Full Federal Register notice here: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/E8-29671.htm
[Federal Register: December 19, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 245)]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R8-ES-2008-0006; 92210-1117-0000 B4]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revised
Designation of Critical Habitat for the Quino Checkerspot Butterfly
(Euphydryas editha quino)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of comment period, notice of
availability of draft economic analysis, and amended required
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
reopening of the comment period on our January 17, 2008, proposed
revised designation of critical habitat for the Quino checkerspot
butterfly under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We also announce the availability of the draft economic analysis (DEA),
a revision to proposed critical habitat Unit 2, and an amended required
determinations section of the proposal. We are reopening the comment
period to allow all interested parties an opportunity to comment
simultaneously on the proposed revision of critical habitat (including
the changes to proposed critical habitat Unit 2), the associated DEA,
and the amended required determinations section. If you submitted
comments previously, then you do not need to resubmit them because they
are included in the public record for this rulemaking and we will fully
consider them in preparation of our final determination.
DATES: We will accept comments received on or before January 20, 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.
U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing,
Attn: RIN 1018-AV23; Division of Policy and Directives Management; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington,
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)
We will accept written comments and information during this
reopened comment period on our proposed revision to critical habitat
for the Quino checkerspot butterfly published in the Federal Register
on January 17, 2008 (73 FR 3328), as revised by this notice, the DEA of
the proposed revised designation, and the amended required
determinations provided in this document. We will consider information
and recommendations from all interested parties. We are particularly
interested in comments concerning:
(1) The reasons why we should or should not designate habitat as
critical habitat under section 4 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
including whether there are threats to the subspecies from human
activity, the degree of which can be expected to increase due to the
designation, and whether that increase in threat outweighs the benefit
of designation such that the designation of critical habitat is not
(2) Specific information on:
The amount and distribution of Quino checkerspot butterfly
Locations within the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing that contain features essential to the conservation of
the subspecies that we should include in the designation and why, and
Locations not within the geographical area occupied at the
time of listing that are essential to the conservation of the
subspecies and why.
(3) Land use designations and current or planned activities in the
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed revised critical
(4) Probable economic, national security, or other impacts of
designating particular areas as critical habitat. We are particularly
interested in any impacts on small entities, and the benefits of
including or excluding areas that exhibit these impacts.
(5) The potential exclusion of non-Federal lands covered by the
City of Chula Vista Subarea Plan (under the San Diego County Multiple
Species Conservation Program) from final revised critical habitat, and
whether such exclusion is appropriate and why.
(6) The potential exclusion of non-Federal lands covered by the
Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan
(MSHCP) from final revised critical habitat, and whether such exclusion
is appropriate and why. (Please note that although Tribal lands and
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWDSC) lands are
located within the geographic boundary/area covered by the MSHCP, they
are not a part of the MSHCP).
(7) Inclusion of all proposed MWDSC lands in the final critical
habitat designation, and whether inclusion is appropriate and why.
Through a mapping error we included MWDSC lands in Figure 2 of the
proposed revised rule (73 FR 3328, January 17, 2008) that depicted
areas considered for exclusion from critical habitat. Our intent was
not to group these non-Federal lands with other lands considered for
exclusion. We did not specify in the proposed revised rule that MWDSC
would not be excluded from the final critical habitat designation. As
noted in question 6 above, MWDSC is not a signatory to the MSHCP even
though their non-Federal lands occur within the MSHCP plan area.
Whether we should include or exclude Tribal lands of the
Cahuilla Band of Mission Indians (preferred name ``Cahuilla Band of
Indians'') and Ramona Band of Cahuilla Mission Indians of California
(preferred name ``Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians'') in Riverside
County, and Campo Band of Diegueno Mission Indians (preferred name
``Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians'') in San Diego County from final
revised critical habitat and why. Economic impacts to the Cahuilla Band
of Indians and the Campo Band of Kumeyaay Indians are analyzed in this
DEA. During the first public comment period for proposed revisions to
critical habitat that opened January 17, 2008, and closed March 17,
2008, we received a letter from the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians
informing us that land proposed for critical habitat included tribally-
owned fee lands of the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians. These tribally
owned fee lands were classified as privately owned in Table 2 of the
proposed revisions to critical habitat, therefore economic impacts to
the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians are not analyzed in the DEA.
economic impacts to the Ramona Band of Cahuilla Indians will be
analyzed in the final EA, and will be taken into consideration for
possible exclusion from the final revised critical habitat.
(9) Whether there are areas we previously designated, but did not
include in our proposed revision to critical habitat, that should be
designated as critical habitat.
(10) Information on the extent to which any Federal, State, and
local environmental protection measures we reference in the DEA were
adopted largely as a result of the subspecies' listing.
(11) Information on whether the DEA identifies all Federal, State,
and local costs and benefits attributable to the proposed revision of
critical habitat, and information on any costs or benefits that we may
(12) Information on whether the DEA makes appropriate assumptions
regarding current practices and any regulatory changes that likely may
occur if we designate revised critical habitat.
(13) Information on whether the DEA correctly assesses the effect
on regional costs associated with any land use controls that may result
from the revised designation of critical habitat.
(14) Information on areas that the revised critical habitat
designation could potentially impact to a disproportionate degree.
(15) Information on whether the DEA identifies all costs that could
result from the proposed revised designation.
(16) Information on any quantifiable economic benefits of the
(17) Whether the benefits of excluding any particular area outweigh
the benefits of including that area under section 4(b)(2) of the Act.
(18) Economic data on the incremental costs of designating a
particular area as revised critical habitat.
(19) Whether we could improve or modify our approach to designating
critical habitat to provide for greater public participation and
understanding, or assist us in accommodating public concerns and
(20) Any foreseeable impacts on energy supplies, distribution, and
use resulting from the proposed designation and, in particular, any
impacts on electricity production, and the benefits of including or
excluding areas that exhibit these impacts.
If you submitted comments or information on the proposed revised
rule (73 FR 3328) during the initial comment period from January 17,
2008, to March 17, 2008, please do not resubmit them. These comments
are included in the public record for this rulemaking and we will fully
consider them in the preparation of our final determination. Our final
determination concerning revised critical habitat will take into
consideration all written comments and any additional information we
receive during both comment periods. On the basis of public comments,
we may, during the development of our final determination, find that
areas within those proposed do not meet the definition of critical
habitat, that some modifications to the described boundaries are
appropriate, or that areas are appropriate for exclusion under section
4(b)(2) of the Act.
You may submit your comments and materials concerning the proposed
revised rule or DEA 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
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed revised rule, will be
available for public inspection on http://www.regulations.gov
, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER
You may obtain copies of the original proposed revision of critical
habitat and the DEA on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov
by mail from the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER