pp. 1644–1648). 

The magnitude of this negative outcome 

is greatly amplified in situations where 

active management measures (such as 

reintroduction, fire management, and 

control of invasive species) are 

necessary for species conservation (Bean 

2002, pp. 3–4). We believe that the 

judicious use of excluding specific areas 

of non-federally owned lands from 

critical habitat designations can 

contribute to species recovery and 

provide a superior level of conservation 

than critical habitat alone. 

The purpose of designating critical 

habitat is to contribute to the 

conservation of threatened and 

endangered species and the ecosystems 

upon which they depend. The outcome 

of the designation, triggering regulatory 

requirements for actions funded, 

authorized, or carried out by Federal 

agencies under section 7 of the Act, can 

sometimes be counterproductive to its 

intended purpose on non-Federal lands. 

Thus the benefits of excluding areas that 

are covered by effective partnerships or 

other conservation commitments can 

often be high. 

Benefits of Excluding Lands With 

Approved Management Plans 

The benefits of excluding lands with 

approved long-term management plans 

from critical habitat designation include 

relieving landowners, communities, and 

counties of any additional regulatory 

burden that might be imposed by a 

critical habitat designation. Most HCPs 

and other conservation plans take many 

years to develop and, upon completion, 

are consistent with the recovery 

objectives for listed species that are 

covered within the plan area. Many 

conservation plans also provide 

conservation benefits to unlisted 

sensitive species. Imposing an 

additional regulatory review as a result 

of the designation of critical habitat may 

undermine these conservation efforts 

and partnerships designed to 

proactively protect species to ensure 

that listing under the Act will not be 

necessary. Designation of critical habitat 

within the boundaries of management 

plans that provide conservation 

measures for a species could be viewed 

as a disincentive to those entities 

currently developing these plans or 

contemplating them in the future, 

because one of the incentives for 

undertaking conservation is greater ease 

of permitting where listed species will 

be affected. Addition of a new 

regulatory requirement would remove a 

significant incentive for undertaking the 

time and expense of management 

planning. In fact, designating critical 

habitat in areas covered by a pending 

HCP or conservation plan could result 

in the loss of some species’ benefits if 

participants abandon the planning 

process, in part because of the strength 

of the perceived additional regulatory 

compliance that such designation would 

entail. The time and cost of regulatory 

compliance for a critical habitat 

designation do not have to be quantified 

for them to be perceived as additional 

Federal regulatory burden sufficient to 

discourage continued participation in 

plans targeting listed species’

conservation. 

A related benefit of excluding lands 

within management plans from critical 

habitat designation is the unhindered, 

continued ability it gives us to seek new 

partnerships with future plan 

participants including States, counties, 

local jurisdictions, conservation 

organizations, and private landowners, 

which together can implement 

conservation actions that we would be 

unable to accomplish otherwise. If lands 

within approved management plan 

areas are designated as critical habitat, 

it would likely have a negative effect on 

our ability to establish new partnerships 

to develop these plans, particularly 

plans that address landscape-level 

conservation of species and habitats. By 

preemptively excluding these lands, we 

preserve our current partnerships and 

encourage additional conservation 

actions in the future. 

Furthermore, both HCP and Natural 

Community Conservation Planning 

(NCCP) HCP applications require a 

consultation, which would review the 

effects of all HCP-covered activities that 

might adversely impact the species 

under a jeopardy standard, including 

possibly significant habitat modification 

(see definition of ‘‘harm’’ at 50 CFR 

17.3), even without the critical habitat 

designation. In addition, Federal actions 

not covered by the HCP in areas 

occupied by listed species would still 

require consultation under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act, and we would review 

these actions for possibly significant 

habitat modification, in accordance with 

the definition of harm referenced above. 

The information provided in the 

previous section applies to all the 

following discussions of benefits of 

inclusion or exclusion of critical habitat. 

Proposed Exclusions Under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act 

After consideration under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act, we are proposing to 

exclude the following area of habitat 

from final revised critical habitat for the 

bay checkerspot butterfly: Lands 

covered under the San Bruno Mountain 

Habitat Conservation Plan. We believe 

that the lands’ value for conservation 

has been addressed by existing 

protective actions and is appropriate for 

exclusion under the provisions of 

section 4(b)(2). We specifically solicit 

comment, however, on the proposed 

exclusion of these areas. A detailed 

analysis of our proposed exclusion of 

these lands under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act is provided in the paragraphs that 

follow. 

Habitat Conservation Plan Lands—

Exclusions Under Section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act 

We consider a current plan to provide 

adequate management or protection if it 

meets the following criteria: (1) The 

plan is complete and provides the same 

or better level of protection from 

adverse modification or destruction 

than that provided through a 

consultation under section 7(a)(2) of the 

Act; (2) there is a reasonable expectation 

that the conservation management 

strategies and actions will be 

implemented based on past practices, 

written guidance, or regulations; and (3) 

the plan provides conservation 

strategies and measures consistent with 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48195 

currently accepted principles of 

conservation biology. We believe that 

the plan described below fulfills these 

criteria, and we are considering the 

exclusion from critical habitat of nonFederal lands covered by this plan that 

provide for the conservation of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. We are requesting 

comments on the benefit to the bay 

checkerspot butterfly from conservation 

measures established by the San Bruno 

Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan. 

San Bruno Mountain Habitat 

Conservation Plan (SBMHCP) 

The SBMHCP was originally 

completed in November 1982, and we 

issued a 30-year section 10(a)(1)(B) 

permit to the permittees on March 4, 

1983. The permit (PRT 2–9818) expires 

on March 4, 2013, unless it is renewed 

(Jones and Stokes 2007, p. 1–2). San 

Bruno Mountain is located on the 

northern end of the San Francisco 

Peninsula, south of the San Mateo-San 

Francisco County line, and is bordered 

to the north by Daly City, to the east by 

the City of Brisbane, to the south by the 

City of South San Francisco, and to the 

west by the City of Colma. The SBMHCP 

is comprised of 3,600 ac (1,457 ha) of 

which approximately 3,500 ac (1,416 

ha) are open space. To date, there have 

been four amendments to the SBMHCP. 

Amendment five is currently in 

development with a draft expected to be 

published in the Federal Register near 

the end of 2007 or early 2008. We 

expect a finalized amendment in 2008. 

Participants in Amendment five of the 

SBMHCP include the City of Brisbane 

and the County of San Mateo. The 

existing incidental take permit covers 

3,380 ac (1,368 ha) of San Bruno 

Mountain and includes the following 

species: Mission blue butterfly, San 

Bruno elfin butterfly, and San Francisco 

garter snake (Thamnophis sirtalis 

tetrataenia) (Jones and Stokes 2007, p. 

1–2). Unit 1 of proposed revised critical 

habitat is completely contained within 

the SBMHCP, with the majority of Unit 

1 in San Bruno Mountain County Park. 

Amendment five would add the bay 

checkerspot butterfly and Callippe 

silverspot butterfly to the incidental 

take permit of the SBMHCP and would 

reconfigure the development plan on 

the Northwest Ridge to allow take of 

covered species on approximately 26 ac 

(11 ha) on the Northwest Ridge. 

Amendment five would also increase 

funding for management and monitoring 

activities throughout the Mountain with 

the establishment of an endowment. 

The Northeast Ridge covers 228 ac (92 

ha) located in the northeast corner of 

San Bruno Mountain. The majority, 

approximately 90 percent, of the site is 

annual grassland, while the surrounding 

land use includes single-family 

neighborhoods across Guadalupe 

Canyon Parkway to the north, 

undeveloped open space to the east, 

multi-family residential development to 

the south, and the State and County 

Park to the west (Jones and Stokes 2007, 

p. 2–3). The Northeast Ridge does not 

include areas historically occupied by 

the bay checkerspot butterfly. 

Amendment five to the SBMHCP 

includes proposed and ongoing 

conservation actions designed to benefit 

both the bay checkerspot butterfly and 

Callippe silverspot butterfly. 

Conservation actions include: (1) 

Vegetation management (i.e., prescribed 

fire, herbicide application, mowing, and 

grazing); (2) replanting and restoration; 

and (3) monitoring. The Service expects 

Amendment five will provide 

substantial protection for all of the 

primary constituent elements (PCEs) for 

the bay checkerspot butterfly, and that 

protected lands will receive the special 

management required through funding 

mechanisms that will be implemented 

under Amendment five of the SBMHCP. 

Benefits of Inclusion 

The primary benefit to designation of 

critical habitat is the requirement that 

federal agencies consult with the 

Service to ensure that their actions are 

not likely to result in the destruction or 

adverse modification of critical habitat. 

If critical habitat were designated in this 

area, PCEs in the area would be 

protected from destruction or adverse 

modification by federal actions using a 

conservation standard based on the 

Ninth Circuit’s decision in Gifford 

Pinchot. This requirement would be in 

addition to the requirement that 

proposed Federal actions would not be 

likely to jeopardize the species’

continued existence. However, since the 

SBMHCP area is not currently occupied 

by the species, consultation for 

activities that may adversely affect the 

bay checkerspot butterfly, including 

possibly significant habitat modification 

(see definition of ‘‘harm’’ at 50 CFR 

17.3) would not be required under 

section 7. Therefore, inclusion of 

portions of the SBMHCP in critical 

habitat would require consultation if 

Federal actions would result in adverse 

modification of critical habitat. 

As discussed above, Amendment five 

of the SBMHCP is expected to provide 

substantial protection of the PCEs and 

special management of essential habitat 

for the bay checkerspot butterfly on 

SBMHCP conservation lands. We expect 

the SBMHCP to provide a greater level 

of management for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly on private lands than would 

designation of critical habitat on private 

lands because the management activities 

associated with the addition of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly and Callippe 

silverspot butterfly within the SBMHCP 

will improve habitat for both species 

within the SBMHCP. Moreover, 

inclusion of these non-Federal lands as 

critical habitat would not necessitate 

additional management and 

conservation activities that would 

exceed the approved SBMHCP and its 

implementing agreement. As a result, 

we do not anticipate that any action on 

these lands would destroy or adversely 

modify the areas proposed as revised 

critical habitat. Therefore, we do not 

expect that including those areas in the 

final designation would lead to any 

changes to actions on the conservation 

lands to avoid destroying or adversely 

modifying that habitat. 

A benefit of including an area in 

critical habitat is the education of 

landowners and the public regarding the 

potential conservation value of these 

areas. The inclusion of an area in 

critical habitat may focus and contribute 

to conservation efforts by other parties 

by clearly delineating areas of high 

conservation values for certain species. 

However, we believe that this 

conservation benefit has largely been 

achieved for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly through listing of the species, 

the previous critical habitat designation, 

and the ongoing preparation of the 

Santa Clara County HCP. 

Benefits of Exclusion 

The benefits of excluding lands 

within HCPs from critical habitat 

designation include relieving 

landowners, communities, and counties 

of any additional regulatory burden that 

might be imposed by a critical habitat 

designation. Many HCPs, particularly 

large regional HCPs, take many years to 

develop and, upon completion, become 

regional conservation plans that are 

consistent with the recovery objectives 

for listed species that are covered within 

the plan area. In fact, designating 

critical habitat in areas covered by a 

pending HCP could result in the loss of 

species’ benefits if participants abandon 

the voluntary HCP process, in part 

because of the strength of the perceived 

additional regulatory compliance that 

such designation would entail. The time 

and cost of regulatory compliance for a 

critical habitat designation do not have 

to be quantified for them to be perceived 

as additional Federal regulatory burden 

sufficient to discourage continued 

voluntary participation in plans 

targeting the conservation of listed 

species. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48196 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

Furthermore, an HCP application 

must itself be consulted upon. Such a 

consultation would review the effects of 

all activities covered by the HCP that 

may adversely affect the species, 

including possibly significant habitat 

modification (see definition of ‘‘harm’’

at 50 CFR 17.3), even without the 

critical habitat designation. In addition, 

Federal actions not covered by the HCP 

in areas occupied by listed species 

would still require consultation under 

section 7 of the Act and would be 

reviewed for possibly significant habitat 

modification in accordance with the 

definition of harm referenced above. 

This standard also would apply to all 

consultation conducted in the interim 

period prior to finalization of an HCP, 

whether incidental take exemption is 

provided under section 7 or section 10 

of the Act. 

Benefits of Exclusion Outweigh Benefits 

of Inclusion 

We have reviewed and evaluated the 

conservation measures identified in the 

SBMHCP. Based on this evaluation, we 

currently find that the benefits of 

exclusion of the lands essential to the 

conservation of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly in the planning area for the 

SBMHCP outweigh the benefits of 

including Unit 1 in our final critical 

habitat designation. Our final 

determination will be made after we 

receive public comment on this 

proposed revised critical habitat 

designation. 

The exclusion of these lands from 

critical habitat will help preserve the 

partnerships that we have developed 

with local jurisdictions and project 

proponents in the development of the 

SBMHCP. The educational benefits of 

critical habitat, including informing the 

public of areas that are essential for the 

long-term conservation of the species, 

are still accomplished from material 

provided on our Web site and through 

public notice and comment procedures 

required to establish the Santa Clara 

County HCP. The public also has been 

informed through the public 

participation that occurs during the 

development of each amendment to the 

SBMHCP. For these reasons, we believe 

that designating critical habitat has little 

benefit in areas covered by the 

SBMHCP. 

Exclusion Will Not Result in Extinction 

of the Species 

We believe that exclusion of these 

lands would not result in the extinction 

of the bay checkerspot butterfly as: 

(1) The area is not currently occupied; 

(2) The lands Unit 1 are in are within 

the boundaries of the SBMHCP; and 

(3) Ongoing and new conservation 

measures designed for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly and Callippe 

silverspot butterfly will enhance and 

protect the majority of habitat for the 

bay checkerspot butterfly on San Bruno 

Mountain. 

Actions that may adversely affect the 

subspecies within Unit 1 are expected to 

be covered under the SBMHCP. In 

addition, if the bay checkerspot 

butterfly becomes established within 

Unit 1, it will be protected from take 

under section 9 of the Act. The 

exclusion leaves these protections 

unchanged from those that would exist 

if the excluded areas were to be 

designated as critical habitat. 

Critical habitat is being proposed for 

the bay checkerspot butterfly in other 

areas that will be accorded the 

protection from adverse modification by 

Federal actions using the conservation 

standard based on the Ninth Circuit 

decision in Gifford Pinchot. 

Additionally, the subspecies occurs on 

lands protected and managed either 

explicitly for the subspecies or 

indirectly through more general 

objectives to protect natural values; this 

factor, in concert with the other 

protections provided under the Act for 

these lands absent designation of critical 

habitat and in concert with protections 

afforded the species by the other lands 

proposed for designation as critical 

habitat, leads us to find that exclusion 

of these lands would not result in 

extinction of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. We do not believe that this 

exclusion would result in the extinction 

of the subspecies because the SBMHCP 

will: (1) Preserve approximately 3,500 

ac (1,416 ha) of open space, which 

includes the vast majority of bay 

checkerspot butterfly habitat within the 

SBMHCP; (2) incorporate a range of 

habitat management and enhancement 

measures; and (3) include a monitoring 

program for several listed butterfly 

species including the bay checkerspot 

butterfly. 

Economics 

An analysis of the economic impacts 

of proposing revised critical habitat for 

the bay checkerspot butterfly is being 

prepared. We will announce the 

availability of the draft economic 

analysis as soon as it is completed, at 

which time we will seek public review 

and comment. When completed, copies 

of the draft economic analysis will be 

available for downloading from the 

Internet at http://www.fws.gov/ 

sacramento/, or by contacting the 

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office 

directly (see ADDRESSES). 

Peer Review 

In accordance with our joint policy 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we are 

obtaining the expert opinions of at least 

three appropriate and independent 

specialists regarding this proposed rule. 

The purpose of peer review is to ensure 

that our proposed revised critical 

habitat designation is based on 

scientifically sound data, assumptions, 

and analyses. We will send copies of 

this proposed rule to these peer 

reviewers immediately following 

publication in the Federal Register. We 

will invite these peer reviewers to 

comment during the public comment 

period on the specific assumptions and 

conclusions regarding the proposed 

designation of revised critical habitat. 

We will consider all comments and 

information received during the 

comment period on this proposed rule 

during preparation of a final 

rulemaking. Accordingly, the final 

decision may differ from this proposal. 

Public Hearings 

The Act provides for one or more 

public hearings on this proposal, if we 

receive any requests for hearings. We 

must receive your request for a public 

hearing within 45 days after the date of 

this publication in the Federal Register. 

Send your request to the person named 

in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section. We will schedule 

public hearings on this proposal, if any 

are requested, and announce the dates, 

times, and places of those hearings in 

the Federal Register and local 

newspapers at least 15 days before the 

first hearing. 

Clarity of the Rule 

Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review) requires each 

agency to write regulations and notices 

that are easy to understand. We invite 

your comments on how to make this 

proposed rule easier to understand, 

including answers to questions such as 

the following: (1) Are the requirements 

in the proposed rule clearly stated? (2) 

Does the proposed rule contain 

technical jargon that interferes with the 

clarity? (3) Does the format of the 

proposed rule (grouping and order of 

the sections, use of headings, 

paragraphing, and so forth) aid or 

reduce its clarity? (4) Is the description 

of the notice in the SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION section of the preamble 

helpful in understanding the proposed 

rule? (5) What else could we do to make 

this proposed rule easier to understand? 

Send a copy of any comments on how 

we could make this proposed rule easier 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48197 

to understand to: Office of Regulatory 

Affairs, Department of the Interior, 

Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW., 

Washington, DC 20240. You may e-mail 

your comments to this address: 

Exsec@ios.doi.gov. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12866, this document is a significant 

rule in that it may raise novel legal and 

policy issues, but it is not anticipated to 

have an annual effect on the economy 

of $100 million or more or affect the 

economy in a material way. Due to the 

tight timeline for publication in the 

Federal Register, the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has not 

formally reviewed this rule. We are 

preparing a draft economic analysis of 

this proposed action, which will be 

available for public comment, to 

determine the economic consequences 

of designating the specific area as 

critical habitat. This economic analysis 

also will be used to determine 

compliance with Executive Order 

12866, Regulatory Flexibility Act, Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act, Executive Order 12630, 

Executive Order 13211, and Executive 

Order 12875. 

Further, Executive Order 12866 

directs Federal agencies promulgating 

regulations to evaluate regulatory 

alternatives (Office of Management and 

Budget, Circular A–4, September 17, 

2003). Pursuant to Circular A–4, once it 

has been determined that the Federal 

regulatory action is appropriate, then 

the agency will need to consider 

alternative regulatory approaches. Since 

the determination of critical habitat is a 

statutory requirement under the Act, we 

must then evaluate alternative 

regulatory approaches, where feasible, 

when promulgating a designation of 

critical habitat. 

In developing our designations of 

critical habitat, we consider economic 

impacts, impacts to national security, 

and other relevant impacts under 

section 4(b)(2) of the Act. Based on the 

discretion allowable under this 

provision, we may exclude any 

particular area from the designation of 

critical habitat providing that the 

benefits of such exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of specifying the area as critical 

habitat and that such exclusion would 

not result in the extinction of the 

subspecies. As such, we believe that the 

evaluation of the inclusion or exclusion 

of particular areas, or combination of 

both, constitutes our regulatory 

alternative analysis. 

Within these areas, the types of 

Federal actions or authorized activities 

that we have identified as potential 

concerns are listed above in the section 

on Section 7 Consultation. The 

availability of the draft economic 

analysis will be announced in the 

Federal Register and in local 

newspapers so that it is available for 

public review and comments. At that 

time the draft economic analysis will be 

available from the Internet Web site at 

http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/ or by 

contacting the Sacramento Fish and 

Wildlife Office directly (see ADDRESSES). 

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

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

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

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 1996), 

whenever an agency is required to 

publish a notice of rulemaking for any 

proposed or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effects of the rule on small 

entities (small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of the agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. The SBREFA amended the 

Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) to 

require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of the factual basis for 

certifying that the rule will not have a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

At this time, the Service lacks the 

available economic information 

necessary to provide an adequate factual 

basis for the required RFA finding. 

Therefore, the RFA finding is deferred 

until completion of the draft economic 

analysis prepared under section 4(b)(2) 

of the Act and Executive Order 12866. 

This draft economic analysis will 

provide the required factual basis for the 

RFA finding. Upon completion of the 

draft economic analysis, the Service will 

publish a notice of availability of the 

draft economic analysis of the proposed 

revised designation and reopen the 

public comment period for the proposed 

revised designation. The Service will 

include with the notice of availability, 

as appropriate, an initial regulatory 

flexibility analysis or a certification that 

the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities accompanied 

by the factual basis for that 

determination. The Service has 

concluded that deferring the RFA 

finding until completion of the draft 

economic analysis is necessary to meet 

the purposes and requirements of the 

RFA. Deferring the RFA finding in this 

manner will ensure that the Service 

makes a sufficiently informed 

determination based on adequate 

economic information and provides the 

necessary opportunity for public 

comment. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501), 

the Service makes the following 

findings: 

(a) 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 tribal governments’’

with two exceptions. It excludes ‘‘a 

condition of Federal assistance.’’ It also 

excludes ‘‘a duty arising from 

participation in a voluntary Federal 

program,’’ unless the regulation ‘‘relates 

to a then-existing Federal program 

under which $500,000,000 or more is 

provided annually to State, local, and 

tribal governments under entitlement 

authority,’’ if the provision would 

‘‘increase the stringency of conditions of 

assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps upon, or 

otherwise decrease, the Federal 

Government’s responsibility to provide 

funding,’’ and the State, local, or Tribal 

governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust 

accordingly. At the time of enactment, 

these entitlement programs were: 

Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child 

Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services 

Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation 

State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption 

Assistance, and Independent Living; 

Family Support Welfare Services; and 

Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal 

private sector mandate’’ includes a 

regulation that ‘‘would impose an 

enforceable duty upon the private 

sector, except (i) a condition of Federal 

assistance or (ii) a duty arising from 

participation in a voluntary Federal 

program.’’

The designation of critical habitat 

does not impose a legally binding duty 

on non-Federal government entities or 

private parties. Under the Act, the only 

regulatory effect is that Federal agencies 

must ensure that their actions do not 

destroy or adversely modify critical 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48198 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

habitat under section 7. While nonFederal 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 on to State 

governments. 

(b) Due to current public knowledge 

of the species’ protection, the 

prohibition against take of the species 

both within and outside of the 

designated areas, the fact that the 

majority of the areas are already 

designated as critical habitat, and the 

fact that critical habitat provides no 

incremental restrictions, we do not 

anticipate that this rule will 

significantly or uniquely affect small 

governments. As such, Small 

Government Agency Plan is not 

required. However, we will further 

evaluate this issue as we conduct our 

economic analysis and revise this 

assessment if appropriate. 

Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

an Executive Order (E.O. 13211; Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. Executive Order 

13211 requires agencies to prepare 

Statements of Energy Effects when 

undertaking certain actions. While this 

proposed rule to designate revised 

critical habitat for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly is a significant regulatory 

action under Executive Order 12866 in 

that it may raise novel legal and policy 

issues, it 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. 

However, we will, further evaluate this 

issue as we conduct our economic 

analysis and review and revise this 

assessment as warranted. 

Takings 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12630 (‘‘Government Actions and 

Interference with Constitutionally 

Protected Private Property Rights’’), we 

have analyzed the potential takings 

implications of designating revised 

critical habitat for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly in a takings implications 

assessment. The takings implications 

assessment concludes that this proposed 

revised designation of critical habitat for 

the bay checkerspot butterfly does not 

pose significant takings implications. 

