[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 25 (Monday, February 7, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 5946-5976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-2600]



[[Page 5945]]

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

Part III





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 17



Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Determination 
of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California Gnatcatcher; Proposed 
Rule

Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 25 / Monday, February 7, 2000 / 
Proposed Rules

[[Page 5946]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AF32


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed 
Determination of Critical Habitat for the Coastal California 
Gnatcatcher

AGENCY:  Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION:  Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY:  We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose 
designation of critical habitat for the coastal California gnatcatcher 
pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The 
proposed critical habitat unit boundaries encompasses approximately 
323,726 hectares (799,916 acres) of gnatcatcher habitat in Los Angeles, 
Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, California. 
The actual area containing gnatcatcher habitat is smaller.
    Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and 
unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species 
and that may require special management considerations or protection. 
The primary constituent elements for the gnatcatcher are those habitat 
components that are essential for the primary biological needs of 
foraging, nesting, rearing of young, intra-specific communication, 
roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering (Atwood 1990). 
Areas that do not currently contain all of the primary constituent 
elements, but that could develop them in the future, may be essential 
to the conservation of the species and may be designated as critical 
habitat.
    Proposed critical habitat does not include lands covered by an 
existing, legally operative, incidental take permit for the coastal 
California gnatcatcher under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The 
Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) provide for special management and 
protection under the terms of the permit and the lands covered by them 
are therefore not proposed for inclusion in the critical habitat.
    In areas where HCPs have not yet had permits issued, we have 
proposed critical habitat for lands encompassing core populations of 
gnatcatchers and areas essential for habitat connectivity which may 
require special management considerations or protections.
    We solicit data and comments from the public on all aspects of this 
proposal, including data on economic and other impacts of the 
designation and our approaches for handling HCPs. We may revise this 
proposal to incorporate or address new information received during the 
comment period.

DATES: Comments: We will consider comments received by April 7, 2000.
    Public Hearings: The dates of three public hearings scheduled for 
this proposal are:

1. Los Angeles and Orange Counties--February 15, 2000.
2. San Diego County--February 17, 2000.
3. Riverside and San Bernardino Counties--February 23, 2000.

    All public hearings will be held from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. and 
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Comments: If you wish to comment, you may submit your 
comments and materials concerning this proposal by any one of several 
methods.
    You may submit written comments and information to the Field 
Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, California 92008.
    You may hand-deliver written comments to our Carlsbad Fish and 
Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue 
West, Carlsbad, California 92008.
    You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#107667217371777e507667633e777f66"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="157362247674727b557362663b727a63">[email protected]</span></a>. Please submit comments in ASCII file format and avoid 
the use of special characters and encryption. Please include ``Attn: 
[RIN number]'' and your name and return address in your e-mail message. 
If you do not receive a confirmation from the system that we have 
received your e-mail message, contact us directly by calling our 
Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office at phone number 760-431-9440.
    Public Hearings: Three public hearings are scheduled. Public 
hearing locations are:

1. Los Angeles and Orange Counties--Sheraton Anaheim Hotel, 1015 West 
Ball Road, Anaheim, California.
2. San Diego County--San Diego Hilton Mission Valley, 901 Camino del 
Rio South, San Diego, California.
3. Riverside and Bernardino Counties--Holiday Inn Select Riverside, 
3400 Market Street, Riverside, California.

    Availability of Documents: 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 Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Field Supervisor, Carlsbad Fish and 
Wildlife Office, at the above address (telephone: 760/431-9440; 
facsimile 760/431-9624). For information about western Los Angeles 
County, contact the Field Supervisor, Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2493 Portola Road Suite B, Ventura, 
California 93003 (telephone: 805/644-1766; facsimile 805/644-3958).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The insectivorous coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila 
californica californica) is a small (length 11 centimeters (4.5 
inches), weight 6 grams (0.2 ounces)), long-tailed member of the old-
world warbler and gnatcatcher family Sylviidae (American Ornithologist 
Union 1998). The bird's plumage is dark blue-gray above and grayish-
white below. The tail is mostly black above and below. The male has a 
distinctive black cap which is absent during the winter. Both sexes 
have a distinctive white eye-ring.
    The coastal California gnatcatcher is one of three subspecies of 
the California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica). This taxon is 
restricted to coastal southern California and northwestern Baja 
California, Mexico, from Ventura and San Bernardino Counties, 
California, south to approximately El Rosario, Mexico, at about 30 deg. 
north latitude (American Ornithologists' Union 1957, Atwood 1991, Banks 
and Gardner 1992, Garrett and Dunn 1981). An evaluation of the historic 
range of the coastal California gnatcatcher indicates that about 41 
percent of its latitudinal distribution is within the United States and 
59 percent within Baja California, Mexico (Atwood 1990). A more 
detailed analysis, based on elevational limits associated with 
gnatcatcher locality records, reveals that a significant portion (65 to 
70 percent) of the coastal California gnatcatcher's historic range may 
have been located in southern California rather than Baja California 
(Atwood 1992). The analysis suggested that the species occurs below 
about 912 meters (m) (3,000 feet (ft)) in elevation. Of the 
approximately 8,700 historic or current locations used in the analysis 
for this proposed rule, more than 99 percent were below 770 m (2,500 
ft).
    The coastal California gnatcatcher was considered locally common in 
the mid-1940s although a decline in the extent of its habitat was noted 
(Grinnell and Miller 1944). By the 1960s, this species had apparently 
experienced a significant population decline in the United States that 
has been attributed to widespread destruction of its habitat.

[[Page 5947]]

Pyle and Small (1961) reported that ``the California subspecies is very 
rare, and lack of recent records of this race compared with older 
records may indicate a drastic reduction in population.'' Atwood (1980) 
estimated that no more than 1,000 to 1,500 pairs remained in the United 
States. He also noted that remnant portions of its habitat were highly 
fragmented with nearly all being bordered on at least one side by 
rapidly expanding urban centers. Subsequent reviews of coastal 
California gnatcatcher status by Garrett and Dunn (1981) and Unitt 
(1984) paralleled the findings of Atwood (1980). The species was listed 
as threatened in March 1993, due to habitat loss and fragmentation 
resulting from urban and agricultural development, and the synergistic 
effects of cowbird parasitism and predation (58 FR 16742).
    The coastal California gnatcatcher typically occurs in or near sage 
scrub habitat, which is a broad category of vegetation that includes 
the following plant communities as classified by Holland (1986): 
Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan coastal sage scrub, maritime 
succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan 
(areas created when sediments from the stream are deposited) scrub, 
southern coastal bluff scrub, and coastal sage-chaparral scrub. Based 
upon dominant species, these communities have been further divided into 
series such as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat, 
California buckwheat-white sage, California encelia, California 
sagebrush, California sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-
California buckwheat, coast prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage, 
scalebroom, and white sage (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995).
    The majority of plant species found in sage scrub habitat are low-
growing, drought-deciduous shrubs and sub-shrubs. Generally speaking, 
most types of sage scrub are dominated by one or more of the 
following-- California sagebrush (Artemisia californica), buckwheats 
(Eriogonum fasciculatum and E. cinereum), encelias (Encelia californica 
and E. farinosa), and various sages (commonly Salvia mellifera, S. 
apiana, and S. leucophylla). Sage scrub often occurs in a patchy, or 
mosaic, distribution pattern throughout the range of the gnatcatcher.
    Gnatcatchers also use chaparral (shrubby plants adapted to dry 
summers and moist winters), grassland, and riparian (areas near a 
source of water) habitats where they occur in proximity to sage scrub. 
These non-sage scrub habitats are used for dispersal and foraging 
(Atwood et al. 1998; Campbell et al. 1998). Availability of these non-
sage scrub areas may be essential during certain times of the year, 
particularly during drought conditions, for dispersal, foraging, or 
nesting.
    A comprehensive overview of the life history and ecology of the 
coastal California gnatcatcher is provided by Atwood (1990) and is the 
basis for much of the discussion presented below. The coastal 
California gnatcatcher is non-migratory and defends breeding 
territories ranging in size from 1 to 6 hectares (ha) (2 to 14 acres 
(ac)). Reported home ranges vary in size from 5 to 15 ha (13 to 39 ac) 
for this species (Mock and Jones 1990). The breeding season of the 
coastal California gnatcatcher extends from late February through July 
with the peak of nest initiations (startups) occurring from mid-March 
through mid-May. Nests are composed of grasses, bark strips, small 
leaves, spider webs, down, and other materials and are often located in 
California sagebrush about 1 m (3 ft) above the ground. Nests are 
constructed over a 4- to 10-day period. Clutch size averages four eggs. 
The incubation and nestling periods encompass about 14 and 16 days, 
respectively. Both sexes participate in all phases of the nesting 
cycle. Although the coastal California gnatcatcher may occasionally 
produce two broods in one nesting season, the frequency of this 
behavior is not known. Juveniles are dependent upon, or remain closely 
associated with, their parents for up to several months following 
departure from the nest and dispersal from their natal (place of birth) 
territory.
    Dispersal of juveniles generally requires a corridor of native 
vegetation providing certain foraging and shelter requisites to link 
larger patches of appropriate sage scrub vegetation (Soule 1991). These 
dispersal corridors facilitate the exchange of genetic material and 
provide a path for recolonization of areas from which the species has 
been extirpated (Soule 1991 and Galvin 1998). It has been suggested 
that ``natal dispersal [through corridors] is therefore an important 
aspect of the biology of [a] * * * nonmigratory, territorial bird * * * 
[such as] the California gnatcatcher * * *'' Galvin (1998). Although it 
has also been suggested that juvenile coastal California gnatcatchers 
are capable of dispersing long distances (up to 22 kilometers (14 
miles)) across fragmented and highly disturbed sage scrub habitat, such 
as found along highway and utility corridors or remnant mosaics of 
habitat adjacent to developed lands, generally the species disperses 
short distances through contiguous, undisturbed habitat (Bailey and 
Mock 1998, Famolaro and Newman 1998, and Galvin 1998). Moreover, it is 
likely that populations will experience increased juvenile mortality in 
fragmented habitats where dispersal distances are greater than average 
(Atwood et al. 1998). This would be particularly true if dispersal was 
across non-or sub-optimal habitats that function as population sinks 
(areas where mortality is greater than reproduction rates) (Soule 
1991).

Previous Federal Action

    On March 30, 1993, we published a final rule determining the 
gnatcatcher to be a threatened species (58 FR 16741). In making this 
determination, we relied, in part, on taxonomic studies conducted by 
Dr. Jonathan Atwood of the Manomet Bird Observatory. As is standard 
practice in the scientific community, we cited the conclusions by Dr. 
Atwood in a peer reviewed, published scientific article pertaining to 
the subspecific taxonomy of the gnatcatcher (Atwood 1991).
    On December 10, 1993, we published a final special rule concerning 
the take of the gnatcatcher pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act (58 FR 
63088). This rule defines the conditions for which incidental take of 
the gnatcatcher resulting from certain land-use practices regulated by 
State and local governments through the Natural Community Conservation 
Planning Act of 1991 (NCCP) would not be a violation of section 9 of 
the Act. We found that implementation of the special 4(d) rule and the 
NCCP program provides for conservation and management of the 
gnatcatcher and its habitat in a manner consistent with the purposes of 
the Act.
    The Endangered Species Committee of the Building Industry 
Association of Southern California and other plaintiffs filed a suit 
challenging the listing on several grounds, but primarily based on our 
conclusions regarding gnatcatcher taxonomy. In a Memorandum Opinion and 
Order filed in the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia 
(District Court) on May 2, 1994, the District Court vacated the listing 
determination, holding that the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) 
should have made available the underlying data that formed the basis of 
Dr. Atwood's conclusions on the taxonomy of the gnatcatcher.
    Following the District Court's decision, Dr. Atwood released his 
data to the Service. We made these data available to the public for 
review and comment on June 2, 1994 (59 FR 28508). By order dated June 
16, 1994, the District Court reinstated the threatened

