27588 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

50 CFR Part 17 

[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0038; 

92210–1117–0000–B4] 

RIN 1018–AW22 

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife 

and Plants; Proposed Revised Critical 

Habitat for Navarretia fossalis 

(Spreading Navarretia) 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 

revise designated critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis (spreading 

navarretia). Approximately 6,872 acres 

(ac) (2,781 hectares (ha)) of habitat fall 

within the boundaries of the proposed 

revised critical habitat designation. This 

proposed revised designation of critical 

habitat is located in Los Angeles, 

Riverside, and San Diego Counties in 

southern California. 

DATES: We will accept comments from 

all interested parties until August 10, 

2009. We must receive requests for 

public hearings, in writing, at the 

address shown in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section by July 27, 

2009. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

by one of the following methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: http:// 

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments to 

Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0039. 

• U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public 

Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R8– 

ES–2009–0038; Division of Policy and 

Directives Management; U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203. We will 

not accept e-mail or faxes. We will post 

all comments on http:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post any personal 

information you provide us (see the 

Public Comments section below for 

more information). 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jim 

Bartel, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and 

Wildlife Office, 6010 Hidden Valley 

Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011; 

telephone (760) 431–9440; facsimile 

(760) 431–5901. If you use a 

telecommunications device for the deaf 

(TDD), call the Federal Information 

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

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Public Comments 

We intend any final action resulting 

from this proposal to be as accurate and 

as effective as possible. Therefore, we 

request comments or suggestions on this 

proposed rule. We particularly seek 

comments concerning: 

(1) The reasons we should or should 

not revise the designation of habitat as 

‘‘critical habitat’’ under section 4 of the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), 

including whether the benefit of 

designation would outweigh any threats 

to the species caused by the designation, 

such that the designation of critical 

habitat is prudent. 

(2) Specific information on: 

• Areas that provide habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis that we did not 

discuss in this proposed critical habitat 

rule, 

• Areas containing the features 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis that we should include in the 

designation and why, 

• Areas not containing features 

essential for the conservation of the 

species and why, and 

• Areas not occupied at the time of 

listing that are essential to the 

conservation of the species and why. 

(3) Land-use designations and current 

or planned activities in the areas 

proposed as critical habitat, as well as 

their possible effects on proposed 

critical habitat. 

(4) Comments or information that may 

assist us in identifying or clarifying the 

primary constituent elements. 

(5) How the proposed revised critical 

habitat boundaries could be refined to 

more closely circumscribe the 

landscapes identified as containing the 

features essential to the species’ 

conservation. 

(6) Any probable economic, nationalsecurity, or other impacts of designating 

particular areas as critical habitat, and, 

in particular, any impacts on small 

entities (e.g., small businesses or small 

governments), and the benefits of 

including or excluding areas that exhibit 

these impacts. 

(7) Whether any specific subunits 

being proposed as critical habitat should 

be excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act, and whether the benefits of 

potentially excluding any particular 

area outweigh the benefits of including 

that area under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act. 

(8) The potential exclusion of the 

portion of the subunit (Unit 2) being 

proposed as critical habitat within the 

jurisdiction of the City of Carlsbad 

Habitat Management Plan, a subarea 

plan under the San Diego Multiple 

Habitat Conservation Plan under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether the 

benefits of exclusion of this area 

outweigh the benefits of including this 

area as critical habitat, and why. 

(9) Specific reasons whether we 

should exclude, under section 4(b)(2) of 

the Act, the subunit proposed as critical 

habitat within the unincorporated 

community of Ramona in San Diego 

County (Subunit 4E), an area where the 

County of San Diego is working on a 

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) called 

the ‘‘North County Plan’’ with the 

Service that is currently available for 

public review (The North County Plan 

is available on the Internet at: http:// 

www.sdcounty.ca.gov/dplu/mscp/ 

nc.html), and whether the benefits of 

exclusion of this area outweigh the 

benefits of including this area as critical 

habitat, and why. 

(10) The potential exclusion of the 

subunits being proposed as critical 

habitat within the jurisdiction of the 

County of San Diego Subarea Plan 

(Subunit 3A and portions of Subunits 

5B, 5F, and 5I) under the San Diego 

Multiple Species Conservation Plan 

under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and 

whether the benefits of exclusion of this 

area outweigh the benefits of including 

this area as critical habitat, and why. 

(11) The potential exclusion of the 

subunits being proposed as critical 

habitat within the jurisdiction of the 

Western Riverside County Multiple 

Species Habitat Conservation Plan 

(Subunits 6A, 6B, 6C, 6D, and 6E) under 

section 4(b)(2) of the Act, and whether 

the benefits of exclusion of this area 

would outweigh the benefits of 

including this area as critical habitat, 

and why. 

(12) Information on any quantifiable 

economic costs or benefits of the 

proposed revised designation of critical 

habitat. 

(13) Whether we could improve or 

modify our approach to designating 

critical habitat in any way to provide for 

greater public participation and 

understanding, or to better 

accommodate public concerns and 

comments. 

Our final determination concerning 

critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis 

will take into consideration all written 

comments and any additional 

information we receive during the 

comment period. These comments are 

included in the public record for this 

rulemaking and we will fully consider 

them in the preparation of our final 

determination. On the basis of public 

comments, we may, during the 

development of our final determination, 

find that areas within the proposed 

designation do not meet the definition 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27589 

of critical habitat, that some 

modifications to the described 

boundaries are appropriate, or that areas 

may or may not be appropriate for 

exclusion under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act. 

You may submit your comments and 

materials concerning this proposed rule 

by one of the methods listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. We will not 

consider comments sent by e-mail or fax 

or to an address not listed in the 

ADDRESSES section. 

If you submit a comment via http:// 

www.regulations.gov, your entire 

comment—including any personal 

identifying information—will be posted 

on the Web site. If you submit a 

hardcopy comment that includes 

personal identifying information, you 

may request at the top of your document 

that we withhold this information from 

public review. However, we cannot 

guarantee that we will be able to do so. 

We will post all hardcopy comments on 

http://www.regulations.gov. 

Background 

It is our intent to discuss only those 

topics directly relevant to the proposed 

revised designation of critical habitat in 

this proposed rule. No new information 

pertaining to the species description, 

life history, ecology, or habitat of 

Navarretia fossalis was received 

following the 2005 final critical habitat 

designation for this species; summary 

information relevant to this species’ 

critical habitat is provided below. This 

rule incorporates new information on 

the distribution of N. fossalis that was 

not available when we completed our 

2005 final critical habitat designation 

for this species. For more information 

on N. fossalis, refer to the final listing 

rule published in the Federal Register 

on October 13, 1998 (63 FR 54975), and 

the designation of critical habitat for N. 

fossalis published in the Federal 

Register on October 18, 2005 (70 FR 

60658). Additionally, more information 

on this species can be found in the 

Recovery Plan for the Vernal Pools of 

Southern California (Recovery Plan) 

finalized on September 3, 1998 (Service 

1998a). 

Species Description 

Navarretia fossalis is a low, mostly 

spreading or ascending, annual herb, 4 

to 6 inches (in.) (10 to 15 centimeters 

(cm)) tall. The lower portions of the 

stems are mostly glabrous (bare). The 

leaves are soft and finely divided, 0.4 to 

2 in. (1 to 5 cm) long, and spine-tipped 

when dry. The corolla (i.e., flower tube 

and petals) are white to lavender-white 

with linear petals and are arranged in 

flat-topped, compact, leafy heads. The 

fruit is an ovoid, 2-chambered capsule 

(Moran 1977, pp. 155–156; Day 1993, p. 

847). The fruit of this species consists of 

indehiscent (i.e., not opening 

spontaneously at maturity to release 

seeds) capsules 0.08 to 0.12 in. (2 to 3 

millimeters (mm)) long containing 5 to 

25 seeds (Moran 1977, p. 156; Day 1993, 

p. 847). The seeds develop a sticky, 

slimy coating when wet, which may 

retain moisture and aid in germination 

(Moran 1977, p. 156). 

Habitat 

Navarretia fossalis grows in natural 

vernal pool habitat, seasonally flooded 

alkali vernal plain habitat (a habitat that 

includes alkali playa, alkali scrub, alkali 

vernal pool, and alkali annual 

grassland), and man-made irrigation 

ditches and detention basins (Bramlet 

1993a, pp. 10, 14, 21–23; Ferren and 

Fiedler 1993, pp. 126–127; Spencer 

1997, pp. 8, 13). A common feature of 

the N. fossalis habitat is its ephemerally 

wet, flooded, or ponded nature (i.e., 

habitat is wet for a portion the year and 

dry the remainder of the year), and in 

this rule, we use the term ‘‘ephemerally 

wet habitats’’ to refer to N. fossalis 

habitat. These habitats are periodically 

wet or ponded from October to May, 

and dry from June to September. The 

period of time during which these 

habitats pond is referred to as the 

‘‘period of inundation.’’ This time 

period varies from year to year 

depending on the timing and amount of 

precipitation. Despite the ephemeral 

nature of the wetland habitat where N. 

fossalis occurs its habitat occurs and 

relies on ‘‘fixed landscape features’’ that 

include (1) mounds of soil that are 

interspersed with depressed areas 

(basins) that harbor appropriate clay 

soils that provide ponding opportunities 

during winter and spring months; or (2) 

flood plain areas with alkali soils that 

drain slowly following winter and 

spring rains. The ponding that N. 

fossalis requires for its growth and 

reproduction would not be present 

without this underlying topography, 

which is a fixed and permanent feature 

of the landscape. So even though the 

wetland habitat is ephemeral, the 

habitat where N. fossalis occurs is 

geographically fixed and there are only 

a limited number of locations that can 

support this species. 

Life History 

The life cycle of Navarretia fossalis 

begins with the germination of seeds 

when the habitat is in the wetland phase 

(i.e., flooded or ponded) during winter 

and spring months. In contrast to most 

species of Navarretia, which are unable 

to grow in vernal pool habitat, N. 

fossalis and other vernal pool 

Navarretias have indehiscent fruit/ 

capsules. This means that the capsules 

that hold the seeds do not break apart 

when the seeds mature, and instead the 

seeds are held on the plant until the 

capsules absorb water and expand to 

break open the fruit after a substantial 

rain (Crampton 1954, pp. 233–234; 

Spencer and Rieseberg 1998, p. 82). 

After the seeds are released from the 

capsules, they come in contact with the 

wet soil and are able to germinate. This 

enables the seeds to germinate under 

favorable conditions when the habitat is 

inundated with the winter and spring 

rains. After germination, plants grow 

and flower in May and June as the 

habitat dries (Glenn Lukos Associates, 

Inc. 2000, p. 17). Subsequently, the 

plant produces fruit and senesces in the 

hot, dry summer months. The cycle 

begins again each year when the fall and 

spring rains begin. 

In addition to the general life history 

for Navarretia fossalis, there are two 

important evolutionary traits that 

contribute to this species survival: (1) Its 

relatively limited seed dispersal 

capability; and (2) the presence of a 

persistent seed bank. 

Navarretia fossalis has ‘‘limited 

dispersal capabilities,’’ which is one 

cause of this species’ narrow 

distribution, and also demonstrates this 

species’ ability to persist in occupied 

habitat. The seeds of N. fossalis are not 

dispersed far from the parent plant, 

because the seed capsules are 

indehiscent and do not shatter when the 

plants dry in the summer heat 

(Crampton 1954, pp. 233–234; Spencer 

1997, p. 17). Instead, the seeds remain 

on the dried plant until heavy winter 

rains break up the dry plants and cause 

the seed capsules to open (Spencer 

1997, p. 17). In a local context, the 

limited dispersal for N. fossalis is 

advantageous because the seeds stay in 

suitable habitat rather than being 

transported into areas that do not 

provide suitable habitat (Zedler 1990, 

pp. 130–134). As a result, the bulk of the 

seeds produced by N. fossalis stay close 

to the parent plants and contribute to 

the persistence of the species within the 

local area. Conversely, the limited 

dispersal of this species results in a 

decreased ability for this species to 

colonize new habitats. In relation to the 

conservation of this species, conserving 

occupied localities will help to conserve 

this species because N. fossalis has traits 

that allow it to be successful in the same 

habitat year after year. Additionally, 

putting resources towards the 

conservation will help prevent local 

extinctions, which in the case of a 

species with limited dispersal 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27590 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

capabilities, could be detrimental to the 

species (Spencer 1997, p. 17). 

Navarretia fossalis has a persistent 

seed bank that makes occupied sites 

more valuable for conservation than 

potential, but unoccupied, habitat. Elam 

(1998, p. 182) indicates that many 

plants restricted to vernal pool habitat 

are thought to have a persistent seed 

bank. At one site where N. fossalis was 

salvaged, both standing plants and soil 

that contained plants encased in silt 

were collected. In germination tests, 

both the current crop of seeds (standing 

plants) and the seeds encased in silt 

(presumably from previous years) were 

viable (Wall 2004, pp. 2–3). Additional 

studies should be conducted to better 

quantify the seed bank that exists for N. 

fossalis, but we believe the currently 

available information demonstrates that 

N. fossalis has a persistent seed bank in 

occupied areas. Therefore, the 

preservation of the seed bank is 

important to the conservation of this 

species, primarily with native 

occurrences where the seed bank has 

built up over several years. Native 

occurrences contrast with translocated 

occurrences (where seed or plants are 

moved from one location to another) 

because in most translocations, only 

seed from a single year is moved and 

used to establish a new occurrence. In 

a native occurrence, seed has been 

deposited in the local area year after 

year. Therefore, native occurrences have 

a more varied seed bank and will more 

likely persist into the future. 

Geographic Range and Status 

Navarretia fossalis is distributed from 

northwestern Los Angeles County and 

western Riverside County, south 

through coastal San Diego County, 

California, to northwestern Baja 

California, Mexico (Moran 1977, p. 156; 

Oberbauer 1992, p. 7). It is found at 

elevations between sea level and 4,250 

feet (ft) (1,300 meters (m)) in vernal pool 

and seasonally flooded alkali vernal 

plain habitats (Day 1993, pp. 847–848; 

Tibor 2001, p. 229; California Natural 

Diversity Database (CNDDB) 2008, pp. 

1–44). 

In the United States, Navarretia 

fossalis is limited to Los Angeles, 

Riverside, and San Diego Counties in 

southern California. At the time of 

listing (1998), N. fossalis was known 

from approximately 30 occurrences, 

with 60 percent of the known plants 

concentrated in three areas: Otay Mesa 

in southern San Diego County, along the 

San Jacinto River in western Riverside 

County, and near Hemet in Riverside 

County (referred to as the Salt Creek 

Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain in the 

current proposed revised critical habitat 

rule) (October 13, 1998, 63 FR 54975). 

In the final listing rule (October 13, 

1998, 63 FR 54975), we estimated that 

less than 300 ac (121 ha) of habitat in 

the United States was occupied by this 

species in approximately 30 

occurrences. This habitat estimate only 

quantified the areas where N. fossalis 

was physically found (i.e., ponded areas 

of ephemeral wetlands) and did not 

include the intermixed upland areas 

and local watersheds necessary to 

support the conservation of this species. 

For this reason, we have identified a 

much larger area as proposed critical 

habitat for N. fossalis in this rule than 

the 300 ac (121 ha) of occupied habitat 

discussed in the final listing rule for this 

species. Each area that we propose as 

critical habitat contains a current 

occurrence of N. fossalis; however, N. 

fossalis does not physically occur 

throughout the entirety of each area. 

The 6,872 ac (2,781 ha) proposed as 

critical habitat contains occurrences of 

N. fossalis and surrounding upland 

areas that contain the primary 

constituent elements essential to 

support N. fossalis where it physically 

occurs within the proposed critical 

habitat. For information about how this 

proposed critical habitat rule compares 

to the final critical habitat designated 

for this species in 2005, see the 

‘‘Summary of Changes From Previously 

Designated Critical Habitat’’ section 

below. 

In Mexico, Navarretia fossalis is 

limited to northwestern Baja California. 

At the time of listing (1998), N. fossalis 

was known from approximately nine 

occurrences concentrated in three areas: 

Along the international border, on the 

plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe and 

north of Ensenada, and on the San 

Quintin coastal plain (Moran 1977, p. 

156). 

In this proposed rule, we use the 

word ‘‘occurrence’’ to refer to a specific 

area where Navarretia fossalis has been 

positively identified. An occurrence of 

N. fossalis is not necessarily 

synonymous with a population of N. 

fossalis. One occurrence may refer to 

several localized areas where N. fossalis 

has been found in habitat that is 

continuous and connected, such as the 

several mile stretch along the San 

Jacinto River in Riverside, California, 

where N. fossalis occurs intermittently 

(although the habitat is essentially 

continuous). One occurrence may also 

refer to only one localized area where N. 

fossalis has been found, in habitat that 

is isolated, such as the vernal pools at 

the Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station in 

Carlsbad, California, where the next 

closest occurrence is several miles 

(kilometers) away. The occurrences that 

we defined in this rule are not the same 

as the element occurrences described by 

the California Natural Diversity 

Database (CNDDB). 

As part of this proposed revised 

critical habitat, we reviewed the 

available data on Navarretia fossalis. We 

determined that a total of 51 

documented occurrences exist from the 

United States and that 49 of these 

occurrences are extant (i.e., currently 

supporting an occurrence of N. fossalis). 

Since this species was listed in 1998, 17 

additional occurrences have been 

documented from survey reports and 

herbarium collections. We believe that 

the recently documented occurrences 

were extant at the time of listing 

because this species has limited 

dispersal capabilities, and the species 

can only occur in specific habitat types 

with fixed landscape features. (Limited 

dispersal is defined and discussed in 

detail in paragraph 3 of the ‘‘Life 

History’’ section. ‘‘Fixed landscape 

features’’ we further defined the first 

time we used this terminology 

(paragraph 1 of the ‘‘Habitat’’ section.) It 

is unlikely that any new occurrences 

were established during the relatively 

short, ten-year time period following the 

listing of this species. Instead, we 

believe the areas discovered to contain 

N. fossalis in the years since the listing 

were occupied for many years prior to 

listing of the species and were only 

recently documented due to increased 

number of surveys for this species. 

Additionally, all recently documented 

occurrences of N. fossalis are within the 

historical geographical range of the 

species. Therefore, throughout this rule 

we refer to all occurrences as ‘‘occupied 

at the time of listing’’ whether the areas 

were documented before or after the 

species was listed. 

As part of our review of data on this 

species, we were able to get a more 

complete list of the past herbarium 

collections for Navarretia fossalis in 

Baja California, Mexico; all of which 

were made prior to the listing of this 

species. Our current list of collections 

from Mexico indicates that there are 12 

specific locations where N. fossalis has 

been found in Baja California (Sanborn 

2009, pp. 2–3). Other than the original 

collection information, we have no 

specific data on these occurrences; 

however, development, clay mining, 

and agricultural activities have been 

ongoing in the areas where N. fossalis 

has been found in the past (Moran 1984, 

pp. 175–178). We cannot make any 

specific conclusions about how many of 

these occurrences are extant, but we do 

think that this species is as rare in 

Mexico as it is in the United States and 

that its existence is threatened by 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27591 

development, clay mining, and 

agricultural activities in Mexico. 

Areas Needed for Conservation: Core 

and Satellite Habitat Areas 

Details about the distribution and 

status of this species provide important 

background information for 

understanding the areas that we are 

proposing for revised critical habitat. 

The areas that contain the features 

essential for the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis and that we are 

proposing as revised critical habitat in 

this rule are represented by core habitat 

areas and satellite habitat areas. Core 

habitat represents the most critical areas 

in conserving this species, including 

areas that contain the highest 

concentrations of N. fossalis and the 

largest contiguous blocks of habitat for 

this species. We identified four core 

habitat areas; three core habitat areas 

were identified in the listing rule (along 

the San Jacinto River, in the Upper Salt 

Creek drainage, and on Otay Mesa), and 

in the current revised proposed critical 

habitat rule, we added one additional 

area that we believe represents a core 

habitat area (Mesa de Burro on the Santa 

Rosa Plateau). In addition to the four 

core areas, N. fossalis occurs at several 

other sites that make up the range of this 

species; many of these sites also contain 

the features essential to the conservation 

of this species. 

In this rule, we use the term ‘‘satellite 

habitat areas’’ to mean habitat areas that 

support occurrences that are smaller 

than those supported by the ‘‘core 

habitat areas,’’ but provide the means to 

significantly contribute to the recovery 

of N. fossalis. Satellite habitat areas 

provide connectivity between the core 

habitat areas by shortening the distances 

that pollen and seeds would need to be 

transferred, fill in gaps that would exist 

in the species range, if only the core 

habitat areas were conserved, support 

stable occurrences (e.g., occurrences 

that continue to persist in an area), and 

likely support genetically unique 

occurrences. The satellite habitat areas 

are generally smaller than the core 

habitats. However, the satellite habitat 

areas contain the features essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis. 

Together, the core habitat areas and 

satellite habitat areas represent a matrix 

of viable occurrences that provide the 

stability, resilience, and flexibility that 

this species requires to survive current 

threats and adapt to future threats that 

may be caused by environmental 

changes. Special management 

considerations or protection of the core 

habitat areas and satellite habitat areas 

will help with the recovery of N. fossalis 

and bring the species to the point where 

the protections of the Act are no longer 

needed. 

The four core habitat areas where this 

species occurs are large, both in number 

of occupied areas and in terms of the 

occurrence size (greater than 3,000 

plants). The core habitat areas support 

self-sufficient occurrences that have 

been resilient to human impacts at the 

landscape scale. These core habitat 

areas contain the largest occurrences of 

N. fossalis, and, therefore, the 

conservation of these areas and the 

essential features contained therein will 

make a substantial contribution to the 

recovery of this species. 

We have determined, however, that 

the conservation of the core habitat 

areas alone will not be sufficient to 

provide for recovery of Navarretia 

fossalis. As a result, we believe that the 

conservation of satellite habitat areas is 

essential for the recovery of this species. 

Satellite habitats include: (1) Important 

peripheral occurrences of this species 

that are on the geographic edge of this 

species’ distribution; (2) occurrences 

that are isolated from other occurrences 

by geographic features; and (3) areas 

that are nested within the distribution of 

this species and provide connections 

between the core habitat areas and other 

satellite habitat areas. The satellite 

habitat areas are dispersed throughout 

the range of this species. Therefore, we 

believe the protection and management 

of both core and satellite habitat areas 

will result in a matrix of viable 

occurrences and supportive habitat 

areas that will provide for the long-term 

conservation of N. fossalis. 

Previous Federal Actions 

On October 18, 2005 (70 FR 60658), 

we published our final designation of 

critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis. 

On December 19, 2007, the Center for 

Biological Diversity filed a complaint in 

the U.S. District Court for the Southern 

District of California challenging our 

designation of critical habitat for N. 

fossalis and Brodiaea filifolia (Center for 

Biological Diversity v. United States 

Fish and Wildlife Service et al., Case No. 

07–CV–02379–W–NLS). This lawsuit 

challenged the validity of the 

information and reasoning we used to 

exclude areas from the 2005 critical 

habitat designation for N. fossalis. On 

July 25, 2008, we reached a settlement 

agreement, in which we agreed to 

reconsider critical habitat designation 

for N. fossalis. The settlement stipulated 

that we submit a proposed revised 

critical habitat designation for N. 

fossalis to the Federal Register for 

publication on or before May 29, 2009, 

and submit a final revised critical 

habitat designation to the Federal 

Register for publication on or before 

May 28, 2010. 

Critical Habitat 

Critical habitat is defined in section 3 

of the Act as: 

(1) The specific areas within the 

geographical area occupied by a species, 

at the time it is listed in accordance 

with the Act, on which are found those 

physical or biological features 

(a) Essential to the conservation of the 

species and 

(b) That may require special 

management considerations or 

protection; and 

(2) Specific areas outside the 

geographical area occupied by a species 

at the time it is listed, upon a 

determination that such areas are 

essential for the conservation of the 

species. 