However, we will, further evaluate this 

issue as we conduct our economic 

analysis and review and revise this 

assessment as warranted. 

Federalism 

In accordance with Executive Order 

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 

proposed revised critical habitat 

designation with appropriate State 

resource agencies in California. The 

designation of critical habitat in areas 

currently occupied by the bay 

checkerspot butterfly imposes no 

additional restrictions to those currently 

in place and, therefore, has 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 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. 

While making this definition and 

identification does not alter where and 

what federally sponsored activities may 

occur, it may assist these local 

governments in long-range planning 

(rather than having the government wait 

for case-by-case section 7 consultations 

to occur). 

Civil Justice Reform 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988 (Civil Justice Reform), the Office 

of the Solicitor has determined that this 

rule does not unduly burden the judicial 

system and meets the requirements of 

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

We have proposed revised critical 

habitat in accordance with the 

provisions of the Act. This proposed 

rule uses standard property descriptions 

and identifies the PCEs within the 

designated areas to assist the public in 

understanding the habitat needs of the 

bay checkerspot butterfly. 

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. This rule will not 

impose recordkeeping or reporting 

requirements on State or local 

governments, individuals, businesses, or 

organizations. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 

It is our position that, outside the 

jurisdiction of the Tenth Federal Circuit, 

we do not need to prepare 

environmental analyses as defined by 

the NEPA in connection with 

designating critical habitat under the 

Act. We published a notice outlining 

our reasons for this determination in the 

Federal Register on October 25, 1983 

(48 FR 49244). This assertion was 

upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of 

Appeals (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 

F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. Ore. 1995), cert. 

denied 116 S. Ct. 698 (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), Executive 

Order 13175, and the Department of 

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 have determined that there are no 

tribal lands occupied at the time of 

listing that contain the features essential 

for the conservation, and no Tribal 

lands that are unoccupied areas that are 

essential for the conservation, of the bay 

checkerspot butterfly. Therefore, revised 

critical habitat for the bay checkerspot 

butterfly has not been proposed on 

Tribal lands. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this proposed rulemaking is available 

upon request from the Field Supervisor, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48199 

Sacramento Fish and Wildlife Office 

(see ADDRESSES). 

Author(s) 

The primary author of this package is 

the Sacramento Fish and Wildlife 

Office. 

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17 

Endangered and threatened species, 

Exports, Imports, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, 

Transportation. 

Proposed Regulation Promulgation 

Accordingly, we propose to amend 

part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 

50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, 

as set forth below: 

PART 17—[AMENDED] 

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. 

2. In § 17.95(i), revise the entry for 

‘‘Bay checkerspot butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha bayensis)’’ to read as follows: 

§ 17.95 Critical habitat—wildlife. 

* * * * * 

(i) Insects. 

* * * * * 

Bay Checkerspot Butterfly (Euphydryas 

editha bayensis) 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties, 

California, on the maps below. 

(2) The primary constituent elements 

of critical habitat for the bay 

checkerspot butterfly are the habitat 

components that provide: 

(i) The presence of annual or 

perennial grasslands with little to no 

overstory that provide north/south and 

east/west slopes with a tilt of more than 

7 degrees for larval host plant survival 

during periods of atypical weather (e.g., 

drought). Common grassland species 

include wild oats (Avena fatua), soft 

chess (Bromus hordeaceus), California 

oatgrass (Danthonia californica), purple 

needlegrass (Nassella pulchra), and 

Idaho fescue (Festuca idahoensis); less 

abundant in these grasslands are annual 

and perennial forbs such as filaree 

(Erodium botrys), true clovers (Trifolium 

sp.), dwarf plantain (Plantago erecta), 

and turkey mullein (Croton setigerus). 

(ii) The presence of the primary larval 

host plant, dwarf plantain (Plantago 

erecta) and at least one of the secondary 

host plants, purple owl’s-clover 

(Castilleja densiflora) or exserted 

paintbrush (Castilleja exserta), are 

required for reproduction, feeding, and 

larval development. 

(iii) The presence of adult nectar 

sources for feeding. Common nectar 

sources include desertparsley 

(Lomatium spp.), California goldfields 

(Lasthenia californica), tidy-tips (Layia 

platyglossa), sea muilla (Muilla 

maritima), scytheleaf onion (Allium 

falcifolium), false babystars (Linanthus 

androsaceus), and intermediate 

fiddleneck (Amsinckia intermedia). 

(iv) Aquatic features such as 

wetlands, springs, seeps, streams, lakes, 

and ponds and their associated banks, 

that provide moisture during periods of 

spring drought; these features can be 

ephemeral, seasonal, or permanent. 

(v) Soils derived from serpentinite 

ultramafic rock (Montara, Climara, 

Henneke, Hentine, and Obispo soil 

series) or similar soils (Inks, 

Candlestick, Los Gatos, Fagan, and 

Barnabe soil series) that provide areas 

with fewer aggressive, nonnative plant 

species for larval host plant and adult 

nectar plant survival and reproduction. 

(vi) The presence of stable holes and 

cracks in the soil, and surface rock 

outcrops that provide shelter for the 

larval stage of the bay checkerspot 

butterfly during summer diapause. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures (such as buildings, 

aqueducts, runways, roads, and other 

paved areas) and the land on which they 

are located existing on the effective date 

of this rule and not containing one or 

more of the primary constituent 

elements. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

on a base of USGS 7.5′ quadrangles 

using USDA National Agricultural 

Imagery Program (NAIP) county-wide 

MrSID compressed mosaics of 1 meter 

resolution and natural color aerial 

photography from summer 2005. 

Critical habitat units were then mapped 

using Universal Transverse Mercator 

(UTM) zone 10, North American Datum 

(NAD) 1983 coordinates. 

(5) Note: Index map for bay 

checkerspot butterfly critical habitat 

units (Map 1) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48200 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22AU07.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48201 

(6) Unit 1 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: San Bruno Mountain, San 

Mateo County, California. From USGS 

1:24,000 scale quadrangle San Francisco 

South. 

(i) Unit 1: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N):; 52853, 4170062; 