[[Page 5948]]

status of the gnatcatcher pending a determination by the Secretary 
whether the listing should be revised or revoked in light of the public 
review and comment of Dr. Atwood's data. On March 27, 1995, we 
published a determination to retain the threatened status for the 
gnatcatcher (60 FR 15693).
    At the time of the listing, we concluded that designation of 
critical habitat for the gnatcatcher was not prudent because such 
designation would not benefit the species and would make the species 
more vulnerable to activities prohibited under section 9 of the Act. We 
were aware of several instances of apparently intentional habitat 
destruction that had occurred during the listing process. In addition, 
most land occupied by the gnatcatcher was in private ownership, and we 
did not believe a designation of critical habitat to be of benefit 
because of a lack of a Federal nexus (critical habitat has regulatory 
applicability only for activities carried out, funded, or authorized by 
a Federal agency).
    On May 21, 1997, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 
issued an opinion (Natural Resources Defense Council v. U.S. Department 
of the Interior, 113 F. 3d 1121) that required us to issue a new 
decision regarding the prudency of determining critical habitat for the 
gnatcatcher. In this opinion, the Court held that the ``increased 
threat'' criterion in the regulations may justify a not prudent finding 
only when we have weighed the benefits of designation against the risks 
of designation. Secondly, with respect to the ``not beneficial'' 
criterion explicit in the regulations, the Court ruled that our 
conclusion that designation of critical habitat was not prudent because 
it would fail to control the majority of land-use activities within 
critical habitat was inconsistent with Congressional intent that the 
not prudent exception to designation should apply ``only in rare 
circumstances.'' The Court noted that a substantial portion of 
gnatcatcher habitat would be subject to a future Federal nexus 
sufficient to trigger section 7 consultation requirements regarding 
critical habitat. Thirdly, the Circuit Court determined that our 
conclusion that designation of critical habitat would be less 
beneficial to the species than another type of protection (e.g., State 
of California Natural Communities Conservation Program (NCCP) efforts) 
did not absolve us from the requirement to designate critical habitat. 
The Court also criticized the lack of specificity in our analysis.
    On February 8, 1999, we published a notice of determination in the 
Federal Register (64 FR 5957) regarding the prudency of designating 
critical habitat for the gnatcatcher. We found that the designation of 
critical habitat was prudent on Federal lands within the range of the 
gnatcatcher and nonFederal lands where a current or likely future 
Federal nexus exists. We determined that designating critical habitat 
on private lands lacking a current or likely future Federal nexus or 
any lands subject to the provision of an approved HCP under section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act and/or an approved NCCP under which the 
gnatcatcher is a covered species would provide no additional benefit to 
the species. Further, we determined that the threats (e.g., activities 
prohibited under section 9 of the Act) from designating critical 
habitat on private lands would outweigh the benefits in certain areas.
    On August 4, 1999, in response to a motion filed by the Natural 
Resources Defense Council, the U.S. District Court for the Central 
District of California ordered the Service to propose critical habitat 
by October 4, 1999. In response to this order and in preparation of a 
proposal using our prudency determination (64 FR 5957), we had 
difficulty delineating critical habitat because of the uncertainty 
regarding likely future Federal nexuses. Since publication of the 
determination, we discovered that the Federal nexuses relied on in our 
prudency determination for several development projects no longer 
existed. Conversely, other projects were found to have current Federal 
nexuses, which were lacking when we developed the prudency 
determination. Given the unpredictability of determining whether a 
Federal nexus is likely to exist on any given parcel of private land, 
we have reevaluated our previous conclusion and now conclude that there 
may be a regulatory benefit from designating critical habitat for the 
gnatcatcher on private lands now lacking an identifiable Federal nexus 
because such lands may have a nexus to a Federal agency action in the 
future.
    In our prudency determination (64 FR 5957), we described the threat 
posed by vandalism towards the gnatcatcher and its habitat, largely 
coastal sage scrub. We cited several cases under investigation by our 
Law Enforcement Division and various newspaper articles regarding this 
threat. We determined that the designation of critical habitat would 
increase the instances of habitat destruction and exacerbate threats to 
the gnatcatcher. Therefore, we concluded that the threat posed by 
vandalism that would result from designating private lands lacking a 
Federal nexus as critical habitat would outweigh the benefit that would 
be provided. We acknowledged that critical habitat may provide some 
benefit by highlighting areas where the species may occur or areas that 
are important to recovery. However, we stated that such locational data 
are well known, and designation of critical habitat on private lands 
may incite some members of the public and increase incidences of 
habitat vandalism above current levels.
    We have reconsidered our evaluation in the prudency determination 
of the threats posed by vandalism. We have determined that the threats 
to the gnatcatcher and its habitat from the specific instances of 
habitat destruction we identified do not outweigh the broader 
educational, and any potential regulatory and other possible benefits, 
that a designation of critical habitat would provide for this species. 
The instances of likely vandalism, though real, were relatively 
isolated given the wide-ranging habitat of the gnatcatcher. 
Additionally, having determined that the existence of current or likely 
future Federal nexuses is an unreliable basis upon which to include or 
exclude private lands as critical habitat, we are not compelled to 
identify specific scattered parcels of private land with presumptive 
Federal nexuses. Instead, we are able to use a landscape approach in 
identifying areas for critical habitat designation that does not appear 
to highlight individual parcels of private land. Consequently, we 
conclude that designating critical habitat on private lands will not 
increase incidences of habitat vandalism above current levels for this 
species. In contrast, a designation of critical habitat will provide 
some educational benefit by formally identifying on a range-wide basis 
those areas essential to the conservation of the species and, thus, the 
areas likely to be the focus of our recovery efforts for the 
gnatcatcher. Therefore, we conclude that the benefits of designating 
critical habitat on nonFederal lands essential for the conservation of 
the gnatcatcher outweigh the risks of increased vandalism resulting 
from such designation.
    The Service considered the existing status of lands in designating 
areas as critical habitat. Section 10(a) of the Act authorizes us to 
issue permits for the taking of listed species incidental to otherwise 
lawful activities. Incidental take permit applications must be 
supported by a HCP that identifies conservation measures that the 
permittee agrees to implement for the species to minimize and mitigate 
the impacts of the requested incidental take. NonFederal lands that are 
covered by an

[[Page 5949]]

existing operative permit issued for California gnatcatcher under 
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act receive special management and 
protection under the terms of the permit and are therefore not being 
proposed for inclusion in critical habitat.
    We expect that critical habitat may be used as a tool to help 
identify areas within the range of the California gnatcatcher most 
critical for the conservation of the species, and we will encourage 
development of HCPs for such areas on nonFederal lands. We consider 
HCPs to be one of the most important methods through which nonFederal 
landowners can resolve endangered species conflicts. We provide 
technical assistance and work closely with applicants throughout 
development of HCPs to help identify special management considerations 
for the California gnatcatcher. HCPs provide a package of protection 
and management measures sufficient to address the conservation needs of 
the species. Therefore, we have not included any lands covered by an 
existing legally-operative incidental take permit for California 
gnatcatcher in this proposed critical habitat designation.
    In light of our decision to reconsider the prudency determination, 
we needed additional time to revise the determination (64 FR 5957) and 
develop a proposed critical habitat rule based on the revised 
determination. We therefore requested an extension of 120 days in which 
to reevaluate prudency and propose critical habitat, which the District 
Court granted. The Court also ordered us to publish a final critical 
habitat rule by September 30, 2000.

Critical Habitat

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3 of the Act as--(i) the 
specific areas within the geographic 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 geographic 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'' means the use of all methods and procedures that are 
necessary to bring an endangered or a threatened species to the point 
at which listing under the Act is no longer necessary.
    Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and 
unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species 
and that may require special management considerations or protection. 
Areas that do not currently contain all of the primary constituent 
elements, but that could develop them in the future, may be essential 
to the conservation of the species and may be designated as critical 
habitat.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or 
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 also requires conferences on 
Federal actions that are likely to result in the adverse modification 
or destruction of proposed critical habitat. Aside from the added 
protection that may be provided under section 7, the Act does not 
provide other forms of protection to lands designated as critical 
habitat. Because consultation under section 7 of the Act does not apply 
to activities on private or other nonFederal lands that do not involve 
a Federal nexus, critical habitat designation would not afford any 
protection under the Act against such activities.
    Designating critical habitat does not, in itself, lead to recovery 
of a listed species. Designation does not create a management plan, 
establish a preserve area where no actions are allowed, establish 
numerical population goals, prescribe specific management actions 
(inside or outside of critical habitat), or directly affect areas not 
designated as critical habitat. Specific management recommendations for 
areas designated as critical habitat are most appropriately addressed 
in recovery plans and management plans, and through section 7 
consultation and section 10 HCPs.
    Section 3(5)(C) of the Act generally requires that not all areas 
that can be occupied by a species be designated as critical habitat. 
Therefore, not all areas containing the primary constituent elements 
are necessarily essential to the conservation of the species. Areas 
that contain one or more of the primary constituent elements that may 
support gnatcatchers, but are not included within critical habitat 
boundaries, would be considered under other parts of the Act and/or 
other conservation laws and regulations.

Methods

    In determining areas that are essential to conserve the 
gnatcatcher, we used the best scientific and commercial data available. 
This included data from research and survey observations published in 
peer reviewed articles; regional Geographic Information System (GIS) 
coverages; habitat evaluation models for the San Diego County Multiple 
Species Conservation Plan (MSCP), the North San Diego County Multiple 
Habitat Conservation Plans (MHCP), and the North County Subarea of the 
MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego County; approved HCPs; and data 
collected from reports submitted by biologists holding section 
10(a)(1)(A) recovery permits. Following the listing of the species, a 
concerted effort was undertaken to survey significant portions of the 
species' range in San Diego and Orange Counties for the purpose of 
developing and implementing HCPs, and more recently, surveys of varying 
intensity have been conducted in Los Angeles, Riverside, San 
Bernardino, and Ventura Counties.

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 critical 
habitat, we are required to base critical habitat determinations on the 
best scientific and commercial data available and to consider those 
physical and biological features that are essential to the conservation 
of the species and that may require special management considerations 
and protection. Such requirements 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, 
rearing of offspring; and habitats that are protected from disturbance 
or are representative of the historic geographical and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    The areas we are proposing to designate as critical habitat provide 
some or all of those habitat components essential for the primary 
biological needs of the gnatcatcher also called primary constituent 
elements.
    The primary constituent elements for the gnatcatcher are those 
habitat components that are essential for the primary biological needs 
of foraging, nesting, rearing of young, intra-specific communication, 
roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, or sheltering (Atwood 1990). 
Primary constituent elements are provided in undeveloped areas, 
including agricultural lands, that support or have the potential to 
support, through natural successional processes, various types of sage 
scrub or chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur 
proximally to sage scrub and where they may be utilized for biological 
needs such as breeding and foraging (Atwood et al. 1998, Campbell et 
al. 1998). Primary constituent elements associated with the biological

[[Page 5950]]

needs of dispersal are also found in undeveloped areas, including 
agricultural lands, that provide or could provide connectivity or 
linkage between or within larger core areas, including open space and 
disturbed areas containing introduced plant species that may receive 
only periodic use.
    Primary constituent elements include, but are not limited to, the 
following plant communities--Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan 
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, 
Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and 
coastal sage-chaparral scrub (Holland 1986). Based upon dominant 
species, these communities have been further divided into series such 
as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat, California buckwheat-
white sage, California encelia, California sagebrush, California 
sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-California buckwheat, coast 
prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage, scalebroom, and white sage 
(Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). Dominant plants within these communities 
include California sagebrush, buckwheats, encelias, and various sages 
(commonly Salvia mellifera, S. apiana, and S. leucophylla). Other 
commonly occurring plants include coast goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), 
bush monkeyflower (Mimulus aurantiacus), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus 
mexicana), bladderpod (Isomeris arborea), deerweed (Lotus scoparius), 
chaparral mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatum), laurel sumac (Malosma 
laurina), and several species of Rhus (R. integrifolia, R. ovata, and 
R. trilobata). Succulent species, such as boxthorn (Lycium spp.), cliff 
spurge (Euphorbia misera), jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), and various 
species of cacti (Opuntia littoralis, O. prolifera, and Ferocactus 
viridescens), and live-forever (Dudleya spp.), are represented in 
maritime succulent scrub, coast prickly-pear scrub, and southern 
coastal bluff scrubs.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

    We considered several qualitative criteria in the selection and 
proposal of specific areas or units for gnatcatcher critical habitat. 
Such criteria focused on designating units--(1) Throughout the 
geographical and elevational range of the species; (2) within various 
occupied plant communities, such as Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan 
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage scrub, 
Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, and 
coastal sage-chaparral scrub; (3) in documented areas of large, 
contiguous blocks of occupied habitat (i.e., core population areas); 
and/or in areas that link core populations areas (i.e., linkage areas). 
These criteria are similar to criteria used to identify reserve/
preserve lands in approved HCPs covering the gnatcatcher.
    To identify proposed critical habitat units, we first examined 
those lands identified for conservation under approved HCPs covering 
the gnatcatcher. These planning efforts utilized habitat evaluation 
models, gnatcatcher occurrence data, and reserve design criteria to 
identify reserve systems of core gnatcatcher populations and linkage 
areas that are essential for the conservation of the species.
    We then evaluated those areas where on-going habitat conservation 
planning efforts have resulted in the preparation of biological 
analyses that identify habitat important for the conservation of the 
gnatcatcher. These include--the Western Riverside County MSHCP, the 
Rancho Palos Verdes MSHCP, the North San Diego County MHCP, the North 
County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego County, and the 
Southern Subregion of Orange County's NCCP. We used those biological 
analyses in concert with data regarding current gnatcatcher 
occurrences--(1) sage scrub vegetation, (2) elevation, and (3) 
connectivity to identify those lands that are essential for the 
conservation of the gnatcatcher within the respective planning area 
boundaries.
    Finally, we evaluated other lands for their conservation value for 
the gnatcatcher. We delimited a study area by selecting geographic 
boundaries based on the following--(1) gnatcatcher occurrences, (2) 
sage scrub vegetation, (3) elevation, and (4) connectivity to other 
gnatcatcher occurrences. We determined conservation value based on the 
presence of, or proximity to, significant gnatcatcher core populations 
and/or sage scrub, sage scrub habitat quality, parcel or habitat patch 
size, surrounding land-uses, and potential to support resident 
gnatcatchers and/or facilitate movement of birds between known habitat 
areas.
    Proposed Critical Habitat Units are defined by specific map units 
that have been delineated using public land survey (PLS) sections 
(generally one square mile) or Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) 
coordinates in Spanish Land Grant areas (areas which have not been 
surveyed for inclusion into PLS). On Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 
we used training area boundaries and UTM coordinates. Within the Orange 
County NCCP Central/Coastal Subregions we used boundaries of select 
Existing Land Use and North Ranch Policy Plan areas.
    We did not map critical habitat in sufficient detail to exclude all 
developed areas such as towns, housing developments, and other lands 
unlikely to contain primary constituent elements essential for 
gnatcatcher conservation. Within the delineated critical habitat unit 
boundaries, only lands where one or more constituent elements are found 
are proposed for critical habitat. Existing features and structures 
within proposed areas, such as buildings, roads, aqueducts, railroads, 
and other features, do not contain one or more of the primary 
constituent elements. Therefore, these areas are not proposed for 
critical habitat.

