Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Notices 18617

murrelets (Brachyramphus marmoratus

marmoratus), bald eagles (Haliaeetus

leucocephalus), and American peregrine

falcons (Falco peregrinus anatum) that

may occur on the Applicant’s Tree

Farm. The proposed incidental take may

occur as a result of timber harvest

activities, and road construction and

maintenance in the various habitat types

that occur now, and will occur on the

Tree Farm during the 50-year term of

the proposed permit. The application

includes a Habitat Conservation Plan

(HCP), which the Applicant proposes to

implement as a condition of the permit,

and an Implementation Agreement (IA)

which identifies the responsibilities of

the parties under the HCP. The IA

would provide for the issuance of

additional permits under certain

conditions for the incidental take of

species not presently listed under the

Act, but which may become listed

during the term of the proposed permit,

and which may occur in habitats on the

Tree Farm.

The FWS, in conjunction with NMFS,

announces the availability of an

Environmental Assessment (EA) for the

proposed issuance of the incidental take

permit and signing of the IA. The

agencies are also making draft permit

conditions available for public review

and comment should the permit be

issued. The FWS is taking

administrative responsibility for

announcing the availability of the

aforementioned documents. All

comments received will become part of

the public record and may be released.

This notice is provided pursuant to

section 10(c) of the Act and National

Environmental Policy Act regulations

(40 CFR 1506.6).

DATES: Written comments on the permit

application, EA, and draft permit

conditions should be received on or

before May 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments regarding the

application or EA should be addressed

to Mr. Curt Smitch, Assistant Regional

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,

3704 Griffin Lane, SE, Suite 102

Olympia, Washington 98501 (360–753–

9440). Please refer to permit PRT–

813744 when submitting comments.

Individuals wishing copies of the

application, EA, or draft permit

conditions, for review should

immediately contact the above office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Brian Bogaczyk, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service at (360) 753–5824, or Matt

Longenbaugh, National Marine Fisheries

Service at (360) 753–7761, at the

address listed above.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Under section 9 of the Act, and its

implementing regulations, ‘‘take’’ of a

threatened or endangered species is

prohibited. However, the FWS and

NMFS, under limited circumstances,

may issue permits to take threatened

and endangered wildlife species if such

taking is incidental to, and not the

purpose of, otherwise lawful activities.

Regulations governing permits for

threatened species are in 50 CFR 17.32

and in 50 CFR 17.22 for endangered

species.

The Applicant proposes to implement

the HCP containing conservation

measures for the northern spotted owl,

marbled murrelet, bald eagle, peregrine

falcon, and other currently unlisted

species, as a condition of the permit

which would authorize the incidental

take of listed species during timber

harvest activities on the approximately

7,485-acre Tree Farm. The Applicant’s

proposed timber harvest may result in

the take, as defined in the Act and its

implementing regulations, of listed

species. The term of the proposed HCP

and permit is 50 years.

The Applicant proposes to mitigate

for the impacts of any incidental take by

maintaining the best late successional

habitat (>80 years old) on the Tree Farm

in harvest deferrals until ingrowth of

additional older, higher quality habitat

occurs. Measures to maintain important

habitat structures such as wildlife trees,

snags and downed logs would be

implemented on all harvest units.

Further, riparian measures designed to

protect stream associated amphibians,

and anadromous and resident fish

would be implemented along streams.

Additional benefits to these riparian

species would be provided by

improvements to road construction and

maintenance techniques.

Implementation of all measures would

be initiated immediately upon issuance

of the permit, and would continue for

the term of the permit.

The EA considers the environmental

consequences of 3 alternatives,

including the proposed action and noaction alternatives. The proposed action

alternative is the issuance of the permit

under section 10(a) of the Act that

would authorize incidental take of listed

species, and signing of the IA to cover

currently unlisted species, that may

occur in the habitats on the Applicant’s

Tree Farm. The proposed action would

require the Applicant to implement the

HCP. Under the no-action alternative,

the Applicant would continue to abide

by section 9 take prohibitions under the

Act; an incidental take permit would

not be issued. The third alternative is to

manage the Tree Farm according to the

standards and guidelines described in

the Northwest Forest Plan, which would

maintain approximately 61 percent of

the Tree Farm in reserves.

Dated: April 22, 1996.

Thomas Dwyer,

Deputy Regional Director, Region 1, Fish and

Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon.

[FR Doc. 96–10360 Filed 4–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

Receipt of Application for Incidental

Take Permit for Surveying BlackFooted Ferrets in Chaves County, NM

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,

Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: Mr. Scott Ellis has applied to

the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)

for an incidental take permit pursuant to

Section 10(A)1(a) of the Endangered

Species Act for the purpose of scientific

research and enhancement of

propogation and survival of the

endangered black-footed ferret (Mustela

nigripes), as prescribed by Service

recovery documents. The applicant has

been assigned permit number PRT–

804124. The requested permit, which is

for a period of 2 years, authorizes the

incidental take of the black-footed ferret

which may occur as a result of

nocturnal surveys of a 150-acre blacktailed prairie dog colony in Chaves

County, New Mexico.

DATES: Written comments on the

application should be received on or

before May 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Persons wishing to review

the application may obtain a copy by

contacting to the Chief, Ecological

Services/Endangered Species, U.S. Fish

and Wildlife Service, P.O. Box 1306,

Albuquerque, New Mexico 87103. The

request must be received by the Chief,

Ecological Services/Endangered Species

within 30 days of the date of this

publication. Please refer to permit

number PRT–804124 when submitting

comments.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 9

of the Act prohibits the ‘‘taking’’ of

endangered species such as the blackfooted ferret. However, the Service,

under limited circumstances, may issue

permits to take endangered wildlife

species when such take is for scientific

purposes. Regulations governing

permits for endangered species are at 50

CFR 17.22.
18618 Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 82 / Friday, April 26, 1996 / Notices

Applicant

Scott Ellis plans to conduct nocturnal

black-footed ferret surveys on a 150-acre

prairie dog colony. Permit number PRT–

804124 has been assigned to this

applicant, and this permit is valid for a

period of 2 years.