52856, 4170038; 52862, 4170043; 52866, 

4170045; 52889, 4170061; 52915, 

4170074; 52940, 4170084; 52970, 

4170091; 52991, 4170102; 53010, 

4170112; 53036, 4170134; 53057, 

4170130; 53070, 4170151; 53089, 

4170171; 53112, 4170170; 53135, 

4170154; 53153, 4170109; 53184, 

4170104; 53203, 4170081; 53207, 

4170041; 53201, 4169958; 53214, 

4169958; 53241, 4169938; 53257, 

4169970; 53281, 4169974; 53303, 

4169965; 53323, 4169971; 53344, 

4169964; 53355, 4169943; 53374, 

4169943; 53402, 4169930; 53404, 

4169906; 53428, 4169900; 53458, 

4169913; 53489, 4169909; 53527, 

4169898; 53563, 4169900; 53592, 

4169902; 53627, 4169892; 53656, 

4169877; 53671, 4169859; 53713, 

4169856; 53710, 4169804; 53665, 

4169711; 53618, 4169606; 53604, 

4169575; 53559, 4169488; 53521, 

4169481; 53492, 4169479; 53478, 

4169457; 53474, 4169413; 53454, 

4169388; 53434, 4169364; 53387, 

4169340; 53357, 4169322; 53336, 

4169300; 53317, 4169269; 53301, 

4169264; 53287, 4169242; 53260, 

4169178; 53235, 4169105; 53164, 

4169029; 53100, 4169010; 53101, 

4168943; 53069, 4168920; 53013, 

4168954; 52936, 4168954; 52882, 

4169005; 52824, 4169051; 52752, 

4169071; 52718, 4169074; 52650, 

4169066; 52628, 4169020; 52610, 

4168977; 52552, 4168965; 52580, 

4169045; 52440, 4169117; 52362, 

4169110; 52352, 4169041; 52235, 

4169066; 52242, 4169257; 52198, 

4169347; 52168, 4169354; 52159, 

4169382; 52152, 4169426; 52142, 

4169428; 52127, 4169422; 52107, 

4169432; 52094, 4169445; 52088, 

4169459; 52083, 4169491; 52068, 

4169488; 52054, 4169493; 52049, 

4169483; 52049, 4169465; 52046, 

4169432; 52038, 4169413; 52024, 

4169400; 52010, 4169390; 51996, 

4169388; 51993, 4169373; 51990, 

4169352; 51989, 4169338; 51977, 

4169310; 51954, 4169295; 51930, 

4169292; 51912, 4169296; 51896, 

4169310; 51876, 4169332; 51849, 

4169369; 51827, 4169382; 51815, 

4169391; 51792, 4169390; 51759, 

4169390; 51747, 4169402; 51752, 

4169424; 51760, 4169437; 51769, 

4169458; 51771, 4169481; 51797, 

4169559; 51721, 4169595; 51695, 

4169469; 51667, 4169464; 51647, 

4169469; 51623, 4169501; 51589, 

4169527; 51592, 4169674; 51570, 

4169677; 51550, 4169674; 51508, 

4169668; 51477, 4169671; 51435, 

4169674; 51423, 4169719; 51419, 

4169736; 51408, 4169731; 51394, 

4169713; 51379, 4169697; 51354, 

4169691; 51341, 4169690; 51337, 

4169681; 51315, 4169681; 51303, 

4169689; 51279, 4169713; 51229, 

4169810; 51184, 4169770; 51171, 

4169745; 51155, 4169731; 51135, 

4169723; 51129, 4169719; 51129, 

4169710; 51129, 4169690; 51127, 

4169669; 51118, 4169651; 51104, 

4169629; 51086, 4169609; 51061, 

4169598; 51035, 4169591; 50999, 

4169589; 50967, 4169591; 50935, 

4169599; 50913, 4169616; 50896, 

4169638; 50882, 4169668; 50844, 

4169623; 50831, 4169611; 50810, 

4169588; 50792, 4169588; 50777, 

4169590; 50760, 4169600; 50748, 

4169602; 50738, 4169589; 50731, 

4169574; 50731, 4169561; 50736, 

4169542; 50740, 4169517; 50741, 

4169495; 50736, 4169475; 50729, 

4169463; 50723, 4169447; 50722, 

4169430; 50718, 4169415; 50710, 

4169399; 50701, 4169385; 50690, 

4169374; 50679, 4169365; 50674, 

4169349; 50664, 4169330; 50655, 

4169312; 50635, 4169299; 50623, 

4169292; 50613, 4169284; 50613, 

4169268; 50597, 4169255; 50583, 

4169239; 50580, 4169215; 50583, 

4169191; 50613, 4169153; 50665, 

4169090; 50650, 4169068; 50617, 

4169048; 50572, 4169043; 50542, 

4169042; 50519, 4169048; 50498, 

4169052; 50483, 4169061; 50461, 

4169073; 50444, 4169085; 50387, 

4169124; 50362, 4169151; 50346, 

4169178; 50322, 4169174; 50297, 

4169175; 50279, 4169181; 50235, 

4169183; 50203, 4169194; 50169, 

4169217; 50139, 4169238; 50122, 

4169250; 50104, 4169267; 50081, 

4169290; 50073, 4169317; 50068, 

4169345; 50069, 4169377; 50070, 

4169388; 50068, 4169402; 50068, 

4169418; 50076, 4169438; 50087, 

4169455; 50087, 4169464; 50068, 

4169486; 50054, 4169509; 50044, 

4169534; 50035, 4169557; 50033, 

4169584; 50034, 4169608; 50040, 

4169631; 50045, 4169650; 50050, 

4169664; 50055, 4169673; 50059, 

4169686; 50068, 4169712; 50078, 

4169734; 50090, 4169776; 50096, 

4169811; 50117, 4169844; 50136, 

4169877; 50152, 4169904; 50180, 

4169920; 50235, 4169925; 50279, 

4169932; 50323, 4169940; 50364, 

4169954; 50399, 4169970; 50412, 

4169998; 50435, 4170034; 50460, 

4170069; 50490, 4170103; 50485, 

4170138; 50482, 4170165; 50479, 

4170188; 50491, 4170214; 50483, 

4170257; 50495, 4170295; 50515, 

4170330; 50547, 4170370; 50580, 

4170407; 50613, 4170479; 50624, 

4170446; 50640, 4170421; 50667, 

4170395; 50706, 4170376; 50730, 

4170351; 50756, 4170336; 50784, 

4170314; 50799, 4170279; 50794, 

4170250; 50767, 4170227; 50774, 

4170205; 50811, 4170182; 50851, 

4170185; 50881, 4170201; 50892, 

4170233; 50944, 4170243; 50957, 

4170277; 50980, 4170307; 51017, 

4170327; 51050, 4170349; 51063, 

4170366; 51069, 4170404; 51069, 

4170462; 51093, 4170507; 51112, 

4170535; 51128, 4170569; 51159, 

4170601; 51180, 4170643; 51195, 

4170685; 51203, 4170750; 51268, 

4170754; 51274, 4170805; 51322, 

4170818; 51364, 4170820; 51385, 

4170786; 51354, 4170744; 51345, 

4170699; 51303, 4170619; 51206, 

4170481; 51188, 4170457; 51133, 

4170443; 51104, 4170432; 51101, 

4170397; 51113, 4170364; 51119, 

4170341; 51150, 4170331; 51167, 

4170314; 51187, 4170309; 51214, 

4170298; 51227, 4170315; 51243, 

4170321; 51262, 4170291; 51287, 

4170284; 51316, 4170276; 51343, 

4170291; 51382, 4170291; 51427, 

4170277; 51455, 4170354; 51495, 

4170371; 51506, 4170328; 51536, 

4170284; 51569, 4170288; 51589, 

4170279; 51614, 4170278; 51628, 

4170264; 51622, 4170249; 51626, 

4170230; 51629, 4170215; 51643, 

4170211; 51657, 4170201; 51673, 

4170196; 51689, 4170185; 51711, 

4170180; 51736, 4170180; 51767, 

4170176; 51793, 4170180; 51823, 

4170182; 51845, 4170150; 51843, 

4170122; 51871, 4170112; 51874, 

4170144; 51879, 4170178; 51893, 

4170205; 51914, 4170246; 51916, 

4170287; 51943, 4170335; 51944, 

4170395; 51956, 4170442; 51967, 

4170500; 51964, 4170535; 51947, 

4170559; 51929, 4170584; 51937, 

4170647; 51943, 4170683; 51944, 

4170710; 51919, 4170764; 51916, 

4170789; 51925, 4170815; 51944, 

4170850; 51955, 4170879; 51974, 

4170905; 51980, 4170939; 51981, 

4170982; 51997, 4170985; 52017, 

4170989; 52040, 4170986; 52056, 

4170972; 52076, 4170953; 52091, 

4170957; 52113, 4170977; 52150, 

4170992; 52173, 4170975; 52186, 

4170953; 52150, 4170924; 52147, 

4170872; 52166, 4170834; 52169, 

4170799; 52160, 4170686; 52125, 

4170673; 52125, 4170651; 52160, 

4170651; 52157, 4170619; 52131, 

4170600; 52141, 4170564; 52173, 

4170564; 52176, 4170503; 52128, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48202 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

4170295; 52125, 4170263; 52134, 

4170222; 52153, 4170202; 52176, 

4170190; 52214, 4170190; 52243, 

4170206; 52266, 4170196; 52266, 

4170129; 52236, 4170086; 52202, 

4170051; 52145, 4169994; 52165, 

4169960; 52221, 4169933; 52269, 

4169930; 52319, 4169895; 52385, 

4169894; 52425, 4169868; 52461, 

4169881; 52449, 4170010; 52462, 

4170073; 52488, 4170158; 52518, 

4170166; 52539, 4170168; 52560, 

4170160; 52575, 4170162; 52596, 

4170173; 52616, 4170174; 52651, 

4170154; 52683, 4170159; 52723, 

4170154; 52754, 4170155; 52782, 

4170155; 52805, 4170147; 52831, 

4170134; 52847, 4170094; returning to 

52853, 4170062. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 1 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 2) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48203 

(7) Unit 2 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Pulgas Ridge, San Mateo 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangle San Mateo. 

(i) Unit 2: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22au07.014</GPH>
48204 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

coordinates (E,N): 558502, 4151442; 

558422, 4151451; 558339, 4151484; 

558223, 4151555; 558094, 4151656; 

557957, 4151788; 557745, 4152013; 

557545, 4152228; 557398, 4152392; 

557274, 4152523; 557191, 4152632; 

557123, 4152751; 557076, 4152838; 

557061, 4152902; 557012, 4153060; 

557027, 4153077; 557027, 4153130; 

556994, 4153145; 556961, 4153171; 

556939, 4153182; 556936, 4153216; 

556913, 4153220; 556880, 4153242; 

556868, 4153273; 556867, 4153329; 

557060, 4153350; 557277, 4153095; 

557358, 4153009; 557407, 4152900; 

557494, 4152681; 557576, 4152631; 

557851, 4152470; 558104, 4152134; 

558210, 4152004; 558320, 4151850; 

558268, 4151803; 558302, 4151758; 

558363, 4151800; 558474, 4151666; 

558625, 4151470; 558602, 4151463; 

558557, 4151448; returning to 558502, 

4151442. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 3) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48205 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22au07.015</GPH>
48206 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(8) Unit 3 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Edgewood Park, San Mateo 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangle Woodside. 

(i) Unit 3: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 564162, 4146806; 

564197, 4146796; 564234, 4146748; 

564270, 4146731; 564196, 4146657; 

564182, 4146642; 564169, 4146630; 

564154, 4146615; 564142, 4146585; 

564128, 4146601; 564108, 4146585; 

564097, 4146565; 564092, 4146540; 

564078, 4146514; 564061, 4146457; 

564032, 4146525; 564003, 4146549; 

563949, 4146575; 563903, 4146582; 

563868, 4146576; 563834, 4146542; 

563809, 4146492; 563808, 4146448; 

563842, 4146394; 563811, 4146384; 

563774, 4146364; 563747, 4146377; 

563726, 4146394; 563702, 4146416; 

563668, 4146413; 563684, 4146384; 

563656, 4146377; 563626, 4146409; 

563555, 4146423; 563533, 4146403; 

563533, 4146374; 563520, 4146338; 

563543, 4146316; 563596, 4146356; 

563604, 4146338; 563576, 4146297; 

563520, 4146284; 563450, 4146312; 

563396, 4146314; 563360, 4146293; 

563338, 4146263; 563340, 4146229; 

563365, 4146198; 563424, 4146176; 

563464, 4146140; 563488, 4146094; 

563459, 4146043; 563420, 4146003; 

563361, 4145965; 563305, 4145945; 

563215, 4145902; 563106, 4145980; 

563077, 4145966; 563050, 4145976; 

563014, 4145948; 562923, 4146053; 

562820, 4146153; 562674, 4146184; 

562550, 4146190; 562503, 4146146; 

562432, 4146134; 562367, 4146141; 

562337, 4146177; 562290, 4146269; 

562106, 4146315; 562126, 4146380; 

562087, 4146395; 562148, 4146523; 

562121, 4146554; 562162, 4146602; 

562260, 4146697; 562284, 4146723; 

562369, 4146818; 562418, 4146870; 

562467, 4146918; 562548, 4147005; 

562667, 4147115; 562724, 4147186; 

562744, 4147200; 562771, 4147206; 

562796, 4147214; 562816, 4147212; 

562849, 4147216; 562862, 4147203; 

562874, 4147191; 562858, 4147160; 

562876, 4147148; 562907, 4147149; 

562915, 4147187; 562936, 4147221; 

562955, 4147207; 562963, 4147174; 

563001, 4147137; 563034, 4147121; 

563052, 4147122; 563063, 4147135; 

563063, 4147160; 563070, 4147174; 

563098, 4147180; 563141, 4147173; 

563179, 4147179; 563199, 4147187; 

563196, 4147227; 563164, 4147243; 

563156, 4147274; 563140, 4147290; 

563124, 4147308; 563103, 4147329; 

563087, 4147356; 563093, 4147379; 

563113, 4147405; 563138, 4147424; 

563196, 4147403; 563228, 4147396; 

563247, 4147392; 563256, 4147354; 

563275, 4147334; 563304, 4147313; 

563304, 4147357; 563312, 4147395; 

563324, 4147437; 563329, 4147458; 

563336, 4147478; 563334, 4147508; 

563354, 4147530; 563371, 4147543; 

563411, 4147539; 563440, 4147526; 

563465, 4147513; 563468, 4147488; 

563457, 4147462; 563446, 4147441; 

563436, 4147420; 563429, 4147405; 

563422, 4147390; 563415, 4147377; 

563414, 4147360; 563406, 4147327; 

563408, 4147272; 563443, 4147244; 

563457, 4147229; 563480, 4147222; 

563502, 4147229; 563517, 4147251; 

563534, 4147276; 563553, 4147283; 

563569, 4147282; 563595, 4147274; 

563623, 4147264; 563646, 4147239; 

563645, 4147181; 563608, 4147135; 

563604, 4147096; 563609, 4147060; 

563647, 4147048; 563675, 4147047; 

563668, 4147013; 563671, 4146982; 

563673, 4146964; 563675, 4146954; 

563669, 4146934; 563697, 4146903; 

563739, 4146896; 563788, 4146903; 

563825, 4146934; 563853, 4146979; 

563862, 4146993; 563882, 4147004; 

563902, 4147007; 563915, 4147002; 

563912, 4146981; 563900, 4146963; 

563883, 4146944; 563881, 4146913; 

563889, 4146885; 563888, 4146855; 

563858, 4146857; 563817, 4146861; 

563749, 4146833; 563727, 4146798; 

563744, 4146751; 563776, 4146699; 

563799, 4146661; 563863, 4146689; 

563971, 4146735; 563979, 4146753; 

563997, 4146758; 564017, 4146756; 

564030, 4146769; 564048, 4146778; 

564080, 4146775; 564099, 4146784; 

564131, 4146803; returning to 564162, 

4146806. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 4) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48207 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22au07.016</GPH>
48208 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(9) Unit 4 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Jasper Ridge, San Mateo 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangle Palo Alto. 