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

    The approximate area of proposed critical habitat by county and 
land ownership is shown in Table 1. Proposed critical habitat includes 
gnatcatcher habitat throughout the species' range in the United States 
(i.e., Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego 
Counties, California). Lands proposed are under private, State, and 
Federal ownership, with Federal lands including lands managed by the 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Department of Defense (DOD), Service, 
and Forest Service. Lands proposed as critical habitat have been 
divided into 15 Critical Habitat Units. A brief description of each 
unit and reasons for proposing it as critical habitat are presented 
below.
    Table 1. Approximate proposed critical habitat area (hectares 
(acres)) by county and land ownership. Estimates reflect the total area 
within critical habitat unit boundaries, without regard to the presence 
of primary constituent elements. The area actually proposed as critical 
habitat is therefore less than that indicated in Table 1.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             County                    Federal*           Local/state           Private              Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Los Angeles....................  4,407 ha...........  1,066 ha..........  28,795 ha.........  34,268 ha
                                 (10,890 ac)........  (2,633 ac)........  (71,151 ac).......  (84,675 ac)

[[Page 5951]]

 
Orange.........................  1,428 ha...........  3,736 ha..........  34,128 ha.........  39,346 ha
                                 (3,529 ac).........  (9,232 ac)........  (84,463 ac).......  (97,224 ac)
Riverside......................  7,378 ha...........  7,430 ha..........  90,726 ha.........  105,534 ha
                                 (18,230 ac)........  (18,360 ac).......  (224,181 ac)......  (260,771 ac)
San Bernardino.................  2,952 ha...........  352 ha............  29,666 ha.........  32,971 ha
                                 (7,295 ac).........  (870 ac)..........  (73,304 ac).......  (81,470 ac)
San Diego......................  35,767 ha..........  2,597 ha..........  73,243 ha.........  111,607 ha
                                 (88,378 ac)........  (6,418 ac)........  (180,981 ac)......  (275,777 ac)
                                --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total....................  51,932 ha..........  15,181 ha.........  256,558 ha........  323,726 ha
                                 (128,322 ac).......  (37,513 ac).......  (634,080 ac)......  (799,916 ac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*Federal lands include Bureau of Land Management, Department of Defense, National Forest, and Fish and Wildlife
  Service lands.

Unit 1: San Diego Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP)

    Unit 1 encompasses approximately 20,697 ha (51,141 ac) within the 
MSCP planning area. Lands proposed contain core gnatcatcher 
populations, sage scrub and areas providing connectivity between core 
populations and sage scrub. Proposed critical habitat includes lands 
within the MSCP planning areas that have not received incidental take 
permits for the gnatcatcher under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. This 
includes lands essential to the conservation of the gnatcatcher within: 
the cities of Chula Vista, El Cajon, and Santee; major amendment areas 
within the San Diego County Subarea Plan; the Otay-Sweetwater Unit of 
the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex; and water district 
lands owned by Sweetwater Authority, Helix Water District and Otay 
Water District.

Unit 2: Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar

    Unit 2 encompasses approximately 4,859 ha (12,007 ac) on Marine 
Corps Air Station, Miramar (Station). Lands proposed include areas 
identified as occupied by core gnatcatcher populations in the Station's 
proposed Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan as well as canyons 
and corridors that provide east-west and north-south linkages to 
defined preserve lands adjacent to this unit.

Unit 3: Multiple Habitat Conservation Open Space Program (MHCOSP) for 
San Diego County

    Unit 3 encompasses approximately 6,014 ha (14,860 ac) within the 
MHCOSP. Lands proposed include a core population of gnatcatchers on the 
Cleveland National Forest south of State Route 78 near the upper 
reaches of the San Diego River. It also includes important corridors of 
sage scrub for connectivity.

Unit 4: North San Diego County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan 
(MHCP)

    Unit 4 encompasses approximately 28,542 ha (70,526 ac) within the 
MHCP planning area in northwestern San Diego County. Lands proposed 
contain core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub identified by the 
San Diego Association of Governments' (SANDAG) ``Gnatcatcher Habitat 
Evaluation Model,'' dated March 24, 1999, as high or moderate value. In 
addition, areas proposed provide connectivity between habitat valued as 
high or moderate. This unit also provides connectivity between core 
gnatcatcher populations within adjacent units.

Unit 5: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton

    Unit 5 encompasses approximately 20,613 ha (50,935 ac) on Marine 
Corps Base Camp Pendleton (Base). Areas proposed include 26 training 
areas and portions of an additional 9 training areas (refer to the 
legal description for this unit for the names of the training areas 
affected). The Base contains a substantial coastal corridor of 
gnatcatcher-occupied sage scrub that provides the primary linkage 
between San Diego populations and those in southern Orange County (Unit 
8). Another corridor of gnatcatcher-occupied sage scrub occurs along 
the Santa Margarita River valley that branches inland, connecting with 
habitat in the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station (Unit 6) and further 
north into southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).

Unit 6: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station

    Unit 6 encompasses approximately 3,606 ha (8,909 ac) on Fallbrook 
Naval Weapons Station in northern San Diego County. The unit provides a 
significant segment of a corridor of sage scrub between core 
gnatcatcher populations on Camp Pendleton (Unit 5) and populations in 
southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).

Unit 7: North County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated San Diego 
County

    Unit 7 encompasses approximately 27,295 ha (67,446 ac) within the 
planning area for the North County Subarea of the MSCP for San Diego 
County. Lands proposed contain several core gnatcatcher populations and 
sage scrub identified as high or moderate value. In addition, proposed 
areas provide connectivity between habitat valued as high or moderate. 
This unit constitutes the primary inland linkage between San Diego 
populations and those in southwestern Riverside County (Unit 12).

Unit 8: Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County

    Unit 8 encompasses approximately 27,828 ha (68,763 ac) within the 
planning area for the Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County. This 
unit contains significant core populations and provides the primary 
linkage for core populations on Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton (Unit 
5) to those further north in Orange County (Unit 9).

Unit 9: Central/Coastal NCCP Subregions of Orange County (Central/
Coastal NCCP)

    Unit 9 encompasses approximately 2,337 ha (5,776 ac) within the 
Orange County Central/Coastal NCCP planning area. It includes lands 
containing core gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat 
determined to be essential for the conservation and recovery of the 
gnatcatcher within select Existing-Use Areas, the western portion of 
the North Ranch Policy Plan Area (i.e., west of State Route 241), and 
the designated reserve (panhandle portion) of Marine Corps Air Station 
El Toro.

Unit 10: Palos Verdes Peninsula Subregion, Los Angeles County

    Unit 10 encompasses approximately 5,588 ha (13,808 ac) within the

[[Page 5952]]

subregional planning area for the Palos Verdes Peninsula in Los Angeles 
County, including the City of Rancho Palos Verdes MSHCP area. This unit 
includes a core gnatcatcher population and sage scrub habitat.

Unit 11: East Los Angeles County-Matrix NCCP Subregion of Orange County

    Unit 11 encompasses approximately 22,130 ha (54,682 ac) within the 
Montebello, Chino-Puente Hills, East Coyote Hills and West Coyote Hills 
area. The unit provides the primary connectivity between core 
gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat within the Central/
Coastal Subregions of the Orange County NCCP (Unit 9), the Western 
Riverside County MSHCP (Unit 12), and the Bonelli Regional Park core 
population within the North Los Angeles linkage (Unit 14).

Unit 12: Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation 
Plan (MSHCP)

    Unit 12 encompasses approximately 106,908 ha (264,167 ac) within 
the proposed planning area for the Western Riverside County MSHCP. 
Lands proposed include core populations within the Temecula/Murietta/
Lake Skinner region and the Lake Elsinore/Lake Mathews region. Also 
proposed are regions of connectivity and additional core populations 
that occur along the I-15 corridor, the Lake Perris area, the 
Alessandro Heights area, the Box Spring Mountains/The Badlands, and 
along the foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains into the Chino-Puente 
Hills. These areas provide connectivity between core populations within 
Riverside County and to populations in San Diego, San Bernardino, 
Orange, and Los Angeles Counties. Unit 12 encompasses some of the Core 
Reserves established under the Stephens' Kangaroo Rat HCP. The Lake 
Mathews/Estelle Mountain, Steele Peak, Lake Perris/San Jacinto Core 
Reserves, the Potrero Area of Critical Environmental Concern, and the 
Southwestern Riverside County Multi-Species Reserve provide essential 
habitat for the gnatcatcher and, therefore, have been proposed for 
designation as critical habitat.

Unit 13: San Bernardino Valley MSHCP, San Bernardino County

    Unit 13 encompasses approximately 30,076 ha (74,316 ac) along the 
foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains and within the Jurupa Hills on 
the border of San Bernardino and Riverside Counties. The unit includes 
lands within the San Bernardino National Forest and on Norton Air Force 
Base. This unit contains breeding gnatcatcher populations and 
constitutes a primary linkage between western Riverside County (Unit 
12) and eastern Los Angeles County (Unit 11).

Unit 14: East Los Angeles County Linkage

    Unit 14 encompasses approximately 3,384 ha (8,361 ac) in eastern 
Los Angeles County along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. 
Its main function is in establishing the primary east-west connectivity 
of sage scrub habitat between core gnatcatcher populations in San 
Bernardino County (Unit 13) to those in southeastern Los Angeles County 
(Unit 11).

Unit 15: Western Los Angeles County

    Unit 15 encompasses approximately 13,897 ha (34,339 ac) in western 
Los Angeles county along the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains. It 
includes breeding gnatcatcher populations and sage scrub habitat in the 
Placerita, Box Springs Canyon, and Plum Canyon areas. This unit 
encompasses the northern distributional extreme of the gnatcatcher's 
current range.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

Section 7 Consultation 

    Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the 
Service, to ensure that actions they fund, authorize, or carry out do 
not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat to the extent that the 
action appreciably diminishes the value of the critical habitat for the 
survival and recovery of the species. Individuals, organizations, 
States, local governments, and other nonFederal entities are affected 
by the designation of critical habitat only if their actions occur on 
Federal lands, require a Federal permit, license, or other 
authorization, or involve Federal funding.
    Section 7(a) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including the 
Service, to evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is 
proposed or listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its 
critical habitat, if any is designated or proposed. Regulations 
implementing this interagency cooperation provision of the Act are 
codified at 50 CFR part 402. Section 7(a)(4) requires Federal agencies 
to confer with us on any action that is likely to jeopardize the 
continued existence of a proposed species or result in destruction or 
adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. Conference reports 
provide conservation recommendations to assist the agency in 
eliminating conflicts that may be caused by the proposed action. The 
conservation recommendations in a conference report are advisory. If a 
species is listed or critical habitat is designated, section 7(a)(2) 
requires Federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, 
or carry out are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of 
such a species or to destroy or adversely modify its critical habitat. 
If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its critical 
habitat, the responsible Federal agency (action agency) must enter into 
consultation with us. Through this consultation we would ensure that 
the permitted actions do not destroy or adversely modify critical 
habitat.
    When we issue a biological opinion concluding that a project is 
likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat, we also provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the 
project, if any are identifiable. Reasonable and prudent alternatives 
are defined at 50 CFR 402.02 as alternative actions identified during 
consultation that can be implemented in a manner consistent with the 
intended purpose of the action, that are consistent with the scope of 
the Federal agency's legal authority and jurisdiction, that are 
economically and technologically feasible, and that the Director 
believes would avoid destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat.
    Reasonable and prudent alternatives can vary from slight project 
modifications to extensive redesign or relocation of the project. Costs 
associated with implementing a reasonable and prudent alternative are 
similarly variable.
    Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require Federal agencies to reinitiate 
consultation on previously reviewed actions in instances where critical 
habitat is subsequently designated and the Federal agency has retained 
discretionary involvement or control over the action or such 
discretionary involvement or control is authorized by law. 
Consequently, some Federal agencies may request reinitiation of 
consultation or conferencing with us on actions for which formal 
consultation has been completed if those actions may affect designated 
critical habitat or adversely modify or destroy proposed critical 
habitat.
    We may issue a formal conference report if requested by a Federal 
agency. Formal conference reports on proposed critical habitat contain 
a biological opinion that is prepared according to 50 CFR 402.14, as if 
critical habitat were designated. We may adopt the formal conference 
report as the biological opinion when the critical habitat is