Nancy M. Kaufman,

Regional Director, Region 2, Albuquerque,

New Mexico.

[FR Doc. 96–10325 Filed 4–25–96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510–55–P

Availability of a Revised Habitat

Conservation Plan and Supplement to

a Previously Circulated Environmental

Assessment Evaluating Proposed

Issuance of Incidental Take Permit

PRT–803743 to the City of Poway and

Its Redevelopment Agency in San

Diego County, CA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

SUMMARY: The City of Poway and its

Redevelopment Agency (applicants)

have applied to the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service (Service) for an

incidental take permit (PRT–803743)

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

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as

amended (Act). The application package

includes a Subarea Habitat Conservation

Plan (HCP) and Implementing

Agreement (IA). The proposed

incidental take would occur as a result

of habitat disturbance associated with

residential and limited municipal

development in the City of Poway, San

Diego County, California.

The requested permit would authorize

the incidental take of 4 animal species

listed as endangered and 2 animal

species listed as threatened. The

applicants also have requested coverage

for an additional 37 unlisted, sensitive

species (11 plant, 26 animal), including

three proposed endangered species. Of

these 43 species, 22 are known to occur

within the City of Poway. The June 21,

1995, Notice of Availability (60 FR

32337) inadvertently omitted mention of

the remaining 21 species. These 21

species either are not known to occur

within Poway or the impacts of the HCP

on the species were considered to be

insignificant (discountable, minor in

relationship to the species as a whole,

or not reasonably expected to occur).

The HCP proposes to conserve all 43

species according to standards required

for listed species under the Act. The

applicant has requested that all 43

species be included in the permit. In the

event that any of the 43 species that are

currently unlisted become listed in the

future, the permit would take effect

upon the listing of those species.

An Environmental Assessment/Initial

Study Mitigated Negative Declaration

(EA/IS) for the proposed permit

issuance and draft Subarea HCP was

circulated for public review in June,

1995, in accordance with the National

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and

California Environmental Quality Act

regulations (60 FR 32337). On August

15, 1995, the Poway City Council

approved the Subarea HCP with the

stipulation that participation in the HCP

by private property owners would be

optional, and not mandatory as

originally proposed. Private property

owners who do not wish to be included

in the Subarea HCP and want to develop

their property in a manner that would

result in take of a listed species would

obtain development approvals through

the traditional endangered species

permit process under either section 10

or section 7 of the Act. A supplemental

EA has been prepared to evaluate the

effects of changing the plan from

mandatory to voluntary private

landowner participation. The Subarea

HCP also has been revised accordingly

and an errata sheet prepared. This

notice advises the public that the

supplemental EA and revised HCP are

available for review and comment. All

comments received, including names

and addresses, will become part of the

administrative record and may be made

available to the public. This notice is

provided pursuant to section 10(c) of

the Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR

1506.6).

DATES: Written comments should be

received on or before May 28, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Comments regarding the

adequacy of the supplemental EA and

revised HCP should be addressed to Mr.

Gail Kobetich, Field Supervisor, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker

Avenue West, Carlsbad, CA 92008; FAX

(619) 431–9618.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.

Nancy Gilbert, Fish and Wildlife

Biologist, at the above address,

telephone (619) 431–9440.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Availability of Documents

Copies of the Supplemental EA and

HCP errata sheet will be sent to

everyone on the original distribution list

or who commented on the permit

application during the initial public

comment period. Other individuals who

wish to receive copies of the

supplemental EA or revised HCP for

review should immediately contact Ms.

Gilbert. Copies of the supplemental EA,

Subarea HCP, HCP errata sheet, and

original permit application also may be

viewed by appointment, during normal

business hours, at the above address.

Background

The EA/IS, circulated in June 1995,

evaluated four alternatives including the

proposed action (issuance of the

incidental take permit). The three

alternatives to the proposed action are

summarized below and incorporated by

reference in the supplemental EA, but

analysis of these alternatives is not

repeated in the supplemental EA. Under

the No Action Alternative, the proposed

HCP would not be implemented. The

applicants would either avoid take of

listed species within the planning area,

or apply for individual 10(a)(1)(B)

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; however, greater habitat

fragmentation would likely occur under

the No Action Alternative than the

Proposed Alternative because the lands

set aside for open-space preservation

would not be assembled in a

coordinated preserve system. Under a

100 Percent Preservation of Mitigation

Area Alternative, all identified habitat

and species within the Mitigation Area

would be preserved. Development

would be prohibited within the

proposed Mitigation Area boundary

except on already disturbed areas where

such development would not impact the

viability of the proposed Mitigation

Area. Under the Modified Mitigation

Area Alternative, the proposed

Mitigation Area boundary would consist

only of lands already preserved in

Poway; i.e., cornerstone lands as

identified in the Subarea HCP, parcels

purchased for mitigation of the ScrippsPoway Parkway Extension project, and

slopes over 45 percent within the

Mitigation Area.

Under the Proposed Alternative,

changing participation in the Subarea

HCP from mandatory to optional for

private property owners could modestly

increase impacts to native vegetation

and species, as well as fragmentation in

biological core and linkage areas

important to overall preserve design.

However, existing regulations that

afford protection to listed species would

reduce these effects. In cases where

private property owners choose not to

participate in the Subarea HCP,

preservation of open space and

avoidance or mitigation for biological

impacts would still occur in accordance