(i) Unit 4: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 569513, 4139881; 

569524, 4139862; 569550, 4139849; 

569569, 4139829; 569580, 4139812; 

569578, 4139791; 569578, 4139780; 

569605, 4139771; 569631, 4139770; 

569696, 4139789; 569703, 4139764; 

569676, 4139743; 569686, 4139716; 

569736, 4139668; 569782, 4139670; 

569815, 4139659; 569839, 4139671; 

569869, 4139687; 569893, 4139716; 

569915, 4139714; 569954, 4139692; 

569993, 4139680; 570014, 4139658; 

570027, 4139642; 570046, 4139627; 

569983, 4139608; 568859, 4139177; 

568865, 4139205; 568889, 4139237; 

568921, 4139265; 568951, 4139280; 

568962, 4139308; 568947, 4139319; 

568908, 4139319; 568882, 4139319; 

568882, 4139327; 568885, 4139340; 

568885, 4139353; 568876, 4139355; 

568869, 4139342; 568848, 4139319; 

568831, 4139278; 568816, 4139261; 

568797, 4139250; 568775, 4139252; 

568758, 4139261; 568747, 4139261; 

568736, 4139274; 568745, 4139299; 

568749, 4139323; 568728, 4139344; 

568702, 4139342; 568674, 4139342; 

568666, 4139342; 568664, 4139362; 

568676, 4139387; 568698, 4139407; 

568743, 4139411; 568771, 4139411; 

568805, 4139411; 568816, 4139441; 

568846, 4139490; 568852, 4139520; 

568852, 4139527; 568844, 4139531; 

568833, 4139507; 568788, 4139495; 

568771, 4139495; 568749, 4139505; 

568741, 4139527; 568730, 4139548; 

568724, 4139548; 568713, 4139531; 

568694, 4139518; 568685, 4139503; 

568674, 4139501; 568657, 4139501; 

568642, 4139495; 568627, 4139484; 

568603, 4139473; 568597, 4139499; 

568603, 4139512; 568520, 4139578; 

568505, 4139565; 568475, 4139565; 

568470, 4139574; 568479, 4139595; 

568485, 4139621; 568481, 4139625; 

568462, 4139617; 568425, 4139604; 

568400, 4139604; 568389, 4139623; 

568389, 4139641; 568391, 4139668; 

568404, 4139688; 568410, 4139705; 

568410, 4139722; 568412, 4139741; 

568417, 4139746; 568408, 4139752; 

568389, 4139737; 568361, 4139718; 

568325, 4139694; 568314, 4139694; 

568307, 4139703; 568322, 4139737; 

568335, 4139765; 568348, 4139791; 

568335, 4139793; 568315, 4139789; 

568305, 4139799; 568296, 4139814; 

568270, 4139808; 568246, 4139783; 

568225, 4139748; 568210, 4139748; 

568210, 4139778; 568221, 4139803; 

568247, 4139836; 568261, 4139857; 

568252, 4139870; 568210, 4139863; 

568165, 4139858; 568142, 4139865; 

568145, 4139890; 568159, 4139919; 

568152, 4139934; 568108, 4139937; 

568099, 4139966; 568083, 4139989; 

568070, 4140011; 568066, 4140038; 

568090, 4140032; 568131, 4139998; 

568168, 4139984; 568203, 4139975; 

568250, 4139976; 568279, 4139979; 

568289, 4139967; 568294, 4139945; 

568303, 4139922; 568324, 4139914; 

568345, 4139906; 568371, 4139896; 

568407, 4139913; 568461, 4139913; 

568495, 4139923; 568526, 4139951; 

568571, 4140000; 568574, 4140034; 

568543, 4140051; 568497, 4140049; 

568467, 4140066; 568430, 4140076; 

568397, 4140063; 568353, 4140055; 

568300, 4140059; 568250, 4140072; 

568225, 4140087; 568205, 4140107; 

568200, 4140141; 568207, 4140177; 

568200, 4140183; 568163, 4140157; 

568082, 4140161; 568023, 4140180; 

568005, 4140193; 567998, 4140211; 

568015, 4140225; 568027, 4140241; 

568028, 4140259; 568006, 4140269; 

567984, 4140271; 567967, 4140280; 

567962, 4140301; 567948, 4140320; 

567930, 4140339; 567915, 4140373; 

567904, 4140392; 567938, 4140398; 

567980, 4140405; 568008, 4140418; 

568001, 4140442; 567988, 4140457; 

568031, 4140467; 568098, 4140470; 

568123, 4140484; 568166, 4140471; 

568183, 4140472; 568180, 4140494; 

568172, 4140517; 568147, 4140543; 

568153, 4140554; 568184, 4140561; 

568209, 4140577; 568249, 4140579; 

568285, 4140585; 568318, 4140597; 

568356, 4140608; 568383, 4140600; 

568423, 4140577; 568471, 4140580; 

568488, 4140590; 568483, 4140612; 

568507, 4140625; 568551, 4140623; 

568572, 4140632; 568606, 4140653; 

568658, 4140676; 568681, 4140691; 

568705, 4140693; 568723, 4140687; 

568741, 4140684; 568762, 4140673; 

568807, 4140653; 568830, 4140634; 

568862, 4140607; 568873, 4140591; 

568894, 4140584; 568891, 4140566; 

568881, 4140556; 568856, 4140536; 

568838, 4140520; 568834, 4140499; 

568812, 4140474; 568803, 4140445; 

568791, 4140422; 568786, 4140395; 

568739, 4140382; 568733, 4140366; 

568719, 4140353; 568682, 4140355; 

568648, 4140350; 568651, 4140331; 

568668, 4140312; 568672, 4140286; 

568653, 4140278; 568668, 4140256; 

568713, 4140235; 568736, 4140273; 

568769, 4140284; 568805, 4140303; 

568827, 4140297; 568848, 4140312; 

568872, 4140321; 568918, 4140335; 

568964, 4140327; 569000, 4140248; 

569024, 4140226; 569058, 4140256; 

569097, 4140267; 569129, 4140244; 

569166, 4140211; 569186, 4140185; 

569202, 4140165; 569217, 4140136; 

569219, 4140119; 569228, 4140106; 

569240, 4140094; 569260, 4140088; 

569282, 4140073; 569286, 4140045; 

569284, 4140017; 569286, 4139986; 

569279, 4139961; 569254, 4139955; 

569242, 4139943; 569217, 4139920; 

569211, 4139900; 569246, 4139893; 

569275, 4139877; 569305, 4139877; 

569342, 4139883; 569367, 4139919; 

569404, 4139945; 569434, 4139949; 

569455, 4139945; 569485, 4139917; 

returning to 569513, 4139881. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 5) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48209 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22au07.017</GPH>
48210 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

(10) Unit 5 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Coyote Ridge, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Unit 5: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 607067, 4127789; 

607267, 4127710; 607475, 4127729; 

607713, 4127722; 607817, 4127626; 

607733, 4127426; 607803, 4127314; 

607825, 4127248; 607762, 4127173; 

607740, 4127113; 607808, 4127063; 

607894, 4127046; 608043, 4127019; 

608116, 4126921; 608123, 4126707; 

608000, 4126634; 607880, 4126543; 

607769, 4126507; 607654, 4126497; 

607668, 4126413; 607779, 4126408; 

607805, 4126324; 608058, 4126129; 

608255, 4125992; 608610, 4125722; 

608893, 4125417; 609482, 4125417; 

609838, 4125398; 610196, 4125396; 

610302, 4125557; 610370, 4125506; 

610487, 4125492; 610584, 4125439; 

610692, 4125442; 610769, 4125405; 

610827, 4125316; 610877, 4125249; 

610937, 4125251; 610947, 4125345; 

610759, 4125562; 610815, 4125701; 

610858, 4125797; 610945, 4125841; 

611101, 4125858; 611199, 4125833; 

611308, 4125853; 611356, 4125884; 

611424, 4125805; 611461, 4125744; 

611542, 4125723; 611602, 4125671; 

611673, 4125610; 611808, 4125456; 

611970, 4125331; 612147, 4125249; 

612322, 4125103; 612539, 4124931; 

612515, 4124823; 612590, 4124756; 

612648, 4124664; 612753, 4124575; 

612773, 4124506; 612879, 4124335; 

612972, 4124219; 613073, 4124178; 

613129, 4124085; 613251, 4123917; 

612901, 4123110; 612999, 4123014; 

613100, 4122932; 613193, 4122893; 

613280, 4122832; 613351, 4122715; 

613426, 4122657; 613489, 4122657; 

613563, 4122662; 613669, 4122607; 

613741, 4122596; 613761, 4121952; 

613847, 4121872; 613918, 4121781; 

613988, 4121649; 614098, 4121520; 

614145, 4121459; 614160, 4121384; 

614120, 4121332; 614113, 4121264; 

614125, 4121201; 614245, 4121185; 

614310, 4121161; 614342, 4121127; 

614393, 4121110; 614418, 4121079; 

614433, 4121039; 614479, 4121095; 

614513, 4121108; 614547, 4121103; 

614579, 4121103; 614616, 4121102; 

614628, 4121071; 614610, 4121032; 

614633, 4121024; 614691, 4121025; 

614737, 4121019; 614760, 4120988; 

614750, 4120961; 614713, 4120939; 

614711, 4120903; 614703, 4120876; 

614718, 4120863; 614731, 4120832; 

614743, 4120810; 614774, 4120852; 

614784, 4120819; 614904, 4120878; 

614919, 4120849; 614913, 4120812; 

614919, 4120775; 614897, 4120730; 

614874, 4120715; 614886, 4120686; 

614891, 4120659; 614921, 4120671; 

614969, 4120678; 614999, 4120664; 

614999, 4120625; 614974, 4120593; 

614980, 4120547; 614950, 4120517; 

614942, 4120488; 614970, 4120470; 

614986, 4120424; 614996, 4120339; 

615037, 4120410; 615163, 4120270; 

615782, 4119656; 615873, 4119555; 

616483, 4119029; 616524, 4118999; 

616548, 4118936; 616751, 4118743; 

617140, 4118453; 617213, 4118434; 

617322, 4118406; 617774, 4118066; 

617873, 4118037; 617986, 4118057; 

618040, 4118015; 617983, 4117993; 

617934, 4117940; 617896, 4117916; 

617930, 4117901; 617984, 4117896; 

618000, 4117874; 618032, 4117863; 

618054, 4117849; 618052, 4117820; 

618027, 4117810; 618025, 4117766; 

618067, 4117760; 618067, 4117728; 

618144, 4117713; 618222, 4117720; 

618262, 4117696; 618278, 4117655; 

618256, 4117633; 618279, 4117591; 

618286, 4117527; 618323, 4117503; 

618317, 4117455; 618359, 4117439; 

618413, 4117435; 618427, 4117461; 

618457, 4117471; 618489, 4117476; 

618489, 4117501; 618516, 4117516; 

618545, 4117506; 618559, 4117469; 

618589, 4117466; 618618, 4117430; 

618642, 4117442; 618642, 4117477; 

618684, 4117503; 618711, 4117527; 

618730, 4117550; 618760, 4117564; 

618797, 4117553; 618818, 4117545; 

618836, 4117511; 618852, 4117500; 

618877, 4117494; 618874, 4117457; 

618894, 4117445; 618932, 4117427; 

618932, 4117442; 618957, 4117445; 

618976, 4117432; 618976, 4117393; 

619062, 4117364; 619092, 4117373; 

619113, 4117369; 619111, 4117323; 

619145, 4117283; 619062, 4117188; 

619058, 4117150; 619037, 4117123; 

618984, 4117044; 619147, 4117114; 

619236, 4117123; 619294, 4117077; 

619329, 4117080; 619357, 4117092; 

619387, 4117074; 619392, 4117037; 

619382, 4117011; 619414, 4117004; 

619446, 4116993; 619441, 4116938; 

619469, 4116920; 619402, 4116823; 

619440, 4116755; 619489, 4116757; 

619515, 4116739; 619583, 4116708; 

619659, 4116774; 619806, 4116613; 

619745, 4116580; 619760, 4116519; 

619876, 4116570; 619891, 4116539; 

619874, 4116459; 619970, 4116340; 

619915, 4116290; 619854, 4116284; 

619808, 4116227; 619760, 4116188; 

619866, 4116164; 619958, 4116213; 

620004, 4116181; 619951, 4116136; 

619968, 4116109; 620048, 4116152; 

620070, 4116140; 620015, 4116025; 

620025, 4115996; 620097, 4116077; 

620139, 4116040; 620177, 4116007; 

620101, 4115906; 619985, 4115879; 

619949, 4115869; 619900, 4115865; 

619923, 4115831; 619979, 4115805; 

620021, 4115779; 620052, 4115780; 

620086, 4115760; 620115, 4115725; 

620141, 4115694; 620199, 4115750; 

620290, 4115727; 620413, 4115661; 

620583, 4115555; 620617, 4115454; 

620788, 4115324; 620903, 4115266; 

620995, 4115260; 621058, 4115374; 

621097, 4115435; 621107, 4115413; 

621122, 4115390; 621149, 4115374; 

621156, 4115344; 621200, 4115254; 

621608, 4115039; 621668, 4115004; 

621715, 4114977; 621744, 4114932; 

621789, 4114879; 621788, 4114836; 

621788, 4114810; 621768, 4114773; 