[[Page 5953]]

designated, if no significant new information or changes in the action 
alter the content of the opinion (see 50 CFR 402.10(d)).
    Activities on Federal lands that may affect the coastal California 
gnatcatcher or its critical habitat will require section 7 
consultation. Activities on private or State lands requiring a permit 
from a Federal agency, such as a permit from the U. S. Army Corps of 
Engineers (Army Corps) under section 404 of the Clean Water Act, or 
some other Federal action, including funding (e.g., Federal Highway 
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, or Federal Emergency 
Management Agency) will also continue to be subject to the section 7 
consultation process. Federal actions not affecting listed species or 
critical habitat and actions on nonFederal lands that are not federally 
funded or permitted do not require section 7 consultation.
    Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us to evaluate briefly in any 
proposed or final regulation that designates critical habitat those 
activities involving a Federal action that may adversely modify such 
habitat or that may be affected by such designation. Activities that 
may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat include those that 
alter the primary constituent elements to an extent that the value of 
critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher 
is appreciably reduced. We note that such activities may also 
jeopardize the continued existence of the species. Activities that, 
when carried out, funded, or authorized by a Federal agency, may 
directly or indirectly adversely affect critical habitat include, but 
are not limited to--
    (1) Removing, thinning, or destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as 
defined in the primary constituent elements discussion), whether by 
burning or mechanical, chemical, or other means (e.g., woodcutting, 
grubbing, grading, overgrazing, construction, road building, mining, 
herbicide application, etc.) and
    (2) Appreciably decreasing habitat value or quality through 
indirect effects (e.g., noise, edge effects, invasion of exotic plants 
or animals, or fragmentation).
    To properly portray the effects of critical habitat designation, we 
must first compare the section 7 requirements for actions that may 
affect critical habitat with the requirements for actions that may 
affect a listed species. Section 7 prohibits actions funded, 
authorized, or carried out by Federal agencies from jeopardizing the 
continued existence of a listed species or destroying or adversely 
modifying the listed species' critical habitat. Actions likely to 
``jeopardize the continued existence'' of a species are those that 
would appreciably reduce the likelihood of the species' survival and 
recovery. Actions likely to ``destroy or adversely modify'' critical 
habitat are those that would appreciably reduce the value of critical 
habitat for the survival and recovery of the listed species.
    Common to both definitions is an appreciable detrimental effect on 
both survival and recovery of a listed species. Given the similarity of 
these definitions, actions likely to destroy or adversely modify 
critical habitat would almost always result in jeopardy to the species 
concerned, particularly when the area of the proposed action is 
occupied by the species concerned. In those cases, critical habitat 
provides little additional protection to a species, and the 
ramifications of its designation are few or none. However, if occupied 
habitat becomes unoccupied in the future, there is a potential benefit 
to critical habitat in such areas.
    Federal agencies already consult with us on activities in areas 
currently occupied by the species to ensure that their actions do not 
jeopardize the continued existence of the species. These actions 
include, but are not limited to--
    (1) Regulation of activities affecting waters of the United States 
by the Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water 
Act;
    (2) Regulation of water flows, damming, diversion, and 
channelization by Federal agencies;
    (3) Regulation of grazing, mining, and recreation by the BLM or 
Forest Service;
    (4) Road construction and maintenance, right of way designation, 
and regulation of agricultural activities;
    (5) Regulation of airport improvement activities by the Federal 
Aviation Administration jurisdiction;
    (6) Military training and maneuvers on Marine Corps Base Camp 
Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar and other applicable 
DOD lands;
    (7) Construction of roads and fences along the International Border 
with Mexico, and associated immigration enforcement activities by the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service;
    (8) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency;
    (9) Construction of communication sites licensed by the Federal 
Communications Commission; and
    (10) Activities funded by the U. S. Environmental Protection 
Agency, Department of Energy, or any other Federal agency.
    All proposed critical habitat is within the geographical area 
occupied by the species and is likely used by gnatcatchers, whether by 
reproductive, territorial birds, or by birds merely moving through the 
area. Thus, in a broad sense, we consider all critical habitat to be 
occupied by the species. Federal agencies already consult with us on 
activities in areas currently occupied by the species to ensure that 
their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species, 
thus we do not anticipate additional regulatory protection will result 
from critical habitat designation.

Relationship to Incidental Take Permits Issued Under Section 10

    Several habitat conservation planning efforts have been completed 
within the range of the gnatcatcher. Principal among these are NCCP 
efforts in Orange and San Diego Counties. NCCP plans completed and 
permitted to date have resulted in the conservation of 40,208 ha 
(99,310 ac) of gnatcatcher habitat.
    In southwestern San Diego County, the development of the MSCP has 
resulted in our approval of three subarea plans under section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. These three southern subarea plans account for 
approximately 95 percent of the gnatcatcher habitat in southern San 
Diego County. When fully implemented, the MSCP will result in the 
establishment of conservation areas that collectively contain 28,844 ha 
(71,274 ac) of coastal sage scrub vegetation within a 69,573-ha 
(171,917-ac) preserve area.
    Additionally, we have approved the Orange County Central-Coastal 
NCCP/HCP and issued an incidental take permit under section 10(a)(1)(B) 
of the Act. Implementation of the plan will result in the conservation 
of 15,677 ha (38,738 ac) of Reserve lands, which contain 7,621 ha 
(18,831 ac) of coastal sage scrub.
    The gnatcatcher habitat in the approved planning areas in San Diego 
and Orange Counties was selected, with our technical assistance and 
that of the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), for 
permanent preservation and configuration into a biologically viable 
interlocking system of reserves by the local jurisdictions. The reserve 
system established within the approved planning areas includes those 
habitat areas that we consider essential to the long-term survival and 
recovery of the gnatcatcher. In addition, the plans detail management 
measures for the reserve lands that protect, restore, and enhance their 
value as gnatcatcher habitat.
    The essential gnatcatcher habitat that is within planning areas is 
permanently

[[Page 5954]]

protected in the habitat reserves; no additional private lands within 
the planning areas warrant designation as critical habitat. Because the 
gnatcatcher habitat preserved in the planning areas is managed for the 
benefit of the gnatcatcher under the terms of the plans, and associated 
section 10 (a)(1)(B) permits there are no ``additional management 
considerations or protections'' required for those lands. Therefore, we 
have determined that private lands within approved HCP planning areas 
and covered by an existing section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the 
gnatcatcher do not meet the definition of critical habitat in the Act, 
and we are not proposing designation of such lands as critical habitat.
    We also have approved several smaller multiple species HCPs in San 
Diego Riverside, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties. These include, 
Bennett Property, Meadowlark Estates, Fieldstone, and Poway Subarea 
Plan in San Diego County; Coyote Hills East and Shell Oil in Orange 
County; Ocean Trails in Los Angeles County; and Lake Mathews in 
Riverside County. These efforts have resulted in the protection of 
3,743 ha (9,250 ac) of gnatcatcher habitat.
    The currently approved and permitted HCPs are designed to ensure 
the long-term survival of covered species, including the gnatcatcher, 
within the plan areas. The reserve lands and other conservation lands 
that require protection under these approved plans encompass those 
lands essential for the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher. The 
HCPs and implementation agreements outline management measures and 
protections for the conservation lands that are crafted to protect, 
restore, and enhance their value as gnatcatcher habitat. Because 
appropriate management and protection of areas essential for the 
conservation of the gnatcatcher are required under these approved and 
permitted plans, we do not believe these areas meet the definition of 
critical habitat nor do we believe they require designation.
    As is the case with existing approved gnatcatcher HCPs, the 
gnatcatcher plans currently under development will provide for 
protection and management of habitat areas essential for the 
conservation of the gnatcatcher while directing development and habitat 
modification to nonessential areas of lower habitat value. The HCP 
development process provides an opportunity for more intensive data 
collection and analysis regarding the use of particular habitat areas 
by gnatcatchers. The process also enables us to conduct detailed 
evaluations of the importance of such lands to the long term survival 
of the species in the context of constructing a biologically configured 
system of interlinked habitat blocks. We fully expect that HCPs 
undertaken by local jurisdictions (e.g., counties, cities) and other 
parties will identify, protect, and provide appropriate management for 
those specific lands within the boundaries of the plans that are 
essential for the long-term conservation of the species. We believe and 
fully expect that our analyses of these proposed HCPs and proposed 
permits under section 7 will show that covered activities carried out 
in accordance with the provisions of the HCPs and permits will not 
result in destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat.
    We provide technical assistance and work closely with applicants 
throughout the development of HCPs to identify appropriate conservation 
management and lands essential for the long-term conservation of the 
gnatcatcher. Several HCP efforts are now underway for the gnatcatcher 
and other listed and non-listed species, in Orange, Los Angeles, 
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties in areas proposed 
herein as critical habitat. These HCPs, coupled with appropriate 
adaptive management, should provide for the conservation of the 
species. We are soliciting comments on whether future approval of HCPs 
and issuance of section 10(a)(1)(B) permits for the gnatcatcher should 
trigger revision of designated critical habitat to exclude lands within 
the HCP area and, if so, by what mechanism (see Public Comments 
Solicited section).

Relationship to the 4(d) Special Rule for the Gnatcatcher

    On December 10, 1993, a final special rule concerning take of the 
gnatcatcher was published pursuant to section 4(d) of the Act (58 FR 
63088). Under the 4(d) special rule, incidental take of gnatcatchers is 
not considered to be a violation of section 9 of the Act if--(1) Take 
results from activities conducted pursuant to the requirements of the 
NCCP and in accordance with an approved NCCP plan for the protection of 
coastal sage scrub habitat, prepared consistent with the State of 
California's Conservation and Process Guidelines (Guidelines) dated 
November 1993; and (2) the Service issues written concurrence that the 
plan meets the standards for issuance of an incidental take permit 
under 50 CFR 17.32(b)(2). Within enrolled subregions actively engaged 
in the preparation of an NCCP plan, the take of gnatcatchers will not 
be a violation of section 9 of the Act if such take results from 
activities conducted in accordance with the Guidelines. The Guidelines 
limit habitat loss during the interim planning period to no more than 5 
percent of coastal sage scrub with lower long-term conservation 
potential in existence at the time of adoption of the 4(d) special 
rule.
    The Guidelines specify criteria to evaluate the long-term 
conservation potential of sage scrub that is proposed for loss during 
the period that NCCP plans are being developed to assist participating 
jurisdictions in providing interim protection for areas that support 
habitat that is likely to be important to conservation of the 
gnatcatcher. These jurisdictions are--the Southern and Matrix 
subregions of Orange County; the cities of Rancho Palos Verdes and San 
Dimas in Los Angeles County; MSCP subareas in the cities of Santee, El 
Cajon, Chula Vista, and Coronado; the MHCP Subregion of northwestern 
San Diego County; the North County Subarea of San Diego's MSCP; San 
Diego County's MHCOSP; and six water districts in San Diego County.
    We intend that participating jurisdictions will be able to continue 
to apply the 4(d) special rule within designated critical habitat and 
to issue Habitat Loss Permits, with the joint concurrence of us and the 
CDFG, provided the jurisdictions are actively working to complete their 
subarea plans and adhere to the Guidelines. To be consistent with the 
Guidelines, the jurisdictions must find, and we and CDFG must concur, 
that:
    1. The proposed habitat loss is consistent with the interim loss 
criteria in the Guidelines and with any subregional process if 
established by the subregion:
    (a) the habitat loss does not cumulatively exceed the 5 percent 
guideline;
    (b) the habitat loss will not preclude connectivity between areas 
of high habitat values;
    (c) the habitat loss will not preclude or prevent the preparation 
of the subregional NCCP;
    (d) the habitat loss has been minimized and mitigated to the 
maximum extent practicable in accordance with section 4.3 of the 
Guidelines.
    2. The habitat loss will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of 
the survival and recovery of listed species in the wild, and
    3. The habitat loss is incidental to otherwise lawful activities.
    Because, in addition to avoiding jeopardy to the gnatcatcher, the 
Guidelines direct habitat loss to areas with low long-term conservation 
potential that will not preclude

[[Page 5955]]

development of adequate NCCP plans and ensure that connectivity between 
areas of high habitat value will be maintained, we believe that 
allowing a small percentage of habitat loss within designated critical 
habitat pursuant to the 4(d) rule is not likely to adversely modify or 
destroy critical habitat by appreciably reducing its value for both the 
survival and recovery of the species. When we make a final critical 
habitat determination, we will prepare a new biological opinion on the 
4(d) rule to formally evaluate the effects of the rule on designated 
critical habitat.
    Requests for copies of the regulations on listed wildlife and 
inquiries about prohibitions and permits may be addressed to the U. S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service, Branch of Endangered Species, 911 NE. 11th 
Ave., Portland, OR 97232 (telephone 503-231-2063, facsimile 503-231-
6143).

Economic Analysis

    Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate critical 
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial data 
available and to consider the economic and other relevant impacts of 
designating a particular area as critical habitat. We may exclude areas 
from critical habitat upon a determination that the benefits of such 
exclusions outweigh the benefits of specifying such areas as critical 
habitat. We cannot exclude such areas from critical habitat when such 
exclusion will result in the extinction of the species. Although we 
could not identify any incremental effects of this proposed critical 
habitat designation above those impacts of listing, we will conduct an 
economic analysis to further evaluate this finding. We will conduct the 
economic analysis for this proposal prior to a final determination. 
When the draft economic analysis is completed, we will announce its 
availability with a notice in the Federal Register, and we will reopen 
the comment period for 30 days at that time to accept comments on the 
economic analysis or further comment on the proposed rule.

