[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 92 (Friday, May 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25734-25735]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11630]



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


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Availability of a Draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental 
Impact Statement for Issuance of a Permit to Allow Incidental Take of 
Threatened and Endangered Species Within the Multiple Species 
Conservation Program Planning Area in San Diego County, CA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the availability of a draft joint 
Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (DEIR/DEIS) 
for the proposed incidental take of species listed pursuant to the 
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The proposed take 
would occur due to urban development in southwestern San Diego County, 
California. The County of San Diego and cities of San Diego, Chula 
Vista, Coronado, Del Mar, El Cajon, Imperial Beach, La Mesa, Lemon 
Grove, National City, Poway, and Santee (applicants) intend to apply to 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for incidental take 
permits pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act.
    The Service anticipates that the applicants will request permits 
for 10 listed animals: the threatened Western snowy plover (Charadrius 
alexandrinus nivosus) and coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila 
californica californica); and the endangered Riverside fairy shrimp 
(Streptocephalus woottoni), California brown pelican (Pelecanus 
occidentalis californicus), bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), 
light-footed clapper rail (Rallus longirostris levipes), California 
least tern (Sterna antillarum), southwestern willow flycatcher 
(Empidonax traillii extimus), least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii 
pusillus), and Pacific pocket mouse (Perognathus longimembris 
pacificus).
    The Service also anticipates that the applicants will request 
covered species agreements for 3 endangered plants, 4 plants and 1 
animal proposed for listing, and 39 other unlisted species (26 plants, 
9 birds, 2 reptiles, 1 mammal, and 1 invertebrate). The exact number of 
species included in these covered species agreements may change between 
the draft and final EIR/EIS. The purpose of the agreements is to 
conserve listed and unlisted species, thereby reducing the uncertainty 
associated with development and future species' listings.
    The programmatic DEIR/DEIS evaluates the effects on the human 
environment expected to occur from proposed issuance of the permits and 
covered species agreements. Incidental take would be minimized and 
mitigated by implementation of the regional Multiple Species 
Conservation Program (MSCP) plan. This notice is provided pursuant to 
section 10(c) of the Act and National Environmental Policy Act 
regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
    In addition, Federal approval of the MSCP plan is required as part 
of the special 4(d) rule for the California gnatcatcher. Incidental 
take of the gnatcatcher is allowed under section 4(d) of the Act if 
take results from activities conducted pursuant to the California 
Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) Act, the NCCP Process 
Guidelines, and the NCCP Southern California Coastal Sage Scrub 
Conservation Guidelines.