Conservation, as defined under 

section 3 of the Act, means the use of 

all methods and procedures that are 

necessary to bring any endangered or 

threatened species to the point at which 

the measures provided under the Act 

are no longer necessary. Such methods 

and procedures include, but are not 

limited to, all activities associated with 

scientific resources management, such 

as research, census, law enforcement, 

habitat acquisition and maintenance, 

propagation, live trapping, 

transplantation, and—in the 

extraordinary case where population 

pressures within a given ecosystem 

cannot otherwise be relieved—regulated 

taking. 

Critical habitat receives protection 

under section 7(a)(2) of the Act through 

the prohibition against Federal agencies 

carrying out, funding, or authorizing the 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. Section 7(a)(2) of the Act 

requires consultation on Federal actions 

that may affect critical habitat. The 

designation of critical habitat does not 

affect land ownership or establish a 

refuge, wilderness, reserve, preserve, or 

other conservation area. Such 

designation does not allow the 

government or public to access private 

lands. Such designation does not 

require implementation of restoration, 

recovery, or enhancement measures by 

private landowners. Where a landowner 

requests Federal agency funding or 

authorization for an action that may 

affect a listed species or critical habitat, 

the consultation requirements of section 

7(a)(2) would apply, but even in the 

event of a destruction or adverse 

modification finding, the landowner’s 

obligation is not to restore or recover the 

species, but to implement reasonable 

and prudent alternatives to avoid 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27592 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat. 

For inclusion in a critical habitat 

designation, the habitat within the 

geographical area occupied by the 

species at the time of listing must 

contain physical and biological features 

that are essential to the conservation of 

the species, and be included only if 

those features may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. Critical habitat designations 

identify, to the extent known using the 

best scientific data available, habitat 

areas that provide essential life cycle 

needs of the species (i.e., areas on which 

are found the Primary Constituent 

Elements (PCEs) laid out in the 

appropriate quantity and spatial 

arrangement essential to the 

conservation of the species). Under the 

Act, we can designate critical habitat in 

areas outside the geographical area 

occupied by the species at the time it is 

listed as critical habitat only when we 

determine that those areas are essential 

for the conservation of the species. 

Section 4 of the Act requires that we 

designate critical habitat on the basis of 

the best scientific and commercial data 

available. Further, our Policy on 

Information Standards Under the 

Endangered Species Act (published in 

the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 

FR 34271)), the Information Quality Act 

(section 515 of the Treasury and General 

Government Appropriations Act for 

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

5658)), and our associated Information 

Quality Guidelines provide criteria, 

establish procedures, and provide 

guidance to ensure that our decisions 

are based on the best scientific data 

available. They require our biologists, to 

the extent consistent with the Act and 

with the use of the best scientific data 

available, to use primary and original 

sources of information as the basis for 

recommendations to designate critical 

habitat. 

When we are determining which areas 

should be designated as critical habitat, 

our primary source of information is 

generally the information developed 

during the listing process for the 

species. Additional information sources 

may include the recovery plan for the 

species, articles in peer-reviewed 

journals, conservation plans developed 

by States and counties, scientific status 

surveys and studies, biological 

assessments, or other unpublished 

materials and expert opinion or 

personal knowledge. 

Habitat is often dynamic, and species 

may move from one area to another over 

time. Furthermore, we recognize that 

designation of critical habitat may not 

include all habitat areas that we may 

eventually determine are necessary for 

the recovery of the species, based on 

scientific data not now available to the 

Service. For these reasons, a critical 

habitat designation does not signal that 

habitat outside the designated area is 

unimportant or may not promote the 

recovery of the species. 

Areas that support occurrences, but 

are outside the critical habitat 

designation, will continue to be subject 

to conservation actions we implement 

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

are also subject to the regulatory 

protections afforded by the section 

7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, as determined 

on the basis of the best available 

scientific information at the time of the 

agency action. Federally funded or 

permitted projects affecting listed 

species outside their designated critical 

habitat areas may still result in jeopardy 

findings in some cases. Similarly, 

critical habitat designations made on the 

basis of the best available information at 

the time of designation will not control 

the direction and substance of future 

recovery plans, habitat conservation 

plans (HCPs), or other species 

conservation planning efforts if new 

information available to these planning 

efforts calls for a different outcome. 

Methods 

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

we used the best scientific and 

commercial data available in 

determining areas occupied at the time 

of listing that contain the features 

essential to the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis. We reviewed the 

approach to the conservation of N. 

fossalis provided in its recovery plan 

(Service 1998a, pp. 1–113, appendices), 

the 2005 final designation of critical 

habitat for N. fossalis (October 18, 2005, 

70 FR 60658), information from State, 

Federal, and Local government agencies, 

and information from academia and 

private organizations that collected 

scientific data on the species. Other 

information we used for this proposed 

revised critical habitat includes: The 

CNDDB (CNDDB 2008, pp. 1–44); 

published and unpublished papers, 

reports, academic theses, surveys; 

Geographic Information System (GIS) 

data (such as species occurrence data, 

soil data, land use, topography, aerial 

imagery, and ownership maps); 

correspondence to the Service from 

recognized experts; and other 

information as available. 

Primary Constituent Elements 

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

of the Act and regulations at 50 CFR 

424.12(b), in determining which areas 

occupied by the species at the time of 

listing to propose as critical habitat, we 

consider those physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species that may 

require special management 

considerations or protection. We 

consider the physical and biological 

features to be the primary constituent 

elements (PCEs) laid out in the 

appropriate quantity and spatial 

arrangement for the conservation of the 

species. The PCEs include, but are not 

limited to: 

(1) Space for individual and 

population growth and for normal 

behavior; 

(2) Food, water, air, light, minerals, or 

other nutritional or physiological 

requirements; 

(3) Cover or shelter; 

(4) Sites for breeding, reproduction, 

and rearing (or development) of 

offspring; and 

(5) Habitats that are protected from 

disturbance or are representative of the 

historical, geographical, and ecological 

distributions of a species. 

We derived the PCEs required for 

Navarretia fossalis from its biological 

needs. The area proposed for 

designation as revised critical habitat 

consists of ephemeral wetland habitat 

for the reproduction and growth of N. 

fossalis, intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

to support the ephemeral wetland 

habitat, and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months. The methods of 

dispersal and pollination for N. fossalis 

are not well understood and may not be 

captured by this proposed revised 

critical habitat. Likewise, the larger 

watershed areas that support the 

ephemeral wetland habitat are difficult 

to define and may require hydrological 

data and modeling that are not 

available; therefore, areas beyond the 

local watershed are not included in this 

proposed critical habitat rule. The PCEs 

and the resulting physical and 

biological features essential for the 

conservation of N. fossalis are derived 

from studies of this species’ habitat, 

ecology, and life history as described 

below, in the ‘‘Background’’ section in 

this proposed rule, as well as in the 

previous critical habitat rule (October 

18, 2005, 70 FR 60658), and in the final 

listing rule published in the Federal 

Register on October 13, 1998 (63 FR 

54975). 

Habitats That Are Representative of the 

Historic Geographical and Ecological 

Distribution of the Species 

Navarretia fossalis is restricted to 

temporary wetlands in southern 

California and northwestern Baja 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27593 

California (Moran 1977, pp. 155–156; 

Oberbauer 1992, p. 7; Day 1993, p. 847; 

CNDDB 2008, pp. 1–44), and primarily 

associated with vernal pools and 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitats (Moran 1977, pp. 155–156; 

Bramlet 1993a, p. 10; Day 1993, p. 847; 

Ferren and Fiedler 1993, pp. 126–127). 

In Los Angeles County, N. fossalis is 

known to occur in vernal pools on 

Cruzan Mesa and the associated 

drainage of Plum Canyon. In Riverside 

County, N. fossalis is known to occur in 

large vernal pools with basins that range 

in size from 0.5 ac (0.2 ha) to 10.0 ac 

(4.0 ha) (e.g., CNDDB 2008, EO 43, 44), 

and in temporary wetlands that are 

described as seasonally flooded alkali 

vernal plain habitat along the San 

Jacinto River and near Salt Creek in 

Hemet (e.g., CNDDB 2008, EO 22, 23, 

24). In San Diego County, N. fossalis is 

found in vernal pools that are smaller 

than those in Riverside County, ranging 

in size from 0.01 ac (0.005 ha) to 0.2 ac 

(0.09 ha) and are often found in clusters 

of several vernal pools referred to as 

vernal pool complexes (e.g., CNDDB 

2008, EO 4, 14, 19). In Mexico, N. 

fossalis is known from fewer than 12 

occurrences, of which the main 

occurrences are clustered in three areas: 

along the international border, on the 

plateaus south of the Rio Guadalupe, 

and on the San Quintin coastal plain 

(Moran 1977, p. 156). 

Ephemeral Wetland Habitat 

Despite the variation in the types of 

habitat where Navarretia fossalis is 

found (i.e., vernal pool habitat and 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitat), these ephemeral wetlands all 

share the same temporary nature (i.e., 

areas fill with water during winter or 

spring months and dry completely 

during summer and fall months). 

Navarretia fossalis depends on both the 

inundation and the drying of its habitat 

for survival. This type of ephemerally 

wet habitat does not support upland 

plants that live in a dry environment 

year round or wetland plants that 

require year round moisture to become 

established (Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998). 

Rather, these habitats support 

specialized plants, such as N. fossalis 

that are able to grow in the open niche 

created by the exclusion of strictly 

upland and wetland plants. 

Navarretia fossalis primarily occurs in 

ephemeral wetland habitat, more 

specifically, vernal pool and seasonally 

flooded alkali vernal plain habitat 

(Moran 1977, pp.156–157; Bramlet 

1993a, p. 10; Bramlet 1993b, p. 14; Day 

1993, p. 847). Vernal pools form during 

the winter rains in depressions that are 

part of a gently sloping, undulating 

landscape, where soil mounds are 

interspersed with basins. This 

landscape is called ‘‘mima-mound’’ 

topography (Cox 1984, pp. 1397–1398), 

which is situated above an impervious 

soil layer called a ‘‘hard pan’’ or ‘‘clay 

pan.’’ Additionally, the final listing rule 

states that N. fossalis can occur in 

ditches and other artificial depressions 

associated with degraded vernal pool 

habitat (63 FR 54975, October 13, 1998; 

Moran 1977, p. 155). 

Seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitat includes alkali playa, alkali 

scrub, alkali vernal pool, and alkali 

annual grassland components. The 

hydrologic regime for this habitat 

involves sporadic flooding (as described 

above) in combination with slow 

drainage on the alkaline soils. The 

habitat floods locally on a seasonal 

basis. Mid-range floods occur less 

frequently, approximately every 20 to 50 

years, but are necessary to maintain the 

habitat by removing scrub vegetation 

(Roberts 2004, p. 4). During a typical, 

seasonal flooding period, alkali scrub 

vegetation expands its distribution into 

the deeper areas of the seasonally 

flooded alkali vernal plain habitat and 

crowds out the more ephemeral wetland 

species. During a large scale flooding 

period, standing and slow draining 

water remains for weeks or months and 

results in the death of alkali scrub 

vegetation. As a result, conditions 

become favorable for annual species 

(e.g., Navarretia fossalis) to regain and 

locally expand their range (Bramlet 

2004, p. 8; Roberts 2004, p. 4). 

Intermixed Wetland and Upland 

Habitats That Act as the Local 

Watershed 

Vernal pools within a vernal pool 

complex are hydrologically connected 

to one another within the local 

geographical context. Seasonally 

flooded alkali vernal plain habitats are 

also hydrologically connected by 

flowing water. Water flows over the 

surface from one vernal pool to another 

or throughout the seasonally flooded 

alkali vernal plain. Due to an 

impervious clay layer or hard pan, water 

also flows and collects below ground 

such that the soil becomes saturated 

with water. The result of the movement 

of the water through vernal pool and 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

systems is that pools fill and hold water 

continuously for a number of days 

following the initial rainfall (Hanes et 

al. 1990, p. 51). For this reason, these 

hydrologic systems are best described 

from a watershed perspective. The local 

watershed associated with a vernal pool 

complex or seasonally flooded alkali 

vernal plain includes all surfaces in the 

surrounding area that flow into the 

vernal pool complex or seasonally 

flooded alkali vernal plain. Some 

hydrologic systems (e.g., the San Jacinto 

River, the Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 

Alkali Plain) have watersheds that cover 

a large area and that contribute to filling 

and the hydrological dynamics of the 

system, while other hydrologic systems 

have very small watersheds (e.g., Carroll 

Canyon, Nobel Drive) and fill almost 

entirely from direct rainfall (Hanes et al. 

1990, p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998, 

p. 38). It is also possible that subsurface 

inflows from surrounding soils within a 

watershed contribute to filling some 

vernal pools and seasonally flooded 

alkali vernal plains (Hanes et al. 1990, 

p. 53; Hanes and Stromberg 1998, p. 48). 

Topography and Soils That Support 

Ponding During Winter and Spring 

Impervious subsurface layers of clay 

soils or hardpan geology, combined 

with flat to gently sloping topography, 

serve to inhibit rapid infiltration of 

rainwater, resulting in ponded water in 

vernal pools and seasonally flooded 

alkali vernal plains (Bramlet 1993a, p. 1; 

Bauder and McMillian 1998, pp. 57–59). 

These soils also act as a buffer to 

moderate the water chemistry and rate 

of water loss to evaporation (Zedler 

1987, pp. 17–30). In Los Angeles 

County, the vernal pools that support 

Navarretia fossalis are found on 

Cieneba-Pismo-Caperton soils (Service 

GIS analysis). In western Riverside 

County, the seasonally flooded alkali 

vernal plain habitat that supports N. 

fossalis is found on Domino, Traver, 

Waukena, and Chino soils (Bramlet 

1993a, p. 1, 10; December 15, 1994, 59 

FR 64812). In San Diego County, the 

vernal pool habitat that supports N. 

fossalis is found on Huerhuero, 

Placentia, Olivenhain, Stockpen, and 

Redding soils (Service GIS analysis). 

Primary Constituent Elements for 

Navarretia fossalis 

Under the Act and its implementing 

regulations, we are required to identify 

the physical and biological features 

within the geographical area occupied 

by Navarretia fossalis at the time of 

listing that are essential to the 

conservation of the species and which 

may require special management 

considerations or protection. The 

physical and biological features are 

those PCEs laid out in a specific special 

arrangement and quantity determined to 

be essential to the conservation of the 

species. All areas proposed as critical 

habitat for N. fossalis were occupied at 

the time of listing (see the ‘‘Geographic 

Range and Status’’ section for a more 

detailed explanation) and are currently 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27594 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

occupied, are within the species’ 

geographic range, and contain sufficient 

essential features to support at least one 

life history function. 

Based on our current knowledge of 

the life history, biology, and ecology of 

Navarretia fossalis, and the 

requirements of the habitat to sustain 

the essential life history functions of the 

species, we determined that the PCEs 

specific to N. fossalis are: 

(1) PCE 1—Ephemeral wetland 

habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 ha)) 

and seasonally flooded alkali vernal 

plains that become inundated by the 

winter rains and hold water or have 

saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6 months 

during a year with average rainfall. This 

period of inundation is long enough to 

promote germination, flowering, and 

seed production for N. fossalis and other 

native species typical of vernal pool and 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitat, but not so long that true 

wetland species inhabit the areas. 

(2) PCE 2—Intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed. Areas characterized by 

mounds, swales, and depressions within 

a matrix of upland habitat that results in 

intermittently flowing surface and 

subsurface water in swales, drainages, 

and pools that support the habitat 

described in PCE 1, and provide the 

water that allows for the inundation 

described in PCE 1. 

(3) PCE 3—Soils that support ponding 

during winter and spring. Soils found in 

areas characterized in PCE 2 that allow 

for ponding of water because they have 

a clay component or other property that 

creates an impermeable surface or 

subsurface layer. The properties of these 

soils contribute to reduced percolation 

and minimal run-off of water, all of 

which lead to supporting the habitat 

and period of inundation described in 

PCE 1. These soil types are known to 

include, but are not limited to: CienebaPismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles 

County; Domino, Traver, and Willows 

soils in Riverside County; and 

Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain, 

Stockpen, and Redding soils in San 

Diego County. 

With this proposed designation of 

critical habitat, we intend to conserve 

the physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species, through the identification of the 

appropriate quantity and spatial 

arrangement of the PCEs sufficient to 

support the life history functions of the 

species. For Navarretia fossalis, the size 

of the ephemeral wetland habitat can 

vary a great deal, but the important 

factor (i.e., the appropriate quantity and 

spatial arrangement of the PCEs) in any 

of the subunits proposed as critical 

habitat is that the vernal pool or alkali 

playa habitat has intact and functioning 

hydrology and intact adjacent upland 

areas that ensure a functioning 

ecosystem. All units and subunits 

proposed as critical habitat contain the 

PCEs in the appropriate quantity and 

spatial arrangement essential to the 

conservation of this species and support 

multiple life processes for N. fossalis. 

Special Management Considerations or 

Protection 

When designating critical habitat, we 

assess whether the occupied areas 

contain the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of the species, and 

whether these features may require 

special management considerations or 

protection. 

The area proposed for designation as 

revised critical habitat will require some 

level of management to address the 

current and future threats to the 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. In all units, special 

management considerations or 

protection of the essential features may 

be required to provide for the sustained 

function of the ephemeral wetland 

ecosystems on which N. fossalis 

depends. The designation of critical 

habitat does not imply that lands 

outside of critical habitat do not play an 

important role in the conservation of N. 

fossalis. Activities with a Federal nexus 

that may affect areas outside of critical 

habitat, such as development, 

agricultural activities, and road 

construction, are still subject to review 

under section 7 of the Act if they may 

affect N. fossalis, because Federal 

agencies must consider both effects to 

the plant and effects to critical habitat 

independently. The prohibitions of 

section 9 of the Act applicable to N. 

fossalis under 50 CFR 17.71 (e.g., reduce 

to possession or maliciously damage or 

destroy on Federal lands) also continue 

to apply both inside and outside of 

designated critical habitat. 

Researchers estimate that greater than 

90 percent of the vernal pool habitat in 

southern California has been converted 

as a result of past human activities 

(Bauder and McMillian 1998, pp. 56–67; 

Keeler-Wolf et al. 1998, pp. 10, 60–61, 

63–64). A detailed discussion of threats 

to Navarretia fossalis and its habitat can 

be found in the final listing rule 

(October 13, 1998, 63 FR 54975), the 

previous critical habitat designation 

(October 18, 2005, 70 FR 60658), and 

the Recovery Plan for Vernal Pools of 

Southern California (Service 1998a, 

pp.1–113, appendices). The features 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis require special management 

considerations or protection to reduce 

the following threats, among others: 

habitat destruction and fragmentation 

from urban and agricultural 

development; pipeline construction; 

alteration of hydrology and floodplain 

dynamics; excessive flooding; 

channelization; water diversions; offroad vehicle activity; trampling by cattle 

and sheep; weed abatement; fire 

suppression practices (including discing 

and plowing to remove weeds and 

create fire breaks); competition from 

nonnative plant species; and direct and 

indirect impacts from some human 

recreational activities (October 13, 1998, 

63 FR 54975; Service 1998a, p. 7). 

Criteria Used To Identify Critical 

Habitat 

We are proposing to designate critical 

habitat in areas that were occupied by 

the species at the time of listing and 

continue to be occupied today, and that 

contain the PCEs in the quantity and 

spatial arrangement to support life 

history functions essential for the 

conservation of the species (see the 

‘‘Geographic Range and Status’’ section 

for more information). We are not 

proposing to designate any areas outside 

the geographical area occupied at the 

time of listing. All units and subunits 

proposed contain the PCEs in the 

appropriate quantity and spatial 

arrangement essential to the 

conservation of this species and support 

multiple life processes for N. fossalis. 

As required by section 4(b)(1)(A) of 

the Act, we use the best scientific and 

commercial data available in 

determining areas that contain the 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of Navarretia fossalis. The 

‘‘Methods’’ section summarizes the data 

used for this proposed revised critical 

habitat. This proposed revised rule is an 

effort to update our 2005 final 

designation of critical habitat for N. 

fossalis with the best available data. In 

some areas that were analyzed in 2005, 

we have new information that led us to 

either add or remove areas from this 

proposal to revise critical habitat. 

This section provides details of the 

process and criteria we used to 

delineate proposed revised critical 

habitat. This proposed revised rule is 

the result of a progression of 

conservation efforts for Navarretia 

fossalis. This progression is based 

largely on the past analysis of the areas 

that are required for the conservation of 

N. fossalis as presented in the Recovery 

Plan for Vernal Pools of Southern 

California (Service 1998a, pp.1–113, 

appendices), the 2005 final critical 

habitat designation, and new 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27595 

information we obtained on the species 

and its distribution since listing. Table 

1 shows the changes in identified 

essential habitat between the 1998 

Recovery Plan, the 2005 final critical 

habitat designation, and this proposed 

revised critical habitat designation. The 

unit names used in this proposed 

revised critical habitat are based on the 

names used for management areas used 

in the 1998 Recovery Plan. The specific 

changes made to the 2005 final 

designation of critical habitat are 

summarized in the ‘‘Summary of 

Changes From Previously Designated 

Critical Habitat’’ section of this rule. 

TABLE 1—AREAS IDENTIFIED AS ESSENTIAL TO NAVARRETIA FOSSALIS CONSERVATION

Location* Recovery plan appendix Final critical habitat (2005) Proposed revised critical 

habitat (2009) 

Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area 

Cruzan Mesa ................................................................... F ........................................ 1A ...................................... 1A. 

Plum Canyon ................................................................... N/A ..................................... 1B ...................................... 1B. 

Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

Stuart Mesa, Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp Pendleton, Recovery plan (RP)** name: Stuart Mesa.F ........................................ 4(a)(3) exemption .............. 4(a)(3) exemption. 

Wire Mountain, MCB Camp Pendleton, RP name: Wire 

Mountain.

F ........................................ ............................................ 4(a)(3) exemption. 

Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station, RP name: JJ 2 

Poinsettia Lane.

F ........................................ 2 (partially excluded under 

section 4(b)(2)).

2. 

Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area 

Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) ................................... N/A ..................................... ............................................ 3A. 

Carroll Canyon (D 5–8) ................................................... ............................................ ............................................ 3B. 

Nobel Drive (X 5) ............................................................. ............................................ ............................................ 3C. 

Large Pool southwest of runway, MCAS Miramar .......... N/A ..................................... ............................................ 4(a)(3) exemption. 

EE1–2, MCAS Miramar, RP name: EE1–2, Miramar Interior.F ........................................ 4(a)(3) exemption.

Kearny Mesa (U 19) ........................................................ N/A ..................................... 4(a)(3) exemption.

New Century (BB 2), RP name: BB 2 New Century ...... G.

Montgomery Field, RP name: N1–4, 6 Montgomery 

Field.

F ........................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

3D. 

Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area 

San Marcos (North L 15), RP name: L 7, 8, 14–20 ....... G.

San Marcos (Northwest L 14), RP name: L 7, 8, 14–20 G.

San Marcos (L 1–6), RP name: L 1–6, 9–13 San 

Marcos.

F ........................................ 4C1 .................................... 4C1. 

San Marcos (L 9–10), RP name: L 1–6, 9–13 San 

Marcos.

F ........................................ 4C2 .................................... 4C2. 

San Marcos (L 11–13), RP name: L 1–6, 9–13 San 

Marcos.

F ........................................ 4D ...................................... 4D. 

San Marcos (North L 15), RP name: L 7, 8, 14–20 ....... G.

Ramona, RP name: Ramona .......................................... F.

Ramona, RP name: Ramona T ....................................... G ........................................ 4E ...................................... 4E. 

Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1–3), RP name: Sweetwater Lake.F ........................................ 5A ( partially excluded 

under section 4(b)(2)).