Public Comments Solicited

    It is our intent that any final action resulting from this proposal 
will be as accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit 
comments or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental 
agencies, the scientific community, industry or any other interested 
party concerning this proposed rule.
    In this proposed rule, we do not propose to designate critical 
habitat on nonFederal lands within the boundaries of an existing 
approved HCP and covered by an existing legally operative incidental 
take permit for California gnatcatchers issued under section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act because the existing HCPs provide for 
development in nonessential areas and establish long-term commitments 
to conserve the species and areas essential to the conservation of the 
gnatcatcher. Therefore, we believe that such areas do not meet the 
definition of critical habitat because they do not need special 
management considerations or protection. However, we are specifically 
soliciting comments on the appropriateness of this approach and on the 
following or other alternative approaches for critical habitat 
designation in areas covered by existing approved HCPs:
    (1) Designate critical habitat without regard to existing HCP 
boundaries and allow the section 7 consultation process on the issuance 
of the incidental take permit to ensure that any take we authorized 
will not destroy or adversely modify critical habitat;
    (2) Designate reserves, preserves, and other conservation lands 
identified by approved HCPs, on the premise that they encompass areas 
that are essential to conservation of the species within the HCP area 
and that will continue to require special management protection in the 
future. Under this approach, all other lands covered by existing 
approved HCPs where incidental take for the gnatcatcher is authorized 
under a legally operative permit pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the 
Act would be excluded from critical habitat.
    The amount of critical habitat we designate for the gnatcatcher in 
a final rule may either increase or decrease, depending upon which 
approach we adopt for dealing with designation in areas of existing 
approved HCPs.
    Additionally, we are seeking comments on critical habitat 
designation relative to future HCPs. Several conservation planning 
efforts are now underway for the gnatcatcher (and other listed and 
nonlisted species) in Orange, Los Angeles, Riverside, San Bernardino, 
and San Diego Counties in areas we are proposing as critical habitat. 
For areas where HCPs are currently under development, we are proposing 
to designate critical habitat for areas that we believe are essential 
to the conservation of the species and need special management or 
protection. We invite comments on the appropriateness of this approach.
    In addition, we invite comments on the following or other 
approaches for addressing critical habitat within the boundaries of 
future approved HCPs upon issuance of section 10(a)(1)(B) permits for 
the gnatcatcher--
    (1) Retain critical habitat designation within the HCP boundaries 
and use the section 7 consultation process on the issuance of the 
incidental take permit to ensure that any take we authorize will not 
destroy or adversely modify critical habitat;
    (2) Revise the critical habitat designation upon approval of the 
HCP and issuance of the section 10(a)(1)(B) permit to retain only 
preserve areas, on the premise that they encompass areas essential for 
the conservation of the species within the HCP area and require special 
management and protection in the future. Assuming that we conclude, at 
the time an HCP is approved and the associated incidental take permit 
is issued, that the plan protects those areas essential to the 
conservation of the gnatcatcher, we would revise the critical habitat 
designation to exclude areas outside the reserves, preserves, or other 
conservation lands established under the plan. Consistent with our 
listing program priorities, we would publish a proposed rule in the 
Federal Register to revise the critical habitat boundaries;
    (3) As in (2) above, retain only preserve lands within the critical 
habitat designation, on the premise that they encompass areas essential 
for conservation of the species within the HCP area and require special 
management and protection in the future. However, under this approach, 
the exclusion of areas outside the preserve lands from critical habitat 
would occur automatically upon issuance of the incidental take permit. 
The public would be notified and have the opportunity to comment on the 
boundaries of the preserve lands and the revision of designated 
critical habitat during the public review and comment process for HCP 
approval and permitting;
    (4) Remove designated critical habitat entirely from within the 
boundaries of an HCP when the plan is approved (including preserve 
lands), on the premise that the HCP establishes long-term commitments 
to conserve the species and no further special management or protection 
is required. Consistent with our listing program priorities, we would 
publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register to revise the critical 
habitat boundaries; or
    (5) Remove designated critical habitat entirely from within the 
boundaries of HCPs when the plans are approved (including preserve 
lands), on the premise that the HCP establishes long-term commitments 
to conserve the species and no additional special management or 
protection is required.

[[Page 5956]]

This exclusion from critical habitat would occur automatically upon 
issuance of the incidental take permit. The public would be notified 
and have the opportunity to comment on the revision of designated 
critical habitat during the public notification process for HCP 
approval and permitting.
    Additionally, we are seeking comments on the following--
    (1) The reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined 
to be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act, including 
whether the benefits of designation will outweigh any threats to the 
species due to designation or other consequences to conservation of the 
gnatcatcher resulting from designation;
    (2) Specific information on the amount and distribution of 
gnatcatchers and what habitat is essential to the conservation of the 
species and why;
    (3) Land use practices and current or planned activities in the 
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
    (4) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the 
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on 
small entities or families; and
    (5) Economic and other values associated with designating critical 
habitat for the gnatcatcher such as those derived from non-consumptive 
uses (e.g., hiking, camping, bird-watching, enhanced watershed 
protection, improved air quality, increased soil retention, ``existence 
values,'' and reductions in administrative costs).
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold 
their home address from the rulemaking record, which we will honor to 
the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which 
we would withhold from the rulemaking record a respondent's identity, 
as allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or 
address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your 
comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make 
all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals 
identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations 
or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate 
and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose 
of such review is to ensure decisions are based on scientifically sound 
data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send these peer reviewers 
copies of this proposed rule 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 critical habitat.
    We will consider all comments and data received during the 60-day 
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 requested. Given the large geographic extent covered by this 
proposal, the high likelihood of multiple requests, and the need to 
publish the final determination by September 30, 2000, we have 
scheduled three hearings. The hearings are scheduled to be held in 
Anaheim for Los Angeles and Orange Counties on February 15, 2000; in 
San Diego for San Diego County on February 17, 2000; and in Riverside 
for Riverside and San Bernardino Counties on February 23, 2000. Written 
comments submitted during the comment period will receive equal 
consideration as comments presented at a public hearing. For additional 
information on public hearings see the ADDRESSES section.

Clarity of the Rule

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations and 
notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to 
make this proposed rule easier to understand including answers to 
questions such as the following--(1) Are the requirements in the 
document clearly stated? (2) Does the proposed rule contain technical 
language or jargon that interferes with the clarity? (3) Does the 
format of the proposed rule (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the 
description of the proposed rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section of the preamble helpful in understanding the document? (5) What 
else could we do to make the proposed rule easier to understand?

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review

    This document has been reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB), in accordance with Executive Order 12866. OMB makes the 
final determination under Executive Order 12866.
    (a) This rule will not have an annual economic effect of $100 
million or adversely affect an economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 
environment, or other units of government. A cost-benefit and economic 
analysis is not required. The coastal California gnatcatcher was listed 
as a threatened species in 1993. In fiscal years 1998 through 2000 we 
have conducted 50 formal section 7 consultations with other Federal 
agencies to ensure that their actions would not jeopardize the 
continued existence of the gnatcatcher. We have also issued an 
estimated 15 section 10(a)(1)(B) incidental take permits for entities 
that have prepared HCPs for areas where the species occurs.
    The areas proposed for critical habitat are currently occupied by 
the coastal California gnatcatcher. Under the Act, critical habitat may 
not be adversely modified by a Federal agency action; it does not 
impose any restrictions on nonFederal persons unless they are 
conducting activities funded or otherwise sponsored or permitted by a 
Federal agency (see Table 2 below). Section 7 requires Federal agencies 
to ensure that they do not jeopardize the continued existence of the 
species. Based upon our experience with the species and its needs, we 
conclude that any Federal action or authorized action that could 
potentially cause an adverse modification of the proposed critical 
habitat would currently be considered as ``jeopardy'' under the Act. 
Accordingly, the designation of currently occupied areas as critical 
habitat does not have any incremental impacts on what actions may or 
may not be conducted by Federal agencies or nonFederal persons that 
receive Federal authorization or funding. NonFederal persons that do 
not have a Federal ``sponsorship'' of their actions are not restricted 
by the designation of critical habitat (they continue to be bound by 
the provisions of the Act concerning ``take'' of the species).
    (b) This rule will not create inconsistencies with other agencies' 
actions. As discussed above, Federal agencies have been required to 
ensure that their actions do not jeopardize the continued existence of 
the coastal California gnatcatcher since the listing in 1993. The 
prohibition against adverse modification of critical habitat is not

[[Page 5957]]

expected to impose any additional restrictions to those that currently 
exist because all proposed critical habitat is occupied. Because of the 
potential for impacts on other Federal agency activities, we will 
continue to review this proposed action for any inconsistencies with 
other Federal agency actions.
    (c) This rule will not materially affect entitlements, grants, user 
fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their recipients. 
Federal agencies are currently required to ensure that their activities 
do not jeopardize the continued existence of the species, and as 
discussed above we do not anticipate that the adverse modification 
prohibition (resulting from critical habitat designation) will have any 
incremental effects.
    (d) This rule will not raise novel legal or policy issues. The 
proposed rule follows the requirements for determining critical habitat 
contained in the Endangered Species Act.

                   Table 2.--Impacts of Gnatcatcher Listing and Critical Habitat Designation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                          Additional activities
                                          Activities potentially affected by species     potentially affected by
       Categories of activities                        listing only \1\                      critical habitat
                                                                                             designation \2\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Activities Potentially         Activities such as removing, thinning, or         None
 Affected \3\.                          destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as defined in
                                        the primary constituent elements discussion),
                                        whether by burning or mechanical, chemical, or
                                        other means (e.g. woodcutting, grubbing,
                                        grading, overgrazing, construction, road
                                        building, mining, herbicide application, etc.)
                                        and appreciably decreasing habitat value or
                                        quality through indirect effects (e.g. noise,
                                        edge effects, invasion of exotic plants or
                                        animals, or fragmentation that the Federal
                                        Government carries out.
Private Activities Potentially         Activities such as removing, thinning, or         None
 Affected \4\.                          destroying gnatcatcher habitat (as defined in
                                        the primary constituent elements discussion),
                                        whether by burning or mechanical, chemical, or
                                        other means (e.g. woodcutting, grubbing,
                                        grading, overgrazing, construction, road
                                        building, mining, herbicide application, etc.)
                                        and appreciably decreasing habitat value or
                                        quality through indirect effects (e.g. noise,
                                        edge effects, invasion of exotic plants or
                                        animals, or fragmentation that require a
                                        Federal action (permit, authorization, or
                                        funding).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This column represents the activities potentially affected by listing the gnatcatcher as a threatened
  species (March 30, 1993; 58 FR 16741) under the Endangered Species Act.
\2\ This column represents the activities potentially affected by the critical habitat designation in addition
  to those activities potentially affected by listing the species.
\3\ Activities initiated by a Federal agency.
\4\ Activities initiated by a private entity that may need Federal authorization or funding.

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

    In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of 
critical habitat will have a significant effect on a substantial number 
of small entities. As discussed under Regulatory Planning and Review 
above, this rule is not expected to result in any restrictions in 
addition to those currently in existence. As indicated on Table 1 (see 
Proposed Critical Habitat Designation section) we have designated 
property owned by Federal, State and local governments, and private 
property.
    Within these areas, the types of Federal actions or authorized 
activities that we have identified as potential concerns are:
    (1) Regulation of activities affecting waters of the United States 
by the Army Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water 
Act;
    (2) Regulation of water flows, damming, diversion, and 
channelization by Federal agencies;
    (3) Regulation of grazing, mining, and recreation by the BLM or 
Forest Service;
    (4) Road construction and maintenance, right of way designation, 
and regulation of agricultural activities;
    (5) Regulation of airport improvement activities by the Federal 
Aviation Administration jurisdiction;
    (6) Military training and maneuvers on Marine Corps Base Camp 
Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Station, Miramar and other applicable 
DOD lands;
    (7) Construction of roads and fences along the International Border 
with Mexico, and associated immigration enforcement activities by the 
Immigration and Naturalization Service;
    (8) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency;
    (9) Construction of communication sites licensed by the Federal 
Communications Commission; and
    (10) Activities funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 
Department of Energy, or any other Federal agency.
    Many of these activities sponsored by Federal agencies within the 
proposed critical habitat areas are carried out by small entities (as 
defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act) through contract, grant, 
permit, or other Federal authorization. As discussed in section 1 
above, these actions are currently required to comply with the listing 
protections of the Act, and the designation of critical habitat is not 
anticipated to have any additional effects on these activities.
    For actions on nonFederal property that do not have a Federal 
connection (such as funding or authorization), the current restrictions 
concerning take of the species remain in effect, and this rule will 
have no additional restrictions.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2))

    In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of 
critical habitat will cause (a) any effect on the economy of $100 
million or more, (b) any increases in costs or prices for consumers, 
individual industries, Federal, State, or local government agencies, or 
geographic regions in the economic analysis, or (c) any significant 
adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, 
innovation, or the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to compete with 
foreign-based enterprises.

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

    In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
et seq.):
    (a) This rule will not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small 
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. Small 
governments will only be affected to the extent that any Federal funds, 
permits or other authorized activities must ensure that their actions 
will not adversely affect the critical habitat. However, as discussed 
in

[[Page 5958]]

section 1, these actions are currently subject to equivalent 
restrictions through the listing protections of the species, and no 
further restrictions are anticipated.
    (b) This rule will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million or 
greater in any year, that is, it is not a ``significant regulatory 
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. The designation of 
critical habitat imposes no obligations on State or local governments.

Takings

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, the rule does not have 
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is 
not required. As discussed above, the designation of critical habitat 
affects only Federal agency actions. The rule will not increase or 
decrease the current restrictions on private property concerning take 
of the coastal California gnatcatcher. Due to current public knowledge 
of the species protection, the prohibition against take of the species 
both within and outside of the designated areas, and the fact that 
critical habitat provides no incremental restrictions, we do not 
anticipate that property values will be affected by the critical 
habitat designation. Additionally, critical habitat designation does 
not preclude development of habitat conservation plans and issuance of 
incidental take permits. Landowners in areas that are included in the 
designated critical habitat will continue to have opportunity to 
utilize their property in ways consistent with the survival of the 
gnatcatcher.

