Cities Index.
032123-C-8 Corresp. Sakashita.pdf

Long Beach City Council
March 21, 2023

Document
032123-C-8 Corresp. Sakashita.pdf
Meeting
March 21, 2023
Body
Long Beach City Council
Original file
26.8 MB
Text extracted from the city's file for reading and search. Open the original on longbeach.legistar.com. That file is the official record.

El Callejon Creek (34.5475, –120.2701);
El Jaro Creek (34.5327, –120.2861);
Llanito Creek (34.5499, –120.2762);
Salsipuedes Creek (34.5711, –120.4076).
(iii) Santa Ynez, Zaca Hydrologic
Sub-area 331430. Outlet(s) = Santa Ynez
River (Lat 34.6172, Long –120.2352)
upstream.
(iv) Santa Ynez to Bradbury
Hydrologic Sub-area 331440. Outlet(s) =
Santa Ynez River (Lat 34.5847, Long
–120.1445) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Alisal Creek (34.5465, –120.1358);
Hilton Creek (34.5839, –119.9855);
Quiota Creek (34.5370, –120.0321); San
Lucas Creek (34.5558, –120.0119); Santa
Ynez River (34.5829, –119.9805);
Unnamed Tributary (34.5646,
–120.0043).
(3) South Coast Hydrologic Unit
3315— (i) Arroyo Hondo Hydrologic
Sub-area 331510. Outlet(s) = Alegria
Creek (Lat 34.4688, Long –120.2720);
Arroyo Hondo Creek (34.4735,
–120.1415); Cojo Creek (34.4531,
–120.4165); Dos Pueblos Creek (34.4407,
–119.9646); El Capitan Creek (34.4577,
–120.0225); Gato Creek (34.4497,
–119.9885); Gaviota Creek (34.4706,
–120.2267); Jalama Creek (34.5119,
–120.5023); Refugio Creek (34.4627,
–120.0696); Sacate Creek (34.4708,
–120.2942); San Augustine Creek
(34.4588, –120.3542); San Onofre Creek
(34.4699, –120.1872); Santa Anita Creek
(34.4669, –120.3066); Tecolote Creek
(34.4306, –119.9173) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Alegria Creek (34.4713,
–120.2714); Arroyo Hondo Creek
(34.5112, –120.1704); Cojo Creek
(34.4840, –120.4106); Dos Pueblos Creek
(34.5230, –119.9249); El Capitan Creek
(34.5238, –119.9806); Escondido Creek
(34.5663, –120.4643); Gato Creek
(34.5203, –119.9758); Gaviota Creek
(34.5176, –120.2179); Jalama Creek
(34.5031, –120.3615); La Olla (34.4836,
–120.4071); Refugio Creek (34.5109,
–120.0508); Sacate Creek (34.4984,
–120.2993); San Augustine Creek
(34.4598, –120.3561); San Onofre Creek
(34.4853, –120.1890); Santa Anita Creek
(34.4742, –120.3085); Tecolote Creek
(34.5133, –119.9058); Unnamed
Tributary (34.5527, –120.4548);
Unnamed Tributary (34.4972,
–120.3026).
(ii) UCSB Slough Hydrologic Sub-area
331531. Outlet(s) = San Pedro Creek (Lat

34.4179, Long –119.8295); Tecolito
Creek (34.4179, –119.8295) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Atascadero Creek
(34.4345, –119.7755); Carneros Creek
(34.4674, –119.8584); Cieneguitas Creek
(34.4690, –119.7565); Glen Annie Creek
(34.4985, –119.8666); Maria Ygnacio
Creek (34.4900, –119.7830); San
Antonio Creek (34.4553, –119.7826);
San Pedro Creek (34.4774, –119.8359);
San Jose Creek (34.4919, –119.8032);
Tecolito Creek (34.4478, –119.8763);
Unnamed Tributary (34.4774,
–119.8846).
(iii) Mission Hydrologic Sub-area
331532. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Burro Creek
(Lat 34.4023, Long –119.7430); Mission
Creek (34.4124, –119.6876); Sycamore
Creek (34.4166, –119.6668) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Burro Creek
(34.4620, –119.7461); Mission Creek
(34.4482, –119.7089); Rattlesnake Creek
(34.4633, –119.6902); San Roque Creek
(34.4530, –119.7323); Sycamore Creek
(34.4609, –119.6841).
(iv) San Ysidro Hydrologic Sub-area
331533. Outlet(s) = Montecito Creek (Lat

34.4167, Long –119.6344); Romero
Creek (34.4186, –119.6208); San Ysidro
Creek (34.4191, –119.6254); upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Cold Springs Creek
(34.4794, –119.6604); Montecito Creek
(34.4594, –119.6542); Romero Creek
(34.4452, –119.5924); San Ysidro Creek
(34.4686, –119.6229); Unnamed
Tributary (34.4753, –119.6437).
(v) Carpinteria Hydrologic Sub-area
331534. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Paredon (Lat

34.4146, Long –119.5561); Carpenteria
Lagoon (Carpenteria Creek) (34.3904,
–119.5204); Rincon Lagoon (Rincon
Creek) (34.3733, –119.4769) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Paredon
(34.4371, –119.5481); Carpinteria Creek
(34.4429, –119.4964); El Dorado Creek
(34.4682, –119.4809); Gobernador Creek
(34.4249, –119.4746); Rincon Lagoon
(Rincon Creek) (34.3757, –119.4777);
Steer Creek (34.4687, –119.4596);
Unnamed Tributary (34.4481,
–119.5112).
(4) Ventura River Hydrologic Unit
4402— (i) Ventura Hydrologic Sub-area
440210. Outlet(s) = Ventura Estuary
(Ventura River) (Lat 34.2742, Long
–119.3077) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Canada Larga (34.3675, –119.2377);
Hammond Canyon (34.3903,
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00094 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52581 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations –119.2230); Sulphur Canyon (34.3727,
–119.2362); Unnamed Tributary
(34.3344, –119.2426); Unnamed
Tributary (34.3901, –119.2747).
(ii) Ventura Hydrologic Sub-area
440220. Outlet(s) = Ventura River (Lat