5A. 

Otay River Valley (M2) .................................................... ............................................ 5B ...................................... 5B. 

Otay Mesa (J26), RP name: J 26 Otay Mesa ................ F ........................................ 5C.

Proctor Valley (R1), RP name: R Proctor Valley ............ F ........................................ ............................................ 5F. 

Otay Reservoir (K3–5), RP name: K3–5 Otay River ...... F ........................................ ............................................ 5G. 

K1, 2, RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7 Otay River ........................ G ........................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

K 6, 7, RP name: K 1, 2, 6, 7 Otay River ....................... G.

Western Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes, RP name: 

J 2, 5, 7, 11–21, 23–30 Otay Mesa/J 3 Otay Mesa.

F/G ..................................... Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

5H/5I. 

Western Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes (J 32 (West 

Otay A + B), J 33 (Sweetwater High School)).

N/A ..................................... ............................................ 5H. 

Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes, RP name: 

23–30 Otay Mesa/J 22 Otay Mesa.

F/G ..................................... Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

5H/5I. 

Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes, RP name: J 

19, 27, 28E, 28W Otay Mesa.

............................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

RP name: J (undescribed) .............................................. G.


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27596 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 1—AREAS IDENTIFIED AS ESSENTIAL TO NAVARRETIA FOSSALIS CONSERVATION—Continued 

Location* Recovery plan appendix Final critical habitat (2005) Proposed revised critical 

habitat (2009) 

Unit 6: Riverside Management Area 

San Jacinto River, RP name: San Jacinto ...................... F ........................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

6A. 

Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain, RP name: 

Hemet/Salt Creek.

F ........................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

6B. 

Wickerd Road and Scott Road Pools ............................. N/A ..................................... ............................................ 6C. 

Skunk Hollow, RP name: Skunk Hollow ......................... ............................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

6D. 

RP name: Temecula ........................................................ F.

Mesa de Burro, RP name: Santa Rosa Plateau ............. F ........................................ Excluded under section 

4(b)(2).

6E. 

Total Areas (out of 39 areas listed in this table) ..... 27 ....................................... 22 ....................................... 27. 

*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were included in Appendix F or G of the Recovery Plan; designated, excluded, or exempt in 2005; or proposed as critical habitat in the current rule. Note: The alpha-numeric labels were applied in the recovery plan. 

**RP name = Name in recovery plan, if different from the current rule. 

Appendices F and G of the Recovery 

Plan provide information on the areas 

that are needed to stabilize (or prevent 

extinction of) Navarretia fossalis 

(Appendix F) and the areas that are 

needed to reclassify (or recover) N. 

fossalis (Appendix G). In Table 1, we 

summarized the data from the recovery 

plan. According to this summary, 27 

locations were highlighted as areas that 

needed to be conserved and managed to 

recover N. fossalis. Our 2005 final rule 

to designate critical habitat used the 

Recovery Plan as the basis for 

designating areas as critical habitat; 

however, the rule included some 

additions and subtractions of those 

areas determined as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis in the 

Recovery Plan. Nine areas that the 

Recovery Plan identified as important 

were not identified in the 2005 final 

rule as essential to the conservation of 

N. fossalis, and four areas were added 

that were not highlighted in the 

Recovery Plan. The nine areas that were 

in the Recovery Plan but not included 

in the 2005 final rule were sites for 

which we did not have specific 

occurrence data or areas where recent 

surveys had not found N. fossalis. For 

these reasons, we do not believe these 

areas are essential to the conservation of 

N. fossalis and we did not include them 

in the 2005 critical habitat designation. 

The four areas that were added to the 

2005 final rule were locations where the 

occurrence data indicated that these 

areas contained the features essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis. 

A total of 22 areas were identified in 

the 2005 final rule as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis (see Table 1). 

There are eight occurrences of N. 

fossalis that were highlighted in the 

Recovery Plan that we did not include 

in this proposed revised critical habitat. 

We do not have detailed information on 

these occurrences, and during recent 

surveys at some of these sites, N. 

fossalis has not been observed. 

Additionally, we included areas in this 

proposed revised critical habitat (based 

on new data) that were not highlighted 

in the Recovery Plan. While some of the 

areas are different, we believe that the 

non-inclusion of some areas in the 

Recovery Plan and the inclusion of 

other areas for which we have better 

data will achieve the overall goal of the 

Recovery Plan for N. fossalis and 

provide for the conservation of this 

species. 

In this proposed revised designation 

of critical habitat for Navarretia fossalis, 

we selected areas based on the best 

scientific data available that possess 

those physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species, and that may require special 

management considerations or 

protection. We took into account the 

past conservation planning that 

occurred for N. fossalis in the Recovery 

Plan and in the 2005 critical habitat 

designation. For this proposed revised 

rule, we completed the following steps 

to delineate critical habitat: (1) 

Compiled all available data on N. 

fossalis into a GIS database; (2) 

reviewed data to ensure accuracy; (3) 

determined which occurrences existed 

at the time of listing; (4) determined 

which areas are currently occupied; (5) 

defined the areas containing the features 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis in terms of core habitat areas 

and satellite habitat areas; (6) 

determined if each occupied area 

represents core habitat or satellite 

habitat and, therefore, should be 

proposed as critical habitat; and (7) for 

both core and satellite habitat areas, 

mapped the specific locations that 

contain the essential physical and 

biological features (PCEs in the quantity 

and spatial arrangement needed to 

support life history functions essential 

for N. fossalis). These steps are 

described in detail below. 

(1) We compiled all available data on 

Navarretia fossalis into a GIS database. 

Data on locations where N. fossalis 

occurs was based on collections and 

observations made by botanists (both 

amateur and professional), biological 

consultants, and academic researchers. 

We compiled data from the following 

sources to create our GIS database for N. 

fossalis: (1) Data used in the Recovery 

Plan and in the 2005 final critical 

habitat rule for N. fossalis; (2) the 

CNDDB data report for N. fossalis and 

accompanying GIS records (CNDDB 

2008, pp. 1–44); (3) data presented in 

the City of San Diego’s Vernal Pool 

Inventory for 2002–2003 (City of San 

Diego 2004, pp. 1–125, appendices); (4) 

the data report for N. fossalis from the 

California Consortium of Herbaria and 

accompanying Berkeley Mapper GIS 

records (Consortium of California 

Herbaria 2008, pp. 1–17); (5) the 

Western Riverside County Multiple 

Species Habitat Conservation Plan 

(Western Riverside County MSHCP) 

species GIS database; and (6) the 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office’s 

internal species GIS database, which 

includes the species data used for the 

San Diego Multiple Species 

Conservation Plan (MSCP) and the San 

Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation 

Plan (MHCP), reports from section 7 

consultations, and FWS observations of 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27597 

N. fossalis (CFWO internal species GIS 

database). 

(2) We reviewed the data that we 

compiled to ensure its accuracy. We 

checked each data point in our database 

to ensure that it represented an original 

collection or observation of Navarretia 

fossalis. Data that did not represent an 

original collection or observation was 

removed from our database. Secondly, 

we checked each data point to ensure 

that it was mapped in the correct 

location. Data points that did not match 

the description for the original 

collection or observation were 

remapped in the correct location or 

removed from our database. 

(3) We determined which occurrences 

existed at the time of listing. We 

concluded that all known occurrences, 

except for a single occurrence 

translocated after this species was 

listed, were extant at the time of listing. 

We drew this conclusion because 

Navarretia fossalis has limited dispersal 

capabilities. We believe that the 

documentation of additional 

occurrences after the species was listed 

was due to an increased effort to survey 

for this species. Therefore, except on the 

single occasion where this species was 

translocated to a new location, all of the 

areas that we know of for this species 

were occupied prior to the time this 

species was listed. In other words, we 

do not believe that this species has 

naturally colonized any new areas since 

it was listed. 

(4) We determined which areas are 

currently occupied. For areas where we 

had past occupancy data for Navarretia 

fossalis, we assumed the area is 

currently occupied unless: (a) Two or 

more rare plant surveys conducted 

during the past 10 years did not find N. 

fossalis (providing the surveys were 

conducted in years with average rainfall 

and during the appropriate months to 

find this species (March, April, and 

May); or (b) the site was significantly 

disturbed since the last observation of 

the species at that location. 

(5) We defined the areas necessary for 

conservation of N. fossalis in terms of 

‘‘core habitat areas’’ and ‘‘satellite 

habitat areas.’’ See the ‘‘Areas Needed 

for Conservation: Core and Satellite 

Habitat Areas’’ section in this rule for 

definitions of these areas. 

(6) We determined if each occupied 

area represents core habitat or satellite 

habitat, and, therefore, should be 

proposed as critical habitat. In the final 

listing rule (63 FR 54975, October 13, 

1998), we stated that 60 percent of the 

known occurrences of Navarretia 

fossalis are concentrated in three 

locations: Otay Mesa in southern San 

Diego County, along the San Jacinto 

River in western Riverside County, and 

near Hemet in Riverside County 

(referred to as the Salt Creek Seasonally 

Flooded Alkali Plain in this proposed 

rule). These three areas represent core 

habitat for N. fossalis. In addition to 

these three core habitat areas, Mesa de 

Burro in Riverside County represents 

core habitat for this species due to the 

large size of the occurrence observed 

there in 2008 and because of the large 

amount of intact vernal pool habitat on 

this mesa. In total, we identified four 

core habitat areas for N. fossalis. These 

four areas represent large, 

interconnected ephemeral wetlands. 

Large occurrences of N. fossalis are 

currently present in these four areas, but 

there have been significant impacts to 

these areas in the form of habitat 

fragmentation, nonnative plant 

invasion, agricultural activities, and 

recreational use. These four core habitat 

areas are essential to the conservation of 

N. fossalis because the conservation of 

these areas will anchor the overall 

conservation effort for this species. 

Additionally, the conservation of these 

four areas will sustain the largest 

occurrences of N. fossalis and allow for 

N. fossalis to persist where it will be 

less constrained by the threats that 

negatively impact its essential habitat 

features (PCEs). 

Habitat areas outside the four core 

habitat areas also support stable, intact 

occurrences of Navarretia fossalis. 

These satellite areas represent unique 

habitat within this species’ range that 

also contain the PCEs laid out in the 

appropriate quantity and spatial 

arrangement essential for the 

conservation of the species. The 

conservation of multiple areas that 

support occurrences dispersed 

throughout the range of N. fossalis will 

allow occurrences to persist and 

expand, ensuring that this species will 

not go extinct. The satellite habitat areas 

occur over a wide range of soils and at 

various elevations that include several 

occurrences over a range of 

environmental variables, the 

preservation of which will help 

maintain the genetic diversity of N. 

fossalis. The satellite habitat areas allow 

for connections between existing 

occurrences of N. fossalis, and together 

with the core habitat areas, will create 

a sustainable matrix of habitat for this 

species that will enable it to evolve and 

respond to future environmental 

changes. 

Areas were selected as satellite habitat 

areas if they are: (1) Important 

peripheral occurrences of this species 

that are on the geographic edge of this 

species’ distribution; (2) occurrences 

that are isolated from other occurrences 

by geographic features; or (3) areas that 

are nested within the distribution of this 

species and provide connections 

between the core habitat areas and other 

satellite habitat areas. 

(7) For the core and satellite habitat 

areas, we mapped the specific areas that 

contain the physical and biological 

features (the PCEs) in the quantity and 

spatial arrangement needed to support 

life history functions essential for 

Navarretia fossalis. We first mapped the 

ephemeral wetland habitat in the 

occupied area using occurrence data, 

aerial imagery, and 1:24,000 

topographic maps. We then mapped the 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that make up the local watersheds and 

the topography and soils that support 

the occupied ephemeral wetland 

habitat. We mapped this area using 

USGS topographic 1:24,000 scale maps, 

aerial imagery, and soil maps to identify 

the gently sloping area associated with 

ephemeral wetland habitat and any 

adjacent areas that slope directly into 

the ephemeral wetland habitat which 

likely contribute to the hydrology of the 

ephemeral wetland habitat. In most 

cases, we delineated the border of the 

proposed revised critical habitat around 

the occupied ephemeral wetlands and 

associated local watershed areas to 

follow natural breaks in the terrain such 

as ridgelines, mesa edges, and steep 

canyon slopes. 

When determining the proposed 

revised critical habitat boundaries, we 

made every effort to map precisely only 

the areas that contain the PCEs and 

provide for the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis. However, we cannot 

guarantee that every fraction of 

proposed revised critical habitat 

contains the PCEs due to the mapping 

scale that we use to draft critical habitat 

boundaries. Additionally, we made 

every attempt to avoid including 

developed areas such as lands 

underlying buildings, paved areas, and 

other structures that lack PCEs for N. 

fossalis. The scale of the maps we 

prepared under the parameters for 

publication within the Code of Federal 

Regulations may not reflect the 

exclusion of such developed areas. Any 

developed structures and the land under 

them inadvertently left inside critical 

habitat boundaries shown on the maps 

of this proposed revised critical habitat 

are excluded by text in this rule and are 

not proposed for critical habitat 

designation. Therefore, Federal actions 

involving these lands would not trigger 

section 7 consultation with respect to 

critical habitat and the requirement of 

no adverse modification unless the 

specific actions may affect the species or 

PCEs in adjacent critical habitat. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27598 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Summary of Changes From Previously 

Designated Critical Habitat 

The areas identified in this rule 

constitute a proposed revision from the 

areas we designated as critical habitat 

for Navarretia fossalis on October 18, 

2005 (70 FR 60658). The differences 

include the following: 

(1) We refined the PCEs to more 

accurately define the physical and 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of Navarretia fossalis. 

The PCEs were written in both the 2005 

final critical habitat and this proposed 

rule to describe the ephemeral wetland 

habitat where N. fossalis occurs, the 

associated watersheds that support the 

ephemeral wetland habitat, and the soils 

and topography that allow water to 

pond during winter and spring months. 

In the PCE related to the vernal pools 

and flooded alkali vernal plains where 

N. fossalis occurs, we added 

information relating to the necessary 

timing and duration of ponding in the 

ephemeral wetlands where N. fossalis 

occurs (PCE 1). In the PCE related to the 

local watershed and filling of the 

ephemeral wetland habitat, we 

discussed the landforms that contribute 

to the local hydrology and local 

watershed (PCE 2). In the PCE related to 

soils types associated with habitat for N. 

fossalis, we state that these soil types 

facilitate the slow percolation and 

minimal run-off of water necessary for 

the ephemeral wetland habitat where N. 

fossalis occurs (PCE 3). 

(2) We revised the criteria used to 

identify critical habitat. Similar to the 

2005 critical habitat, we used the 

Recovery Plan as the basis for our 

criteria. However, in this proposed 

revised critical habitat we conducted an 

additional analysis of all the Navarretia 

fossalis data currently available. The 

result of the additional analysis was that 

some areas identified as essential in the 

2005 designation were removed and 

other areas were included in this 

proposed rule that were not identified 

as essential in the 2005 designation. We 

described the steps that we used to 

identify and delineate the areas that we 

are proposing as critical habitat in more 

detail compared to the 2005 critical 

habitat designation to ensure that the 

public better understands why the areas 

are being proposed as critical habitat. 

(3) We improved our mapping 

methodology to more accurately define 

the critical habitat boundaries and to 

better represent those areas that possess 

the physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species. This proposed revised rule 

identifies 12,313 fewer acres (4,983 ha) 

considered essential to the conservation 

of Navarretia fossalis than we identified 

in the 2005 rule. However, this 

reduction is primarily due to our 

attempt to better represent the areas that 

contain the essential features for N. 

fossalis. For example, in the 2005 final 

rule, we delineated large areas of 

watershed habitat as essential, which 

resulted in large, poorly defined critical 

habitat areas. The major reductions to 

the 2005 critical habitat are discussed in 

detail below (see #6). Finally, in the 

2005 final rule, we used a 100-meter 

grid to delineate critical habitat. In this 

proposed revised rule, we mapped the 

areas that contain the PCEs as accurately 

as possible by more directly 

approximating the delineation of 

essential areas rather than using a 100- 

meter grid to map essential areas. 

However, we acknowledge the 

possibility that, due to mapping, data, 

and resource constraints, there may be 

some undeveloped areas mapped as 

critical habitat that do not contain the 

PCEs. 

(4) We identified several areas we are 

considering for exclusion from this 

proposed revised critical habitat 

designation under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act. Any exclusions in our upcoming 

final revised critical habitat designation 

could differ from the exclusions we 

made in the 2005 final critical habitat 

designation. 

(5) We added and subtracted some 

subunits and revised the area of 

proposed revised critical habitat. The 

2005 final critical habitat designation 

(70 FR 60658, October 18, 2005) 

included 4 units and 10 subunits, 

comprising a total of 652 ac (264 ha), 

which were grouped to match the 

management areas described in the 1998 

Recovery Plan. This proposed revision 

includes 6 units with 24 subunits (two 

of which are exempt from designation 

under section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act), 

comprising a total of 7,086 ac (2,868 ha) 

of land considered essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis. These 6 

units and 24 subunits match the units 

and subunits in the 2005 critical habitat 

to the extent that the subunits overlap 

and match the management areas 

described in the 1998 Recovery Plan. In 

2005 we identified 18,747 ac (7,587 ha) 

of land containing features essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis that we 

did not designate as critical habitat. The 

lands were either exempt from critical 

habitat under section 4(a)(3)(B) of the 

Act or we excluded them under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act. In this proposed 

revised rule, 2 subunits on MCB Camp 

Pendleton (145 ac (59 ha)) and MCAS 

Miramar (69 ac (28 ha)) are exempt 

under section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. We 

are also considering excluding certain 

areas under section 4(b)(2) of the Act 

from the final designation. Specifically, 

we are requesting public comment on 

the potential exclusion of 5,675 ac 

(2,296 ha) covered by the Western 

Riverside County Multiple Species 

Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), 3 

ac (1 ha) covered by the Carlsbad 

Habitat Management Plan (HMP) under 

the San Diego Multiple Habitat 

Conservation Plan (MHCP), and 86 ac 

(35 ha) covered by the County of San 

Diego under the San Diego Multiple 

Species Conservation Plan (MSCP). 

In Table 2 below, we provide a 

comparison between the 2005 final 

critical habitat designation and this 

proposed revised critical habitat rule. 

The table identifies the change in area 

for each subunit in the 2005 critical 

habitat designation and our new areas 

for units and subunits in this proposed 

revised critical habitat designation. 

Some areas designated in the 2005 rule 

are not proposed as critical habitat 

because they do not meet the criteria we 

are using to designate critical habitat 

(See Table 2). Additionally, there are 

areas being proposed as critical habitat 

that were not considered in the 2005 

final critical habitat because we have 

determined that these areas contain 

features essential for the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27599 

TABLE 2—A COMPARISON OF THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS CONTAINING FEATURES ESSENTIAL TO THE CONSERVATION OF

Navarretia fossalis IN THE 2005 FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION AND THIS PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL

HABITAT DESIGNATION

Location* 

2005 Final critical habitat 2009 Proposed revised critical habitat Difference (2009 

minus 2005) 

Subunit Area containing 

essential features Subunit Area containing essential features Area 

Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area 

Cruzan Mesa ....................................... 1A ......................... 294 ac (119 ha) ... 1A ......................... 129 ac (52 ha) ..... ¥165 ac (¥67 

ha). 

Plum Canyon ...................................... 1B ......................... 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 1B ......................... 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 0 ac (0 ha). 

Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

MCB Camp Pendleton ........................ 4(a)(3) exemption 67 ac (27 ha) ....... 4(a)(3) exemption 145 ac (59 ha) ..... 78 ac (32 ha). 

Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station ..... 2; partially excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

22 ac (9 ha) ......... 2 ........................... 9 ac (4 ha) ........... ¥13 ac (¥5 ha). 

Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area 

Santa Fe Valley .................................. Proposed as Unit 

3, but determined not essential.

.............................. Not proposed ....... ..............................

Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) ...... .............................. .............................. 3A ......................... 5 ac (2 ha) ........... 5 ac (2 ha). 

Carroll Canyon .................................... .............................. .............................. 3B ......................... 20 ac (8 ha) ......... 20 ac (8 ha). 

Nobel Drive ......................................... .............................. .............................. 3C ........................ 37 ac (15 ha) ....... 37 ac (15 ha). 

MCAS Miramar ................................... 4(a)(3) exemption 61 ac (25 ha) ....... 4(a)(3) exemption 69 ac (28 ha) ....... 8 ac (3 ha). 

Montgomery Field ............................... Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

38 ac (16 ha) ....... 3D ........................ 48 ac (20 ha) ....... 10 ac (4 ha). 

Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area 

San Marcos (Upham) .......................... 4C1 ...................... 34 ac (14 ha) ....... 4C1 ...................... 34 ac (14 ha) ....... 0. 

San Marcos (Universal Boot) .............. 4C2 ...................... 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 4C2 ...................... 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 0. 

San Marcos (Bent Avenue) ................ 4D ........................ 7 ac (3 ha) ........... 4D ........................ 5 ac (2 ha) ........... ¥2 ac (¥1 ha). 

Ramona ............................................... 4E ......................... 86 ac (35 ha) ....... 4E ......................... 135 ac (55 ha) ..... 49 ac (20 ha). 

Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1–3) ........ 5A; partially excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

163 ac (66 ha) ..... 5A ......................... 95 ac (38 ha) ....... ¥68 ac (¥27 ha). 

Otay River Valley (K1 and K2) ........... Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

57 ac (23 ha) ....... Not proposed, determined not essential............................... ¥57 ac (¥23 ha). 

Otay River Valley (M2) ....................... 5B and excluded 

under section 

4(b)(2).

109 ac (44 ha) ..... 5B ......................... 24 ac (10 ha) ....... ¥85 ac (¥34 ha). 

Otay Mesa (J26) ................................. 5C and excluded 

under section 

4(b)(2).

19 ac (8 ha) ......... Not proposed, determined not essential............................... ¥19 ac (¥8 ha). 

Arnie’s Point ........................................ Proposed as 

Subunit 5D, but 

determined not 

essential.

.............................. Not proposed ....... ..............................

Proctor Valley (R1–2) ......................... .............................. .............................. 5F ......................... 88 ac (36 ha) ....... 88 ac (36 ha). 

Otay Lakes (K3–5) .............................. .............................. .............................. 5G ........................ 140 ac (57 ha) ..... 140 ac (57 ha). 

Western Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes.Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

117 ac (47 ha) ..... 5H ........................ 143 ac (58ha) ...... 26 ac (11 ha). 

Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes.Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

277 ac (112 ha) ... 5I .......................... 221 ac (89 ha) ..... ¥56 ac (¥23 ha). 

Unit 6: Riverside Management Area 

San Jacinto River ................................ Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

10,774 ac (4,360 

ha).

6A ......................... 3,550 ac (1,437 

ha).

¥7,224 ac 

(¥2,924 ha). 

Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali 

Plain.

Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

2,233 ac (904 ha) 6B ......................... 1,054 ac (427 ha) ¥1,179 ac (¥477 

ha). 

Wickerd Road and Scott Road Pools Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

275 ac (111 ha) ... 6C ........................ 205 ac (83 ha) ..... ¥70 ac (¥28 ha). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27600 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 2—A COMPARISON OF THE AREAS IDENTIFIED AS CONTAINING FEATURES ESSENTIAL TO THE CONSERVATION OF

Navarretia fossalis IN THE 2005 FINAL CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION AND THIS PROPOSED REVISED CRITICAL

HABITAT DESIGNATION—Continued 

Location* 

2005 Final critical habitat 2009 Proposed revised critical habitat Difference (2009 

minus 2005) 

Subunit Area containing 

essential features Subunit Area containing essential features Area 

Skunk Hollow ...................................... Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

306 ac (124 ha) ... 6D ........................ 158 ac (64 ha) ..... ¥148 ac (¥60 

ha). 

Mesa de Burro .................................... Excluded under 

section 4(b)(2).

4,396 ac (1,779 

ha).