Federalism

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have 
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not 
required. The designation of critical habitat in areas currently 
occupied by the coastal California gnatcatcher 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 essential to the conservation of the species are more clearly 
defined, and the primary constituent elements of the habitat necessary 
to the survival of the species are specifically identified. While 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 waiting for case by case section 7 
consultations to occur).

Civil Justice Reform

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the 
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order. We designate critical habitat in accordance with the 
provisions of the Endangered Species Act and plan public hearings on 
the proposed designation during the comment period. The rule uses 
standard property descriptions and identifies the primary constituent 
elements within the designated areas to assist the public in 
understanding the habitat needs of the gnatcatcher.

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

    This rule does not contain any information collection requirements 
for which OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act is required.

National Environmental Policy Act

    We have determined that an Environmental Assessment and/or an 
Environmental Impact Statement as defined by the National Environmental 
Policy Act of 1969 need not be prepared in connection with regulations 
adopted pursuant to section 4(a) of the Act. A notice outlining our 
reason for this determination was published in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This proposed rule does not constitute 
a major Federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human 
environment.

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) and 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our 
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal 
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. The Appendix to Secretarial 
Order 3206 ``American Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust 
Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act'' (1997) provides that 
critical habitat shall not be designated in an area that may impact 
Tribal trust resources unless it is determined essential to conserve a 
listed species. The Appendix further provides that in designating 
critical habitat; ``the Service shall evaluate and document the extent 
to which the conservation needs of a listed species can be achieved by 
limiting the designation to other lands.''
    We have determined that there are no Tribal lands essential for the 
conservation of the gnatcatcher because they do not support core 
gnatcatcher populations, nor do they provide essential linkages between 
core populations. Therefore, we are not proposing to designate critical 
habitat for the gnatcatcher on Tribal lands.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is 
available upon request from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see 
ADDRESSES section).
    Author. The primary author of this notice is Douglas Krofta (see 
ADDRESSES section)

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 Sec. 17.11(h) revise the entry for ``Gnatcatcher, coastal 
California''' under ``BIRDS'' to read as follows:


Sec. 17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

[[Page 5959]]



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          Species                                                      Vertebrate
------------------------------------------------------------                        population where                              Critical     Special
                                                                 Historic range       endangered or      Status    When listed    habitat       rules
            Common name                  Scientific name                               threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
                                           *          *          *          *          *          *         *
               Birds
 
                                           *          *          *          *          *          *         *
Gnatcatcher, coastal California....  Polioptila............  U.S.A. (CA),.........  do                          T          496     17.95(b)     17.41(b)
                                     californica...........  Mexico...............
                                     californica...........
 
                                           *          *          *          *          *          *         *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. In Sec. 17.95 add critical habitat for the coastal California 
gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) under paragraph (b) in 
the same alphabetical order as this species occurs in Sec. 17.11(h), to 
read as follows:


Sec. 17.95  Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.

* * * * *
    (b) Birds.
* * * * *

Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica)

    1. Critical Habitat Units are depicted for Los Angeles, Orange, 
Riverside, San Bernardino, and San Diego Counties, California, on 
the maps below.

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 5960]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.000

    2. Within these areas, the primary constituent elements for the 
gnatcatcher are those habitat components that are essential for the 
primary biological needs of foraging, nesting, rearing of young, 
intra-specific communication, roosting, dispersal, genetic exchange, 
or sheltering (Atwood 1990). Primary constituent elements are 
provided in undeveloped areas, including agricultural lands, that 
support or have the potential to support, through natural 
successional processes, various types of sage scrub or support 
chaparral, grassland, and riparian habitats where they occur 
proximal to sage scrub and where they may be utilized for biological 
needs such as breeding and foraging (Atwood et al. 1998, Campbell et 
al. 1998). Primary constituent elements associated with the 
biological needs of dispersal are also found in undeveloped areas, 
including agricultural lands, that provide or could provide 
connectivity or linkage between or within larger core areas, 
including open space and disturbed areas that may receive only 
periodic use.
    Primary constituent elements include, but are not limited to, 
the following plant communities: Venturan coastal sage scrub, Diegan 
coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub, Riversidean sage 
scrub, Riversidean alluvial fan scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub, 
and coastal sage-chaparral scrub (Holland 1986). Based upon dominant 
species, these communities have been further divided into series 
such as black sage, brittlebush, California buckwheat, California 
buckwheat-white sage, California encelia, California sagebrush, 
California sagebrush-black sage, California sagebrush-California 
buckwheat, coast prickly-pear, mixed sage, purple sage, scalebroom, 
and white sage (Sawyer and Keeler-Wolf 1995). Dominant species 
within these plant communities include California sagebrush 
(Artemisia californica), buckwheats (Eriogonum fasciculatum and E. 
cinereum), encelias (Encelia californica and E. farinosa), and 
various sages (commonly Salvia mellifera, S. apiana, and S. 
leucophylla). Other commonly occurring plants include coast 
goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii), bush monkeyflower (Mimulus 
aurantiacus), Mexican elderberry (Sambucus mexicana), bladderpod 
(Isomeris arborea), deerweed (Lotus scoparius), chaparral mallow 
(Malacothamnus fasciculatum), and laurel sumac (Malosma laurina), 
and several species of Rhus (R. integrifolia, R. ovata, and R. 
trilobata). Succulent species, such as boxthorn (Lycium spp.), cliff 
spurge (Euphorbia misera), jojoba (Simmondsia chinensis), and 
various species of cacti (Opuntia littoralis, O. prolifera, and 
Ferocactus viridescens), and live-forever (Dudleya spp.), are 
represented in maritime succulent scrub, coast prickly-pear scrub, 
and southern coastal bluff scrubs.

[[Page 5961]]

    3. Critical habitat does not include nonFederal lands covered by 
a legally operative incidental take permit for the coastal 
California gnatcatcher issued under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act 
on or before February 7, 2000.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.001

    Map Unit 1: San Diego County MSCP, San Diego County, California. 
From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps San Diego (1980) and El Cajon 
(1982), California. Lands defined by the boundaries of the Otay-
Sweetwater Unit of the San Diego National Wildlife Refuge Complex 
and the San Miguel Major Amendment Area for the San Diego Multiple 
Species Conservation Program. Lands within T. 12 S., R. 01 E., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T. 12 S., R. 01 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20 and 30; T. 13 S., R. 01 
E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 13 S., R. 02 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 03 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2, 10, and 13; T. 14 S., R. 01 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29 and 32; T. 14 S., R. 
02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 35; T. 15 S., R. 01 
E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 9; T. 15 S., R. 01 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 3-5; T. 15 S., R. 02 E., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 6; T. 15 S., R. 02 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2, 3, and 12; T. 15 S., R. 03 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 9; T. 16 S., R. 01 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 17 S., R. 01 E., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 27, and 33-35; T. 17 S., R. 
01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 10, 11, 15-17, 
23-28, and 33; T. 18 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 3-5, 8, 9, 16, 19, 28-30, 32, and 33; T. 18 S., R. 
01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 13, 17, 18, and 20-
23. The following lands within Rincon del Diablo Land Grant: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3667600; 497100, 3667600; 500000, 
3664000; 497000, 3662400; 497000, 3667600. The following lands 
within San Bernardino (Snook) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
492200, 3661600; 495500, 3661600; 495500, 3658500; 497200, 3658500; 
497000, 3657000; 496600, 3656700; 490600, 3656700; 490600, 3660000; 
492200, 3660000; 492200, 3661600. The following lands within Canada 
de San Vicente y Mesa del Padre Barona Land Grant: UTM coordinates 
(X, Y) 515000, 3651400; 515000, 3650400; 513300, 3650400; 513300, 
3651100; 515000, 3651400. The following lands within El Cajon Land 
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 501000, 3640000; 503600, 3640400; 
503600, 3635600; 502000, 3635600; 502000, 3634100; 500300, 3634100; 
500300, 3637200; 498100, 3637200; 501000, 3640000; 511600, 3638900; 
511700, 3638900; 511700, 3634000; 508400, 3634000; 508400, 3635600; 
510000, 3635600; 510000, 3638500; 511600, 3638900; 497000, 3632500; 
502000, 3632500; 502000, 3627600; 500300, 3627600; 500300, 3629200; 
498700, 3629200; 498700, 3630900; 497000, 3630900; 497000, 3632500. 
The following lands within Mission San Diego Land Grant: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3632500; 502000, 3632500; 502000, 
3627600; 500300, 3627600; 500300, 3629200; 498700, 3629200; 498700, 
3630900; 497000, 3630900; 497000, 3632500. The following lands 
within Mission San Diego and Pueblo Lands of San Diego Land Grants: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 481600, 3637800; 485800, 3637400; 485800, 
3636600; 484200, 3636600; 484200, 3635900; 483400, 3635900; 483400, 
3635100; 489700, 3635100; 489700, 3635900; 490600, 3635900; 490600, 
3636500; 489000, 3636500; 489000, 3635800; 488000, 3635800; 488000, 
3636600; 488900, 3636600; 488900, 3637300; 491700, 3637300; 491700, 
3636600; 492300, 3636600; 492300, 3635800; 493100, 3635800; 493100, 
3634300; 491500, 3634300; 491500, 3633400; 489800, 3633400; 489800, 
3632600; 489000, 3632600; 489000, 3634400; 485800, 3634400; 485800, 
3633900; 483300, 3633900; 483300, 3634500; 482500, 3634500; 482500, 
3635900; 481600, 3635900; 481600, 3637800. The following lands 
within Jamacho and La Nacion Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
500300, 3619600; 504500, 3619600; 504500, 3619500; 504000, 3618000; 
503000, 3617800; 502000, 3617800; 502000, 3617200; 500300, 3616200; 
498700, 3616200; 498700, 3617900; 500300, 3617900; 500300, 3619600. 
The following lands within La Nacion, Otay (Dominguez), and Otay 
(Estudillo) Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 498700, 3614600; 
500500, 3614600; 501500, 3611300; 500400, 3611300; 500400, 3608200; 
502000, 3608200; 502000, 3606500; 503600, 3606500; 503600, 3609800; 
505200, 3609800; 505200, 3613000; 506900, 3613000; 506900, 3608000; 
507000, 3607000; 507000, 3606000; 506300, 3606400; 505300, 3606400; 
505300, 3606000; 501900, 3604900; 499900, 3604900; 497000,

[[Page 5962]]

3607600; 497000, 3609700; 495400, 3609700; 495400, 3613100; 498700, 
3613100; 498700, 3614600. The following lands within Jamul Land 
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 514600, 3613200; 515200, 3613200; 
515200, 3612700; 514000, 3611000; 510000, 3610000; 510000, 3612000; 
511900, 3613000; 513000, 3613000; 513000, 3613100; 514600, 3613100; 
514600, 3613200.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.002

    Map Unit 2: Marine Corps Station, Miramar, San Diego County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps El Cajon (1982) and 
San Diego (1980), California. Lands within the following: T. 15 S., 
R. 3 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, SE. \1/4\ sec. 9; S. \1/
2\ sec. 12. Lands within T. 14 S., R. 2 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, E.\1/2\ sec. 35. Federal lands within T. 15 S., R. 2 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 2; S. \1/2\ sec. 7; S. \1/2\ 
sec. 8; S\1/2\ sec. 9; sec. 10 except SE. \1/4\. Lands within T. 14 
S., R. 1 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, E. \1/2\ sec. 31; 
sec. 32. Lands within T. 15 S., R. 1 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, NE. \1/4\ sec. 6; sec. 5; S. \1/2\ sec. 7; and sec. 8. 
Lands within T. 15 S., R. 2 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
SE. \1/4\ sec. 12. The following lands within El Cajon Land Grant: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 501000, 3640000; 503600, 3640400; 503600, 
3635600; 502000, 3635600; 502000, 3634100; 500300, 3634100; 500300, 
3637200; 498100, 3637200; 501000, 3640000. The following lands 
within Mission San Diego and Pueblo Lands of San Diego Land Grants: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 481600, 3637800; 485800, 3637400; 485800, 
3636600; 484200, 3636600; 484200, 3635900; 483400, 3635900; 483400, 
3635100; 489700, 3635100; 489700, 3635900; 490600, 3635900; 490600, 
3636500; 489000, 3636500; 489000, 3635800; 488000, 3635800; 488000, 
3636600; 488900, 3636600; 488900, 3637300; 491700, 3637300; 491700, 
3636600; 492300, 3636600; 492300, 3635800; 493100, 3635800; 493100, 
3634300; 491500, 3634300; 491500, 3633400; 489800, 3633400; 489800, 
3632600; 489000, 3632600; 489000, 3634400; 485800, 3634400; 485800, 
3633900; 483300, 3633900; 483300, 3634500; 482500, 3634500; 482500, 
3635900; 481600, 3635900; 481600, 3637800.

[[Page 5963]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.003

    Map Unit 3: Multiple Habitat Conservation Open Space Program 
(MHCOSP), San Diego County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 
quadrangle map Borrego Valley, California (1983). Lands within T. 12 
S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T. 
13 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 22-27, 35, 
and 36; T. 13 S., R. 03 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
17-19, and 31; T. 14 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 1-3, 12, and 13; T. 14 S., R. 03 E., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 6 and 7; T. 15 S., R. 02 E., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5 and 6.