34.3517, Long –119.3069) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Coyote Creek (34.3735,
–119.3337); Matilija Creek (34.4846,
–119.3086); North Fork Matilija Creek
(34.5129, –119.2737); San Antonio
Creek (34.4224, –119.2644); Ventura
River (34.4852, –119.3001).
(iii) Lions Hydrologic Sub-area
440231. Outlet(s) = Lion Creek (Lat

34.4222, Long –119.2644) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Lion Creek (34.4331,
–119.2004).
(iv) Thatcher Hydrologic Sub-area
440232. Outlet(s) = San Antonio Creek
(Lat 34.4224, Long –119.2644) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: San Antonio Creek
(34.4370, –119.2417).
(5) Santa Clara Calleguas Hydrologic
Unit 4403— (i) Mouth of Santa Clara
Hydrologic Sub-area 440310. Outlet(s) =
Santa Clara River (Lat 34.2348, Long
–119.2568) upstream.
(ii) Santa Clara, Santa Paula
Hydrologic Sub-area 440321. Outlet(s) =
Santa Clara River (Lat 34.2731, Long
–119.1474) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Santa Paula Creek (34.4500, –119.0563).
(iii) Sisar Hydrologic Sub-area
440322. Outlet(s) = Sisar Creek (Lat

34.4271, Long –119.0908) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Sisar Creek (34.4615,
–119.1312).
(iv) Sespe, Santa Clara Hydrologic
Sub-area 440331. Outlet(s) = Santa Clara
River (Lat 34.3513, Long –119.0397)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Sespe Creek
(34.4509, –118.9258).
(v) Sespe Hydrologic Sub-area
440332. Outlet(s) = Sespe Creek (Lat

34.4509, Long –118.9258) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Abadi Creek (34.6099,
–119.4223); Alder Creek (34.5691,
–118.9528); Bear Creek (34.5314,
–119.1041); Chorro Grande Creek
(34.6285, –119.3245); Fourfork Creek
(34.4735, –118.8893); Howard Creek
(34.5459, –119.2154); Lady Bug Creek
(34.5724, –119.3173); Lion Creek
(34.5047, –119.1101); Little Sespe Creek
(34.4598, –118.8938); Munson Creek
(34.6152, –119.2963); Park Creek
(34.5537, –119.0028); Piedra Blanca
Creek (34.6109, –119.1838); Pine
Canyon Creek (34.4488, –118.9661);
Portrero John Creek (34.6010,
–119.2695); Red Reef Creek (34.5344,
–119.0441); Rose Valley Creek (34.5195,
–119.1756); Sespe Creek (34.6295,
–119.4412); Timber Creek (34.5184,
–119.0698); Trout Creek (34.5869,
–119.1360); Tule Creek (34.5614,
–119.2986); Unnamed Tributary
(34.5125, –118.9311); Unnamed
Tributary (34.5537, –119.0088);
Unnamed Tributary (34.5537,
–119.0048); Unnamed Tributary
(34.5757, –119.3051); Unnamed
Tributary (34.5988, –119.2736);
Unnamed Tributary (34.5691,
–119.3428); West Fork Sespe Creek
(34.5106, –119.0502).
(vi) Santa Clara, Hopper Canyon, Piru
Hydrologic Sub-area 440341. Outlet(s) =
Santa Clara River (Lat 34.3860, Long
–118.8711) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Hopper Creek (34.4263, –118.8309); Piru
Creek (34.4613, –118.7537); Santa Clara
River (34.3996, –118.7837).
(6) Santa Monica Bay Hydrologic Unit
4404— (i) Topanga Hydrologic Sub-area
440411. Outlet(s) = Topanga Creek (Lat

34.0397, Long –118.5831) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Topanga Creek (34.0838,
–118.5980).
(ii) Malibu Hydrologic Sub-area
440421. Outlet(s) = Malibu Creek (Lat

34.0322, Long –118.6796) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Malibu Creek (34.0648,
–118.6987).
(iii) Arroyo Sequit Hydrologic Sub-
area 440444. Outlet(s) = Arroyo Sequit
(Lat 34.0445, Long –118.9338) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Arroyo Sequit
(34.0839, –118.9186); West Fork Arroyo
Sequit (34.0909, –118.9235).
(7) Calleguas Hydrologic Unit 4408—
(i) Calleguas Estuary Hydrologic Sub-
area 440813. Outlet(s) = Mugu Lagoon
(Calleguas Creek) (Lat 34.1093, Long
–119.0917) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Mugu Lagoon (Calleguas Creek) (Lat

34.1125, Long –119.0816).
(ii) [Reserved]
(8) San Juan Hydrologic Unit 4901—
(i) Middle Trabuco Hydrologic Sub-area
490123. Outlet(s) = Trabuco Creek (Lat

33.5165, Long –117.6727) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Trabuco Creek (33.5264,
–117.6700).
(ii) Lower San Juan Hydrologic Sub-
area 490127. Outlet(s) = San Juan Creek
(Lat 33.4621, Long –117.6842) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: San Juan Creek
(33.4929, –117.6610); Trabuco Creek
(33.5165, –117.6727).
(iii) San Mateo Hydrologic Sub-area
490140. Outlet(s) = San Mateo Creek
(Lat 33.3851, Long –117.5933) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: San Mateo Creek
(33.4779, –117.4386); San Mateo
Canyon (33.4957, –117.4522).
(9) Maps of critical habitat for the
Southern California Steelhead ESU
follow:

BILLING CODE 3510 –22P
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52582 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00096 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.028</GPH>
52583 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.029</GPH>
52584 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00098 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.030</GPH>
52585 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00099 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.031</GPH>
52586 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00100 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.032</GPH>
52587 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00101 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.033</GPH>
52588 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00102 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.034</GPH>
52589 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations BILLING CODE 3510 –22–C
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00103 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.035</GPH>
52590 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations (k) Central Valley Spring Run
Chinook Salmon (O. tshawytscha).