6E ......................... 708 ac (287 ha) ... ¥3,688 ac 

(¥1,493 ha). 

Total Area Essential for the Conservation of Navarretia fossalis............................... 19,399 ac (7,851 

ha).

.............................. 7,086 ac (2,868 

ha).

¥12,313 ac 

(¥4,983 ha).** 

*This table does not include all locations that are occupied by Navarretia fossalis. It includes only those locations that were designated as critical habitat in 2005 or proposed as critical habitat in this rule. 

**Values in this table may not sum due to rounding. 

(6) Following is a list of the areas 

reduced or enlarged in this proposed 

revision to critical habitat designation, 

or eliminated from the 2005 final 

critical habitat designation, and an 

explanation of why these areas are no 

longer considered to contain the PCEs in 

the appropriate spatial arrangement and 

quantity essential to the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis. 

(a) Cruzan Mesa—The habitat 

identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis on Cruzan 

Mesa in 2005 included the areas on top 

of this mesa where occurrences of N. 

fossalis had been found. The slopes of 

the mesa were also included due to the 

gridding technique that was used to 

describe critical habitat in the 2005 final 

rule. Because the mesa slopes do not 

contribute to the watershed of the vernal 

pools on Cruzan Mesa occupied by N. 

fossalis, they were removed. This area 

was reduced by 165 ac (67 ha). 

(b) Poinsettia Lane Commuter 

Station—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis at the Poinsettia Lane Commuter 

Station in 2005 included several vernal 

pools where occurrences of N. fossalis 

had been found. Due to the base map 

layer and the coarseness of the gridding 

techniques used in the 2005 final rule, 

some of the area designated as critical 

habitat consisted of developed 

residential lots and some of the area was 

on the west side of the railroad tracks 

where N. fossalis has not been found. 

These areas do not contribute to the 

watershed of the vernal pools at the 

Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station and 

were removed. In some places the 

boundary of this proposed subunit 

includes lands that were not mapped in 

2005 due to our change in mapping 

methodology to better capture the 

watershed for these vernal pools. This 

area was reduced by 13 ac (5 ha). 

(c) San Marcos (Bent Avenue)—The 

habitat identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis in San 

Marcos in 2005 included several vernal 

pools where occurrences of N. fossalis 

had been found. In the 2005 final rule, 

we were unaware that the designated 

critical habitat included developed 

areas. These areas do not contribute to 

the watershed of the vernal pools in San 

Marcos and were removed. This area 

was reduced by 2 ac (1 ha). 

(d) Ramona—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis in Ramona in the 2005 final rule 

captured the vernal pools where N. 

fossalis had been found, but did not 

capture the associated watershed area. 

In some places, the boundary of this 

proposed subunit includes lands that 

were not mapped in 2005 due to our 

change in mapping methodology to 

better capture the watershed for the 

vernal pools in this area. This area was 

enlarged by 49 ac (20 ha). 

(e) Montgomery Field—The habitat 

identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis at 

Montgomery Field in the 2005 final rule 

did not capture all of the vernal pool 

and associated watershed area essential 

for the conservation of N. fossalis. In 

some places, the boundary of this 

proposed subunit includes lands that 

were not mapped in 2005 due to our 

change in mapping methodology to 

better capture the vernal pools and 

watershed area in this subunit. This area 

was enlarged by 10 ac (4 ha). 

(f) Sweetwater Vernal Pools—The 

habitat identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis at the 

Sweetwater Vernal Pools in the 2005 

final rule included several vernal pools 

where occurrences of N. fossalis had 

been found. Due to the coarseness of the 

gridding technique used in the 2005 

final rule, the lands designated included 

areas that actually slope away from the 

vernal pools. These areas do not 

contribute to the watershed of the 

Sweetwater vernal pools and were 

removed. This area was reduced by 68 

ac (27 ha). 

(g) Otay River Valley (K1 and EO 

10)—The habitat identified as essential 

to the conservation of N. fossalis in the 

Otay River Valley at the K1 and K2 

vernal pool complexes are not known to 

support N. fossalis at this time. We have 

no data that indicates N. fossalis 

occurred in the K1 vernal pool complex. 

Navarretia fossalis was last reported in 

the Otay River Valley at CNDDB EO 10 

in 1981. At this time, we do not believe 

that the unoccupied habitat in the Otay 

River Valley is essential for the 

conservation of N. fossalis. More 

occupied habitat exists for N. fossalis 

than we were aware of when the 1998 

Recovery Plan was written and we 

believe that the species can be recovered 

with the management and protection of 

habitat that is currently occupied. We 

removed 57 ac (23 ha) in the Otay River 

Valley. 

(h) Otay River Valley (M2)—The 

habitat identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis in the Otay 

River Valley in 2005 included several 

vernal pools where occurrences of N. 

fossalis had been found. Due to the 

coarseness of the gridding technique in 

the 2005 final rule, the lands designated 

included areas that actually slope away 

from the vernal pools. These areas do 

not contribute to the watershed of the 

vernal pools in the Otay River Valley 

and were removed. This area was 

reduced by 85 ac (34 ha). 

(i) Otay Mesa (J26)—The habitat 

identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis on Otay Mesa 

at the J26 vernal pool complex is not 

known to support an occurrence of N. 

fossalis at this time, and we have no 

data that indicates N. fossalis ever 

occurred in the J26 vernal pool 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27601 

complex. Surveys of the area conducted 

by the City of San Diego in 2003 did not 

locate N. fossalis in the J26 vernal pool 

complex. The 1998 Recovery Plan 

indicated the J26 vernal pool complex is 

important for the stabilization of N. 

fossalis as a species. However, at this 

time, we do not believe that the 

unoccupied habitat at the J26 vernal 

pool complex in Otay Mesa is essential 

for the conservation of N. fossalis. More 

occupied habitat for this species exists 

than we were aware of when the 1998 

Recovery Plan was written and we 

believe that N. fossalis can be recovered 

with the management and protection of 

habitat that is currently occupied. We 

removed 19 ac (8 ha) at the J26 vernal 

pool complex. 

(j) Western Otay Mesa vernal pool 

complexes—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis within the Western Otay Mesa 

vernal pool complexes in 2005 included 

several vernal pools where occurrences 

of N. fossalis had been found. Due to the 

coarseness of the gridding technique 

used in the 2005 final rule, the lands 

designated included areas that actually 

slope away from the vernal pools. These 

areas do not contribute to the watershed 

of the vernal pools within the Western 

Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes and 

were removed. There are also additional 

areas that provide habitat for N. fossalis 

that were not included in the 2005 final 

rule. These areas meet our criteria for 

critical habitat as described in this 

proposed revised critical habitat and 

have been included. In some places, the 

boundary of this proposed subunit 

includes essential habitat that was not 

mapped in 2005. When our mapping 

methods changed, we used more 

detailed maps to ensure that all vernal 

pool complexes occupied by N. fossalis 

were accurately mapped. Overall, this 

area was enlarged by 26 ac (11 ha). 

(k) Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool 

complexes—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis within the Eastern Otay Mesa 

vernal pool complexes in 2005 included 

several vernal pools where occurrences 

of N. fossalis had been found. Due to the 

coarseness of the gridding technique 

used to describe critical habitat in the 

2005 final rule, the lands designated 

included areas that actually slope away 

from the vernal pools. These areas do 

not contribute to the conservation of N. 

fossalis within the Eastern Otay Mesa 

vernal pool complexes and were 

removed. There are also additional areas 

that provide habitat for N. fossalis that 

were not included in the 2005 final rule. 

These areas meet our criteria for critical 

habitat as described in this proposed 

revised critical habitat and have been 

included. In some places, the boundary 

of this proposed subunit includes lands 

that were not mapped in 2005. When 

our mapping methods changed, we used 

more detailed maps to ensure that all 

vernal pool complexes occupied by N. 

fossalis were accurately mapped. 

Overall, this area was reduced by 57 ac 

(23 ha). 

(l) San Jacinto River—The habitat 

identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis along the San 

Jacinto River in 2005 included a large 

area north of the habitat known to 

support occurrences of N. fossalis. This 

area is referred to as Mystic Lake. It is 

an ephemeral lake bed that only fills 

during years of high rainfall. Mystic 

Lake may help create conditions that 

result in the appropriate habitat for N. 

fossalis to the south (downstream). 

However, based on the best available 

data, we do not believe that this area 

provides an essential contribution to the 

viability of the occurrences of N. fossalis 

along the San Jacinto River. In this 

proposed revised rule we have 

identified the ephemeral wetland 

habitat that supports occurrences of N. 

fossalis and local associated watershed 

areas as PCEs. The Mystic Lake area 

included in the 2005 critical habitat rule 

does not constitute part of the local 

associated watershed area for the San 

Jacinto River occurrences as defined in 

this proposed revised rule. Although the 

Mystic Lake area may contribute to 

conservation of N. fossalis in a general 

sense, it is not occupied by the species 

and we do not consider it to be essential 

to the conservation of the species. In 

addition to the removal of the Mystic 

Lake area, some habitat on the outer 

edges of the San Jacinto River flood 

plain were removed from critical habitat 

because they do not contain the 

physical and biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of this 

species. This area was reduced by 7,224 

ac (2,924 ha). 

(m) Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 

Alkali Plain—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis at the Salt Creek Seasonally 

Flooded Alkali Plain in 2005 included 

a large area to the west that is outside 

of the local watershed for this vernal 

pool complex. Upon closer examination 

of USGS 1:24,000 scale topographic 

maps, we determined that some areas 

identified in the 2005 rule as essential 

to the conservation of N. fossalis do not 

fall within the local watershed of this 

vernal pool complex. Impacts 

originating from these more distant 

watershed areas could affect the vernal 

pool complex, but we do not believe 

that these areas contain essential 

physical and biological features or are 

otherwise essential to the conservation 

of this species in the Salt Creek 

Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain. This 

area was reduced by 1,179 ac (477 ha). 

(n) Wickerd Road and Scott Road 

Pools—The habitat identified as 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis at the Wickerd Road and Scott 

Road Pools in 2005 included two vernal 

pools where occurrences of N. fossalis 

had been found. Due to the coarseness 

of the gridding technique that was used 

to describe critical habitat in the 2005 

final rule, some of the areas consisted of 

developed residential lots. These areas 

do not contribute to the watershed of 

the vernal pools at Wickerd Road and 

Scott Road Pools and were removed. In 

some places the boundary of this 

proposed subunit includes lands that 

were not mapped in 2005 due to our 

change in mapping methodology to 

better capture the watershed for these 

two pools. This area was reduced by 70 

ac (28 ha). 

(o) Skunk Hollow—The habitat 

identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis at Skunk 

Hollow in 2005 included two vernal 

pools where occurrences of N. fossalis 

had been found. Due to the coarseness 

of the gridding technique that was used 

to describe critical habitat in the 2005 

final rule, some of the areas designated 

consisted of developed residential lots. 

There were also some areas included 

that slope away from the vernal pools. 

These areas do not contribute to the 

watershed of the vernal pools at Skunk 

Hollow and were removed. In some 

places, the boundary of this proposed 

subunit includes lands that were not 

mapped in 2005 due to our change in 

mapping methodology to better capture 

the watershed for these two pools. This 

area was reduced by 148 ac (60 ha). 

(p) Santa Rosa Plateau (Renamed 

‘‘Mesa de Burro’’ in this revised 

proposed critical habitat rule)—The 

habitat identified as essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis on the Santa 

Rosa Plateau in the 2005 rule included 

the entire plateau area (i.e., flat tablelike geological formations), which 

contains three distinct plateaus. Upon 

further review, we found that N. fossalis 

only occurs on one of the plateaus: Mesa 

de Burro. We determined that only the 

Mesa de Burro plateau contains the 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of this 

species. The other areas on the Santa 

Rosa Plateau are not known to support 

N. fossalis and are not hydrologically 

connected to Mesa de Burro, and 

therefore are not essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis. This area 

was reduced by 3,688 ac (1,493 ha). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27602 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(7) The following areas we consider to 

contain features essential to the 

conservation of the species have been 

added to this proposed revised critical 

habitat, but were not considered 

essential to the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis in the 2005 final 

critical habitat designation: Santa Fe 

Valley (Crosby Estates); Carroll Canyon; 

Nobel Drive; Proctor Valley; and Otay 

Lakes. We have added a total of 290 ac 

(117 ha) of proposed critical habitat in 

these five new subunits. An explanation 

of how the added areas contribute to the 

conservation of N. fossalis is provided 

below in the ‘‘Proposed Revised Critical 

Habitat Designation’’ section. 

Proposed Revised Critical Habitat 

Designation 

We are proposing 6 units that include 

22 subunits as critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis. The critical habitat 

areas we describe below, which include 

the 22 subunits we are proposing as 

critical habitat but not the 2 subunits 

that are exempt from critical habitat, 

constitute our best assessment at this 

time of areas that meet the definition of 

critical habitat for N. fossalis. Table 3 

identifies the approximate area of each 

proposed critical habitat subunit by 

landownership. These subunits, which 

generally correspond to the geographic 

area of the subunits delineated in the 

2005 designation (see Table 2 for a 

detailed comparison of this proposed 

rule and the 2005 designation), if 

finalized, will replace the current 

critical habitat designation for N. 

fossalis in 50 CFR 17.96(a). The critical 

habitat areas we describe below 

constitute our best assessment of areas 

determined to be occupied at the time 

of listing that contain the primary 

constituent elements with the 

appropriate spatial arrangement and 

quantity (i.e., essential features) that 

may require special management 

considerations or protection. We are not 

proposing any unoccupied areas or 

areas outside of the species’ historical 

range because we determined that 

occupied lands within the species’ 

historical range are sufficient for the 

conservation of N. fossalis, providing 

that these lands are protected and 

receive special management 

considerations for N. fossalis. 

TABLE 3—AREA ESTIMATES (ACRES (AC) HECTARES (HA)) AND LAND OWNERSHIP FOR Navarretia fossalis PROPOSED

REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT

Location Federal State government Local government Private Total 

Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin-Orange Management Area 

1A. Cruzan Mesa ................................ .............................. .............................. .............................. 129 ac (52 ha) ..... 129 ac (52 ha). 

1B. Plum Canyon ................................ .............................. .............................. .............................. 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 32 ac (13 ha). 

Unit 2: San Diego: Northern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

MCB Camp Pendleton ........................ 4(a)3 exemption* .. .............................. .............................. .............................. 4(a)3 exemption.* 

2. Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station .............................. .............................. 6 ac (2 ha) ........... 3 ac (1 ha) ........... 9 ac (4 ha). 

Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa Management Area 

3A. Santa Fe Valley (Crosby Estates) .............................. .............................. .............................. 5 ac (2 ha) ........... 5 ac (2 ha). 

3B. Carroll Canyon ............................. .............................. .............................. 16 ac (7 ha) ......... 3 ac (1 ha) ........... 20 ac (8 ha). 

3C. Nobel Drive .................................. .............................. .............................. 37 ac (15 ha) ....... .............................. 37 ac (15 ha). 

MCAS Miramar ................................... 4(a)3 exemption* .. .............................. .............................. .............................. 4(a)3 exemption.* 

3D. Montgomery Field ........................ .............................. .............................. 48 ac (20 ha) ....... .............................. 48 ac (20 ha). 

Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management Area 

4C1. San Marcos (Upham) ................. .............................. .............................. .............................. 34 ac (14 ha) ....... 34 ac (14 ha). 

4C2. San Marcos (Universal Boot) ..... .............................. .............................. 15 ac (6 ha) ......... 17 ac (7 ha) ......... 32 ac (13 ha). 

4D. San Marcos (Bent Avenue) .......... .............................. .............................. .............................. 5 ac (2 ha) ........... 5 ac (2 ha). 

4E. Ramona ........................................ .............................. .............................. 3 ac (1 ha) ........... 132 ac (53 ha) ..... 135 ac (55 ha). 

Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal Mesa Management Area 

5A. Sweetwater Vernal Pools (S1–3) 23 ac (9 ha) ......... 1 ac (<1 ha) ......... 71 ac (29 ha) ....... .............................. 95 ac (38 ha). 

5B. Otay River Valley (M2) ................. .............................. .............................. .............................. 24 ac (10 ha) ....... 24 ac (10 ha). 

5F. Proctor Valley (R1–2) ................... .............................. .............................. 51 ac (21 ha) ....... 37 ac (15 ha) ....... 88 ac (36 ha). 

5G. Otay Lakes (K3–5) ....................... .............................. .............................. 140 ac (57 ha) ..... .............................. 140 ac (57 ha). 

5H. Western Otay Mesa vernal pool 

complexes.

.............................. .............................. 45 ac (18 ha) ....... 98 ac (40 ha) ....... 143 ac (58 ha). 

5I. Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool 

complexes.

.............................. .............................. .............................. 221 ac (89 ha) ..... 221 ac (89 ha). 

Unit 6: Riverside Management Area 

6A. San Jacinto River ......................... .............................. 1,504 ac (608 ha) .............................. 2,046 ac (828 ha) 3,550 ac (1,437 

ha). 

6B. Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 

Alkali Plain.

.............................. .............................. .............................. 1,054 ac (427 ha) 1,054 ac (427 ha). 

6C. Wickerd Road and Scott Road 

Pools.

.............................. .............................. .............................. 205 ac (83 ha) ..... 205 ac (83 ha). 

6D. Skunk Hollow ............................... .............................. .............................. .............................. 158 ac (64 ha) ..... 158 ac (64 ha). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27603 

TABLE 3—AREA ESTIMATES (ACRES (AC) HECTARES (HA)) AND LAND OWNERSHIP FOR Navarretia fossalis PROPOSED

REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT—Continued 

Location Federal State government Local government Private Total 

6E. Mesa de Burro .............................. .............................. 675 ac (273 ha) ... .............................. 32 ac (13 ha) ....... 708 ac (287 ha). 

Total ............................................. 23 ac (9 ha) ......... 2,180 ac (882 ha) 434 ac (176 ha) ... 4,235 ac (1,714 

ha).

6,872 ac (2,781 

ha).** 

* 145 ac (59 ha) of federally owned land on MCB Camp Pendleton and 69 ac (28 ha) of federally owned land MCAS Miramar are exempt from 

this critical habitat (see ‘‘Exemptions under Section 4(a)(3) of the Act’’ section). 

** Values in this table may not sum due to rounding. 

Critical Habitat Units 

Presented below are brief descriptions 

of all subunits and reasons why they 

meet the definition of critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis. The units in this 

proposed revised critical habitat 

correspond to the management areas 

described in the 1998 Recovery Plan for 

Vernal Pools of Southern California. 

Each subunit contains either (1) a core 

habitat area; or (2) a satellite habitat area 

that provide connectivity between core 

habitat areas or other satellite habitat 

areas that are captured in other 

subunits. Areas identified as subunits 

that harbor satellite habitat areas were 

identified as containing features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species (compared to other areas not 

identified as essential habitat) due to a 

combination of their geographic 

proximity to core habitat areas, their 

status as an area that supports a stable 

occurrence (representing occurrences 

that continue to persist within a given 

geographic area), and the likelihood that 

these particular habitat areas support 

genetically unique occurrences. Other 

areas not chosen as satellite areas/ 

subunits include occurrences that are 

represented by one or more of the 

following characteristics: small 

population size, no detailed information 

on occurrence, lack of observations 

during recent surveys, locations not 

identified in the Recovery Plan, or areas 

that have low likelihood of persistence 

due to fragmentation or enclosure by 

developed areas, resulting in unstable 

occurrences. 

Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin—Orange 

Management Area 

Unit 1 is located in northwestern Los 

Angeles County and consists of two 

subunits totaling 161 ac (65 ha) of 

private land. 

Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa 

Subunit 1A is located near the City of 

Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County, 

California. This subunit is on Cruzan 

Mesa, northwest of Forest Park and the 

Sierra Highway and southwest of 

Vasquez Canyon Road. Subunit 1A 

consists of 129 ac (52 ha) of private land 

and meets our selection criteria as 

satellite habitat. Cruzan Mesa is one of 

the only areas in Los Angeles County 

that supports mesa-top vernal pools. As 

satellite habitat, this subunit supports a 

stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis, 

provides potential connectivity with 

Subunit 1B, and likely supports a 

genetically distinct occurrence because 

of the separation of these two northern 

occurrences from other occurrences of 

N. fossalis. This subunit and subunit 1B 

(described below) represent the most 

northern occurrences of this species. 

Subunit 1A contains physical and 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., mowing, grading) that occur in the 

vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. 

Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon 

Subunit 1B is located near the City of 

Santa Clarita in Los Angeles County, 

California. This subunit is in Plum 

Canyon, west of Forest Park and the 

Sierra Highway and north of Plum 

Canyon Road. Subunit 1B consists of 32 

ac (13 ha) of private land and meets our 

selection criteria as satellite habitat. As 

satellite habitat, this subunit supports a 

stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis, 

provides potential connectivity with 

Subunit 1A, and likely supports a 

genetically distinct occurrence because 

of the separation of these two northern 

occurrences from other occurrences of 

N. fossalis. The Plum Canyon vernal 

pool habitat occurs on a flat area downslope from the vernal pools on Cruzan 

Mesa. The vernal pools on Cruzan Mesa 

(Subunit 1A) and Plum Canyon 

represent the only habitat for N. fossalis 

in Los Angeles County and the most 

northern occurrences of this species. 

Subunit 1B contains physical and 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species within this 

subunit. Please see the ‘‘Special 

Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. 

Unit 2: San Diego—Northern Coastal 

Mesa Management Area 

Unit 2 is located in Northern Coastal 

San Diego County and consists of one 

subunit totaling 9 ac (4 ha), as well as, 

the exempt areas on MCB Camp 

Pendleton. This unit contains 6 ac (3 ha) 

owned by the North County Transit 

District, and 3 ac (1 ha) of private land. 

MCB Camp Pendleton is exempt in this 

revised critical habitat designation for 

Navarretia fossalis under section 

4(a)(3)(B) of the Act because the 2007 

Integrated Natural Resources 

Management Plan (INRMP) for MCB 

Camp Pendleton provides a benefit to N. 

fossalis (see the ‘‘Exemptions under 

Section 4(a)(3) of the Act’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a detailed 

discussion). 

Unit 2: Poinsettia Lane Commuter 

Station 

Unit 2 is located adjacent to the City 

of Carlsbad in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27604 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

bounded by Avenida Encinas on the 

north, a housing development on the 

east, Poinsettia Lane on the south, and 

train tracks on the west. Unit 2 consists 

of approximately 9 ac (4 ha) that 

includes 6 ac (2 ha) of land owned by 

State or local governments and 3 ac (1 

ha) of private land. Unit 2 meets our 

selection criteria as satellite habitat. As 

satellite habitat, this subunit supports a 

stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis 

and provides potential connectivity 

between occurrences of N. fossalis on 

MCB Camp Pendleton and in Subunits 

4C1, 4C2, and 4D. The Poinsettia Lane 

vernal pool complex consists of a series 

of vernal pools that run parallel to the 

berm created by the train tracks. Unit 2 

contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

We are considering this subunit for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section 

of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal Mesa 

Management Area 

Unit 3 is located in Central Coastal 

San Diego County and consists of four 

subunits totaling 110 ac (45 ha), as well 

as the exempt lands on MCAS Miramar. 

This unit contains 102 ac (42 ha) owned 

by State and local governments, and 8 

ac (3 ha) of private land. MCAS Miramar 

is exempt in this proposed revised 

critical habitat designation for 

Navarretia fossalis under section 

4(a)(3)(B) of the Act, because the 2006 

INRMP for MCAS Miramar provides a 

benefit to N. fossalis (see the 

‘‘Exemptions under Section 4(a)(3) of 

the Act’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a detailed discussion). 