621773, 4114740; 621772, 4114662; 

621773, 4114638; 621766, 4114618; 

621782, 4114597; 621842, 4114600; 

621857, 4114586; 621875, 4114583; 

621881, 4114552; 621827, 4114518; 

621800, 4114474; 621727, 4114441; 

621038, 4114280; 620937, 4114292; 

620831, 4114261; 620028, 4114564; 

619674, 4114732; 619494, 4114297; 

619385, 4114096; 619025, 4114273; 

618895, 4114410; 618599, 4114424; 

618361, 4114506; 618185, 4114530; 

617740, 4115026; 617095, 4115754; 

616662, 4116332; 616403, 4116568; 

616244, 4116697; 616203, 4116810; 

616126, 4117005; 615933, 4117032; 

615789, 4117099; 615722, 4117186; 

615933, 4117280; 616097, 4117217; 

616167, 4117292; 616030, 4117460; 

615914, 4117446; 615683, 4117614; 

615229, 4117907; 615099, 4117854; 

615457, 4117510; 615390, 4117438; 

615003, 4117751; 614469, 4118133; 

613965, 4118481; 613877, 4118533; 

613865, 4118566; 613797, 4118629; 

613843, 4118668; 613790, 4118831; 

613636, 4118894; 613636, 4119149; 

613557, 4119283; 613403, 4119531; 

613254, 4119651; 613077, 4119606; 

612893, 4119620; 612832, 4119665; 

612853, 4119708; 612847, 4119729; 

612784, 4119705; 612770, 4119740; 

612715, 4119760; 612640, 4119824; 

612618, 4119872; 612583, 4119977; 

612062, 4120400; 611707, 4120758; 

611686, 4120748; 611631, 4120824; 

611294, 4121127; 611234, 4121214; 

611301, 4121327; 611238, 4121402; 

610975, 4121590; 610770, 4121774; 

610611, 4121899; 610472, 4122085; 

610310, 4122006; 610106, 4122145; 

610077, 4122227; 610126, 4122316; 

610217, 4122395; 610179, 4122447; 

610133, 4122430; 610089, 4122512; 

610125, 4122559; 610156, 4122607; 

610157, 4122653; 610128, 4122660; 

610058, 4122641; 610016, 4122607; 

609977, 4122674; 610091, 4122763; 

610187, 4122847; 610220, 4122921; 

610249, 4122977; 610374, 4123102; 

610254, 4123181; 610015, 4123335; 

609613, 4123583; 609641, 4123630; 

609399, 4123790; 609324, 4123843; 

609182, 4124041; 608934, 4123924; 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48211 

608736, 4124027; 608538, 4124145; 

608423, 4124256; 608167, 4124471; 

608065, 4124633; 608059, 4124666; 

607803, 4124871; 607677, 4124973; 

607615, 4125109; 607637, 4125224; 

607756, 4125351; 607593, 4125474; 

607351, 4125490; 607272, 4125663; 

607018, 4125820; 606980, 4125845; 

606948, 4125876; 606896, 4125972; 

606890, 4125996; 606845, 4125998; 

606796, 4126045; 606753, 4126055; 

606663, 4126127; 606595, 4126178; 

606463, 4126353; 606314, 4126287; 

606282, 4126331; 606153, 4126428; 

605939, 4126505; 605841, 4126533; 

605785, 4126693; 605832, 4126844; 

605701, 4126851; 605621, 4127118; 

605715, 4127161; 605847, 4127159; 

605992, 4127130; 606076, 4127058; 

606215, 4127099; 606422, 4127010; 

606465, 4126897; 606699, 4126796; 

606886, 4126695; 607019, 4126736; 

607190, 4126796; 607356, 4126935; 

607437, 4127065; 607306, 4127251; 

607149, 4127421; 607062, 4127440; 

606910, 4127537; 606714, 4127727; 

606521, 4127943; 606345, 4128015; 

606227, 4128006; 606179, 4127924; 

606131, 4127779; 606097, 4127827; 

606067, 4127868; 605982, 4127883; 

605953, 4128027; 605857, 4127996; 

605761, 4128001; 605703, 4128063; 

605662, 4128160; 605702, 4128211; 

605770, 4128251; 605842, 4128289; 

605912, 4128287; 605946, 4128220; 

605992, 4128138; 606059, 4128152; 

606148, 4128174; 606210, 4128152; 

606324, 4128056; 606410, 4128049; 

606321, 4128171; 606343, 4128210; 

606614, 4128290; 606611, 4128519; 

606706, 4128535; 606802, 4128525; 

607015, 4128424; 607079, 4128412; 

607069, 4128316; 607125, 4128227; 

607190, 4128215; 607202, 4128263; 

607252, 4128252; 606865, 4127849; 

returning to 607067, 4127789. 

(ii) Note: Unit 5 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly is depicted on Map 6 in 

paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(11) Unit 6 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Tulare Hill, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Unit 6: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 611281, 4120978; 

612010, 4120354; 611543, 4119895; 

611200, 4120245; 611116, 4120132; 

611229, 4119983; 611293, 4119653; 

611241, 4119512; 610967, 4119335; 

610463, 4118831; 609658, 4119568; 

610117, 4119846; 609799, 4120229; 

609915, 4120374; 609819, 4120430; 

610113, 4120749; 610310, 4120833; 

610459, 4120769; 610548, 4120910; 

610294, 4121063; 610681, 4121486; 

returning to 611281, 4120978. 

(ii) Note: Unit 6 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly is depicted on Map 6 in 

paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(12) Unit 7 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Santa Teresa Hills, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Unit 7: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 602892, 4120825; 

602923, 4120888; 602998, 4120912; 

603046, 4120912; 603077, 4120894; 

603120, 4120901; 603159, 4120888; 

603185, 4120851; 603194, 4120824; 

603233, 4120815; 603305, 4120824; 

603337, 4120812; 603356, 4120775; 

603336, 4120735; 603317, 4120709; 

603299, 4120671; 603316, 4120645; 

603371, 4120634; 603422, 4120632; 

603481, 4120647; 603524, 4120628; 

603599, 4120583; 603652, 4120583; 

603668, 4120618; 603683, 4120664; 

603766, 4120676; 603778, 4120651; 

603798, 4120616; 603811, 4120597; 

603829, 4120590; 603866, 4120610; 

603887, 4120586; 603927, 4120563; 

603991, 4120557; 604041, 4120556; 

604041, 4120561; 604045, 4120581; 

604039, 4120610; 604026, 4120620; 

604024, 4120626; 603998, 4120656; 

603973, 4120699; 603972, 4120727; 

603976, 4120754; 604006, 4120769; 

604040, 4120782; 604073, 4120807; 

604119, 4120837; 604138, 4120855; 

604160, 4120865; 604179, 4120865; 

604194, 4120847; 604199, 4120818; 

604200, 4120795; 604258, 4120790; 

604294, 4120834; 604356, 4120869; 

604368, 4120874; 604382, 4120874; 

604397, 4120865; 604411, 4120855; 

604429, 4120847; 604442, 4120832; 

604453, 4120827; 604467, 4120819; 

604475, 4120816; 604488, 4120800; 

604510, 4120802; 604554, 4120827; 

604549, 4120858; 604561, 4120889; 

604564, 4120912; 604561, 4120952; 

604572, 4120972; 604606, 4120977; 

604622, 4120963; 604624, 4120946; 

604628, 4120920; 604645, 4120904; 

604680, 4120899; 604729, 4120910; 

604729, 4120867; 604787, 4120831; 

604810, 4120814; 604844, 4120783; 

604890, 4120765; 604924, 4120799; 

604948, 4120835; 604970, 4120831; 

604986, 4120786; 605003, 4120742; 

605064, 4120714; 605093, 4120722; 

605132, 4120760; 605163, 4120770; 

605185, 4120744; 605219, 4120689; 

605272, 4120656; 605329, 4120668; 

605395, 4120706; 605405, 4120671; 

605424, 4120642; 605452, 4120646; 

605473, 4120657; 605509, 4120656; 

605548, 4120664; 605588, 4120656; 

605614, 4120682; 605643, 4120689; 

605647, 4120649; 605679, 4120645; 

605711, 4120633; 605746, 4120610; 

605728, 4120571; 605712, 4120545; 

605685, 4120526; 605653, 4120525; 

605613, 4120522; 605608, 4120506; 

605619, 4120496; 605645, 4120487; 

605709, 4120480; 605729, 4120443; 

605749, 4120426; 605775, 4120431; 

605792, 4120456; 605809, 4120473; 

605836, 4120498; 605864, 4120508; 

605879, 4120512; 605904, 4120506; 

605928, 4120490; 605945, 4120465; 

605949, 4120449; 605945, 4120432; 

605953, 4120401; 605971, 4120390; 

606001, 4120399; 606040, 4120411; 

606076, 4120422; 606105, 4120433; 

606133, 4120448; 606158, 4120474; 

606200, 4120494; 606241, 4120516; 

606272, 4120540; 606310, 4120548; 

606353, 4120567; 606378, 4120587; 

606394, 4120604; 606407, 4120596; 

606422, 4120586; 606474, 4120580; 

606521, 4120577; 606553, 4120566; 

606589, 4120544; 606625, 4120524; 

606653, 4120496; 606653, 4120520; 

606626, 4120579; 606625, 4120607; 

606650, 4120613; 606703, 4120612; 

606736, 4120611; 606751, 4120586; 

606748, 4120556; 606762, 4120552; 

606804, 4120566; 606861, 4120594; 

606917, 4120615; 606968, 4120624; 

607030, 4120627; 607084, 4120614; 

607139, 4120594; 607197, 4120614; 

607194, 4120598; 607195, 4120569; 

607195, 4120549; 607188, 4120521; 

607174, 4120507; 607179, 4120472; 

607191, 4120455; 607214, 4120443; 

607247, 4120427; 607277, 4120408; 

607280, 4120373; 607298, 4120340; 

607305, 4120307; 607332, 4120290; 

607364, 4120276; 607395, 4120272; 

607414, 4120266; 607434, 4120261; 

607453, 4120267; 607461, 4120254; 

607462, 4120237; 607458, 4120220; 

607449, 4120201; 607437, 4120184; 

607421, 4120162; 607397, 4120136; 

607370, 4120088; 607327, 4120023; 

607297, 4119983; 607182, 4119926; 

607113, 4119874; 607064, 4119832; 

607020, 4119802; 606938, 4119784; 

606848, 4119768; 606800, 4119732; 

606822, 4119719; 606891, 4119713; 

606982, 4119681; 607021, 4119632; 

607033, 4119550; 607049, 4119507; 

607064, 4119439; 607068, 4119404; 

607099, 4119389; 607118, 4119342; 

607152, 4119323; 607181, 4119286; 

607199, 4119244; 607188, 4119204; 

607229, 4119197; 607254, 4119192; 

607258, 4119169; 607278, 4119158; 

607304, 4119172; 607326, 4119155; 

607367, 4119150; 607402, 4119175; 

607454, 4119194; 607509, 4119213; 

607702, 4119117; 607733, 4119120; 

607774, 4119125; 607775, 4119165; 

607814, 4119200; 607861, 4119222; 

607909, 4119212; 607985, 4119188; 

608024, 4119217; 607998, 4119236; 

608004, 4119270; 608048, 4119275; 

608100, 4119228; 608156, 4119215; 

608213, 4119266; 608334, 4119277; 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48212 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

608348, 4119343; 608310, 4119427; 

608238, 4119516; 608227, 4119572; 

608242, 4119612; 608277, 4119624; 

608310, 4119641; 608344, 4119670; 

608363, 4119689; 608375, 4119702; 

608395, 4119704; 608413, 4119696; 

608439, 4119686; 608464, 4119677; 

608477, 4119655; 608490, 4119640; 

608512, 4119630; 608572, 4119618; 

608626, 4119610; 608635, 4119589; 

608624, 4119571; 608565, 4119580; 