DATES: Written comments on the DEIR/DEIS should be received on or 
before June 26, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Comments should be addressed to Mr. Gail Kobetich, Field 
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue, 
Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments also may be sent by facsimile to 
telephone (619) 431-9618.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nancy Gilbert, Fish and Wildlife 
Biologist, at the above address, telephone (619) 431-9440. Individuals 
wishing copies of the DEIR/DEIS should immediately contact Ms. Gilbert. 
Copies of the DEIR/DEIS have been sent to City and County libraries in 
the greater San Diego area, and to all agencies and individuals who 
participated in the scoping process or requested copies. In addition, 
copies of the draft MSCP Plan are available at public libraries and can 
be obtained by contacting the City of San Diego Clean Water Program, 
600 B Street, Suite 500, San Diego, California 92101, telephone (619) 
533-4200. Upon receipt of an official permit application, the Service 
will officially announce availability of the final MSCP Plan for public 
review as required by section 10(c) of the Act.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under section 9 of the Act and its 
implementing regulations, wildlife listed as threatened or endangered 
are protected from ``taking.'' The Act defines take, in part, as 
killing, harming, or harassing listed wildlife. Service regulations 
further define harm to include significant habitat modification that 
results in death or injury of listed wildlife (50 CFR 17.3). Under 
limited circumstances, the Service may issue permits to take listed 
wildlife if such taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, 
otherwise lawful activities. The taking prohibitions of the Act do not 
apply to listed plants on private lands unless such take would violate 
State law. Regulations governing permits are in 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32. 
Under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, the Service may issue incidental 
take permits for listed animals with an approved conservation plan. 
Among other criteria, issuance of such permits must not jeopardize the 
existence of listed species, both plant and animal.
    The proposed action would allow incidental take of listed animals 
over a 30-year period. Take would occur on approximately 314,900 acres 
of habitat within the 581,600-acre planning area. Approximately 102,400 
acres of the planning area is already developed. To mitigate the 
impacts of the proposed take, the applicants propose establishment of a 
164,300-acre preserve within the boundaries of a Multiple Habitat 
Planning Area (MHPA). According to the draft MSCP plan, 24 habitats 
would be conserved under the [[Page 25735]] MHPA, including 6 rare or 
protected habitats. Fifty-seven species are proposed to be adequately 
protected under the MHPA. The Service would issue incidental take 
permits for listed animal species and covered species agreements for 
listed and unlisted plant and animal species that are adequately 
protected.
    The DEIR/DEIS considers the environmental consequences of 5 
alternatives, including the proposed action and no action alternatives. 
Under the no action or no project alternative, the regional MSCP would 
not be implemented. Jurisdictions would either avoid take of listed 
species within the planning area or apply for individual 10(a) permits 
on a project-by-project basis. Existing land use and environmental 
regulations would apply to all projects proposed within the planning 
area. Existing regulatory practices require mitigation for impacts to 
sensitive species and habitats resulting in lands being set aside for 
open-space preservation. Analyses indicate that the amount of land 
potentially conserved within the MSCP planning area under the no action 
alternative would be similar to that conserved under the proposed 
action (MHPA). However, under the no action alternative, greater 
habitat fragmentation would likely occur because the lands set aside 
for open-space preservation would not be assembled in coordination with 
a regional preserve design.
    Other alternatives consider different preserve configurations. The 
coastal sage scrub (CSS) scenario would conserve 84,900 acres. 
According to the MSCP plan, CSS would include 21 habitats, providing 
adequate protection for 2 habitats, neither of which is rare. Twenty-
six species would be covered under CSS. The biologically preferred (BP) 
scenario would conserve 167,000 acres. According to the MSCP plan, BP 
would include 24 habitats, adequately protecting 9. Of these 9 
habitats, 7 are considered rare. Seventy-three species are proposed to 
be adequately protected under BP. The public lands (PL) scenario would 
conserve 147,000 acres. According to the MSCP plan, PL would include 24 
habitats and adequately protect 6, all of which are rare. Thirty-five 
species are proposed to be adequately protected under PL.
    Local jurisdictions would implement their respective portions of 
the MSCP plan. Preserve establishment would be a cooperative effort 
among Federal, State, and local governments and private landowners. 
These groups would manage habitat on certain lands they currently own 
and on additional lands acquired for the preserve. Additional lands 
within the preserve would be acquired as compensation for impacts to 
habitat both inside and outside the preserve.
    In addition to off-site mitigation, take within the preserve would 
be avoided or minimized through local land-use regulation, 
environmental review, and resource protection guidelines. Land-use 
regulations would emphasize avoidance by limiting encroachment onto 
sensitive biological resources. Long-term preserve management plans 
would be prepared to address habitat management and land-use issues. 
The MSCP plan provides guidelines for vegetative restoration and 
reintroduction, fencing, signs, fire management, grazing, predator and 
exotic species control, insects and disease, lighting, and other 
factors.
    Each jurisdiction would sign an individual implementing agreement 
(IA) with the Service and California Department of Fish and Game to (1) 
obtain permits to take listed animals, (2) obtain covered species 
agreements and assurances for listed plants and unlisted plants and 
animals, and (3) identify the specific responsibilities of each party 
in implementing the MSCP plan. Each jurisdiction would then exercise 
its land-use review and approval powers in accordance with its IA and 
the MSCP. The 5 percent limit on interim take of coastal sage scrub, 
imposed as part of the NCCP program and special 4(d) rule, would be 
replaced by the conditions of each jurisdiction's IA.
    Each jurisdiction would be expected to adopt the final 
configuration of the MSCP preserve within its boundary and adopt the 
recommendations of the MSCP through amendment of its General plan or 
other applicable plans. Zoning would be retained or properties rezoned, 
as needed, and zoning regulations amended to reflect the preserve 
boundaries and to achieve consistency with the MSCP plan. The MSCP 
guidelines for compatible land uses in and adjacent to the preserve are 
expected to be incorporated into the General Plan, zoning regulations, 
and approval process for projects, including adoption of appropriate 
mitigation guidelines. Procedures and regulations for interim controls 
will be necessary to address activities that would potentially impact 
sensitive habitats prior to issuance of permits to individual 
jurisdictions.

    Dated: May 4, 1995.
Thomas Dwyer,
Deputy Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, Oregon
[FR Doc. 95-11630 Filed 5-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P