Critical habitat is designated to include
the areas defined in the following
CALWATER Hydrologic Units:
(1) Tehama Hydrologic Unit 5504— (i)
Lower Stony Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550410. Outlet(s) = Glenn-Colusa Canal
(Lat 39.6762, Long –122.0151); Stony
Creek (39.7122, –122.0072) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Glenn-Colusa Canal
(39.7122, –122.0072); Stony Creek
(39.8178, –122.3253).
(ii) Red Bluff Hydrologic Sub-area
550420. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 39.6998, Long –121.9419) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Antelope Creek
(40.2023, –122.1275); Big Chico Creek
(39.7757, –121.7525); Blue Tent Creek
(40.2284, –122.2551); Burch Creek
(39.8526, –122.1502); Butler Slough
(40.1579, –122.1320); Coyote Creek
(40.0929, –122.1621); Craig Creek
(40.1617, –122.1350); Deer Creek
(40.0144, –121.9481); Dibble Creek
(40.2003, –122.2420); Dye Creek
(40.0904, –122.0767); Elder Creek
(40.0526, –122.1717); Jewet Creek
(39.8913, –122.1005); Kusal Slough
(39.7577, –121.9699); Lindo Channel
(39.7623, –121.7923); McClure Creek
(40.0074, –122.1729); Mill Creek
(40.0550, –122.0317); Mud Creek
(39.7931, –121.8865); New Creek
(40.1873, –122.1350); Oat Creek
(40.0847, –122.1658); Pine Creek
(39.8760, –121.9777); Red Bank Creek
(40.1391, –122.2157); Reeds Creek
(40.1687, –122.2377); Rice Creek
(39.8495, –122.1626); Rock Creek
(39.8189, –121.9124); Salt Creek
(40.1869, –122.1845); Singer Creek
(39.9200, –121.9612); Thomes Creek
(39.8822, –122.5527); Toomes Creek
(39.9808, –122.0642); Unnamed
Tributary (39.8532, –122.1627);
Unnamed Tributary (40.1682,
–122.1459); Unnamed Tributary
(40.1867, –122.1353).
(2) Whitmore Hydrologic Unit 5507—
(i) Inks Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550711. Outlet(s) = Inks Creek (Lat

40.3305, Long –122.1520) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Inks Creek 40.3418,
–122.1332).
(ii) Battle Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550712 Outlet(s) = Battle Creek (Lat

40.4083, Long –122.1102) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Battle Creek (40.4228,
–121.9975); North Fork Battle Creek
(40.4746, –121.8436); South Fork Battle
Creek (40.3549, –121.6861).
(iii) Inwood Hydrologic Sub-area
550722. Outlet(s) = Bear Creek (Lat

40.4352, Long –122.2039) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Bear Creek (40.4859,
–122.1529); Dry Creek (40.4574,
–122.1993).
(3) Redding Hydrologic Unit 5508— (i)
Enterprise Flat Hydrologic Sub-area
550810. Outlet(s)= Sacramento River
(Lat 40.2526, Long –122.1707) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Anderson Creek
(40.3910, –122.1984); Ash Creek
(40.4451, –122.1815); Battle Creek
(40.4083, –122.1102); Churn Creek
(40.5431, –122.3395); Clear Creek
(40.5158, –122.5256); Cow Creek
(40.5438, –122.1318); Olney Creek
(40.5262, –122.3783); Paynes Creek
(40.2810, –122.1587); Stillwater Creek
(40.4789, –122.2597).
(ii) Lower Cottonwood Hydrologic
Sub-area 550820. Outlet(s) =
Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3777, Long
–122.1991) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Cottonwood Creek (40.3943, –122.5254);
Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek
(40.3314, –122.6663); South Fork
Cottonwood Creek (40.1578, –122.5809).
(4) Eastern Tehama Hydrologic Unit
5509— (i) Big Chico Creek Hydrologic
Sub-area 550914. Outlet(s) = Big Chico
Creek (Lat 39.7757, Long –121.7525)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Big Chico
Creek (39.8873, –121.6979).
(ii) Deer Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550920. Outlet(s) = Deer Creek (Lat

40.0144, Long –121.9481) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Deer Creek (40.2019,
–121.5130).
(iii) Upper Mill Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550942. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat

40.0550, Long –122.0317) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Mill Creek (40.3997,
–121.5131).
(iv) Antelope Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550963. Outlet(s) = Antelope Creek
(Lat 40.2023, Long –122.1272) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Antelope Creek
(40.2416, –121.8630); North Fork
Antelope Creek (40.2691, –121.8226);
South Fork Antelope Creek (40.2309,
–121.8325).
(5) Sacramento Delta Hydrologic Unit
5510— (i) Sacramento Delta Hydrologic
Sub-area 551000. Outlet(s) =
Sacramento River (Lat 38.0612, Long
–121.7948) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Cache Slough (38.3086, –121.7633);
Delta Cross Channel (38.2433,
–121.4964); Elk Slough (38.4140,
–121.5212); Elkhorn Slough (38.2898,
–121.6271); Georgiana Slough (38.2401,
–121.5172); Miners Slough (38.2864,
–121.6051); Prospect Slough (38.1477,
–121.6641); Sevenmile Slough (38.1171,
–121.6298); Steamboat Slough (38.3052,
–121.5737); Sutter Slough (38.3321,
–121.5838); Threemile Slough (38.1155,
–121.6835); Yolo Bypass (38.5800,
–121.5838).
(ii) [Reserved]
(6) Valley-Putah-Cache Hydrologic
Unit 5511— (i) Lower Putah Creek
Hydrologic Sub-area 551120. Outlet(s) =
Yolo Bypass (Lat 38.5800, Long
–121.5838) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Sacramento Bypass (38.6057,
–121.5563); Yolo Bypass (38.7627,
–121.6325).
(ii) [Reserved]
(7) Marysville Hydrologic Unit 5515—
(i) Lower Yuba River Hydrologic Sub-
area 551510. Outlet(s) = Bear River (Lat

38.9398, Long –121.5790) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Bear River (38.9783,
–121.5166).
(ii) Lower Yuba River Hydrologic Sub-
area 551530. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat

39.1270, Long –121.5981) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2203,
–121.3314).
(iii) Lower Feather River Hydrologic
Sub-area 551540. Outlet(s) = Feather
River (Lat 39.1270, Long –121.5981)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather
River (39.5203, –121.5475).
(8) Yuba River Hydrologic Unit
5517— (i) Browns Valley Hydrologic
Sub-Area 551712. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek
(Lat 39.2207, Long –121.4088); Yuba
River (39.2203, –121.3314) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Dry Creek (39.3201,
–121.3117); Yuba River (39.2305,
–121.2813).
(ii) Englebright Hydrologic Sub-area
551714. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat

39.2305, Long –121.2813) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2388,
–121.2698).
(9) Valley-American Hydrologic Unit
5519— (i) Lower American Hydrologic
Sub-area 551921. Outlet(s) = American
River (Lat 38.5971, Long –121.5088)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: American
River (38.5669, –121.3827).
(ii) Pleasant Grove Hydrologic Sub-
area 551922. Outlet(s) = Sacramento
River (Lat 38.5965, Long –121.5086)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather
River (39.1270, –121.5981).
(10) Colusa Basin Hydrologic Unit
5520— (i) Sycamore-Sutter Hydrologic
Sub-area 552010. Outlet(s) =
Sacramento River (Lat 38.7604, Long
–121.6767) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Tisdale Bypass (39.0261, –121.7456).
(ii) Sutter Bypass Hydrologic Sub-area
552030. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 38.7849, Long –121.6219) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek (39.1987,
–121.9285); Butte Slough (39.1987,
–121.9285); Nelson Slough (38.8901,
–121.6352); Sacramento Slough
(38.7843, –121.6544); Sutter Bypass
(39.1417, –121.8196; 39.1484,
–121.8386); Tisdale Bypass (39.0261,
–121.7456); Unnamed Tributary
(39.1586, –121.8747).
(iii) Butte Basin Hydrologic Sub-area
552040. Outlet(s) = Butte Creek (Lat

39.1990, Long –121.9286); Sacramento
River (39.4141, –122.0087) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Butte creek (39.7095,
–121.7506); Colusa Bypass (39.2276,
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00104 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52591 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations –121.9402); Unnamed Tributary
(39.6762, –122.0151).
(11) Butte Creek Hydrologic Unit
5521— Upper Little Chico Hydrologic
Sub-area 552130. Outlet(s) = Butte
Creek (Lat 39.7096, –121.7504)
upstream to endpoint(s) in Butte Creek
(39.8665, –121.6344).
(12) Shasta Bally Hydrologic Unit
5524— (i) Platina Hydrologic Sub-area
552436. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork
Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3314,
–122.6663) upstream to endpoint(s) in
Beegum Creek (40.3066, –122.9205);
Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek
(40.3655, –122.7451).
(ii) Spring Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
552440. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 40.5943, Long –122.4343) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Sacramento River
(40.6116, –122.4462)
(iii) Kanaka Peak Hydrologic Sub-area
552462. Outlet(s) = Clear Creek (Lat

40.5158, Long –122.5256) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Clear Creek (40.5992,
–122.5394).
(13) Maps of critical habitat for the
Central Valley Spring Run Chinook ESU
follow:

BILLING CODE 3510 –22–P
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00105 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52592 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00106 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.036</GPH>
52593 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00107 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.037</GPH>
52594 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00108 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.038</GPH>
52595 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00109 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.039</GPH>
52596 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00110 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.040</GPH>
52597 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00111 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.041</GPH>
52598 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00112 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.042</GPH>
52599 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00113 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.043</GPH>
52600 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00114 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.044</GPH>
52601 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00115 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.045</GPH>
52602 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00116 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.046</GPH>
52603 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations BILLING CODE 3510 –22–C
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00117 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.047</GPH>
52604 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations (l) Central Valley steelhead (O.
mykiss). Critical habitat is designated to
include the areas defined in the
following CALWATER Hydrologic
Units:
(1) Tehama Hydrologic Unit 5504— (i)
Lower Stony Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550410. Outlet(s) = Stony Creek (Lat

39.6760, Long –121.9732) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Stony Creek (39.8199,
–122.3391).
(ii) Red Bluff Hydrologic Sub-area
550420. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 39.6998, Long –121.9419) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Antelope Creek
(40.2023, –122.1272); Big Chico Creek
(39.7757, –121.7525); Blue Tent Creek
(40.2166, –122.2362); Burch Creek
(39.8495, –122.1615); Butler Slough
(40.1579, –122.1320); Craig Creek
(40.1617, –122.1350); Deer Creek
(40.0144, –121.9481); Dibble Creek
(40.2002, –122.2421); Dye Creek
(40.0910, –122.0719); Elder Creek
(40.0438, –122.2133); Lindo Channel
(39.7623, –121.7923); McClure Creek
(40.0074, –122.1723); Mill Creek
(40.0550, –122.0317); Mud Creek
(39.7985, –121.8803); New Creek
(40.1873, –122.1350); Oat Creek
(40.0769, –122.2168); Red Bank Creek
(40.1421, –122.2399); Rice Creek
(39.8495, –122.1615); Rock Creek
(39.8034, –121.9403); Salt Creek
(40.1572, –122.1646); Thomes Creek
(39.8822, –122.5527); Unnamed
Tributary (40.1867, –122.1353);
Unnamed Tributary (40.1682,
–122.1459); Unnamed Tributary
(40.1143, –122.1259); Unnamed
Tributary (40.0151, –122.1148);
Unnamed Tributary (40.0403,
–122.1009); Unnamed Tributary
(40.0514, –122.0851); Unnamed
Tributary (40.0530, –122.0769).
(2) Whitmore Hydrologic Unit 5507—
(i) Inks Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550711. Outlet(s) = Inks Creek (Lat

40.3305, Long –122.1520) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Inks Creek (40.3418,
–122.1332).
(ii) Battle Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550712. Outlet(s) = Battle Creek (Lat

40.4083, Long –122.1102) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Baldwin Creek (40.4369,
–121.9885); Battle Creek (40.4228,
–121.9975); Brush Creek (40.4913,
–121.8664); Millseat Creek (40.4808,
–121.8526); Morgan Creek (40.3654,
–121.9132); North Fork Battle Creek
(40.4877, –121.8185); Panther Creek
(40.3897, –121.6106); South Ditch
(40.3997, –121.9223); Ripley Creek
(40.4099, –121.8683); Soap Creek
(40.3904, –121.7569); South Fork Battle
Creek (40.3531, –121.6682); Unnamed
Tributary (40.3567, –121.8293);
Unnamed Tributary (40.4592,
–121.8671).
(iii) Ash Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550721. Outlet(s) = Ash Creek (Lat

40.4401, Long –122.1375) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (40.4628,
–122.0066).
(iv) Inwood Hydrologic Sub-area
550722. Outlet(s) = Ash Creek (Lat

40.4628, Long –122.0066); Bear Creek
(40.4352, –122.2039) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (40.4859,
–121.8993); Bear Creek (40.5368,
–121.9560); North Fork Bear Creek
(40.5736, –121.8683).
(v) South Cow Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550731. Outlet(s) = South Cow
Creek (Lat 40.5438, Long –122.1318)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: South Cow
Creek (40.6023, –121.8623).
(vi) Old Cow Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550732. Outlet(s) = Clover Creek
(Lat 40.5788, Long –122.1252); Old Cow
Creek (40.5442, –122.1317) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Clover Creek (40.6305,
–122.0304); Old Cow Creek (40.6295,
–122.9619).
(vii) Little Cow Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550733. Outlet(s) = Little Cow
Creek (Lat 40.6148, –122.2271); Oak
Run Creek (40.6171, –122.1225)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Little Cow
Creek (40.7114, –122.0850); Oak Run
Creek (40.6379, –122.0856).
(3) Redding Hydrologic Unit 5508— (i)
Enterprise Flat Hydrologic Sub-area
550810. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 40.2526, Long –122.1707) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Ash Creek (40.4401,
–122.1375); Battle Creek (40.4083,
–122.1102); Bear Creek (40.4360,
–122.2036); Calaboose Creek (40.5742,
–122.4142); Canyon Creek (40.5532,
–122.3814); Churn Creek (40.5986,
–122.3418); Clear Creek (40.5158,
–122.5256); Clover Creek (40.5788,
–122.1252); Cottonwood Creek (40.3777,
–122.1991); Cow Creek (40.5437,
–122.1318); East Fork Stillwater Creek
(40.6495, –122.2934); Inks Creek
(40.3305, –122.1520); Jenny Creek
(40.5734, –122.4338); Little Cow Creek
(40.6148, –122.2271); Oak Run (40.6171,
–122.1225); Old Cow Creek (40.5442,
–122.1317); Olney Creek (40.5439,
–122.4687); Oregon Gulch (40.5463,
–122.3866); Paynes Creek (40.3024,
–122.1012); Stillwater Creek (40.6495,
–122.2934); Sulphur Creek (40.6164,
–122.4077).
(ii) Lower Cottonwood Hydrologic
Sub-area 550820. Outlet(s) =
Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3777, Long
–122.1991) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Cold Fork Cottonwood Creek (40.2060,
–122.6608); Cottonwood Creek (40.3943,
–122.5254); Middle Fork Cottonwood
Creek (40.3314, –122.6663); North Fork
Cottonwood Creek (40.4539, –122.5610);
South Fork Cottonwood Creek (40.1578,
–122.5809).
(4) Eastern Tehama Hydrologic Unit
5509— (i) Big Chico Creek Hydrologic
Sub-area 550914. Outlet(s) = Big Chico
Creek (Lat 39.7757, Long –121.7525)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Big Chico
Creek (39.8898, –121.6952).
(ii) Deer Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550920. Outlet(s) = Deer Creek (Lat