608500, 4119579; 608482, 4119564; 

608474, 4119543; 608497, 4119516; 

608575, 4119522; 608635, 4119479; 

608569, 4119409; 608581, 4119330; 

608647, 4119331; 608706, 4119356; 

608749, 4119377; 608758, 4119360; 

608746, 4119302; 608722, 4119196; 

608695, 4119111; 608762, 4119101; 

608846, 4119140; 608892, 4119222; 

608913, 4119397; 608883, 4119569; 

608848, 4119657; 608818, 4119677; 

608789, 4119702; 608778, 4119727; 

608781, 4119765; 608788, 4119783; 

608807, 4119789; 608853, 4119782; 

608898, 4119751; 608918, 4119731; 

608924, 4119709; 608918, 4119681; 

608944, 4119676; 609003, 4119655; 

609001, 4119592; 609027, 4119500; 

609059, 4119489; 609106, 4119530; 

609133, 4119547; 609155, 4119553; 

609176, 4119581; 609208, 4119588; 

609214, 4119600; 609202, 4119624; 

609194, 4119649; 609198, 4119661; 

609212, 4119663; 609248, 4119640; 

609263, 4119633; 609289, 4119634; 

609298, 4119633; 609297, 4119609; 

609293, 4119585; 609299, 4119555; 

609313, 4119543; 609347, 4119543; 

609374, 4119540; 609391, 4119530; 

609411, 4119510; 609428, 4119507; 

609440, 4119498; 609446, 4119470; 

609454, 4119451; 609456, 4119415; 

609476, 4119391; 609509, 4119359; 

609534, 4119358; 609548, 4119366; 

609549, 4119393; 609568, 4119444; 

609582, 4119466; 609606, 4119520; 

609628, 4119547; 609656, 4119568; 

609751, 4119477; 609785, 4119449; 

610381, 4118905; 610464, 4118833; 

610521, 4118824; 610564, 4118822; 

610592, 4118815; 610612, 4118795; 

610617, 4118776; 610617, 4118756; 

610624, 4118735; 610650, 4118729; 

610669, 4118717; 610700, 4118710; 

610723, 4118718; 610757, 4118723; 

610773, 4118706; 610780, 4118658; 

610790, 4118646; 610787, 4118598; 

610775, 4118570; 610773, 4118536; 

610771, 4118519; 610782, 4118517; 

610822, 4118530; 610842, 4118528; 

610864, 4118520; 610880, 4118508; 

610899, 4118501; 610915, 4118487; 

610914, 4118461; 610906, 4118446; 

610889, 4118430; 610886, 4118417; 

610902, 4118393; 610900, 4118367; 

610896, 4118340; 610912, 4118330; 

610934, 4118310; 610940, 4118282; 

610932, 4118260; 610935, 4118251; 

610949, 4118231; 610955, 4118207; 

610957, 4118181; 610964, 4118176; 

610991, 4118168; 610989, 4118152; 

610992, 4118113; 611000, 4118109; 

611019, 4118109; 611041, 4118121; 

611066, 4118127; 611096, 4118122; 

611114, 4118125; 611160, 4118145; 

611185, 4118147; 611220, 4118143; 

611254, 4118124; 611259, 4118093; 

611250, 4118046; 611250, 4118012; 

611247, 4117972; 611255, 4117966; 

611276, 4117974; 611292, 4117975; 

611331, 4117963; 611374, 4117922; 

611421, 4117919; 611446, 4117915; 

611462, 4117908; 611475, 4117891; 

611511, 4117839; 611533, 4117814; 

611554, 4117805; 611567, 4117772; 

611556, 4117741; 611560, 4117712; 

611562, 4117677; 611517, 4117611; 

611572, 4117536; 611578, 4117500; 

611570, 4117478; 611547, 4117451; 

611503, 4117429; 611458, 4117422; 

611405, 4117439; 611323, 4117480; 

611291, 4117518; 611268, 4117566; 

611230, 4117618; 611169, 4117625; 

611114, 4117642; 611070, 4117668; 

611029, 4117753; 610965, 4117724; 

610983, 4117689; 610930, 4117568; 

610751, 4117496; 610716, 4117445; 

610717, 4117413; 610569, 4117220; 

610494, 4117222; 610412, 4117262; 

610370, 4117294; 610350, 4117341; 

610281, 4117354; 610220, 4117381; 

610179, 4117413; 610146, 4117441; 

610127, 4117492; 610058, 4117531; 

609834, 4117339; 609819, 4117309; 

609851, 4117273; 609864, 4117239; 

609877, 4117207; 609909, 4117203; 

609953, 4117196; 609972, 4117166; 

609984, 4117137; 610018, 4117122; 

610053, 4117096; 610057, 4117069; 

610042, 4117036; 610071, 4116966; 

610146, 4116960; 610163, 4116923; 

610160, 4116866; 610192, 4116829; 

610241, 4116817; 610277, 4116801; 

610280, 4116771; 610316, 4116759; 

610333, 4116735; 610363, 4116715; 

610406, 4116666; 610441, 4116619; 

610471, 4116617; 610485, 4116593; 

610463, 4116565; 610449, 4116508; 

610398, 4116453; 610395, 4116401; 

610255, 4116374; 609331, 4116659; 

609272, 4116667; 609248, 4116696; 

609243, 4116729; 609191, 4116694; 

609145, 4116674; 609088, 4116665; 

609059, 4116677; 609041, 4116735; 

609019, 4116789; 609017, 4116848; 

609010, 4116900; 608968, 4116871; 

608980, 4116797; 608957, 4116761; 

608908, 4116728; 608866, 4116734; 

608828, 4116732; 608794, 4116709; 

608767, 4116723; 608748, 4116706; 

608763, 4116671; 608754, 4116626; 

608731, 4116590; 608689, 4116582; 

608642, 4116574; 608613, 4116607; 

608583, 4116601; 608575, 4116571; 

608535, 4116577; 608484, 4116576; 

608459, 4116586; 608478, 4116635; 

608495, 4116666; 608516, 4116692; 

608507, 4116721; 608505, 4116759; 

608505, 4116799; 608459, 4116780; 

608429, 4116789; 608419, 4116757; 

608374, 4116778; 608343, 4116816; 

608330, 4116894; 608294, 4116905; 

608267, 4116941; 608227, 4116912; 

608170, 4116888; 608147, 4116869; 

608125, 4116829; 608082, 4116819; 

608044, 4116792; 608034, 4116830; 

608046, 4116879; 608067, 4116945; 

607973, 4116962; 607862, 4116986; 

607811, 4117004; 607575, 4116987; 

607512, 4116967; 607477, 4116922; 

607403, 4116908; 607360, 4116925; 

607286, 4116951; 607235, 4116993; 

607189, 4117053; 607163, 4117101; 

607132, 4117110; 607087, 4117095; 

607056, 4117114; 607035, 4117167; 

607011, 4117226; 606971, 4117268; 

606961, 4117348; 606973, 4117424; 

607013, 4117456; 607020, 4117494; 

606999, 4117576; 606544, 4118248; 

606457, 4118180; 606425, 4118183; 

606179, 4118071; 605401, 4118117; 

605247, 4118180; 605053, 4118269; 

604965, 4118348; 605178, 4118600; 

604548, 4118947; 604625, 4119145; 

604788, 4119569; 604936, 4119955; 

604817, 4119974; 604817, 4120089; 

604555, 4120119; 604414, 4120139; 

604263, 4120151; 604157, 4120145; 

604024, 4120117; 603930, 4120140; 

603827, 4120202; 603692, 4120233; 

603621, 4120283; 603584, 4120418; 

603491, 4120502; 603421, 4120536; 

603323, 4120533; 603257, 4120527; 

603186, 4120531; 603061, 4120582; 

603033, 4120676; 602970, 4120751; 

returning to 602892, 4120825. 

(ii) Note: Unit 7 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly is depicted on Map 6 in 

paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(13) Unit 8 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Calero Reservoir, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Unit 8: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 605493, 4116867; 

605661, 4116896; 605718, 4116853; 

605799, 4116844; 605856, 4116923; 

605938, 4116906; 606045, 4116752; 

606122, 4116520; 606156, 4116383; 

606165, 4116288; 606051, 4116182; 

606069, 4116127; 606132, 4116039; 

606177, 4116025; 606230, 4116083; 

606269, 4115997; 606336, 4116015; 

606337, 4115938; 606300, 4115931; 

606262, 4115861; 606326, 4115838; 

606387, 4115849; 606433, 4115829; 

606519, 4115734; 606574, 4115740; 

606867, 4115901; 606937, 4115907; 

606994, 4115890; 607043, 4115856; 

607081, 4115818; 607068, 4115755; 

607090, 4115693; 607144, 4115664; 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48213 

607241, 4115643; 607290, 4115588; 

607342, 4115554; 607159, 4115391; 

607119, 4115368; 607073, 4115389; 

607047, 4115495; 606903, 4115584; 

606837, 4115586; 606861, 4115560; 

606919, 4115549; 606944, 4115530; 

606950, 4115482; 606978, 4115469; 

606996, 4115393; 606975, 4115370; 

606902, 4115402; 606901, 4115371; 

606921, 4115339; 606904, 4115306; 

606880, 4115337; 606861, 4115296; 

606876, 4115251; 606935, 4115241; 

606958, 4115263; 606986, 4115195; 

607026, 4115199; 607027, 4115255; 

607060, 4115266; 607082, 4115207; 

607089, 4115149; 607179, 4115149; 

607266, 4115115; 607415, 4115156; 

607464, 4115136; 607555, 4115164; 

607716, 4115136; 607712, 4115003; 

607657, 4114850; 607604, 4114753; 

607518, 4114686; 607611, 4114702; 

607791, 4114919; 607826, 4114984; 

607808, 4115366; 607972, 4115293; 

608186, 4115186; 608470, 4115055; 

608850, 4114830; 608992, 4114854; 

609129, 4114812; 609117, 4115020; 

608880, 4115233; 608512, 4115397; 

608059, 4115492; 608029, 4115644; 

607959, 4115592; 607880, 4115595; 

607966, 4115726; 608052, 4115817; 

608155, 4115878; 608258, 4115908; 

608358, 4115910; 608437, 4115938; 

608556, 4115906; 608545, 4115971; 

608608, 4115990; 608682, 4115957; 

608750, 4115901; 608776, 4115906; 

608815, 4115934; 608892, 4115927; 

608946, 4115873; 608948, 4115826; 

608906, 4115731; 608967, 4115710; 

609032, 4115647; 609481, 4115100; 

609477, 4115025; 609577, 4114951; 

609821, 4114856; 609866, 4114711; 

609880, 4114582; 610030, 4114486; 

610081, 4114398; 610120, 4114330; 

610159, 4114322; 610155, 4114287; 

610124, 4114240; 610287, 4114038; 

610327, 4113965; 610319, 4113865; 

610257, 4113742; 610202, 4113705; 

610079, 4113729; 609993, 4113754; 

609891, 4113813; 609798, 4113845; 

609735, 4113885; 609737, 4113963; 

609663, 4114035; 609563, 4114088; 

609524, 4114248; 609455, 4114356; 

609212, 4114403; 609004, 4114676; 

608945, 4114439; 608774, 4114422; 

608635, 4114302; 608547, 4114164; 

608453, 4113729; 608135, 4113470; 

608079, 4113433; 608043, 4113356; 

608038, 4113230; 608012, 4113254; 

607980, 4113238; 607947, 4113270; 

607907, 4113243; 607855, 4113282; 

607814, 4113362; 607802, 4113545; 

607694, 4113606; 607526, 4113700; 

607691, 4113754; 607691, 4114069; 

607465, 4114176; 607326, 4114660; 

606930, 4114755; 606709, 4114597; 

606401, 4114641; 606250, 4114805; 

605916, 4114924; 605715, 4115195; 

605293, 4115604; 605224, 4115604; 

605180, 4115755; 605224, 4115869; 

605035, 4116101; 605042, 4116215; 

605067, 4116309; 605123, 4116366; 

605229, 4116454; 605338, 4116598; 

605387, 4116705; returning to 605493, 

4116867. 