Subunit 3A: Santa Fe Valley: Crosby 

Estates 

Subunit 3A is located southwest of 

Lake Hodges and east of the 

unincorporated community of Rancho 

Santa Fe. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by a driving range to the north 

and northwest, High Society Way on the 

east and southeast, and Country Girl 

Lane on the southwest. Subunit 3A 

consists of 5 ac (2 ha) of private land 

and meets our selection criteria as 

satellite habitat. As satellite habitat, this 

subunit supports a stable occurrence of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in San Marcos 

and in Subunit 3B. The Crosby Estates 

vernal pool complex consists of a series 

of vernal pools on a flat area 150 ft (46 

m) above the San Dieguito River. This 

vernal pool complex occurred naturally, 

but it had been degraded by past 

agricultural activities. It was restored as 

to its current condition when the 

adjacent area was developed. Subunit 

3A contains physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species that occur in 

the vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. We are 

considering this subunit for exclusion 

under 4(b)(2) of the Act; please see the 

‘‘Proposed Exclusions under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section of this 

proposed rule for more information. 

Subunit 3B: Carroll Canyon 

Subunit 3B is located in the City of 

San Diego in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is located to the 

southwest of the intersection of 

Parkdale Avenue and Osgood Way, and 

is loosely bounded by residential 

development on the north, open space 

to the east, and a quarry to the south 

and west. Subunit 3B consists of 

approximately 20 ac (8 ha) that includes 

17 ac (7 ha) of land owned by State or 

local governments and 3 ac (1 ha) of 

private land. Subunit 3B meets our 

selection criteria as satellite habitat. As 

satellite habitat, this subunit supports a 

stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis 

and provides potential connectivity 

between occurrences of N. fossalis in 

Subunits 3A and 3C. The Carroll 

Canyon vernal pool complex consists of 

a group of vernal pools on the edge of 

a mesa north of Carroll Canyon. 

Historically, there may have been more 

habitat for this species in this area; 

however, the majority of vernal pool 

habitat in the vicinity of this subunit 

has been developed. Subunit 3B 

contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., trespass, illegal trash dumping) 

that occur in the vernal pool basins. 

Please see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive 

Subunit 3C is located in the City of 

San Diego in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by the 805 interstate on the 

northeast, the train tracks on the south, 

and Nobel Drive on the northwest. 

Subunit 3C consists of 37 ac (15 ha) of 

land owned by State or local 

governments and meets our selection 

criteria as satellite habitat. As satellite 

habitat, this subunit supports a stable 

occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and 

provides potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

3B and 3D. The Nobel Drive vernal pool 

complex consists of a group of vernal 

pools on a mesa-top north of Rose 

Canyon. Subunit 3C contains the 

physical and biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis, including ephemeral wetland 

habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 

and soils that support ponding during 

winter and spring months (PCE 3). The 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species in this subunit may require 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27605 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

Subunit 3D: Montgomery Field 

Subunit 3D is located in the City of 

San Diego in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is located at 

Montgomery Field (airport) to the 

northeast of the runway area. Subunit 

3D consists of 48 ac (20 ha) of land 

owned by the City of San Diego and 

meets our selection criteria as satellite 

habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit 

supports a stable occurrence of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity with the 

occurrence of N. fossalis in Subunit 3C. 

The Montgomery Field vernal pool 

complex consists of a large group of 

vernal pools east of the runway area at 

Montgomery Field, although only the 

northeastern portion of this vernal pool 

complex is being proposed as critical 

habitat. Navarretia fossalis has not been 

documented in the southeastern portion 

of this vernal pool complex. The 

northeastern portion and southeastern 

portion of this vernal pool complex are 

hydrologically disconnected by past 

development of the area. Subunit 3D 

contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species that occur in 

the vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. 

Unit 4: San Diego: Inland Management 

Area 

Unit 4 is located in Inland San Diego 

County and consists of four subunits 

totaling 206 ac (83 ha). This unit 

contains 15 ac (6 ha) owned by State 

and local governments, and 191 ac (77 

ha) of private land. 

Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D: San Marcos 

Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D are located 

in the City of San Marcos in San Diego 

County, California. These three subunits 

consist of three separate vernal pool 

complexes. The first (Subunit 4C1) is 

loosely bounded by La Mirada Drive on 

the northeast, Las Posas Road on the 

southeast, Linda Vista Drive on the 

southwest, and South Pacific Street on 

the northwest. The second (Subunit 

4C2) is loosely bounded by Linda Vista 

Drive on the northeast, Las Posas Road 

on the east, West San Marcos Boulevard 

on the south, and South Pacific Street 

on the west. The third (Subunit 4D) is 

loosely bounded by South Bent Avenue 

on the northeast, commercial 

development on the southeast and 

southwest, and Linda Vista Drive on the 

northwest. Subunit 4C1 consists of 34 ac 

(14 ha) of private land, Subunit 4C2 

consists of 15 ac (6 ha) of land owned 

by local government and 17 ac (7 ha) of 

private land, and Subunit 4D consists of 

5 ac (2 ha) of private land. These three 

subunits meet our selection criteria as 

satellite habitat areas because they 

support stable occurrences of Navarretia 

fossalis and provide potential 

connectivity between occurrences of N. 

fossalis in Unit 2 and Subunit 4E. We 

grouped these vernal pool complexes 

because of the clustered nature of these 

occurrences. These subunits have 

separate subunit numbers to be 

consistent with the numbering 

identified in the previous critical habitat 

designation. Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 4D 

contain the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in these 

subunits may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., commercial development, trespass, 

off-road vehicle use) that occur in the 

vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. 

Subunit 4E: Ramona 

Subunit 4E is located in the 

unincorporated community of Ramona. 

This subunit is loosely bounded by the 

Ramona Airport and Ramona Airport 

Road on the north, Sawday Road on the 

east, Santa Maria Creek on the south, 

and a series of rock outcrops on the 

west. Subunit 4E consists of 

approximately 135 ac (55 ha) that 

includes 3 ac (1 ha) of land owned by 

State or local governments and 132 ac 

(53 ha) of private land. Subunit 4E 

meets our selection criteria as satellite 

habitat. As satellite habitat, this subunit 

supports a stable occurrence of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity with occurrences 

of N. fossalis in Subunits 4C1, 4C2, and 

4D. The vernal pools in this subunit 

occur in gently sloping grassland habitat 

and are at the highest elevation where 

N. fossalis is known to occur. Subunit 

4E contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., agricultural activities, recreational 

use) that occur in the vernal pool basins. 

Please see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

Unit 5: San Diego: Southern Coastal 

Mesa Management Area 

Unit 5 is located in Southern San 

Diego County and consists of six 

subunits totaling 711 ac (288 ha). This 

unit contains 23 ac (9 ha) of federally 

owned land, 308 ac (124 ha) of land 

owned by State and local governments, 

and 380 ac (154 ha) of private land. 

Subunit 5A: Sweetwater Vernal Pools 

Subunit 5A is located southwest of 

the Sweetwater Reservoir. This subunit 

is loosely bounded by the Sweetwater 

Reservoir on the north, steeply sloping 

topography on the east, State Route 125 

on the south, and an unnamed drainage 

on the west. Subunit 5A consists of 

approximately 95 ac (38 ha) and 

includes 23 ac (9 ha) of Federal land 

that is part of the San Diego National 

Wildlife Refuge Complex and 72 ac (29 

ha) of land owned by State or local 

governments and meets our selection 

criteria as satellite habitat. This satellite 

habitat subunit supports a stable 

occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and 

provides potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

5B and 5F. Some of the area occupied 

by N. fossalis was lost during the 

construction of State Route 125. The soil 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27606 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

from that area was salvaged and is being 

used to restore other vernal pools in this 

subunit. Subunit 5A contains the 

physical and biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis, including ephemeral wetland 

habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 

and soils that support ponding during 

winter and spring months (PCE 3). The 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species in this subunit may require 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

Subunit 5B: Otay River Valley 

Subunit 5B is located adjacent to the 

City of Chula Vista in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by Olympic Parkway on the 

north, a housing development on the 

east, and a landfill to the southwest. 

Subunit 5B consists of 24 ac (10 ha) of 

private land and meets our selection 

criteria as satellite habitat, which 

supports a stable occurrence of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

5A and 5H. Subunit 5B contains the 

physical and biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis, including ephemeral wetland 

habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 

and soils that support ponding during 

winter and spring months (PCE 3). The 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species in this subunit may require 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

We are considering the portion of this 

subunit covered by the County of San 

Diego Subarea Plan under the MSCP for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section 

of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Subunit 5F: Proctor Valley 

Subunit 5F is located between the 

unincorporated communities of Eastlake 

and Jamul in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is located along 

Proctor Valley Road in Proctor Valley. 

Subunit 5F consists of approximately 88 

ac (36 ha) and includes 51 ac (21 ha) of 

land owned by the City of San Diego 

and 37 ac (15 ha) of private land. 

Subunit 5F meets our selection criteria 

as satellite habitat, which supports a 

stable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis 

and provides potential connectivity 

between occurrences of N. fossalis in 

Subunits 5A and 5G. The vernal pools 

in this subunit occur in Proctor Valley 

on a flat area that is slightly elevated 

from the stream channel that runs 

through this valley. The vernal pools in 

this subunit to the west of Proctor 

Valley Road have been severely 

impacted by off-road vehicle use, but 

the vernal pools to the east of Proctor 

Valley road have remained relatively 

intact. Subunit 5F contains the physical 

and biological features that are essential 

to the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use, offroad vehicle use) that occur in the 

vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. We are 

considering the portion of this subunit 

covered by the County of San Diego 

Subarea Plan under the MSCP for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section 

of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Subunit 5G: Otay Lakes 

Subunit 5G is located east of the City 

of Chula Vista in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by Lower Otay Reservoir to the 

north and west and by the slopes of 

Otay Mountain to the southeast. Subunit 

5G consists of 140 ac (57 ha) of land 

owned by State or local governments 

and meets our selection criteria as 

satellite habitat because this location 

supports a stable occurrence of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

5F and 5I. The vernal pool complexes in 

this subunit are located on the flat areas 

to the south of Lower Otay Reservoir. 

Subunit 5G contains the physical and 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

Subunit 5H: Western Otay Mesa Vernal 

Pool Complexes 

Subunit 5H is located within the Otay 

Mesa Community planning area of the 

City of San Diego in San Diego County, 

California. Subunit 5H consists of 

approximately 143 ac (58 ha) that 

includes 45 ac (18 ha) of land owned by 

State or local governments and 98 ac (40 

ha) of private land. Subunit 5H and 

Subunit 5I encompass the core habitat 

on Otay Mesa. As core habitat, this 

subunit contains a large area of habitat 

that supports sizable occurrences of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

5G and 5I. This subunit contains several 

mesa-top vernal pool complexes on 

western Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal pool 

complexes J 2N, J 2S, J 2W, J 4, J 13N, 

J 13S, J 14, J 33, J 34 as in Appendix D 

of City of San Diego, 2004). Subunit 5H 

contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27607 

residential and commercial 

development) that occur in the vernal 

pool basins. Please see the ‘‘Special 

Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. 

Subunit 5I: Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal 

Pool Complexes 

Subunit 5I is located in the City of 

San Diego in San Diego County, 

California. This subunit contains several 

mesa top vernal pool complexes on 

eastern Otay Mesa. Subunit 5I consists 

of 220 ac (89 ha) of private land. 

Subunit 5I along with Subunit 5H 

encompass the core habitat on Otay 

Mesa. As core habitat, this subunit 

contains a large area of habitat that 

supports sizable occurrences of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

5B and 5H. This subunit contains 

several mesa-top vernal pool complexes 

on eastern Otay Mesa (Bauder vernal 

pool complexes J 22, J 29, J 30, J 31N, 

J 31S as in Appendix D of City of San 

Diego, 2004 and Service GIS). Subunit 

5I contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use, 

residential and commercial 

development) that occur in the vernal 

pool basins. Please see the ‘‘Special 

Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. We are 

considering the portion of this subunit 

covered by the County of San Diego 

Subarea Plan under the MSCP for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ 

section of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Unit 6: Riverside Management Area 

Unit 6 is located in Western Riverside 

County and consists of five subunits 

totaling 5,675 ac (2,297 ha). This unit 

contains 2,179 ac (882 ha) of land 

owned by the State of California’s 

Department of Fish and Game and 3,496 

ac (1,415 ha) of private land. 

Subunit 6A: San Jacinto River 

Subunit 6A is generally located along 

the San Jacinto River near the cities of 

Hemet and Perris in Riverside County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by Mystic Lake on the 

northeast and by the Perris Airport in 

the southwest. Subunit 6A consists of 

approximately 3,550 ac (1,437 ha), 

including 1,504 ac (609 ha) of land 

owned by State or local governments 

and 2,046 ac (828 ha) of private land. 

Subunit 6A encompasses the core 

habitat along the San Jacinto River. As 

core habitat, this subunit contains a 

large area of habitat that supports 

sizable occurrences of Navarretia 

fossalis and provides potential 

connectivity between occurrences of N. 

fossalis in Subunits 6B and 5C. This 

subunit consists of seasonally flooded 

alkali vernal plains that occur along the 

San Jacinto River. Subunit 6A contains 

the physical and biological features that 

are essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis, including ephemeral wetland 

habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 

and soils that support ponding during 

winter and spring months (PCE 3). The 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species in this subunit may require 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., manure dumping, flood control) 

that occur in the vernal pool basins. 

Please see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

We are considering this subunit for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

Under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ 

section of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Subunit 6B: Salt Creek Seasonally 

Flooded Alkali Plain 

Subunit 6B is located near the City of 

Hemet and west of the Hemet-Ryan 

Airport in Riverside County, California. 

This subunit is loosely bounded by 

Devonshire Avenue on the north, 

Warren Road on the east, the train tracks 

on the south, and the low-lying hills on 

the west. Subunit 6B consists of 1,054 

ac (427 ha) of private land that 

encompasses the core habitat along the 

Upper Salt Creek drainage in western 

Hemet. As core habitat, this subunit 

contains a large area of habitat that 

supports sizable occurrences of 

Navarretia fossalis and provides 

potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

6A and 6C. This subunit consists of 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plains. 

Subunit 6B contains the physical and 

biological features that are essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., grazing, flood control, discing for 

vegetation control) that occur in the 

vernal pool basins. Please see the 

‘‘Special Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. We are 

considering this subunit for exclusion 

under 4(b)(2) of the Act; please see the 

‘‘Proposed Exclusions under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section of this 

proposed rule for more information. 

Subunit 6C: Wickerd and Scott Road 

Pools 

Subunit 6C is located in the City of 

Menifee in Riverside County, California. 

This subunit is loosely bounded by lowlying hills north of Garbani Road on the 

north, Briggs Road on the east, Scott 

Road on the south, and Menifee Road on 

the west. Subunit 6C consists of 205 ac 

(83 ha) of private land and meets our 

selection criteria as satellite habitat 

because this location supports a stable 

occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and 

provides potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

6A, 6B, and 6D. This subunit consists of 

two large vernal pools. Subunit 6C 

contains the physical and biological 

features that are essential to the 

conservation of N. fossalis, including 

ephemeral wetland habitat (PCE 1), 

intermixed wetland and upland habitats 

that act as the local watershed (PCE 2), 

and the topography and soils that 

support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., residential or agricultural 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27608 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

development, discing for vegetation 

control, and maintenance of existing 

pipelines) that occur in the vernal pool 

basins. Please see the ‘‘Special 

Management Considerations or 

Protection’’ section of this proposed rule 

for a discussion of the threats to N. 

fossalis habitat and potential 

management considerations. We are 

considering this subunit for exclusion 

under 4(b)(2) of the Act; please see the 

‘‘Proposed Exclusions under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section of this 

proposed rule for more information. 

Subunit 6D: Skunk Hollow 

Subunit 6D is located east of the City 

of Murrieta in Riverside County, 

California. This subunit is loosely 

bounded by Browning Street on the 

north, the edge of an unnamed canyon 

on the east, Murrieta Hot Springs Road 

on the south, and Pourroy Avenue on 

the west. Subunit 6D consists of 158 ac 

(64 ha) of private land and meets our 

selection criteria as satellite habitat 

because this subunit supports a stable 

occurrence of Navarretia fossalis and 

provides potential connectivity between 

occurrences of N. fossalis in Subunits 

6C and 6E. This subunit consists of the 

large Skunk Hollow vernal pool and a 

small pool to the east of the Skunk 

Hollow pool. Subunit 6D contains the 

physical and biological features that are 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis, including ephemeral wetland 

habitat (PCE 1), intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed (PCE 2), and the topography 

and soils that support ponding during 

winter and spring months (PCE 3). The 

physical and biological features 

essential to the conservation of the 

species in this subunit may require 

special management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

We are considering this subunit for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section 

of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Subunit 6E: Mesa de Burro 

Subunit 6E is located west of the City 

of Murrieta in Riverside County, 

California. This subunit is on Mesa de 

Burro within the Santa Rosa Plateau 

Ecological Reserve. Subunit 6E consists 

of approximately 708 ac (287 ha), 

including 676 ac (274 ha) of land owned 

by State or local governments and 32 ac 

(13 ha) of private land. Subunit 6E 

encompasses the core habitat on Mesa 

de Burro at the Santa Rosa Plateau. 

As core habitat, this subunit contains 

a large area of habitat that supports a 

sizable occurrence of Navarretia fossalis 

and provides potential connectivity 

between occurrences of N. fossalis on 

MCB Camp Pendleton and in Subunit 

6D. This subunit consists of seasonally 

flooded alkali vernal plains, including 

mesa-top vernal pools on volcanic basalt 

soils. Subunit 6E contains the physical 

and biological features that are essential 

to the conservation of N. fossalis, 

including ephemeral wetland habitat 

(PCE 1), intermixed wetland and upland 

habitats that act as the local watershed 

(PCE 2), and the topography and soils 

that support ponding during winter and 

spring months (PCE 3). The physical 

and biological features essential to the 

conservation of the species in this 

subunit may require special 

management considerations or 

protection to address threats from 

nonnative plant species and activities 

(e.g., unauthorized recreational use) that 

occur in the vernal pool basins. Please 

see the ‘‘Special Management 

Considerations or Protection’’ section of 

this proposed rule for a discussion of 

the threats to N. fossalis habitat and 

potential management considerations. 

We are considering this subunit for 

exclusion under 4(b)(2) of the Act; 

please see the ‘‘Proposed Exclusions 

under Section 4(b)(2) of the Act’’ section 

of this proposed rule for more 

information. 

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation 

Section 7 Consultation 

Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires 

Federal agencies, including the Service, 

to ensure that actions they fund, 

authorize, or carry out are not likely to 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat. Decisions by the 5th and 9th 

Circuit Courts of Appeals have 

invalidated our definition of 

‘‘destruction or adverse modification’’ 

(50 CFR 402.02) (see Gifford Pinchot 

Task Force v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, 378 F.3d 1059 (9th Cir 2004) 

and Sierra Club v. U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service et al., 245 F.3d 434, 

442F (5th Cir 2001)), and we do not rely 

on this regulatory definition when 

analyzing whether an action is likely to 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat. Under the statutory provisions 

of the Act, we determine destruction or 

adverse modification on the basis of 

whether, with implementation of the 

proposed Federal action, the affected 

critical habitat would remain functional 

(or retain the current ability for the PCEs 

to be functionally established) to serve 

its intended conservation role for the 

species (Service 2004a, p. 3). 

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

Federal agencies to confer with us on 

any action that is likely to jeopardize 

the continued existence of a species 

proposed for listing or result in 

destruction or adverse modification of 

proposed critical habitat. Conference 

reports provide conservation 

recommendations to assist the agency in 

eliminating conflicts that may be caused 

by the proposed action. We may issue 

a formal conference report if requested 

by a Federal agency. Formal conference 

reports on proposed critical habitat 

contain an 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 designated, if no substantial 

new information or changes in the 

action alter the content of the opinion 

(see 50 CFR 402.10(d)). The 

conservation recommendations in a 

conference report or opinion are 

advisory. 

If a species is listed or critical habitat 

is designated, section 7(a)(2) of the Act 

requires Federal agencies to ensure that 

activities they authorize, fund, or carry 

out are not likely to jeopardize the 

continued existence of 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 in most cases. As 

a result of this consultation, we 

document compliance with the 

requirements of section 7(a)(2) through 

our issuance of: 

(1) A concurrence letter for Federal 

actions that may affect, but are not 

likely to adversely affect, listed species 

or designated critical habitat; or 

(2) A biological opinion for Federal 

actions that are likely to adversely affect 

listed species or designated critical 

habitat. 

An exception to the concurrence 

process referred to in (1) above occurs 

in consultations involving National Fire 

Plan projects. In 2004, the U.S. Forest 

Service and the BLM reached 

agreements with the Service to 

streamline a portion of the section 7 

consultation process (BLM–ACA 2004, 

pp. 1–8; FS–ACA 2004, pp. 1–8). The 

agreements allow the U.S. Forest 

Service and the BLM the opportunity to 

make ‘‘not likely to adversely affect’’ 

(NLAA) determinations for projects 

implementing the National Fire Plan. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27609 

Such projects include prescribed fire, 

mechanical fuels treatments (thinning 

and removal of fuels to prescribed 

objectives), emergency stabilization, 

burned area rehabilitation, road 

maintenance and operation activities, 

ecosystem restoration, and culvert 

replacement actions. The U.S. Forest 

Service and the BLM must ensure staff 

are properly trained, and both agencies 

must submit monitoring reports to the 

Service to determine if the procedures 

are being implemented properly and 

that effects on endangered species and 

their habitats are being properly 

evaluated. As a result, we do not believe 

the alternative consultation processes 

being implemented as a result of the 

National Fire Plan will differ 

significantly from those consultations 

being conducted by the Service. 

If we issue a biological opinion 

concluding that a project is likely to 

jeopardize the continued existence of a 

listed species or destroy or adversely 

modify critical habitat, we also provide 

reasonable and prudent alternatives to 

the project, if any are identifiable. We 

define ‘‘Reasonable and prudent 

alternatives’’ at 50 CFR 402.02 as 

alternative actions identified during 

consultation that: 

• Can be implemented in a manner 

consistent with the intended purpose of 

the action, 

• Can be implemented consistent 

with the scope of the Federal agency’s 

legal authority and jurisdiction, 

• Are economically and 

technologically feasible, and 

• Would, in the Director’s opinion, 

avoid jeopardizing the continued 

existence of the listed species or 

destroying or adversely modifying its 

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. 

When we issue a biological opinion 

concluding that a project is not likely to 

jeopardize a listed species or adversely 

modify its critical habitat but may result 

in incidental take of listed animals, we 

provide an incidental take statement 

that specifies the impact of such 

incidental taking on the species. We 

then define ‘‘Reasonable and Prudent 

Measures’’ considered necessary or 

appropriate to minimize the impact of 

such taking. Reasonable and prudent 

measures are binding measures the 

action agency must implement to 

receive an exemption to the prohibition 

against take contained in section 9 of 

the Act. These reasonable and prudent 

measures are implemented through 

specific ‘‘Terms and Conditions’’ that 

must be followed by the action agency 

or passed along by the action agency as 

binding conditions to an applicant. 

Reasonable and prudent measures, 

along with the terms and conditions that 

implement them, cannot alter the basic 

design, location, scope, duration, or 

timing of the action under consultation 

and may involve only minor changes 

(50 CFR 402.14). The Service may 

provide the action agency with 

additional conservation 

recommendations, which are advisory 

and not intended to carry binding legal 

force. 

Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require 

Federal agencies to reinitiate 

consultation on previously reviewed 

actions in instances where we have 

listed a new species or subsequently 

designated critical habitat that may be 

affected and the Federal agency has 

retained discretionary involvement or 

control over the action (or the agency’s 

discretionary involvement or control is 

authorized by law). Consequently, 

Federal agencies may sometimes need to 

request reinitiation of consultation with 

us on actions for which formal 

consultation has been completed, if 

those actions with discretionary 

involvement or control may affect 

subsequently listed species or 

designated critical habitat. 