[[Page 5964]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.004

    Map Unit 4: North San Diego County MHCP, San Diego County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California 
(1984). Lands within T. 10 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 22-24, 27, 28, and 33; T. 11 S., R. 01 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 31; T. 11 S., R. 02 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20, 21, 27-29, and 32-35; T. 11 
S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3, 9, 11, 
12, 16-21, 29-33, and 35; T. 11 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 12-14, and 23-25; T. 12 S., R. 01 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 17-20, and 30; T. 12 S., 
R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1 and 2; T. 12 
S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 18, 19, 
22, 23, and 27-35; T. 12 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 12, 13, 21-28, and 33-36; T. 13 S., R. 02 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 03 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-6, 8-10, and 13; T. 13 S., R. 
04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3, 11, 24-26, and 
35. The following lands within Guajome Land Grant: UTM coordinates 
(X, Y) 473300, 3679600; 474600, 3679600; 477300, 3677800; 477200, 
3677700; 477200, 3677800; 475700, 3677800; 475700, 3676300; 475600, 
3676300; 474000, 3677300; 474000, 3677800; 473300, 3677800; 472000, 
3678000; 473300, 3679600. The following lands within Agua Hedionda 
Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 474000, 3672000; 475700, 3670900; 
475700, 3668100; 477100, 3668100; 478000, 3664000; 470700, 3664000; 
470700, 3666500; 469200, 3666500; 469200, 3668200; 470800, 3668200; 
470800, 3669800; 469400, 3669800; 470000, 3672000; 474000, 3672000; 
excluding UTM coordinates (X, Y) 474100, 3666500; 474100, 3664900; 
475600, 3664900; 475600, 3666500; 474100, 3666500. The following 
lands within Rincon del Diablo Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
492000, 3672000; 492700, 3669600; 491600, 3669600; 492000, 3672000; 
497000, 3667600; 497100, 3667600; 500000, 3664000; 497000, 3662400; 
497000, 3667600; 497000, 3662100; 497100, 3662100; 497400, 3661600; 
497400, 3661500; 497000, 3661500; 497000, 3662100; 492200, 3661600; 
495500, 3661600; 495500, 3658500; 497200, 3658500; 497000, 3657000; 
496600, 3656700; 490600, 3656700; 490600, 3660000; 492200, 3660000; 
492200, 3661600. The following lands within Los Vallecitos de San 
Marcos Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 479000, 3669000; 479100, 
3669000; 479100, 3668000; 478800, 3668000; 479000, 3669000. The 
following lands within San Bernardino (Snook) Land Grant: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 492200, 3661600; 495500, 3661600; 495500, 
3658500; 497200, 3658500; 497000, 3657000; 496600, 3656700; 490600, 
3656700; 490600, 3660000; 492200, 3660000; 492200, 3661600. The 
following lands within Los Encinitos and San Dieguito Land Grants: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 475000, 3660000; 480000, 3661000; 480000, 
3656700; 479500, 3656700; 479500, 3658300; 476300, 3658300; 476300, 
3657400; 476200, 3657400; 475000, 3660000; 477000, 3655100; 477900, 
3655100; 477900, 3652000; 477800, 3652000; 477000, 3653000.

[[Page 5965]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.005

    Map Unit 5: Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, San Diego County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California 
(1984). Lands within T. 11 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, sec. 22. The following lands within Santa Margarita y Las 
Flores Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400, 3727400; 442300, 
3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400; 450100, 3718600; 451100, 
3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400; 452700, 3715400; 452700, 
3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700; 451600, 3712700; 451600, 
3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200; 450000, 3702200; 450000, 
3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600; 447000, 3701600; 447000, 
3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700; 445100, 3704800; 443600, 
3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600; 441900, 3701600; 441900, 
3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700; 438700, 3701700; 438700, 
3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700; 443200, 3704700; 442000, 
3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500; 440500, 3709200; 437000, 
3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000; 438900, 3716100; 442100, 
3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300; 440400, 3721000; 442100, 
3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100; 440400, 3727400; 449800, 
3692900; 451400, 3692900; 451400, 3691300; 453200, 3691300; 453200, 
3689700; 455000, 3689700; 455000, 3688000; 453000, 3688000; 449800, 
3690900; 449800, 3692900; 469200, 3691000; 470900, 3691000; 470900, 
3684400; 475100, 3684400; 470800, 3680600; 470800, 3682700; 469200, 
3682700; 469200, 3684400; 466100, 3684400; 466100, 3687800; 469200, 
3687800; 469200, 3691000; 458200, 3688000; 459800, 3688000; 459800, 
3686200; 461200, 3686200; 461200, 3681300; 459600, 3681300; 459600, 
3682700; 458200, 3682700; 458200, 3684500; 456500, 3684500; 456500, 
3686200; 458200, 3686200; 458200, 3688000; 462600, 3678000; 467700, 
3678000; 467700, 3677700; 464400, 3674700; 462400, 3674700; 462600, 
3675400. The Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Station Designated Areas 
(1996); Alpha One; Alpha Two; Bravo One; Bravo Two; Bravo Three; 
Juliett; Lima; Mike; November; Oscar One; Tango; Uniform; Victor; 
Agriculture Lease Area (North); 52 Area; 62 Area; 63 Area; 64 Area; 
San Onofre Housing Area; State Park Lease Area; Red Beach, White 
Beach; Asistencia de Las Flores; Edson Range Impact Area; 
Agriculture Lease Area (South); Mass 3; and Golf Course.

[[Page 5966]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.006

    Map Unit 6: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station, San Diego County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Oceanside, California 
(1984): The following lands within the Santa Margarita y Las Flores 
Land Grant: Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station. The following Federal 
Lands associated with the Fallbrook Naval Weapons Station within T. 
9 S., R. 4 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 35 and 36; 
T. 10 S., R. 4 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1 and 2.

[[Page 5967]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.007

    Map Unit 7: North County Subarea of the MSCP for Unincorporated 
San Diego County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map 
Oceanside, California (1984). Lands within T. 09 S., R. 02 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 20, and 29-32; T. 09 S., R. 
03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-16, 22-26, and 36; 
T. 09 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 12 and 
13; T. 10 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5-
8, 17-20, 31, and 32; T. 10 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 12-14, 19-26, and 29-36; T. 11 S., R. 02 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4-9 and 16-18; T. 11 S., R. 03 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-6 and 10-13; T. 13 
S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 5, 7, 8, 
24, 25, 35, and 36; T. 13 S., R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, sec. 12; T. 13 S., R. 02 E., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 19-21, 28-30, 33, and 34; T. 14 S., R. 02 E., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 4. The following lands within 
Santa Margarita y Las Flores Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
477000, 3697000; 476100, 3694000; 475700, 3694000; 475700, 3696200; 
477000, 3697000. The following lands within Monserate Land Grant: 
UTM coordinates (X ,Y) 485000, 3693000; 488000, 3689000; 487000, 
3685000; 484000, 3685900; 482200, 3685900; 482200, 3689200; 483800, 
3689200; 483800, 3692500; 485000, 3693000. The following lands 
within Valle de Paro (or Santa Maria) Land Grant: UTM coordinates 
(X, Y) 511700, 3660000; 511700, 3656700; 506800, 3656700; 506800, 
3656800; 511000, 3660000; 511700, 3660000; 514900, 3655200; 515300, 
3655200; 515400, 3651900; 515000, 3651900; 515000, 3651700; 513300, 
3651700; 513300, 3653600; 514900, 3653600; 514900, 3655200. The 
following lands within Canada de San Vicente y Mesa del Padre Barona 
Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 516000, 3655000; 520000, 3655000; 
519000, 3653000; 518100, 3652200; 518100, 3653600; 516400, 3653600; 
516500, 3653300; 516500, 3651900; 516300, 3651900; 516000, 3653000; 
519000, 3653000; 523000, 3652000; 523000, 3651000; 519800, 3649500; 
519800, 3651900; 518500, 3651900; 518500, 3652000; 515000, 3651400; 
515000, 3650400; 513300, 3650400; 513300, 3651100.

[[Page 5968]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.008

    Map Unit 8: Southern NCCP Subregion of Orange County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Oceanside (1984) and 
Santa Ana (1985), California. Lands within T. 06 S., R. 06 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 18, 19, 30, and 32; T. 06 
S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-4, 9-14, 
and 23-25; T. 07 S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
sec. 9; T. 07 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
30 and 31; T. 07 S., R. 08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
secs. 24, 25, and 36; T. 08 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 4, 7-9, 16-18, 21, 23, and 26; T. 08 S., R. 068 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 13. The following lands 
within Boca de La Playa, Canada de Los Alisos, Mission Viejo/La Paz, 
and Trabuco Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400, 3727400; 
442300, 3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400; 450100, 3718600; 
451100, 3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400; 452700, 3715400; 
452700, 3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700; 451600, 3712700; 
451600, 3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200; 450000, 3702200; 
450000, 3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600; 447000, 3701600; 
447000, 3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700; 445100, 3704800; 
443600, 3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600; 441900, 3701600; 
441900, 3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700; 438700, 3701700; 
438700, 3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700; 443200, 3704700; 
442000, 3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500; 440500, 3709200; 
437000, 3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000; 438900, 3716100; 
442100, 3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300; 440400, 3721000; 
442100, 3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100; 440400, 3727400.

[[Page 5969]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.009

    Map Unit 9: NCCP for Central/Coastal Subregions of Orange County 
(Central/Coastal NCCP), Orange County, California. From USGS 
1:100,000 quadrangle maps Santa Ana (1985) and Oceanside (1984), 
California. Lands defined by the boundary of the designated reserve 
within Marine Corps Air Station El Toro within the Natural 
Communities Conservation Plan for the Central/Coastal Subregions. 
Lands within T. 06 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
sec. 4; T. 07 S., R. 08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
25 and 36. The following lands within Canon de Santa Ana and Lomas 
de Santiago Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800; 
414500, 3759800; 414500, 3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600; 
421100, 3759600; 421700, 3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500; 
435600, 3751500; 435600, 3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000; 
438000, 3748000; 437800, 3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000; 
430700, 3748000; 430700, 3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400; 
427800, 3751400; 427800, 3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500; 
422800, 3751500; 422800, 3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100; 
419400, 3753100; 419400, 3754700; 416100, 3754700; 416100, 3756400; 
414500, 3756400; 414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000; 409000, 3759000; 
412300, 3759700; 412300, 3759800. The following lands within Canada 
de Los Alisos and Trabuco Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
440400, 3727400; 442300, 3727400; 447000, 3724000; 450100, 3719400; 
450100, 3718600; 451100, 3718600; 451700, 3718100; 451700, 3715400; 
452700, 3715400; 452700, 3713600; 451700, 3713600; 451700, 3712700; 
451600, 3712700; 451600, 3702900; 451500, 3702900; 451500, 3702200; 
450000, 3702200; 450000, 3700700; 448500, 3700700; 448500, 3701600; 
447000, 3701600; 447000, 3700100; 445900, 3700100; 445100, 3701700; 
445100, 3704800; 443600, 3704800; 443600, 3702700; 443000, 3701600; 
441900, 3701600; 441900, 3703200; 440300, 3703200; 440300, 3701700; 
438700, 3701700; 438700, 3703200; 437200, 3703200; 437200, 3704700; 
443200, 3704700; 442000, 3708000; 442000, 3714500; 440500, 3714500; 
440500, 3709200; 437000, 3711000; 437500, 3713000; 438900, 3713000; 
438900, 3716100; 442100, 3716100; 442100, 3719300; 440400, 3719300; 
440400, 3721000; 442100, 3721000; 442100, 3724100; 440400, 3724100; 
440400, 3727400.

[[Page 5970]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.010

    Map Unit 10: Palos Verdes Peninsula Subregion, Los Angeles 
County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Long Beach, 
California (1981). The following lands within Los Palos Verdes Land 
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 369800, 3739900; 370700, 3739900; 
370700, 3738700; 372100, 3738700; 372100, 3739900; 373800, 3739900; 
373800, 3737100; 377200, 3737100; 377200, 3738500; 380400, 3738500; 
380400, 3736900; 378700, 3736900; 378700, 3731800; 376500, 3731800; 
369000, 3734000; 368700, 3735900; 368700, 3739300; 369800, 3739900.