40.0142, Long –121.9476) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Deer Creek (40.2025,
–121.5130).
(iii) Upper Mill Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550942. Outlet(s) = Mill Creek (Lat

40.0550, Long –122.0317) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Mill Creek (40.3766,
–121.5098); Rocky Gulch Creek
(40.2888, –121.5997).
(iv) Dye Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
550962. Outlet(s) = Dye Creek (Lat

40.0910, Long –122.0719) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Dye Creek (40.0996,
–121.9612).
(v) Antelope Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 550963. Outlet(s) = Antelope Creek
(Lat 40.2023, Long –122.1272) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Antelope Creek
(40.2416, –121.8630); Middle Fork
Antelope Creek (40.2673, –121.7744);
North Fork Antelope Creek (40.2807,
–121.7645); South Fork Antelope Creek
(40.2521, –121.7575).
(5) Sacramento Delta Hydrologic Unit
5510— Sacramento Delta Hydrologic
Sub-area 551000. Outlet(s) =
Sacramento River (Lat 38.0653, Long
–121.8418) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Cache Slough (38.2984, –121.7490); Elk
Slough (38.4140, –121.5212); Elkhorn
Slough (38.2898, –121.6271); Georgiana
Slough (38.2401, –121.5172); Horseshoe
Bend (38.1078, –121.7117); Lindsey
Slough (38.2592, –121.7580); Miners
Slough (38.2864, –121.6051); Prospect
Slough (38.2830, –121.6641); Putah
Creek (38.5155, –121.5885); Sevenmile
Slough (38.1171, –121.6298);
Streamboat Slough (38.3052,
–121.5737); Sutter Slough (38.3321,
–121.5838); Threemile Slough (38.1155,
–121.6835); Ulatis Creek (38.2961,
–121.7835); Unnamed Tributary
(38.2937, –121.7803); Unnamed
Tributary (38.2937, –121.7804); Yolo
Bypass (38.5800, –121.5838).
(6) Valley-Putah-Cache Hydrologic
Unit 5511— Lower Putah Creek
Hydrologic Sub-area 551120. Outlet(s) =
Sacramento Bypass (Lat 38.6057, Long
–121.5563); Yolo Bypass (38.5800,
–121.5838) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Sacramento Bypass (38.5969,
–121.5888); Yolo Bypass (38.7627,
–121.6325).
(7) American River Hydrologic Unit
5514— Auburn Hydrologic Sub-area
551422. Outlet(s) = Auburn Ravine (Lat

38.8921, Long –121.2181); Coon Creek
(38.9891, –121.2556); Doty Creek
(38.9401, –121.2434) upstream to
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00118 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52605 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations endpoint(s) in: Auburn Ravine (38.8888,
–121.1151); Coon Creek (38.9659,
–121.1781); Doty Creek (38.9105,
–121.1244).
(8) Marysville Hydrologic Unit 5515—
(i) Lower Bear River Hydrologic Sub-
area 551510. Outlet(s) = Bear River (Lat

39.9398, Long –121.5790) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Bear River (39.0421,
–121.3319).
(ii) Lower Yuba River Hydrologic Sub-
area 551530. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat

39.1270, Long –121.5981) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2203,
–121.3314).
(iii) Lower Feather River Hydrologic
Sub-area 551540. Outlet(s) = Feather
River (Lat 39.1264, Long –121.5984)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Feather
River (39.5205, –121.5475).
(9) Yuba River Hydrologic Unit
5517— (i) Browns Valley Hydrologic
Sub-area 551712. Outlet(s) = Dry Creek
(Lat 39.2215, Long –1121.4082); Yuba
River (39.2203, –1121.3314) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Dry Creek (39.3232, Long
–1121.3155); Yuba River (39.2305,
–1121.2813).
(ii) Englebright Hydrologic Sub-area
551714. Outlet(s) = Yuba River (Lat

39.2305, Long –1121.2813) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Yuba River (39.2399,
–1121.2689).
(10) Valley American Hydrologic Unit
5519— (i) Lower American Hydrologic
Sub-area 551921. Outlet(s) = American
River (Lat 38.5971, –1121.5088)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: American
River (38.6373, –1121.2202); Dry Creek
(38.7554, –1121.2676); Miner’s Ravine
(38.8429, –1121.1178); Natomas East
Main Canal (38.6646, –1121.4770);
Secret Ravine(38.8541, –1121.1223).
(ii) Pleasant Grove Hydrologic Sub-
area 551922. Outlet(s) = Sacramento
River (Lat 38.6026, Long –1121.5155)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Auburn
Ravine (38.8913, –1121.2424); Coon
Creek (38.9883, –1121.2609); Doty Creek
(38.9392, –1121.2475); Feather River
(39.1264, –1121.5984).
(11) Colusa Basin Hydrologic Unit
5520— (i) Sycamore-Sutter Hydrologic
Sub-area 552010. Outlet(s) =
Sacramento River (Lat 38.7604, Long
–1121.6767) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Tisdale Bypass (39.0261, –1121.7456).
(ii) Sutter Bypass Hydrologic Sub-area
552030. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 38.7851, Long –1121.6238)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek
(39.1990, –1121.9286); Butte Slough
(39.1987, –1121.9285); Nelson Slough
(38.8956, –1121.6180); Sacramento
Slough (38.7844, –1121.6544); Sutter
Bypass (39.1586, –1121.8747).
(iii) Butte Basin Hydrologic Sub-area
552040. Outlet(s) = Butte Creek (Lat