Federal activities that may affect 

Navarretia fossalis or its designated 

critical habitat will require section 7 

consultation under the Act. Activities 

on State, Tribal, local, or private lands 

requiring a Federal permit (such as a 

permit from the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers under section 404 of the 

Clean Water Act or a permit under 

section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act from the 

Service) or involving some other Federal 

action (such as funding from the Federal 

Highway Administration, Federal 

Aviation Administration, or the Federal 

Emergency Management Agency) will 

also be subject to the section 7 

consultation process. Federal actions 

not affecting listed species or critical 

habitat, and actions on State, Tribal, 

local, or private lands that are not 

Federally funded, authorized, or 

permitted, do not require section 7 

consultations. 

Application of the ‘‘Adverse 

Modification’’ Standard 

The key factor related to the adverse 

modification determination is whether, 

with implementation of the proposed 

Federal action, the affected critical 

habitat would continue to serve its 

intended conservation role for the 

species, or would retain its current 

ability for the primary constituent 

elements to be functionally established. 

Activities that may destroy or adversely 

modify critical habitat are those that 

alter the physical and biological features 

to an extent that appreciably reduces the 

conservation value of critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis. Generally, the 

conservation role of the N. fossalis 

proposed revised critical habitat units is 

to support viable occurrences in core 

habitat areas and satellite habitat areas. 

Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us 

to briefly evaluate and describe in any 

proposed or final regulation that 

designates critical habitat those 

activities involving a Federal action that 

may destroy or adversely modify such 

habitat, or that may be affected by such 

designation. 

Activities that, when carried out, 

funded, or authorized by a Federal 

agency, may adversely affect critical 

habitat and therefore should result in 

consultation for Navarretia fossalis 

include, but are not limited to, the 

following: 

(1) Actions that would impact the 

ability of an ephemeral wetland to 

continue to provide habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis and other native 

species that require this specialized 

habitat type. Such activities could 

include, but are not limited to, water 

impoundment, stream channelization, 

water diversion, water withdrawal, and 

development activities. These activities 

could alter the biological and physical 

features that provide the appropriate 

habitat for N. fossalis by eliminating 

ponding habitat, changing the duration 

and frequency of the ponding events 

that this species relies on, making the 

habitat too wet and allowing for obligate 

wetland species to become established, 

making the habitat too dry and allowing 

upland species to become established, 

causing large amounts of sediment to be 

deposited in N. fossalis habitat, or 

causing increased erosion and incising 

of waterways. 

(2) Actions that would impact the soil 

and topography that cause water to 

pond during the winter and spring 

months. Such activities could include, 

but are not limited to, deep ripping of 

soils, trenching, soil compaction, and 

development activities. These activities 

could alter the biological and physical 

features that provide the appropriate 

habitat for N. fossalis by eliminating 

ponding habitat, impacting the 

impervious nature of the soil layer, or 

making the soil so impervious that 

water pools for an extended, detrimental 

hydroperiod (as described in the PCEs). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27610 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

Exemptions Under Section 4(a)(3) of the 

Act 

The National Defense Authorization 

Act for Fiscal Year 2004 (Pub. L. 108– 

136) amended the Act to limit areas 

eligible for designation as critical 

habitat. Specifically, section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) 

of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3)(B)(i)) 

now provides: ‘‘The Secretary shall not 

designate as critical habitat any lands or 

other geographical areas owned or 

controlled by the Department of 

Defense, or designated for its use, that 

are subject to an integrated natural 

resources management plan prepared 

under section 670a of this title, if the 

Secretary determines in writing that 

such plan provides a benefit to the 

species for which critical habitat is 

proposed for designation.’’ 

The Sikes Act Improvement Act of 

1997 required each military installation 

that includes land and water suitable for 

the conservation and management of 

natural resources to complete an INRMP 

by November 17, 2001. An INRMP 

integrates implementation of the 

military mission of the installation with 

stewardship of the natural resources 

found on the base. Each INRMP 

includes: 

(1) An assessment of the ecological 

needs on the installation, including the 

need to provide for the conservation of 

listed species; 

(2) A statement of goals and priorities; 

(3) A detailed description of 

management actions to be implemented 

to provide for these ecological needs; 

and 

(4) A monitoring and adaptive 

management plan. 

Among other things, each INRMP 

must, to the extent appropriate and 

applicable, provide for fish and wildlife 

management; fish and wildlife habitat 

enhancement or modification; wetland 

protection, enhancement, and 

restoration where necessary to support 

fish and wildlife; and enforcement of 

applicable natural resource laws. 

We consult with the military on the 

development and implementation of 

INRMPs for installations with federally 

listed species. Any INRMPs developed 

by military installations located within 

the range of Navarretia fossalis and 

which contain those features essential to 

the species’ conservation were analyzed 

for exemption under the authority of 

section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. 

Both Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp 

Pendleton and Marine Corps Air Station 

(MCAS) Miramar have approved 

INRMPs that address Navarretia 

fossalis, and the Marine Corps (on both 

installations) has committed to work 

closely with us, California Department 

of Fish and Game, and California 

Department of Parks and Recreation to 

continually refine the existing INRMPs 

as part of the Sikes Act’s INRMP review 

process. In accordance with section 

4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we determined 

that conservation efforts identified in 

the INRMPs will provide a benefit to N. 

fossalis occurring in habitats within or 

adjacent to MCB Camp Pendleton and 

MCAS Miramar (see the following 

sections that detail this determination 

for each installation). Therefore, 214 ac 

(87 ha) of habitat on MCB Camp 

Pendleton and MCAS Miramar are 

exempt from revised critical habitat for 

N. fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the 

Act. 

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton 

(MCB Camp Pendleton) 

In the previous final critical habitat 

designation for Navarretia fossalis, we 

exempted MCB Camp Pendleton from 

the designation of critical habitat 

(October 18, 2005, 70 FR 60658). We 

based this decision on the conservation 

benefits to N. fossalis identified in the 

INRMP developed by MCB Camp 

Pendleton in November 2001. A revised 

and updated INRMP was prepared by 

MCB Camp Pendleton in March 2007 

(Marine Corp Base Camp Pendleton 

2007). We determined that conservation 

efforts identified in the INRMP provide 

a benefit to the occurrences of N. 

fossalis and vernal pool habitat 

occurring on MCB Camp Pendleton 

(Marine Corp Base Camp Pendleton 

2007, Section 4, pp. 51–76). This 

conservation includes the 145 ac (59 ha) 

of habitat that we believe to be essential 

for the conservation of N. fossalis on 

Stuart Mesa and near the Wire 

Mountain Housing Complex. Therefore, 

lands containing features essential to 

the conservation of N. fossalis on this 

installation are exempt from revised 

critical habitat for N. fossalis under 

section 4(a)(3) of the Act. 

The INRMP for MCB Camp Pendleton 

benefits Navarretia fossalis through 

ongoing efforts to survey and monitor 

the species, and by providing this 

information to all necessary personnel 

through MCB Camp Pendleton’s GIS 

database on sensitive resources and in 

their published resource atlas. The 

INRMP also benefits N. fossalis by 

implementing the following base 

directives to avoid and minimize 

adverse effects to the species: (1) 

Keeping bivouac/command post/field 

support activities at least 984 ft (300 m) 

from N. fossalis habitat year-round; (2) 

keeping vehicle/equipment on existing 

roads (however, foot traffic is authorized 

year-round); and (3) prohibiting digging 

(including construction of fighting 

positions) in N. fossalis habitat (Marine 

Corp Base Camp Pendleton 2007, 

Appendix F, p. 54). Additionally, MCB 

Camp Pendleton’s environmental 

security staff reviews projects and 

enforces existing regulations and orders 

that, through their implementation, 

avoid and minimize impacts to natural 

resources, including N. fossalis and its 

habitat. As a result, activities occurring 

on MCB Camp Pendleton are currently 

being conducted in a manner that 

benefits N. fossalis. Finally, MCB Camp 

Pendleton provides training to 

personnel on environmental awareness 

for sensitive resources on the base, 

including N. fossalis and vernal pool 

habitat. We are currently consulting 

with the Marine Corps under section 7 

of the Act to programmatically address 

potential impacts of military training 

and other activities on MCB Camp 

Pendleton. Upon completion of this 

consultation, we anticipate additional 

measures that benefit N. fossalis to be 

incorporated into the INRMP for MCB 

Camp Pendleton. 

Marine Corps Air Station Miramar 

(MCAS Miramar) 

In the previous final critical habitat 

designation for Navarretia fossalis, we 

exempted MCAS Miramar from the 

designation of critical habitat (October 

18, 2005, 70 FR 60658). We based this 

decision on the conservation benefits to 

N. fossalis identified in the INRMP 

developed by MCAS Miramar in May 

2000. A revised and updated INRMP 

was prepared by MCAS Miramar in 

October 2006 (Gene Stout and 

Associates et al. 2006). We determined 

that conservation efforts identified in 

the INRMP provide a benefit to the 

occurrences of N. fossalis and vernal 

pool habitat occurring on MCAS 

Miramar (Gene Stout and Associates et 

al. 2006, Section 7, pp. 17–23). This 

conservation includes the 69 ac (28 ha) 

of habitat that we have determined 

contains the features essential for the 

conservation of N. fossalis in the 

western portion of MCAS Miramar. 

Therefore, lands containing features 

essential to the conservation of N. 

fossalis on this installation are exempt 

from revised critical habitat for N. 

fossalis under section 4(a)(3) of the Act. 

The INRMP for MCAS Miramar 

benefits Navarretia fossalis through 

ongoing efforts to avoid and minimize 

impacts to the species and vernal pool 

habitat. The INRMP classifies all N. 

fossalis habitat and nearly all other 

vernal pool basins and watersheds on 

MCAS Miramar as a Level I 

Management Area (Gene Stout and 

Associates et al. 2006, Section 5, Table 

1). Under the INRMP, Level I 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27611 

Management Areas receive the highest 

conservation priority of the various 

Management Areas on MCAS Miramar. 

The conservation of vernal pool basins 

and watersheds in the Level I 

Management Areas is achieved through: 

(1) Education of base personnel; (2) 

implementation of proactive measures 

that help avoid accidental impacts (e.g., 

signs and fencing); (3) development of 

procedures to respond to and restore 

accidental impacts on vernal pools; and 

(4) maintenance of an inventory of 

vernal pool basins and the associated 

watersheds on MCAS Miramar (Gene 

Stout and Associates et al. 2006, Section 

7, pp. 17–23). Additionally, the MCAS 

Miramar’s environmental security staff 

reviews projects and enforces existing 

regulations and orders that, through 

their implementation, avoid and 

minimize impacts to natural resources, 

including N. fossalis and its habitat. 

Activities occurring on MCAS Miramar 

are currently being conducted in a 

manner that benefits N. fossalis and 

prevents degradation or destruction of 

the species’ vernal pool habitat. 

Proposed Exclusions Under Section 

4(b)(2) of the Act 

Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that 

the Secretary must designate and revise 

critical habitat on the basis of the best 

available scientific data after taking into 

consideration the economic impact, 

national security impact, and any other 

relevant impact of specifying any 

particular area as critical habitat. The 

Secretary may exclude an area from 

critical habitat if he determines that the 

benefits of such exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of specifying such area as part 

of the critical habitat, unless he 

determines, based on the best scientific 

data available, that the failure to 

designate such area as critical habitat 

will result in the extinction of the 

species. In making that determination, 

the legislative history is clear that the 

Secretary has broad discretion regarding 

which factor(s) to use and how much 

weight to give to any factor. 

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

may exclude an area from designated 

critical habitat based on economic 

impacts, impacts on national security, 

or any other relevant impacts. In 

considering whether to exclude a 

particular area from the designation, we 

must identify the benefits of including 

the area in the designation, identify the 

benefits of excluding the area from the 

designation, and determine whether the 

benefits of exclusion outweigh the 

benefits of inclusion. If based on this 

analysis, we make this determination, 

then we can exclude the area only if 

such exclusion would not result in the 

extinction of the species. 

When considering the benefits of 

inclusion for an area, we consider the 

additional regulatory benefits that area 

would receive from the protection from 

adverse modification or destruction as a 

result of actions with a Federal nexus; 

the educational benefits of mapping 

essential habitat for recovery of the 

listed species; and any benefits that may 

result from a designation due to State or 

Federal laws that may apply to critical 

habitat. 

When considering the benefits of 

exclusion, we consider, among other 

things, whether exclusion of a specific 

area is likely to result in conservation; 

the continuation, strengthening, or 

encouragement of partnerships; and/or 

implementation of a management plan 

that provides equal to or more 

conservation than a critical habitat 

designation would provide. 

In the case of N. fossalis, the benefits 

of critical habitat include public 

awareness of N. fossalis presence and 

the importance of habitat protection, 

and in cases where a Federal nexus 

exists, increased habitat protection for 

N. fossalis due to the protection from 

adverse modification or destruction of 

critical habitat. In practice, a Federal 

nexus exists primarily on Federal lands 

or for projects undertaken or requiring 

authorization by a Federal agency. 

When we evaluate the existence of a 

conservation plan when considering the 

benefits of exclusion, we consider a 

variety of factors including, but not 

limited to, whether the plan is finalized; 

how it provides for the conservation of 

the essential physical and biological 

features; whether there is a reasonable 

expectation that the conservation 

management strategies and actions 

contained in a management plan will be 

implemented into the future; whether 

the conservation strategies in the plan 

are likely to be effective; and whether 

the plan contains a monitoring program 

or adaptive management to ensure that 

the conservation measures are effective 

and can be adapted in the future in 

response to new information. 

After evaluating the benefits of 

inclusion and the benefits of exclusion, 

we carefully weigh the two sides to 

determine whether the benefits of 

exclusion outweigh those of inclusion. 

If we determine that they do, we then 

determine whether exclusion would 

result in extinction. If exclusion of an 

area from critical habitat will result in 

extinction, we will not exclude it from 

the designation. 

Conservation Partnerships on NonFederal Lands 

Most Federally listed species in the 

United States will not recover without 

cooperation of non-Federal landowners. 

More than 60 percent of the United 

States is privately owned (National 

Wilderness Institute 1995), and at least 

80 percent of endangered or threatened 

species occur either partially or solely 

on private lands (Crouse et al. 2002, p. 

720). Stein et al. (1995, p. 400) found 

that only about 12 percent of listed 

species were found almost exclusively 

on Federal lands (90 to 100 percent of 

their known occurrences restricted to 

Federal lands) and that 50 percent of 

Federally listed species are not known 

to occur on Federal lands at all. 

Given the distribution of listed 

species with respect to land ownership, 

conservation of listed species in many 

parts of the United States is dependent 

upon working partnerships with a wide 

variety of entities and the voluntary 

cooperation of many non-Federal 

landowners (Wilcove and Chen 1998, p. 

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

2002, p. 271). Building partnerships and 

promoting voluntary cooperation of 

landowners are essential to 

understanding the status of species on 

non-Federal lands, and are necessary to 

implement recovery actions such as 

reintroducing listed species, habitat 

restoration, and habitat protection. 

Many non-Federal landowners derive 

satisfaction from contributing to 

endangered species recovery. We 

promote these private-sector efforts 

through the Department of the Interior’s 

Cooperative Conservation philosophy. 

Conservation agreements with nonFederal landowners (safe harbor 

agreements, other conservation 

agreements, easements, and State and 

local regulations) enhance species 

conservation by extending species 

protections beyond those available 

through section 7 consultations. In the 

past decade, we encouraged non-Federal 

landowners to enter into conservation 

agreements, based on a view that we can 

achieve greater species conservation on 

non-Federal land through such 

partnerships than we can through 

regulatory methods (December 2, 1996, 

61 FR 63854). 

As discussed above, consultation 

under section 7(a)(2), and the duty to 

avoid jeopardy to a listed species and 

adverse modification of designated 

critical habitat, is only triggered where 

Federal agency action involved. In the 

absence of Federal agency action, the 

primary regulatory restriction applicable 

to non-Federal landowners is the 

prohibition against take of listed animal 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27612 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

species under section 9 of the Act. In 

order to take listed animal species 

where no independent Federal action is 

involved that would trigger section 7 

consultation, a private landowner must 

obtain an incidental take permit under 

section 10 of the Act. However, because 

take of listed plants is not prohibited 

under the Act, section 10 permits are 

not required for listed plant species. As 

a consequence, the Department’s 

Cooperative Conservation approach is 

particularly suited to the conservation 

of listed plant species. By entering into 

voluntary conservation agreements and 

management plans with non-Federal 

landowners to protect listed plant 

species on non-Federal lands and by 

encouraging non-Federal landowners to 

voluntarily include measures to 

conserve listed plants in HCPs 

developed for animal species under 

section 10 of the Act, we can extend 

essential protection to listed plants 

beyond those available under the 

regulatory provisions of the Act. 

Many private landowners, however, 

are wary of the possible consequences of 

encouraging endangered species to their 

property. Mounting evidence suggests 

that some regulatory actions by the 

Federal Government, while wellintentioned and required by law, can 

(under certain circumstances) have 

unintended negative consequences for 

the conservation of species on private 

lands (Wilcove et al. 1996, pp. 5–6; 

Bean 2002, pp. 2–3; Conner and 

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

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

al. 2003, pp. 1639–1643). Many 

landowners fear a decline in their 

property value due to real or perceived 

restrictions on land-use options where 

threatened or endangered species are 

found. Consequently, harboring 

endangered species is viewed by many 

landowners as a liability. This 

perception results in anti-conservation 

incentives because maintaining habitats 

that harbor endangered species 

represents a risk to future economic 

opportunities (Main et al. 1999, pp. 

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

1648). 

According to some researchers, the 

designation of critical habitat on private 

lands significantly reduces the 

likelihood that landowners will support 

and carry out conservation actions 

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

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

The magnitude of this negative outcome 

is greatly amplified in situations where 

active management measures (such as 

reintroduction, fire management, and 

control of invasive species) are 

necessary for species conservation (Bean 

2002, pp. 3–4). We believe that the 

judicious exclusion of specific areas of 

non-federally owned lands from critical 

habitat designations can contribute to 

species recovery and provide a superior 

level of conservation than critical 

habitat alone. 

The purpose of designating critical 

habitat is to contribute to the 

conservation of threatened and 

endangered species and the ecosystems 

upon which they depend. The outcome 

of the designation, triggering regulatory 

requirements for actions funded, 

authorized, or carried out by Federal 

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

Act, can sometimes be 

counterproductive to its intended 

purpose on non-Federal lands. Thus the 

benefits of excluding areas that are 

covered by partnerships or voluntary 

conservation efforts can often be high, 

particularly for listed plant species. 

Benefits of Excluding Lands With HCPs 

The benefits of excluding lands with 

approved HCPs from critical habitat 

designation, such as HCPs that cover 

listed plant species, include relieving 

landowners, communities, and counties 

of any additional regulatory burden that 

might be imposed as a result of the 

critical habitat designation. Many HCPs 

take years to develop, and upon 

completion, are consistent with the 

recovery objectives for listed species 

that are covered within the plan area. 

Many conservation plans also provide 

conservation benefits to unlisted 

sensitive species. 

A related benefit of excluding lands 

covered by approved HCPs from critical 

habitat designation is the unhindered, 

continued ability it gives us to seek new 

partnerships with future plan 

participants, including States, counties, 

local jurisdictions, conservation 

organizations, and private landowners, 

which together can implement 

conservation actions that we would be 

unable to accomplish otherwise. Habitat 

Conservation Plans often cover a wide 

range of species, including listed plant 

species and species that are not State 

and federally listed and would 

otherwise receive little protection from 

development. By excluding these lands, 

we preserve our current partnerships 

and encourage additional conservation 

actions in the future. 

We also note that permit issuance in 

association with HCP applications 

requires consultation under section 

7(a)(2) of the Act, which would include 

the review of the effects of all HCPcovered activities that might adversely 

impact the species under a jeopardy 

standard, including possibly significant 

habitat modification (see definition of 

‘‘harm’’ at 50 CFR 17.3), even without 

the critical habitat designation. In 

addition, all other Federal actions that 

may affect the listed species would still 

require consultation under section 

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

these actions for possibly significant 

habitat modification in accordance with 

the definition of harm referenced above. 

The information provided in the 

previous section applies to the 

following discussions of proposed 

exclusions under section (4)(b)(2). 

Navarretia fossalis is covered under the 

City of Carlsbad Habitat Management 

Plan (HMP) under the MHCP, the 

County of San Diego Subarea Plan under 

the MSCP, and the Western Riverside 

County MSHCP. We are considering the 

exclusion of lands covered by these 

plans. We are also asking for public 

comment on the possible exclusion of 

essential habitat within the City of 

Chula Vista Subarea plan. The Chula 

Vista Subarea Plan does not specifically 

address the conservation of N. fossalis 

(see Table 4 for a list of the subunits that 

we are considering for exclusion). 

Portions of the proposed critical habitat 

subunits may warrant exclusion from 

the proposed designation of critical 

habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act 

based on the partnerships, management, 

and protection afforded under these 

approved and legally operative Habitat 

Conservation Plans (HCPs). In this 

revised proposed rule, we are seeking 

input from the stakeholders in these 

HCPs and the public as to whether or 

not we should exclude these areas from 

the final revised critical habitat 

designation. Below is a brief description 

of each plan and the lands proposed as 

critical habitat that are covered by each 

plan. 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27613 

TABLE 4—AREAS BEING CONSIDERED FOR EXCLUSION FROM THE FINAL REVISED CRITICAL HABITAT UNDER SECTION

4(B)(2) OF THE ACT

Submit 

Area 

considered for 

exclusion 

Carlsbad HMP under the San Diego MHCP 

2. Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station ................................................................................................................................. 3 ac (1 ha). 

Subtotal Carlsbad HMP under the San Diego MHCP ................................................................................................. 3 ac (1 ha). 

County of San Diego subarea plan under the San Diego MSCP 

3A. Sante Fe Valley: Crosby Estates ................................................................................................................................. 5 ac (2 ha). 

5B. Otay River Valley .......................................................................................................................................................... 13 ac (5 ha). 

5F. Proctor Valley ............................................................................................................................................................... 37 ac (15 ha). 

5I. Eastern Otay Mesa vernal pool complexes ................................................................................................................... 30 ac (13 ha). 

Subtotal County of San Diego subarea plan under the San Diego MSCP ................................................................. 86 ac (35 ha). 

Western Riverside County MSHCP 

6A. San Jacinto River ......................................................................................................................................................... 3,550 ac (1,437 ha). 

6B. Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali Plain ................................................................................................................. 1,054 ac (427 ha). 

6C. Wickerd Road Pool and Scott Road Pool .................................................................................................................... 205 ac (83 ha). 

6D. Skunk Hollow ................................................................................................................................................................ 158 ac (64 ha). 

6E. Mesa de Burro .............................................................................................................................................................. 708 ac (287 ha). 

Subtotal for Western Riverside County MSHCP ......................................................................................................... 5,675 ac (2,297 ha). 

Total ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5,725 ac (2,317 ha).* 

*Values in this table may not sum due to rounding. 

San Diego Multiple Habitat 

Conservation Program (MHCP)— 

Carlsbad HMP 

The San Diego MHCP is a 

comprehensive, multi-jurisdictional, 

planning program designed to create, 

manage, and monitor an ecosystem 

preserve in northwestern San Diego 

County. The San Diego MHCP is also a 

regional subarea plan under the State of 

California’s Natural Communities 

Conservation Plan (NCCP) program and 

was developed in cooperation with 

California Department of Fish and Game 

(CDFG). The MHCP preserve system is 

intended to protect viable occurrences 

of native plant and animal species and 

their habitats in perpetuity, while 

accommodating continued economic 

development and quality of life for 

residents of northern San Diego County. 