(ii) Note: Unit 8 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly is depicted on Map 6 in 

paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(14) Unit 9 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Kalana Hills, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Subunit 9A: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 612463, 4115364; 

612548, 4115283; 612611, 4115228; 

612581, 4115190; 612560, 4115157; 

612725, 4114962; 612697, 4114924; 

612640, 4114916; 612512, 4114806; 

612469, 4114770; 612456, 4114706; 

612331, 4114635; 612276, 4114621; 

612159, 4114668; 612036, 4114796; 

611975, 4114842; 611928, 4114901; 

611857, 4114927; 611811, 4114924; 

611806, 4115198; 611735, 4115382; 

611703, 4115487; 611772, 4115526; 

611741, 4115600; 611742, 4115605; 

612028, 4115820; returning to 612463, 

4115364. 

(ii) Subunit 9B: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 613292, 4114458; 

613477, 4114328; 613645, 4114236; 

613859, 4114112; 613800, 4114081; 

613704, 4114080; 613628, 4114115; 

613585, 4114092; 613570, 4114010; 

613464, 4114059; 613430, 4114072; 

613412, 4114118; 613349, 4114160; 

613257, 4114211; 613194, 4114197; 

613162, 4114145; 613100, 4114181; 

613139, 4114270; 613039, 4114320; 

612961, 4114257; 612887, 4114301; 

612805, 4114303; 612782, 4114273; 

612765, 4114285; 612767, 4114321; 

612781, 4114386; 612835, 4114456; 

612806, 4114528; 612760, 4114555; 

612828, 4114608; 612909, 4114620; 

613022, 4114548; 613029, 4114509; 

612967, 4114492; 612953, 4114422; 

612990, 4114368; 613090, 4114360; 

613112, 4114463; 613178, 4114499; 

returning to 613292, 4114458. 

(iii) Note: Unit 9 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly is depicted on Map 6 in 

paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(15) Unit 10 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Morgan Hill, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles San Jose East, Lick 

Observatory, Santa Teresa Hills, and 

Morgan Hill. 

(i) Unit 10: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 617448, 4111989; 

617422, 4111978; 617343, 4111978; 

617295, 4111947; 617252, 4111862; 

617269, 4111828; 617405, 4111774; 

617445, 4111797; 617501, 4111797; 

617512, 4111746; 617589, 4111729; 

617733, 4111766; 618083, 4111853; 

618116, 4111766; 618023, 4111705; 

617936, 4111647; 617899, 4111684; 

617764, 4111596; 617933, 4111368; 

617964, 4111303; 617953, 4111188; 

617891, 4111138; 617937, 4111083; 

617919, 4111040; 617865, 4111014; 

617798, 4111069; 617586, 4110876; 

617618, 4110838; 617504, 4110738; 

617459, 4110704; 617380, 4110673; 

617197, 4110835; 617009, 4111119; 

616981, 4111133; 616936, 4111110; 

616925, 4111147; 616908, 4111187; 

616885, 4111204; 616843, 4111232; 

616817, 4111274; 616809, 4111303; 

616781, 4111297; 616758, 4111257; 

616724, 4111221; 616713, 4111159; 

616744, 4111088; 616724, 4111060; 

616730, 4111037; 616789, 4110983; 

616702, 4110933; 616668, 4110952; 

616620, 4110952; 616611, 4110901; 

616436, 4111062; 616394, 4111037; 

616410, 4110989; 616472, 4110988; 

616532, 4110930; 616523, 4110872; 

616555, 4110831; 616077, 4110537; 

616073, 4110327; 615914, 4110402; 

615846, 4110431; 615912, 4110524; 

615761, 4110576; 615745, 4110646; 

615715, 4110728; 615645, 4110790; 

615684, 4110906; 615779, 4110867; 

615779, 4110825; 615918, 4110725; 

616038, 4110856; 615936, 4110930; 

615947, 4111077; 615894, 4111105; 

615830, 4111216; 615902, 4111306; 

615866, 4111429; 615933, 4111449; 

616044, 4111449; 616147, 4111428; 

616225, 4111410; 616275, 4111430; 

616313, 4111483; 616368, 4111489; 

616399, 4111520; 616394, 4111579; 

616380, 4111625; 616430, 4111650; 

616484, 4111622; 616498, 4111585; 

616555, 4111562; 616671, 4111591; 

616659, 4111653; 616685, 4111715; 

616741, 4111780; 616846, 4111829; 

616677, 4112120; 616760, 4112261; 

616792, 4112343; 617011, 4112356; 

617160, 4112394; 617286, 4112306; 

617433, 4112045; returning to 617448, 

4111989. 

(ii) Note: Map of Units 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 

and 10 for bay checkerspot butterfly 

(Map 6) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48214 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22AU07.018</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48215 

(16) Unit 11 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: Bear Ranch, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangle Gilroy. 

(i) Unit 11: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 627973, 4108674; 

627997, 4108657; 628036, 4108657; 

628517, 4109013; 628547, 4108986; 

628569, 4108953; 628609, 4108899; 

628654, 4108810; 628675, 4108776; 

628697, 4108753; 628708, 4108717; 

628701, 4108687; 628683, 4108668; 

628708, 4108618; 628719, 4108578; 

628726, 4108557; 628743, 4108538; 

628759, 4108514; 628766, 4108489; 

628774, 4108448; 628776, 4108413; 

628784, 4108394; 628817, 4108358; 

628831, 4108330; 628826, 4108298; 

628807, 4108267; 628805, 4108252; 

628827, 4108246; 628860, 4108239; 

628888, 4108215; 628898, 4108190; 

628894, 4108156; 628900, 4108135; 

628887, 4108097; 628904, 4108060; 

628979, 4108058; 629013, 4108041; 

629055, 4108005; 629077, 4107951; 

629088, 4107915; 629087, 4107847; 

629078, 4107807; 629067, 4107784; 

629066, 4107756; 629091, 4107733; 

629173, 4107654; 629175, 4107635; 

629169, 4107615; 629169, 4107587; 

629179, 4107557; 629175, 4107530; 

629168, 4107503; 629165, 4107484; 

629171, 4107459; 629187, 4107421; 

629189, 4107417; 629202, 4107391; 

629194, 4107359; 629201, 4107321; 

629205, 4107280; 629212, 4107231; 

629207, 4107184; 629180, 4107141; 

629074, 4107086; 628673, 4107122; 

628603, 4107130; 628601, 4107162; 

628573, 4107168; 628532, 4107165; 

628503, 4107198; 628506, 4107272; 

628469, 4107287; 628445, 4107329; 

628430, 4107404; 628394, 4107391; 

628343, 4107380; 628308, 4107377; 

628283, 4107408; 628271, 4107440; 

628262, 4107475; 628245, 4107455; 

628210, 4107426; 628174, 4107460; 

628124, 4107465; 628093, 4107495; 

628053, 4107491; 628029, 4107548; 

628013, 4107667; 628012, 4107711; 

627993, 4107768; 627991, 4107794; 

628009, 4107788; 628016, 4107820; 

628005, 4107861; 628010, 4107889; 

628036, 4107929; 628033, 4107940; 

628018, 4107951; 628013, 4107968; 

628015, 4108010; 627996, 4108039; 

627986, 4108074; 627971, 4108126; 

627966, 4108194; 627951, 4108213; 

627936, 4108263; 627899, 4108298; 

627893, 4108347; 627914, 4108383; 

627912, 4108399; 627808, 4108571; 

627781, 4108644; 627779, 4108668; 

627787, 4108683; 627818, 4108682; 

627856, 4108676; 627906, 4108689; 

627933, 4108694; returning to 627973, 

4108674. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 11 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 7) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48216 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22AU07.019</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 48217 

(17) Unit 12 for bay checkerspot 

butterfly: San Martin, Santa Clara 

County, California. From USGS 1:24,000 

scale quadrangles Mt. Madonna and 

Gilroy. 

(i) Unit 12: Land bounded by the 

following UTM zone 10, NAD 1983 

coordinates (E,N): 622117, 4104697; 

622143, 4104673; 622172, 4104651; 

622221, 4104573; 622271, 4104488; 

622281, 4104444; 622254, 4104303; 

622265, 4104278; 622317, 4104276; 

622354, 4104249; 622389, 4104240; 

622423, 4104196; 622439, 4104145; 

622461, 4104090; 622457, 4104054; 

622432, 4104015; 622411, 4103941; 

622393, 4103859; 622404, 4103809; 

622421, 4103769; 622421, 4103689; 

622441, 4103649; 622487, 4103631; 

622538, 4103599; 622557, 4103529; 

622591, 4103461; 622575, 4103406; 

622538, 4103358; 622441, 4103346; 

622399, 4103363; 622352, 4103322; 

622274, 4103300; 622206, 4103304; 

622098, 4103341; 622020, 4103370; 

621920, 4103382; 621843, 4103390; 

621812, 4103362; 621779, 4103365; 

621739, 4103372; 621700, 4103404; 

621682, 4103449; 621705, 4103496; 

621667, 4103560; 621569, 4103489; 

621509, 4103489; 621463, 4103477; 

621464, 4103459; 621411, 4103467; 

621348, 4103472; 621288, 4103477; 

621223, 4103476; 621183, 4103476; 

621127, 4103476; 621079, 4103490; 

621030, 4103508; 620988, 4103525; 

620973, 4103571; 620996, 4103623; 

621025, 4103666; 621055, 4103695; 

621076, 4103707; 621079, 4103733; 

621087, 4103764; 621112, 4103805; 

621046, 4103796; 621009, 4103805; 

620979, 4103791; 620922, 4103774; 

620887, 4103775; 620871, 4103811; 

620845, 4103873; 620806, 4103922; 

620751, 4103944; 620702, 4103984; 

620679, 4103961; 620627, 4103961; 

620593, 4103979; 620591, 4104020; 

620568, 4104053; 620542, 4104032; 

620509, 4104030; 620482, 4104039; 

620450, 4104073; 620393, 4104116; 

620330, 4104174; 620283, 4104200; 

620255, 4104240; 620230, 4104262; 

620197, 4104288; 620191, 4104325; 

620193, 4104362; 620203, 4104399; 

620176, 4104412; 620126, 4104472; 

620132, 4104499; 620211, 4104578; 

620245, 4104578; 620329, 4104574; 

620440, 4104541; 620510, 4104492; 

620543, 4104480; 620529, 4104405; 

620612, 4104386; 620646, 4104431; 

620657, 4104489; 620672, 4104509; 

620728, 4104541; 620794, 4104556; 

620852, 4104539; 620909, 4104525; 

620931, 4104568; 620942, 4104598; 

620946, 4104627; 620968, 4104627; 

620988, 4104586; 621013, 4104556; 

621034, 4104566; 621046, 4104621; 

621098, 4104634; 621083, 4104537; 

621176, 4104528; 621262, 4104540; 

621334, 4104549; 621398, 4104575; 

621488, 4104622; 621559, 4104617; 

621598, 4104563; 621688, 4104533; 

621739, 4104536; 621811, 4104464; 

621836, 4104417; 621908, 4104391; 

621947, 4104386; 621930, 4104434; 

621900, 4104474; 621915, 4104511; 

621952, 4104544; 622003, 4104529; 

622034, 4104556; 622021, 4104585; 

622011, 4104596; 622029, 4104622; 

622038, 4104647; 622064, 4104649; 

622094, 4104646; 622113, 4104680; 

returning to 622117, 4104697. 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 12 for bay 

checkerspot butterfly (Map 8) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
48218 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 162 / Wednesday, August 22, 2007 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * Dated: August 13, 2007. 

Todd Willens, 

Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. 07–4060 Filed 8–21–07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP22AU07.020</GPH>