[[Page 5971]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.011

    Map Unit 11: East Los Angeles-Orange County Matrix NCCP 
Subregion of Orange County, Los Angeles County and Orange County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Long Beach (1981), 
Los Angeles (1983), San Bernardino (1982), and Santa Ana (1985), 
California. Lands within T. 01 S., R. 09 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 28 and 33; T. 02 S., R. 08 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 31; T. 02 S., R. 09 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, and 32-
36; T. 02 S., R. 10 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20, 
29, and 30; T. 02 S., R. 11 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
secs. 3, 9, 10, 13-16, 21-23, 25, 26, and 36; T. 03 S., R. 08 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6, 7, 14, 17, and 18; T. 03 
S., R. 10 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3. The 
following lands within La Puente and San Jose Dalton et al. Land 
Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 424400, 3774200; 427700, 3774200; 
427700, 3769200; 424400, 3769200; 424400, 3767900; 424200, 3767600; 
419600, 3767600; 419600, 3766000; 417900, 3766000; 417900, 3769300; 
424400, 3769300; 424400, 3774200. The following lands within Paso de 
Bartolo (Pico), Potrero Grande, San Antonion (Lugo), San 
Francisquito (Dalton), and unnamed Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, 
Y) 401800, 3767900; 401800, 3764400; 398600, 3764400; 398600, 
3767900; 401800, 3767900. The following lands within Paso de Bartolo 
(Pico) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 403400, 3764500; 405100, 
3764500; 405000, 3762000; 403500, 3761300; 401700, 3761300; 401700, 
3763000; 403400, 3763000; 403400, 3764500. The following lands 
within La Puente Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 405500, 3764500; 
408400, 3764500; 408400, 3761400; 406000, 3762000; 406000, 3763000; 
405500, 3764500. The following lands within Canon de Santa Ana, La 
Habra, La Puente, Lomas de Santiago, Rincon de La Brea, San Juan 
Cajon de Santa Ana, Santiago de Santa Ana, and unnamed Land Grants: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800; 414500, 3759800; 414500, 
3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600; 421100, 3759600; 421700, 
3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500; 435600, 3751500; 435600, 
3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000; 438000, 3748000; 437800, 
3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000; 430700, 3748000; 430700, 
3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400; 427800, 3751400; 427800, 
3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500; 422800, 3751500; 422800, 
3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100; 419400, 3753100; 419400, 
3754700; 416100, 3754700;

[[Page 5972]]

416100, 3756400; 414500, 3756400; 414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000; 
409000, 3759000; 412300, 3759700; 412300, 3759800. The following 
lands within Santa Ana del Chino (addition to) Land Grants: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 425900, 3759600; 429300, 3759600; 429300, 
3757000; 426700, 3757100; 425900, 3758700; 425900, 3759600. The 
following lands within La Habra and Los Coyotes Land Grants: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 409700, 3753300; 412900, 3753300; 412900, 
3750000; 408300, 3750000; 408300, 3751700; 409700, 3751700; 409700, 
3753300. The following lands within San Juan Cajon de Santa Ana Land 
Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 416100, 3751600; 417800, 3751600; 
417800, 3749900; 416100, 3749900; 416100, 3751600.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.012

    Map Unit 12: Western Riverside County MSHCP, Riverside County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle maps Santa Ana (1985) and 
San Bernardino (1982), California. Lands defined by the boundary of 
the Lake Perris/San Jacinto Core Reserve. Lands within T. 01 S., R. 
05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29 and 31-33; T. 01 
S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 35; T. 02 S., 
R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 8, 16-21, and 28-
33; T. 02 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 7, 
8, 13-29, and 36; T. 02 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 9-16, 21-24, 27-29, and 32-34; T. 02 S., R. 05 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4 and 6; T. 02 S., R. 06 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-3; T. 03 S., R. 01 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 19, 20, and 29-32; T. 
03 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-6, 8-11, 
13-15, 21-26, and 36; T. 03 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 21and 29; T. 03 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 5-7; T. 03 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 1, 12-1420-24, and 27; T. 03 S., R. 07 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 29-33; T. 03 S., R. 08 W.,

[[Page 5973]]

San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 25 and 36; T. 04 S., R. 01 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 5; T. 04 S., R. 02 W., 
San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 20 and 28-32; T. 04 S., R. 
03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 25 and 36; T. 04 S., 
R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 27, 28, 32, and 
33; T. 04 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28-
34; T. 04 S., R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 16, 
18, 21, 22, 25-30, and 32-36; T. 04 S., R. 07 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 5, 9-11, 13, 14, 24, and 25; T. 05 S., 
R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 28-31 and 33; T. 
05 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 6, 8, 
9, 16, 17, 20, 21, 29, and 33-36; T. 05 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 18-20, 29, and 30; T. 05 S., R. 04 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 8, 9, 12-14, 16, 17, 19, 20, 
23, 24, 26-30, and 32-34; T. 05 S., R. 05 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 2-11, 13-16, 18, 19, and 22-28; T. 05 S., 
R. 06 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-4, 9-14, and 
24; T. 06 S., R. 01 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 4, 
7-9, 16-20, and 29-31; T. 06 S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 3, 4, 10, 12-17, 19, 20, 22-25, and 34-36; T. 06 S., 
R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 24, 25, 29-33, 
and 36; T. 06 S., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
3, 4, 9, 10, 13-15, 24, and 25; T. 07 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 16-21 and 27-34; T. 07 S., R. 01 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 2-18, 24, 25, and 32-36; T. 07 
S., R. 02 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1, 2, 6, 7, 
and 11-22; T. 07 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
secs. 1-4, 11-13, and 24; T. 08 S., R. 01 E., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 4-10, 15, and 16; T. 08 S., R. 01 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-5; T. 08 S., R. 03 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 23-28 and 31-36. The following 
lands within Jurupa (Rubidoux) and Jurupa (Stearns) Land Grants: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 463100, 3766300; 463100, 3762500; 461400, 
3762500; 461400, 3765700; 463100, 3766300; 459900, 3765100; 459900, 
3764100; 457400, 3764100; 457400, 3764200; 459900, 3765100. The 
following lands within Canon de Santa Ana, Lomas de Santiago Land 
Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 412300, 3759800; 414500, 3759800; 
414500, 3759700; 418100, 3759700; 418100, 3759600; 421100, 3759600; 
421700, 3757500; 429300, 3756300; 429300, 3751500; 435600, 3751500; 
435600, 3749900; 437200, 3749900; 437200, 3748000; 438000, 3748000; 
437800, 3746600; 437100, 3746600; 437100, 3748000; 430700, 3748000; 
430700, 3749800; 429200, 3749800; 429200, 3751400; 427800, 3751400; 
427800, 3749900; 424400, 3749900; 424400, 3751500; 422800, 3751500; 
422800, 3754600; 421200, 3754600; 421200, 3753100; 419400, 3753100; 
419400, 3754700; 416100, 3754700; 416100, 3756400; 414500, 3756400; 
414500, 3758000; 409800, 3758000; 409000, 3759000; 412300, 3759700; 
412300, 3759800. The following lands within El Sobrante de San 
Jacinto Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 463000, 3750000; 463100, 
3748500; 463100, 3746300; 461400, 3746300; 461400, 3747900; 458200, 
3747900; 458200, 3746300; 456700, 3746300; 456700, 3743200; 460000, 
3743200; 460000, 3741600; 463300, 3741600; 463300, 3739000; 456000, 
3739000; 452000, 3742000; 452800, 3743200; 453700, 3743200; 453700, 
3744800; 455300, 3744800; 455300, 3746500; 456400, 3746500; 456400, 
3749600; 458100, 3749600; 463000, 3750000. The following lands 
within La Sierra (Yorba) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 440400, 
3749500; 440400, 3748000; 443700, 3748000; 443700, 3746600; 444100, 
3746600; 444100, 3745300; 443900, 3745300; 438700, 3747900; 438700, 
3749500; 440400, 3749500; 444500, 3744900; 447300, 3744900; 447300, 
3743200; 450500, 3743200; 450000, 3741000; 448000, 3741000; 444500, 
3744800; 444500, 3744900. The following lands within San Jacinto 
Viejo Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 497000, 3730400; 502000, 
3730400; 502000, 3726400; 500300, 3725800; 500300, 3728000; 497000, 
3729000; 497000, 3730400. The following lands within La Laguna 
(Stearns) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 466000, 3730000; 
467000, 3730000; 467600, 3728600; 465500, 3728600; 466000, 3730000; 
472000, 3725000; 472200, 3723900; 472200, 3723800; 471300, 3723800; 
471300, 3724500. The following lands within Temecula Land Grant: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 480000, 3718000; 481000, 3718000; 483400, 
3715700; 480900, 3715700; 480900, 3717300; 480200, 3717300; 480200, 
3717400; 480000, 3718000; 484100, 3714100; 484100, 3715100; 485200, 
3714100; 484100, 3714100; 488000, 3712000; 488700, 3710900; 487500, 
3710900; 487500, 3702000; 480800, 3701000; 480800, 3703700; 482500, 
3703700; 482500, 3705300; 484200, 3705300; 484200, 3710900; 485800, 
3710900; 485800, 3713600; 488000, 3712000. The following lands 
within Santa Rosa (Morino) Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 
488000, 3712000; 488700, 3710900; 487500, 3710900; 487500, 3702000; 
480800, 3701000; 480800, 3703700; 482500, 3703700; 482500, 3705300; 
484200, 3705300; 484200, 3710900; 485800, 3710900; 485800, 3713600; 
488000, 3712000; 478300, 3700700; 479900, 3700700; 479900, 3700600; 
479000, 3700000; 478300, 3700600. The following lands within San 
Jacinto Neuvo y Potrero Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 490000, 
3754000; 490900, 3752800; 488900, 3752800; 488900, 3749600; 487200, 
3749600; 487200, 3753000; 490000, 3754000; 490500, 3751300; 492100, 
3751300; 493900, 3749600; 490500, 3749600; 490500, 3751300; 482300, 
3744800; 484000, 3744800; 484000, 3741600; 485700, 3741600; 485700, 
3740000; 490400, 3740000; 489000, 3739000; 485600, 3739100; 485600, 
3739900; 482300, 3739900; 482300, 3744800. The following lands 
within Pauba Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 503000, 3715000; 
501800, 3713000; 498700, 3713000; 498700, 3711400; 497300, 3711400; 
497300, 3711100; 495700, 3711100; 495700, 3711000; 493500, 3711000; 
493500, 3710900; 492300, 3710900; 492300, 3711000; 492000, 3712000; 
502000, 3716000; 503000, 3715000; 498700, 3709700; 500400, 3709700; 
506000, 3707000; 506300, 3706400; 504800, 3706400; 504800, 3706300; 
498700, 3706300.

[[Page 5974]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.013

    Map Unit 13: San Bernardino Valley MSHCP, San Bernardino County, 
California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map San Bernardino, 
California (1982). Lands within T. 01 N., R. 03 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 16-19, 21, 22, 26-28, 30, and 33-36; T. 01 
N., R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5, 6, 9-15, 
and 24; T. 01 N., R. 05 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
1, 4, 7, 8, 17-20, and 29; T. 01 N., R. 06 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 13-22 and 27-30; T. 01 N., R. 07 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 13-16, and 19-24. T. 01 N., R. 
08 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 24; T. 01 S., R. 02 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 5-9, 14-18, 20-22, 28, 
and 31-33; T. 01 S., R. 03 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, 
secs. 1, 4, 8, 9, 12-16, and 36; T. 02 N., R. 05 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 21, 27, 28, 33, and 35; T. 02 S., R. 02 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 6-10; T. 02 S., R. 03 
W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 1-6 and 8-12; T. 02 S., 
R. 04 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 1. The following 
lands within Muscupiabe Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 461600, 
3788400; 463000, 3788400; 464800, 3787300; 464800, 3786900; 466300, 
3786900; 466400, 3785500; 466400, 3785200; 467000, 3785200; 469300, 
3785100; 469700, 3785100; 472000, 3784000; 473700, 3781900; 466400, 
3781900; 466400, 3778600; 464700, 3778600; 464700, 3780200; 461400, 
3780200; 459000, 3782000; 459000, 3783600; 461400, 3783600; 461400, 
3784200; 461600, 3786200; 461600, 3788400; excluding UTM coordinates 
463200, 3785100; 463200, 3782000; 464700, 3782000; 464700, 3785100; 
463200, 3785100. The following lands within Cucamonga Land Grant: 
UTM coordinates (X, Y) 437000, 3781000; 445000, 3781000; 445000, 
3778800; 437000, 3778800; 437000, 3781000. The following lands 
within San Bernardino Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 479200, 
3773800; 480100, 3773800; 480100, 3772200; 480900, 3772200; 480900, 
3770500; 479200, 3770500; 479200, 3773800; 488000, 3767300; 489700, 
3767300; 489700, 3765700; 488900, 3765700; 488900, 3764100; 488000, 
3764100; 488000, 3767300; 489700, 3764100; 493700, 3764100; 493700, 
3762400; 489600, 3762400; 489700, 3764100.

[[Page 5975]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.014

    Map Unit 14: East Los Angeles County Linkage, Los Angeles 
County, California. From USGS 1:100,000 quadrangle map Los Angeles, 
California (1983). Lands within T. 01 N., R. 08 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 19-24; T. 01 N., R. 09 W., San Bernardino 
Principal Meridian, secs. 22-27, 34, and 35; T. 01 S., R. 09 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, sec. 2. The following lands within 
Cucamonga Land Grant: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 437000, 3781000; 
445000, 3781000; 445000, 3778800; 437000, 3778800; 437000, 3781000. 
The following lands within San Jose (Dalton et al.) and San Jose 
Addition Land Grants: UTM coordinates (X, Y) 427000, 3776000; 
427300, 3775700; 424400, 3775700; 424400, 3776500; 427000, 3776000.

[[Page 5976]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP07FE00.015


BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
    Map Unit 15: Western Los Angeles County, California. From USGS 
1:100,000 quadrangle map Los Angeles, California (1983). Lands 
within T. 03 N., R. 14 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 
6, 7, 18, and 19; T. 03 N., R. 15 W., San Bernardino Principal 
Meridian, secs. 1, 4-9, and 15-24; T. 04 N., R. 14 W., San 
Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 18, 19, 30, and 31; T. 04 N., 
R. 15 W., San Bernardino Principal Meridian, secs. 7-11, 13-36. The 
following lands within Ex Mission de San Fernando Land Grant: UTM 
coordinates (X, Y) 369500, 3799000; 369600, 3799000; 370200, 
3798700; 364300, 3798700; 364300, 3798800; 369500, 3799000.

    Dated: February 1, 2000.
Donald J. Barry,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 00-2600 Filed 2-2-00; 1:12 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>