The MHCP includes an approximately 

112,000-ac (45,324-ha) study area 

within the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, 

Escondido, San Marcos, Oceanside, 

Vista, and Solana Beach. At this time, 

only the City of Carlsbad has completed 

its Subarea Plan, which is called the 

Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan 

(Carlsbad HMP). We are only 

considering lands covered by the 

Carlsbad HMP for exclusion. The 

section 10(a)(1)(B) permit for the City of 

Carlsbad HMP was issued on November 

9, 2004 (Service 2004c). 

Navarretia fossalis is a conditionally 

covered species under the Carlsbad 

HMP. ‘‘Conditional’’ coverage means 

that the City of Carlsbad will receive 

assurances for this species after a series 

of conditions is met for this species. 

There is currently one area within the 

City of Carlsbad that helps to support an 

occurrence of N. fossalis. This 

occurrence is on land that is conserved 

and some management is currently 

occurring under the Carlsbad HMP. Any 

new occurrences of N. fossalis that are 

discovered will be conserved under the 

Narrow Endemics Policy that provides 

special protection to rare species such 

as N. fossalis. Under the Narrow 

Endemics Policy of the MHCP, any new 

occurrences found within Focused 

Planning Areas (FPA) (i.e., core areas 

and linkages important for conservation 

of sensitive species) will be conserved at 

levels of 95 to 100 percent. New 

occurrences found outside of FPAs will 

be conserved at a minimum level of 80 

percent based on the Narrow Endemics 

Policy. The Narrow Endemics Policy 

requires the conservation of new 

occurrences of narrow endemic species 

(80 percent outside of FPAs), mitigation 

for unavoidable impacts, and 

implementation of management 

practices designed to achieve no net loss 

of these narrow endemic species. 

Additionally, cities cannot permit more 

than 5 percent gross cumulative loss of 

narrow endemic species or occupied 

area within the FPAs and no more than 

20 percent cumulative loss of narrow 

endemic locations, population numbers, 

or occupied acreage outside of FPAs 

(AMEC Earth and Environmental, Inc. 

2003). 

The Carlsbad HMP currently provides 

conservation for the Navarretia fossalis 

habitat at the Poinsettia Lane Commuter 

Station within Unit 2, which is within 

the boundaries of the Carlsbad HMP. 

Unit 2 consists of 9 ac (4 ha); 3 ac (1 

ha) is private land within the Carlsbad 

HMP and 6 ac (2 ha) is on land owned 

by the North County Transit District that 

is not part of the Carlsbad HMP. The 

conservation for the 3 ac (1 ha) of 

habitat within the Carlsbad HMP is 

outlined in the biological opinion for 

the Carlsbad HMP (Service 2004c, pp. 

312–16). The land is conserved with 

conservation easements, and funds have 

been designated for the management of 

this area to benefit vernal pool species, 

including N. fossalis (Service 2004c, p. 

314). 

Since the issuance of the permit for 

the Carlsbad HMP the 3 ac (1 ha) of land 

that we are considering for exclusion 

has been restored with native 

vegetation. This 3-acre (1 ah) area is 

conserved and management actions 

have taken place. Carlsbad HMP also 

provides the framework to develop a 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27614 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

comprehensive management plan that 

outlines measures necessary for the 

long-term conservation of Navarretia 

fossalis and has funding to implement a 

management plan. We anticipate 

working with the City of Carlsbad to 

draft a management plan that will 

provide for the long-term conservation 

of this area. 

San Diego Multiple Species 

Conservation Program (MSCP)—County 

of San Diego’s Subarea Plan 

The MSCP is a subregional HCP made 

up of several subarea plans that has 

been in place for more than a decade. 

The subregional plan area encompasses 

approximately 582,243 ac (235,626 ha) 

(County of San Diego 1997, p. 1–1; 

MSCP 1998, pp. 2–1, and 4–2 to 4–4) 

and provides for conservation of 85 

federally listed and sensitive species 

(‘‘covered species’’) through the 

establishment and management of 

approximately 171,920 ac (69,574 ha) of 

preserve lands within the Multi-Habitat 

Planning Area (MHPA) (City of San 

Diego) and Pre-Approved Mitigation 

Areas (PAMA) (County of San Diego). 

The MSCP was developed in support of 

applications for incidental take permits 

for several federally listed species by 12 

participating jurisdictions and many 

other stakeholders in southwestern San 

Diego County. Under the umbrella of the 

MSCP, each of the 12 participating 

jurisdictions is required to prepare a 

subarea plan that implements the goals 

of the MSCP within that particular 

jurisdiction. Navarretia fossalis was 

evaluated in the County of San Diego 

and the City of San Diego Subarea Plans. 

As discussed under the ‘‘Benefits of 

Excluding Lands with HCPs’’ section of 

this rule, we are only considering 

exclusion of lands within the County of 

San Diego Subarea Plan. Specifically, 

we are considering the exclusion of 134 

ac (54 ha) in Subunits 3A, 5B, 5F, and 

5I; we are only considering a portion of 

the lands in Subunits 5B, 5F, and 5I (see 

Table 4 for the amount of land being 

considered for exclusion in each 

subunit). 

Upon completion of preserve 

assembly, approximately 171,920 ac 

(69,574 ha) of the 582,243-ac (235,626- 

ha) MSCP plan area will be preserved 

(MSCP 1998, pp. 2–1 and 4–2 to 4–4). 

San Diego County’s subarea plan 

identifies areas where mitigation 

activities should be focused to assemble 

its preserve areas (i.e., PAMA). Those 

areas of the MSCP preserve that are 

already conserved, as well as those areas 

that are designated for inclusion in the 

preserve under the plan, are referred to 

as the ‘‘preserve area’’ in this proposed 

revised critical habitat designation. 

When the preserve is completed, the 

public sector (i.e., Federal, State, and 

local government, and general public) 

will have contributed 108,750 ac 

(44,010 ha) (63.3 percent) to the 

preserve, of which 81,750 ac (33,083 ha) 

(48 percent) was existing public land 

when the MSCP was established and 

27,000 ac (10,927 ha) (16 percent) will 

have been acquired. At completion, the 

private sector will have contributed 

63,170 ac (25,564 ha) (37 percent) to the 

preserve as part of the development 

process, either through avoidance of 

impacts or as compensatory mitigation 

for impacts to biological resources 

outside the preserve. Currently and in 

the future, Federal and State 

governments, local jurisdictions and 

special districts, and managers of 

privately owned lands will manage and 

monitor their lands in the preserve for 

species and habitat protection (MSCP 

1998, pp. 2–1 and 4–2 to 4–4). 

Private lands within the PAMA are 

subject to special restrictions on 

development, and lands that are 

dedicated to the preserve must be 

legally protected and permanently 

managed to conserve the covered 

species. Public lands owned by the 

County, State of California, and the 

Federal Government that are identified 

for conservation under the MSCP must 

also be protected and permanently 

managed to protect the covered species. 

Numerous processes are incorporated 

into the MSCP that allow our oversight 

of the MSCP implementation. For 

example, the MSCP imposes annual 

reporting requirements and provides for 

our review and approval of proposed 

subarea plan amendments and preserve 

boundary adjustments and for Service 

review and comment on projects during 

the California Environmental Quality 

Act review process. We also chair the 

MSCP Habitat Management Technical 

Committee and the Monitoring 

Subcommittee (MSCP 1998, pp. 5–11 to 

5–23). Each MSCP subarea plan must 

account annually for the progress it is 

making in assembling conservation 

areas. We must receive annual reports 

that include, both cumulatively and by 

project, the habitat acreage destroyed 

and conserved within the subareas. This 

accounting process ensures that habitat 

conservation proceeds in rough 

proportion to habitat loss and in 

compliance with the MSCP subarea 

plans and the plans’ associated 

implementing agreements. 

To protect vernal pool habitat, the 

County of San Diego subarea plan 

requires that: (1) Development be 

configured in a manner that minimizes 

impacts to sensitive biological resources 

(Service 1997, p. 10; Service 1998b, p. 

7); (2) unavoidable impacts to vernal 

pools associated with reasonable use or 

essential public facilities be minimized 

and mitigated to achieve no net loss of 

function and value; and (3) a sufficient 

amount of watershed be avoided as 

necessary for the continuing viability of 

vernal pools (Service 1997, pp. 43–44; 

Service 1998b, p. 67). 

At this time, a portion of lands that 

meet the definition of critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis inside the County’s 

subarea plan under the MSCP have 

already been conserved. Although some 

areas placed in conservation are not yet 

fully managed, such management will 

occur over time as the subarea plan is 

implemented. There are also lands 

inside the PAMA, that, although they 

have not yet been formally committed to 

the preserve, are reasonably assured of 

conservation for N. fossalis in 

accordance with the subarea plan. There 

are also lands in Subunits 5B and 5I that 

are not currently covered by the County 

of San Diego’s Subarea Plan because 

they are in major and minor amendment 

areas. There is an established process 

through which these areas can be 

covered by the plan, but presently these 

areas have not gone through this 

process. 

Additionally, projects that are on 

lands that meet the definition of critical 

habitat, but are outside the PAMA 

(preserve areas) must meet the narrow 

endemic requirements under the MSCP. 

Consistent with the narrow endemics 

requirements of the MSCP, the lands 

outside the PAMA boundaries will be 

surveyed for Navarretia fossalis prior to 

any development occurring on these 

lands. Under the County of San Diego’s 

subarea plan, narrow endemic plants, 

including N. fossalis, are conserved 

under the Biological Mitigation 

Ordinance using a process that: (1) 

Requires avoidance to the maximum 

extent feasible; (2) allows for a 

maximum 20 percent encroachment into 

a population if total avoidance is not 

feasible; and (3) requires mitigation at 

the 1:1 to 3:1 (in kind) for impacts if 

avoidance and minimization of impacts 

would result in no reasonable use of the 

property (County of San Diego (BMO) 

1997, p. 11; Service 1998b, p. 12). These 

measures help protect N. fossalis and its 

essential habitat whether the lands are 

located in the PAMA or not. The narrow 

endemic policy for the County of San 

Diego subarea plan requires in situ 

conservation of N. fossalis or mitigation 

to ameliorate any habitat loss. 

Therefore, although some losses may 

occur to this species within the lands 

that are not within the PAMA, the 

preservation, conservation, and 

management of N. fossalis provided by 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27615 

the County of San Diego subarea plan 

under the MSCP promotes the long-term 

conservation of this species and its 

essential habitat within the lands 

covered by the subarea plan. 

In summary, we are considering the 

exclusion of 86 ac (35 ha) that meet the 

definition of critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis within the County of 

San Diego’s subarea plans under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act. There are an 

additional 23 ac (9 ha) of Federal land 

at the San Diego National Wildlife 

Refuge included in Subunit 5A that are 

within the County of San Diego’s 

subarea plan that meet the definition of 

critical habitat, but because these lands 

are federally owned we are not 

considering them for exclusion. The 

1998 final listing rule for N. fossalis 

identified the following primary threats 

for this species: Habitat destruction and 

fragmentation from urban and 

agricultural development, pipeline 

construction, road construction, 

alteration of hydrology and flood plain 

dynamics, excessive flooding, 

channelization, off-road vehicle activity, 

trampling by cattle and sheep, weed 

abatement, fire suppression practices 

(including discing and plowing), and 

competition from nonnative plants 

(October 13, 1998, 63 FR 54938). The 

implementation of the County of San 

Diego MSCP subarea plan helps to 

address these threats through a regional 

planning effort rather than through a 

project-by-project approach, and 

outlines species-specific objectives and 

criteria for the conservation of N. 

fossalis. We will analyze the benefits of 

inclusion and exclusion of this area 

from critical habitat under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act. We request comments 

on lands in major and minor 

amendment areas (Subunits 5B and 5I) 

under the County of San Diego’s subarea 

plan under the MSCP and we encourage 

any public comment in relation to our 

consideration of the areas discussed 

above for inclusion or exclusion. 

Western Riverside County Multiple 

Species Habitat Conservation Plan 

(Western Riverside County MSHCP) 

The Western Riverside County 

MSHCP is a large-scale, multijurisdictional HCP encompassing about 

1.26 million ac (510,000 ha) in western 

Riverside County (Unit 6). The Western 

Riverside County MSHCP addresses 146 

listed and unlisted ‘‘covered species,’’ 

including Navarretia fossalis. 

Participants in the Western Riverside 

County MSHCP include 14 cities; the 

County of Riverside, including the 

Riverside County Flood Control and 

Water Conservation Agency (County 

Flood Control), Riverside County 

Transportation Commission, Riverside 

County Parks and Open Space District, 

and Riverside County Waste 

Department; California Department of 

Parks and Recreation; and the California 

Department of Transportation. The 

Western Riverside County MSHCP was 

designed to establish a multi-species 

conservation program that minimizes 

and mitigates the expected loss of 

habitat and the incidental take of 

covered species. On June 22, 2004, the 

Service issued a single incidental take 

permit (Service 2004b) under section 

10(a)(1)(B) of the Act to 22 permittees 

under the Western Riverside County 

MSHCP for a period of 75 years. 

The Western Riverside County 

MSHCP will establish approximately 

153,000 ac (61,917 ha) of new 

conservation lands (Additional Reserve 

Lands) to complement the approximate 

347,000 ac (140,426 ha) of pre-existing 

natural and open space areas (Public/ 

Quasi-Public (PQP) lands). These PQP 

lands include those under Federal 

ownership, primarily managed by the 

USFS and BLM, and also permitteeowned or controlled open-space areas, 

primarily managed by the State and 

Riverside County. Collectively, the 

Additional Reserve Lands and PQP 

lands form the overall Western 

Riverside County MSHCP Conservation 

Area. The configuration of the 153,000 

ac (61,916 ha) of Additional Reserve 

Lands is not mapped or precisely 

identified (‘‘hard-lined’’) in the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP. Rather, it is 

based on textual descriptions of habitat 

conservation necessary to meet the 

conservation goals for all covered 

species within the bounds of the 

approximately 310,000-ac (125,453-ha) 

Criteria Area and is interpreted as 

implementation of the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP takes place. 

Specific conservation objectives in the 

Western Riverside County MSHCP for 

Navarretia fossalis include providing 

6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of occupied or 

suitable habitat for the species in the 

MSHCP Conservation Area. This acreage 

goal can be attained through acquisition 

or other dedications of land assembled 

from within the Criteria Area (i.e., the 

Additional Reserve Lands) or Narrow 

Endemic Plan Species Survey Area and 

through coordinated management of 

existing PQP lands. We internally 

mapped a ‘‘Conceptual Reserve Design,’’ 

which illustrates existing PQP lands and 

predicts the geographic distribution of 

the Additional Reserve Lands based on 

our interpretation of the textual 

descriptions of habitat conservation 

necessary to meet conservation goals. 

Our Conceptual Reserve Design was 

intended to predict one possible future 

configuration of the eventual 

approximately 153,000 ac (61,916 ha) of 

Additional Reserve Lands in 

conjunction with the existing PQP 

lands, including approximately 6,900 ac 

(2,792 ha) of ‘‘suitable’’ N. fossalis 

habitat, that will be conserved to meet 

the goals and objectives of the plan 

(Service 2004b, p. 73). 

Preservation and management of 

approximately 6,900 ac (2,792 ha) of 

Navarretia fossalis habitat under the 

Western Riverside County MSHCP will 

contribute to conservation and ultimate 

recovery of this species. Navarretia 

fossalis is threatened primarily by 

agricultural activities, development, and 

fuel modification actions within the 

plan area (Service 2004b, pp. 369–378). 

The Western Riverside County MSHCP 

will remove and reduce threats to this 

species and its PCEs as the plan is 

implemented by placing large blocks of 

occupied and unoccupied habitat into 

preservation throughout the 

Conservation Area. Areas identified for 

preservation and conservation include 

13 of the known locations of the species 

at Skunk Hollow, the Santa Rosa 

Plateau, the San Jacinto Wildlife Area, 

floodplains of the San Jacinto River 

from the Ramona Expressway to 

Railroad Canyon, and upper Salt Creek 

west of Hemet. Areas targeted for 

conservation include the floodplains of 

the San Jacinto River, the area along Salt 

Creek from Warren Road to Newport 

Road, and the vernal pools in Upper 

Salt Creek west of Hemet. 

The Western Riverside County 

MSHCP Conservation Area will 

maintain floodplain processes along the 

San Jacinto River and along Salt Creek 

to provide for the distribution of the 

species to shift over time as hydrologic 

conditions and seed bank sources 

change. Additionally, the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP requires 

surveys for Navarretia fossalis as part of 

the project review process for public 

and private projects where suitable 

habitat is present within a defined 

narrow endemic species survey area (see 

Narrow Endemic Species Survey Area 

Map, Figure 6–1 of the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP, Volume I, in 

Dudek and Associates, Inc. 2003). For 

locations with positive survey results, 

90 percent of those portions of the 

property that provide long-term 

conservation value for the species will 

be avoided until it is demonstrated that 

the conservation objectives for the 

species are met (see Protection of 

Narrow Endemic Plant Species; Western 

Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, 

section 6.1.3, in Dudek and Associates, 

Inc. 2003). 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27616 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

The survey requirements, the 

avoidance and minimization measures, 

and the management for Navarretia 

fossalis (and its PCEs) provided for in 

the Western Riverside County MSHCP 

are expected to benefit this species on 

public and private lands covered by the 

plan. We are considering the exclusion 

of approximately 5,675 ac (2,297 ha) of 

private lands and permittee-owned or 

controlled PQP lands in Unit 6 

(Subunits 6A–6E), within the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP Plan Area, 

from the final revised critical habitat 

designation under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act. Projects in the areas proposed as 

critical habitat conducted or approved 

by Western Riverside County MSHCP 

permittees are subject to the 

conservation requirements of the 

MSHCP. For projects that may impact N. 

fossalis, various policies (i.e., Narrow 

Endemic Plant Species Policy, and the 

Riparian/Riverine and Vernal Pool 

Policy in Dudek and Associates, Inc. 

2003) provide additional conservation 

requirements. 

The Western Riverside County 

MSHCP incorporates several processes 

that allow for Service oversight and 

participation in program 

implementation. These processes 

include: (1) Consultation with the 

Service on a long-term management and 

monitoring plan; (2) submission of 

annual monitoring reports; (3) annual 

status meetings with the Service; and (4) 

submission of annual implementation 

reports to the Service (Service 2004b, 

pp. 9–10). Below we provide a brief 

analysis of the lands in Unit 6 that we 

are considering for exclusion and how 

each area is covered by the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP or other 

conservation measures. 

The Western Riverside County 

MSHCP has several measures in place to 

ensure the plan is implemented in a 

way that conserves Navarretia fossalis 

in accordance with the species-specific 

criteria and objectives for this species. 

Projects in the areas proposed as critical 

habitat conducted or approved by 

Western Riverside County MSHCP 

permittees are subject to the 

conservation requirements of the 

MSHCP. For projects that may impact N. 

fossalis, various policies (including the 

Narrow Endemic Plant Species Policy, 

and the Protection of Species Associated 

with Riparian/Riverine Areas and 

Vernal Pools Policy (in Dudek 2003) 

may provide additional conservation. 

We are proposing five subunits within 

Unit 6, all of which are within the 

boundaries of the Western Riverside 

County MSHCP. Each subunit has land 

in different mapping categories (some of 

which overlap) as they relate to different 

polices and review processes under the 

Western Riverside County MSHCP. The 

breakdown for each subunit, in terms of 

how much land is considered ‘‘Public/ 

Quasi Public,’’ within the ‘‘Criteria 

Area,’’ or in one of the ‘‘Narrow 

Endemic Plant Species Survey Areas,’’ 

is presented in Table 5. 

TABLE 5—AREAS PROPOSED FOR CRITICAL HABITAT WITHIN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNTY MSHCP 

Location Public/quasi public lands Lands within the criteria 

area 

Lands within the narrow 

endemic plant species 

survey area 

Total area proposed as 

critical habitat 

6A. San Jacinto River ........................ 1,504 ac (608 ha) ......... 2,264 ac (619 ha) ......... 3,524 ac (1,426 ha) ...... 3,550 ac (1,437 ha). 

6B. Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded 

Alkali Plain.

1 ac (<1 ha) .................. 1,030 ac (417 ha) ......... 1,054 ac (427 ha) ......... 1,054 ac (427 ha). 

6C. Wickerd Pool and Scott Road 

Pool.

0 ac (0 ha) .................... 0 ac (0 ha) .................... 205 ac (83 ha) .............. 205 ac (83 ha). 

6D. Skunk Hollow .............................. 21 ac (8 ha) .................. 0 ac (0 ha) .................... 145 ac (59 ha) .............. 158 ac (64 ha). 

6E. Mesa de Burro ............................ 708 ac (287 ha) ............ 0 ac (0 ha) .................... 708 ac (287 ha) ............ 708 ac (287 ha). 

Two of the subunits, Subunit 6D 

(Skunk Hollow) and Subunit 6E (Mesa 

de Burro), primarily consist of lands 

already in permanent conservation. The 

majority of Subunit 6D was conserved 

as a result of the Rancho Bella Vista 

HCP (Rancho Bella Vista 1999, p. 2; 

CNLM 2009a, p. 1) and the remainder of 

the land in Subunit 6D was conserved 

as a result of the ADA 161 HCP (CNLM 

2009b, p. 1). In total, 100 percent of the 

lands in Subunit 6D are conserved and 

managed specifically for the purpose of 

preserving the vernal pool habitat. 

Subunit 6E is within the Santa Rosa 

Plateau Ecological Reserve. This Reserve 

has four landowners: the California 

Department of Fish and Game, County 

of Riverside, Metropolitan Water 

District of Southern California, and The 

Nature Conservancy. The landowners 

and the Service (which owns no land on 

the Plateau) signed a cooperative 

management agreement on April 16, 

1991 (Dangermond and Associates, Inc. 

1991), and meet regularly to work on the 

management of the Reserve (Riverside 

County Parks 2009, p. 2). The vernal 

pools within this Subunit 6E are 

managed and monitored to preserve the 

unique vernal pool plants and animals 

that occur on the Santa Rosa Plateau, 

including Mesa de Burro. 

The other three units (Subunit 6A, 6B, 

and 6C) are not conserved at this time; 

however, we anticipate that these areas 

will be conserved over time as the 

Western Riverside County MSHCP is 

implemented. Subunit 6A is 99 percent 

within the Narrow Endemic Plant 

Species Survey Area (NEPSSA), and 

Subunits 6B and 6C are entirely within 

the NEPSSA. Because these areas are 

within the NEPSSA, biological surveys 

for Navarretia fossalis will occur prior 

to the development of any areas within 

these subunits. Furthermore, Subunits 

6A and 6B have additional protections 

in place either from past conservation 

efforts or because they are within the 

Criteria Area. 

A large portion of Subunit 6A (1,504 

ac (608 ha), or approximately 42 

percent) is within the San Jacinto 

Wildlife Area, a wildlife area owned 

and operated by the California 

Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). 

This area consists of restored wetlands 

that provide habitat for waterfowl and 

wading birds, as well as seasonally 

flooded vernal plain habitat along the 

San Jacinto River north of the Ramona 

Expressway that supports Navarretia 

fossalis. The Service regularly works 

with the CDFG to ensure that the 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitat at the San Jacinto Wildlife Area 

continues to function and provide a 

benefit for N. fossalis and other 

sensitive species that use this habitat. In 

addition to the portion of Subunit 6A 

owned by CDFG, 98 percent of the 

remaining land (2,006 ac (812 ha)) is 

within the Criteria Area. Projects in this 

area will be implemented through the 

Joint Project Review Process to ensure 

that the requirements of the MSHCP 

permit and the Implementing 

Agreement are properly met (Western 

Riverside County MSHCP, Volume 1, 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27617 

section 6.6.2 in Dudek and Associates, 

Inc. 2003, p. 6–82). 

Additionally, the majority of Subunit 

6B is within the Criteria Area (98 

percent; 1,030 ac (417 ha) out of a total 

1,054 ac (427 ha)) and projects in this 

area will be implemented through the 

Joint Project Review Process. This 

subunit is in the area referred to as West 

Hemet, under the jurisdiction of the City 

of Hemet. The City of Hemet is currently 

in the process of updating their General 

Plan, including addressing the sensitive 

vernal pool resources. Subunit 6C is not 

within the Criteria Area for the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP; however, 

impacts to the pools in this subunit 

should be avoided, minimized, or offset 

through implementation of the 

Protection of Species Associated with 

Riparian/Riverine Areas and Vernal 

Pools Policy and NEPSSA Policy. 

In summary, we are considering 

exclusion of 5,675 ac (2,297 ha) of 

Navarretia fossalis habitat on permitteeowned or controlled lands in Unit 6 that 

meets the definition of critical habitat 

for N. fossalis within the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP under section 

4(b)(2) of the Act. The 1998 final listing 

rule for N. fossalis identified the 

following primary threats to N. fossalis: 

Habitat destruction and fragmentation 

from urban and agricultural 

development, pipeline construction, 

road construction, alteration of 

hydrology and flood plain dynamics, 

excessive flooding, channelization, offroad vehicle activity, trampling by cattle 

and sheep, weed abatement, fire 

suppression practices (including discing 

and plowing), and competition from 

nonnative plant species (October 13, 

1998, 63 FR 54938). The 

implementation of the Western 

Riverside County MSHCP helps to 

address these threats through a regional 

planning effort, and outlines speciesspecific objectives and criteria for the 

conservation of N. fossalis. We will 

analyze the benefits of inclusion and 

exclusion of this area from critical 

habitat under section 4(b)(2) of the Act. 

We encourage any public comment in 

relation to our consideration of the areas 

in Unit 6 for inclusion or exclusion (see 

Public Comments section above). 

Economics 

An analysis of the economic impacts 

for the previous proposed critical 

habitat designation was conducted and 

made available to the public on August 

31, 2005 (70 FR 51742). That economic 

analysis was finalized for the final rule 

to designate critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis published in the 

Federal Register on October 18, 2005 

(70 FR 60658). The analysis determined 

that the costs associated with critical 

habitat for N. fossalis, across the entire 

area considered for designation (across 

designated and excluded areas), were 

primarily a result of the potential effect 

of critical habitat on land development, 

flood control, and transportation. After 

excluding land in Riverside County and 

San Diego County from the proposed 

critical habitat, the economic impact 

was estimated to be between $13.9 and 

$32.1 million over the next 20 years. 

Based on the 2005 economic analysis, 

we concluded that the designation of 

critical habitat for N. fossalis, as 

proposed in 2004, would not result in 

significant small business impacts. This 

analysis is presented in the notice of 

availability for the economic analysis 

published in the Federal Register on 

August 31, 2005 (70 FR 51742). 

We are preparing a new analysis of 

the economic impacts of this proposed 

revision to critical habitat for Navarretia 

fossalis. Because no new geographic 

areas will need to be analyzed, we will 

use the basic framework of the previous 

analysis, primarily updating economic 

figures. We will announce the 

availability of the draft economic 

analysis as soon as it is completed, at 

which time we will seek public review 

and comment. At that time, copies of 

the draft economic analysis will be 

available for downloading from the 

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

Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2009–0038, or 

by contacting the Carlsbad Fish and 

Wildlife Office directly (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). 

During the development of a final 

designation, we will consider economic 

impacts, public comments, and other 

new information, and areas may be 

excluded from the final critical habitat 

designation under section 4(b)(2) of the 

Act and our implementing regulations at 

50 CFR 424.19. 

Peer Review 

In accordance with our joint policy 

published in the Federal Register on 

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

soliciting the expert opinions of at least 

three appropriate independent 

specialists regarding this proposed rule. 

The purpose of peer review is to ensure 

that our critical habitat designation is 

based on scientifically sound data, 

assumptions, and analyses. We have 

invited these peer reviewers to comment 

during this public comment period on 

our specific assumptions and 

conclusions in this proposed revised 

designation of critical habitat. We will 

consider all comments and information 

we receive during this comment period 

on this proposed rule during our 

preparation of a final determination. 

Accordingly, our final decision may 

differ from this proposal. 

Public Hearings 

Section 4(b)(5) of the Act provides for 

one or more public hearings on this 

proposal, if we receive any requests for 

hearings. We must receive your request 

for a public hearing within 45 days after 

the date of this Federal Register 

publication. Send your request to Jim 

Bartel, Field Supervisor of the Carlsbad 

Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section). 

We will schedule public hearings on 

this proposal, if any are requested, and 

announce the dates, times, and places of 

those hearings, as well as how to obtain 

reasonable accommodations, in the 

Federal Register and local newspapers 

at least 15 days before the first hearing. 

Required Determinations 

Regulatory Planning and Review— 

Executive Order 12866 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has determined that this rule is 

not significant and has not reviewed 

this proposed rule under Executive 

Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases 

its determination upon the following 

four criteria: 

(1) Whether the rule will have an 

annual effect of $100 million or more on 

the economy or adversely affect an 

economic sector, productivity, jobs, the 

environment, or other units of the 

government. 

(2) Whether the rule will create 

inconsistencies with other Federal 

agencies’ actions. 

(3) Whether the rule will materially 

affect entitlements, grants, user fees, 

loan programs, or the rights and 

obligations of their recipients. 

(4) Whether the rule raises novel legal 

or policy issues. 

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

et seq.) 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

(RFA; 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq., as amended 

by the Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996), whenever an agency must 

publish a notice of rulemaking for any 

proposed or final rule, it must prepare 

and make available for public comment 

a regulatory flexibility analysis that 

describes the effect of the rule on small 

entities (i.e., small businesses, small 

organizations, and small government 

jurisdictions). However, no regulatory 

flexibility analysis is required if the 

head of an agency certifies the rule will 

not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities. SBREFA amended the RFA to 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27618 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

require Federal agencies to provide a 

statement of factual basis for certifying 

that the rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

An analysis of the economic impacts 

for our previous proposed critical 

habitat designation was conducted and 

made available to the public on August 

31, 2005 (70 FR 51742). This economic 

analysis was finalized for the final rule 

to designate critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis as published in the 

Federal Register on October 18, 2005 

(70 FR 60658). The costs associated with 

critical habitat for N. fossalis, across the 

entire area considered for designation 

(across designated and excluded areas), 

were primarily a result of the potential 

effect of critical habitat on land 

development, flood control, and 

transportation. After excluding land in 

Riverside County and San Diego County 

from the proposed critical habitat, the 

economic impact was estimated to be 

between $13.9 and $32.1 million over 

the next 20 years. Based on the 2005 

economic analysis, we concluded that 

the designation of critical habitat for N. 

fossalis, as proposed in 2004, would not 

result in significant small business 

impacts. This analysis is presented in 

the notice of availability for the 

economic analysis as published in the 

Federal Register on August 31, 2005 (70 

FR 51742). 

While we do not believe our revised 

designation, as proposed, will result in 

a significant impact on a substantial 

number of small business entities based 

on the previous designation, we are 

initiating new analyses to more 

thoroughly evaluate potential economic 

impacts of this revision to critical 

habitat. Therefore, we defer the RFA 

finding until completion of the draft 

economic analysis prepared under 

section 4(b)(2) of the Act and E.O. 

12866. The draft economic analysis will 

provide the required factual basis for the 

RFA finding. Upon completion of the 

draft economic analysis, we will 

announce its availability in the Federal 

Register and reopen the public 

comment period for the proposed 

designation. We will include with this 

announcement, as appropriate, an initial 

regulatory flexibility analysis or a 

certification that the rule will not have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

accompanied by the factual basis for 

that determination. We concluded that 

deferring the RFA finding until 

completion of the draft economic 

analysis is necessary to meet the 

purposes and requirements of the RFA. 

Deferring the RFA finding in this 

manner will ensure that we make a 

sufficiently informed determination 

based on adequate economic 

information and provide the necessary 

opportunity for public comment. 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 

U.S.C. 1501 et seq.) 

In accordance with the Unfunded 

Mandates Reform Act, we make the 

following findings: 

(1) This rule will not produce a 

Federal mandate. In general, a Federal 

mandate is a provision in legislation, 

statute, or regulation that would impose 

an enforceable duty upon State, local, or 

Tribal governments, or the private 

sector, and includes both ‘‘Federal 

intergovernmental mandates’’ and 

‘‘Federal private sector mandates.’’ 

These terms are defined in 2 U.S.C. 

658(5)–(7). ‘‘Federal intergovernmental 

mandate’’ includes a regulation that 

‘‘would impose an enforceable duty 

upon State, local, or [T]ribal 

governments,’’ with two exceptions. It 

excludes ‘‘a condition of Federal 

assistance.’’ It also excludes ‘‘a duty 

arising from participation in a voluntary 

Federal program,’’ unless the regulation 

‘‘relates to a then-existing Federal 

program under which $500,000,000 or 

more is provided annually to State, 

local, and [T]ribal governments under 

entitlement authority,’’ if the provision 

would ‘‘increase the stringency of 

conditions of assistance’’ or ‘‘place caps 

upon, or otherwise decrease, the Federal 

Government’s responsibility to provide 

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

governments ‘‘lack authority’’ to adjust 

accordingly. At the time of enactment, 

these entitlement programs were: 

Medicaid; AFDC work programs; Child 

Nutrition; Food Stamps; Social Services 

Block Grants; Vocational Rehabilitation 

State Grants; Foster Care, Adoption 

Assistance, and Independent Living; 

Family Support Welfare Services; and 

Child Support Enforcement. ‘‘Federal 

private sector mandate’’ includes a 

regulation that ‘‘would impose an 

enforceable duty upon the private 

sector, except (i) a condition of Federal 

assistance or (ii) a duty arising from 

participation in a voluntary Federal 

program.’’ 

The designation of critical habitat 

does not impose a legally binding duty 

on non-Federal Government entities or 

private parties. Under the Act, the only 

regulatory effect is that Federal agencies 

must ensure that their actions do not 

destroy or adversely modify critical 

habitat under section 7. While nonFederal entities that receive Federal 

funding, assistance, permits, or 

otherwise require approval or 

authorization from a Federal agency for 

an action may be indirectly impacted by 

the designation of critical habitat, the 

legally binding duty to avoid 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat rests squarely on the 

Federal agency. Furthermore, to the 

extent that non-Federal entities are 

indirectly impacted because they 

receive Federal assistance or participate 

in a voluntary Federal aid program, the 

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act would 

not apply, nor would critical habitat 

shift the costs of the large entitlement 

programs listed above onto State 

governments. 

(2) Based in part on an analysis 

conducted for the previous designation 

of critical habitat and extrapolated to 

this designation, we do not expect this 

rule to significantly or uniquely affect 

small governments. Small governments 

will be affected only to the extent that 

any programs having Federal funds, 

permits, or other authorized activities 

must ensure that their actions will not 

adversely affect the critical habitat. 

Therefore, a Small Government Agency 

Plan is not required. However, as we 

conduct our economic analysis for the 

revised rule, we will further evaluate 

this issue and revise this assessment if 

appropriate. 

Takings—Executive Order 12630 

In accordance with E.O. 12630 

(Government Actions and Interference 

with Constitutionally Protected Private 

Property Rights), we have analyzed the 

potential takings implications of 

designating critical habitat for 

Navarretia fossalis in a takings 

implications assessment. The takings 

implications assessment concludes that 

this designation of critical habitat for N. 

fossalis does not pose significant takings 

implications for lands within or affected 

by the designation. 

Federalism—Executive Order 13132 

In accordance with E.O. 13132 

(Federalism), this proposed rule does 

not have significant Federalism effects. 

A Federalism assessment is not 

required. In keeping with Department of 

the Interior and Department of 

Commerce policy, we requested 

information from, and coordinated 

development of this proposed critical 

habitat designation with, appropriate 

State resource agencies in California. 

The designation may have some benefit 

to these governments because the areas 

that contain the features essential to the 

conservation of the species are more 

clearly defined, and the primary 

constituent elements of the habitat 

necessary to the conservation of the 

species are specifically identified. This 

information does not alter where and 

what federally sponsored activities may 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27619 

occur. However, it may assist these local 

governments in long-range planning 

(because these local governments no 

longer have to wait for case-by-case 

section 7 consultations to occur). 

Where State and local governments 

require approval or authorization from a 

Federal agency for actions that may 

affect critical habitat, consultation 

under section 7(a)(2) would be required. 

While non-Federal entities that receive 

Federal funding, assistance, or permits, 

or that otherwise require approval or 

authorization from a Federal agency for 

an action, may be indirectly impacted 

by the designation of critical habitat, the 

legally binding duty to avoid 

destruction or adverse modification of 

critical habitat rests squarely on the 

Federal agency. 

Civil Justice Reform—Executive Order 

12988 

In accordance with Executive Order 

12988 (Civil Justice Reform), it has been 

determined that the rule does not 

unduly burden the judicial system and 

that it meets the requirements of 

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

We have proposed to revise critical 

habitat in accordance with the 

provisions of the Act. This proposed 

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 Navarretia fossalis. 

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) 

This rule does not contain any new 

collections of information that require 

approval by OMB under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 

et seq.). This rule will not impose 

recordkeeping or reporting requirements 

on State or local governments, 

individuals, businesses, or 

organizations. An agency may not 

conduct or sponsor, and a person is not 

required to respond to, a collection of 

information unless it displays a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

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

It is our position that, outside the 

jurisdiction of the U.S. Court of Appeals 

for the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to 

prepare environmental analyses as 

defined by NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et 

seq.) in connection with designating 

critical habitat under the Act. We 

published a notice outlining our reasons 

for this determination in the Federal 

Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 

49244). This position was upheld by the 

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth 

Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 

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

516 U.S. 1042 (1996)). 

Clarity of the Rule 

We are required by Executive Orders 

12866 and 12988 and by the 

Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 

1998, to write all rules in plain 

language. This means that each rule we 

publish must: 

(1) Be logically organized; 

(2) Use the active voice to address 

readers directly; 

(3) Use clear language rather than 

jargon; 

(4) Be divided into short sections and 

sentences; and 

(5) Use lists and tables wherever 

possible. 

If you feel that we have not met these 

requirements, send us comments by one 

of the methods listed in the ADDRESSES

section. To better help us revise the 

rule, your comments should be as 

specific as possible. For example, you 

should tell us the numbers of the 

sections or paragraphs that are unclearly 

written, which sections or sentences are 

too long, the sections where you feel 

lists or tables would be useful, etc. 

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), E.O. 13175, 

and the Department of the Interior’s 

manual at 512 DM 2, we have a 

responsibility to communicate 

meaningfully with recognized Federal 

Tribes on a government-to-government 

basis. In accordance with Secretarial 

Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American 

Indian Tribal Rights, Federal-Tribal 

Trust Responsibilities, and the 

Endangered Species Act), we readily 

acknowledge our responsibilities to 

work directly with Tribes in developing 

programs for healthy ecosystems, to 

acknowledge that tribal lands are not 

subject to the same controls as Federal 

public lands, to remain sensitive to 

Indian culture, and to make information 

available to Tribes. 

We determined that there are no tribal 

lands occupied at the time of listing that 

contain the features essential for the 

conservation of the species, nor are 

there any unoccupied tribal lands that 

are essential for the conservation of 

Navarretia fossalis. Therefore, critical 

habitat for N. fossalis is not being 

proposed on tribal lands. We will 

continue to coordinate with Tribal 

governments as applicable during the 

designation process. 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use— 

Executive Order 13211 

On May 18, 2001, the President issued 

an Executive Order (E.O. 13211; Actions 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use) on regulations that 

significantly affect energy supply, 

distribution, and use. E.O. 13211 

requires agencies to prepare Statements 

of Energy Effects when undertaking 

certain actions. Based on an analysis 

conducted for the previous designation 

of critical habitat and extrapolated to 

this designation, along with a further 

analysis of the additional areas included 

in this revision, we determined that this 

proposed rule to designate critical 

habitat for Navarretia fossalis is not 

expected to significantly affect energy 

supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, 

this action is not a significant energy 

action, and no Statement of Energy 

Effects is required. However, we will 

further evaluate this issue as we 

conduct our economic analysis, and we 

will review and revise this assessment 

as warranted. 

References Cited 

A complete list of all references cited 

in this rulemaking is available on 

http://www.regulations.gov and upon 

request from the Field Supervisor, 

Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT

section). 

Author(s) 

The primary author of this notice is 

the staff from the Carlsbad Fish and 

Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT 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 § 17.96(a), revise the entry for 

‘‘Navarretia fossalis (spreading 

navarretia)’’ under family 

Polemoniaceae to read as follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
27620 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

§ 17.96 Critical habitat—plants. 

(a) Flowering plants. 

* * * * * 

Family Polemoniaceae: Navarretia 

fossalis (spreading navarretia) 

(1) Critical habitat units are depicted 

for Los Angeles, Riverside, and San 

Diego Counties, California, on the maps 

below. 

(2) Within these areas, the primary 

constituent elements (PCE) for 

Navarretia fossalis consist of three 

components: 

(i) PCE 1—Ephemeral wetland 

habitat. Vernal pools (up to 10 ac (4 ha)) 

and seasonally flooded alkali vernal 

plains that become inundated by the 

winter rains and hold water or have 

saturated soils for 2 weeks to 6 months 

during a year with average rainfall. This 

period of inundation is long enough to 

promote germination, flowering, and 

seed production for N. fossalis and other 

native species typical of vernal pool and 

seasonally flooded alkali vernal plain 

habitat, but not so long that true 

wetland species inhabit the areas. 

(ii) PCE 2—Intermixed wetland and 

upland habitats that act as the local 

watershed. Areas characterized by 

mounds, swales, and depressions within 

a matrix of upland habitat that result in 

intermittently flowing surface and 

subsurface water in swales, drainages, 

and pools that support the habitat 

described in PCE 1, and provide the 

water that allows for the inundation 

described in PCE 1. 

(iii) PCE3—Soils that support ponding 

during winter and spring. Soils found in 

areas characterized in PCE 2 that allow 

for ponding of water because they have 

a clay component or other property that 

creates an impermeable surface or 

subsurface layer. The properties of these 

soils contribute to reduced percolation 

and minimal run-off of water, all of 

which lead to supporting the habitat 

and period of inundation described in 

PCE 1. These soil types are known to 

include, but are not limited to: CienebaPismo-Caperton soils in Los Angeles 

County; Domino, Traver, and Willows 

soils in Riverside County; and 

Huerhuero, Placentia, Olivenhain, 

Stockpen, and Redding soils in San 

Diego County. 

(3) Critical habitat does not include 

manmade structures existing on the 

effective date of this rule and not 

containing one of more of the primary 

constituent elements, such as buildings, 

aqueducts, airports, and roads, and the 

land on which such structures are 

located. 

(4) Critical habitat map units. Data 

layers defining map units were created 

using a base of U.S. Geological Survey 

7.5′ quadrangle maps. Critical habitat 

units were then mapped using Universal 

Transverse Mercator (UTM) zone 11, 

North American Datum (NAD) 1983 

coordinates. 

(5) Note: Index Map of critical habitat 

units for Navarretia fossalis (spreading 

navarretia) follows: 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27621 

(6) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin—Orange 

Management Area, Los Angeles County, 

CA. Subunit 1A: Cruzan Mesa. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 1A.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Subunit 1A (Cruzan 

Mesa) is at paragraph (7)(ii) of this 

entry. 

(7) Unit 1: Los Angeles Basin—Orange 

Management Area, Los Angeles County, 

CA. Subunit 1B: Plum Canyon. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 1B.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Los Angeles Basin— 

Orange Management Area Subunits 1A 

(Cruzan Mesa) and 1B (Plum Canyon) 

follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.000</GPH>
27622 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(8) Unit 2: San Diego: Northern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area— 

Poinsettia Lane Commuter Station, San 

Diego County, CA. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Unit 2.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 2 (Poinsettia 

Lane Commuter Station) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.001</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27623 

(9) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal 

Mesa Management Area, San Diego 

County, CA. Subunit 3A: Santa Fe 

Valley: Crosby Estates. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 3A.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3A 

(Santa Fe Valley: Crosby Estates) 

follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.002</GPH>
27624 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(10) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal 

Mesa Management Area, San Diego 

County, CA. Subunit 3B: Carroll 

Canyon. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 3B.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3B 

(Carroll Canyon) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.003</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27625 

(11) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal 

Mesa Management Area, San Diego 

County, CA. Subunit 3C: Nobel Drive. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 3C.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3C 

(Nobel Drive) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.004</GPH>
27626 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(12) Unit 3: San Diego: Central Coastal 

Mesa Management Area, San Diego 

County, CA. Subunit 3D: Montgomery 

Field. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 3D.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 3, Subunit 3D 

(Montgomery Field) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.005</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27627 

(13) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland 

Management Area, San Diego County, 

CA. Subunit 4C1: San Marcos (Upham). 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 4C1.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C1 

is at paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(14) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland 

Management Area, San Diego County, 

CA. Subunit 4C2: San Marcos (Universal 

Boot). 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 4C2.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4C2 

is at paragraph (15)(ii) of this entry. 

(15) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland 

Management Area, San Diego County, 

CA. Subunit 4D: San Marcos (Bent 

Avenue). 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 4D.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunits 

4C1, 4C2, and 4D (San Marcos) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.006</GPH>
27628 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(16) Unit 4: San Diego: Inland 

Management Area, San Diego County, 

CA. Subunit 4E: Ramona. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 4E.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 4, Subunit 4E 

(Ramona) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.007</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27629 

(17) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5A: 

Sweetwater Vernal Pools. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5A.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5A 

(Sweetwater Vernal Pools) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.008</GPH>
27630 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(18) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5B: Otay 

River Valley. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5B.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5B 

(Otay River Valley) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.009</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27631 

(19) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5F: Proctor 

Valley. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5F.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5F 

(Proctor Valley) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.010</GPH>
27632 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(20) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5G: Otay 

Lakes. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5G.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5G 

(Otay Lakes) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.011</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27633 

(21) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5H: Western 

Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5H.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5H 

(Western Otay Mesa Vernal Pool 

Complexes) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.012</GPH>
27634 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(22) Unit 5: San Diego: Southern 

Coastal Mesa Management Area, San 

Diego County, CA. Subunit 5I: Eastern 

Otay Mesa Vernal Pool Complexes. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 5I.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 5, Subunit 5I 

(Eastern Otay Mesa Vernal Pool 

Complexes) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.013</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27635 

(23) Unit 6: Riverside Management 

Area, Riverside County, CA. Subunit 

6A: San Jacinto River. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 6A.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6A 

(San Jacinto River) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.014</GPH>
27636 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(24) Unit 6: Riverside Management 

Area, Riverside County, CA. Subunit 6B: 

Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali 

Plain. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 6B.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6B 

(Salt Creek Seasonally Flooded Alkali 

Plain) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.015</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27637 

(25) Unit 6: Riverside Management 

Area, Riverside County, CA. Subunit 6C: 

Wickerd and Scott Road Pools. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 6C.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6C 

(Wickerd and Scott Road Pools) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.016</GPH>
27638 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

(26) Unit 6: Riverside Management 

Area, Riverside County, CA. Subunit 

6D: Skunk Hollow. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 6D.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6D 

(Skunk Hollow) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.017</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 27639 

(27) Unit 6: Riverside Management 

Area, Riverside County, CA. Subunit 6E: 

Mesa de Burro. 

(i) [Reserved for textual description of 

Subunit 6E.] 

(ii) Note: Map of Unit 6, Subunit 6E 

(Mesa de Burro) follows: 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.018</GPH>
27640 Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 110 / Wednesday, June 10, 2009 / Proposed Rules 

* * * * * Dated: May 27, 2009. 

Jane Lyder, 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and 

Wildlife and Parks. 

[FR Doc. E9–13013 Filed 6–9–09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–C 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with PROPOSALSEP10JN09.019</GPH>