39.1990, Long –1121.9286); Sacramento
River (39.4141, –1122.0087) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek (39.7096,
–1121.7504); Colusa Bypass (39.2276,
–1121.9402); Little Chico Creek
(39.7380, –1121.7490); Little Dry Creek
(39.6781, –1121.6580).
(12) Butte Creek Hydrologic Unit
5521— (i) Upper Dry Creek Hydrologic
Sub-area 552110. Outlet(s) = Little Dry
Creek (Lat 39.6781, –1121.6580)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Little Dry
Creek (39.7424, –1121.6213).
(ii) Upper Butte Creek Hydrologic
Sub-area 552120. Outlet(s) = Little
Chico Creek (Lat 39.7380, Long
–1121.7490) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Little Chico Creek (39.8680,
–1121.6660).
(iii) Upper Little Chico Hydrologic
Sub-area 552130. Outlet(s) = Butte
Creek (Lat 39.7096, Long –1121.7504)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Butte Creek
(39.8215, –1121.6468); Little Butte
Creek (39.8159, –1121.5819).
(13) Ball Mountain Hydrologic Unit
5523— Thomes Creek Hydrologic Sub-
area 552310. Outlet(s) = Thomes Creek
(39.8822, –1122.5527) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Doll Creek (39.8941,
–1122.9209); Fish Creek (40.0176,
–1122.8142); Snake Creek (39.9945,
–1122.7788); Thomes Creek (39.9455,
–1122.8491); Willow Creek (39.8941,
–1122.9209).
(14) Shasta Bally Hydrologic Unit
5524— (i) South Fork Hydrologic Sub-
area 552433. Outlet(s) = Cold Fork
Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.2060, Long
–1122.6608); South Fork Cottonwood
Creek (40.1578, –1122.5809) upstream
to endpoint(s) in: Cold Fork Cottonwood
Creek (40.1881, –1122.8690); South Fork
Cottonwood Creek (40.1232,
–1122.8761).
(ii) Platina Hydrologic Sub-area
552436. Outlet(s) = Middle Fork
Cottonwood Creek (Lat 40.3314, Long
–1122.6663) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Beegum Creek (40.3149, –1122.9776):

Middle Fork Cottonwood Creek
(40.3512, –1122.9629).
(iii) Spring Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
552440. Outlet(s) = Sacramento River
(Lat 40.5943, Long –1122.4343)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Middle
Creek (40.5904, –1121.4825); Rock
Creek (40.6155, –1122.4702);
Sacramento River (40.6116,
–1122.4462); Salt Creek (40.5830,
–1122.4586); Unnamed Tributary
(40.5734, –1122.4844).
(iv) Kanaka Peak Hydrologic Sub-area
552462. Outlet(s) = Clear Creek (Lat

40.5158, Long –1122.5256) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Clear Creek (40.5998,
122.5399).
(15) North Valley Floor Hydrologic
Unit 5531— (i) Lower Mokelumne
Hydrologic Sub-area 553120. Outlet(s) =
Mokelumne River (Lat 38.2104, Long
–1121.3804) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Mokelumne River (38.2263,
–1121.0241); Murphy Creek (38.2491,
–1121.0119).
(ii) Lower Calaveras Hydrologic Sub-
area 553130. Outlet(s) = Calaveras River
(Lat 37.9836, Long –1121.3110);
Mormon Slough (37.9456,-121.2907)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Calaveras
River (38.1025, –1120.8503); Mormon
Slough (38.0532, –1121.0102); Stockton
Diverting Canal (37.9594, –1121.2024).
(16) Upper Calaveras Hydrologic Unit
5533— New Hogan Reservoir Hydrologic
Sub-area 553310. Outlet(s) = Calaveras
River (Lat 38.1025, Long –1120.8503)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Calaveras
River (38.1502, –1120.8143).
(17) Stanislaus River Hydrologic Unit
5534— Table Mountain Hydrologic Sub-
area 553410. Outlet(s) = Stanislaus
River (Lat 37.8355, Long –1120.6513)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Stanislaus
River (37.8631, –1120.6298).
(18) San Joaquin Valley Floor
Hydrologic Unit 5535— (i) Riverbank
Hydrologic Sub-area 553530. Outlet(s) =
Stanislaus River (Lat 37.6648, Long
–1121.2414) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Stanislaus River (37.8355, –1120.6513).
(ii) Turlock Hydrologic Sub-area
553550. Outlet(s) = Tuolumne River (Lat

37.6059, Long –1121.1739) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Tuolumne River
(37.6401, –1120.6526).
(iii) Montpelier Hydrologic Sub-area
553560. Outlet(s) = Tuolumne River (Lat

37.6401, Long –1120.6526) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Tuolumne River
(37.6721, –1120.4445).
(iv) El Nido-Stevinson Hydrologic
Sub-area 553570. Outlet(s) = Merced
River (Lat 37.3505, Long –1120.9619)
upstream to endpoint(s) in: Merced
River (37.3620, –1120.8507).
(v) Merced Hydrologic Sub-area
553580. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat

37.3620, Long –1120.8507) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.4982,
–1120.4612).
(vi) Fahr Creek Hydrologic Sub-area
553590. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat

37.4982, Long –1120.4612) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.5081,
–1120.3581).
(19) Delta-Mendota Canal Hydrologic
Unit 5541— (i) Patterson Hydrologic
Sub-area 554110. Outlet(s) = San
Joaquin River (Lat 37.6763, Long
–1121.2653) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

San Joaquin River (37.3491,
–1120.9759).
(ii) Los Banos Hydrologic Sub-area
554120. Outlet(s) = Merced River (Lat

37.3490, Long –1120.9756) upstream to
endpoint(s) in: Merced River (37.3505,
–1120.9619).

VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00119 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52606 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations (20) North Diablo Range Hydrologic
Unit 5543— North Diablo Range
Hydrologic Sub-area 554300. Outlet(s) =
San Joaquin River (Lat 38.0247, Long
–1121.8218) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

San Joaquin River (38.0246,
–1121.7471).
(21) San Joaquin Delta Hydrologic
Unit 5544— San Joaquin Delta
Hydrologic Sub-area 554400. Outlet(s) =
San Joaquin River (Lat 38.0246, Long
–1121.7471) upstream to endpoint(s) in:

Big Break (38.0160, –1121.6849); Bishop
Cut (38.0870, –1121.4158); Calaveras
River (37.9836, –1121.3110); Cosumnes
River (38.2538, –1121.4074);
Disappointment Slough (38.0439,
–1121.4201); Dutch Slough (38.0088,
–1121.6281); Empire Cut (37.9714,
–1121.4762); False River (38.0479,
–1121.6232); Frank’s Tract (38.0220,
–1121.5997); Frank’s Tract (38.0300,
–1121.5830); Holland Cut (37.9939,
–1121.5757); Honker Cut (38.0680,
–1121.4589); Kellog Creek (37.9158,
–1121.6051); Latham Slough (37.9716,
–1121.5122); Middle River (37.8216,
–1121.3747); Mokelumne River
(38.2104, –1121.3804); Mormon Slough
(37.9456,-121.2907); Mosher Creek
(38.0327, –1121.3650); North
Mokelumne River (38.2274,
–1121.4918); Old River (37.8086,
–1121.3274); Orwood Slough (37.9409,
–1121.5332); Paradise Cut (37.7605,
–1121.3085); Pixley Slough (38.0443,
–1121.3868); Potato Slough (38.0440,
–1121.4997); Rock Slough (37.9754,
–1121.5795); Sand Mound Slough
(38.0220, –1121.5997); Stockton Deep
Water Channel (37.9957, –1121.4201);
Turner Cut (37.9972, –1121.4434);
Unnamed Tributary (38.1165,
–1121.4976); Victoria Canal (37.8891,
–1121.4895); White Slough (38.0818,
–1121.4156); Woodward Canal (37.9037,
–1121.4973).
(22) Maps of critical habitat for the
Central Valley Steelhead ESU follow:

BILLING CODE 3510 –22–P
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00120 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 52607 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00121 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.048</GPH>
52608 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00122 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.049</GPH>
52609 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00123 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.050</GPH>
52610 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00124 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.051</GPH>
52611 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00125 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.052</GPH>
52612 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00126 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.053</GPH>
52613 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00127 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.054</GPH>
52614 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00128 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.055</GPH>
52615 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00129 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.056</GPH>
52616 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00130 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.057</GPH>
52617 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00131 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.058</GPH>
52618 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00132 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.059</GPH>
52619 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00133 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.060</GPH>
52620 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00134 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.061</GPH>
52621 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00135 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.062</GPH>
52622 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00136 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.063</GPH>
52623 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00137 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.064</GPH>
52624 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00138 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.065</GPH>
52625 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00139 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.066</GPH>
52626 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00140 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4725 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.067</GPH>
52627 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 170 / Friday, September 2, 2005 / Rules and Regulations [FR Doc. 05–16389 Filed 9–1–05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510 –22–C
VerDate Aug<18>2005 17:17 Sep 01, 2005 Jkt 205001 PO 00000 Frm 00141 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\02SER2.SGM 02SER2 ER02SE05.068</GPH>
Vol. 78 Wednesday,
No. 25 February 6, 2013
Part III
Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical Habitat for Tidewater Goby; Final Rule
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4717 Sfmt 4717 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8746 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0085;
4500030114]
RIN 1018–AX39
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Designation of Critical
Habitat for Tidewater Goby
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.

ACTION: Final rule.

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, designate critical
habitat for the tidewater goby
(Eucyclogobius newberryi) under the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). In total, approximately
12,156 acres (4,920 hectares) in Del
Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma,
Marin, San Mateo, Santa Cruz,
Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange,
and San Diego Counties, California, fall
within the boundaries of the critical
habitat designation.

DATES: This rule becomes effective on
March 8, 2013.

ADDRESSES: This final rule and the
associated final economic analysis are
available on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.

FWS–R8–ES–2011–0085, and from the
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office Web
site at http://www.fws.gov/ventura/.

Comments and materials received, as
well as supporting documentation used
in preparing this final rule, are available
for public inspection, by appointment,
during normal business hours, at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ventura
Fish and Wildlife Office, 2493 Portola
Road, Suite B, Ventura, CA 93003;
telephone 805–644–1766; facsimile
805–644–3958.

The coordinates or plot points or both
from which the maps included in the
regulation are generated are included in
the administrative record for this critical
habitat designation and are available at
http://www.fws.gov/ventura/, at http://
www.regulations.gov in Docket No.

FWS–R8–ES–2011–0085, and at the
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office (see
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT ).

Any additional tools or supporting
information that has been developed for
this critical habitat designation will also
be available at the Fish and Wildlife
Service Web site and Field Office set out
above, and may also be included in the
preamble and/or at http://
www.regulations.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT : For
general information, and information
about the final designation in Santa
Cruz, Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa
Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles
Counties, contact Diane K. Noda, Field
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2493 Portola Road, Suite B,
Ventura, CA 93003; telephone 805–644–
1766; facsimile 805–644–3958. If you
use a telecommunications device for the
deaf (TDD), call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 800–877–8339.

For information about the final
designation in Del Norte, Humboldt,
and Mendocino Counties, contact Nancy
Finley, Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Arcata Fish and
Wildlife Office, 1655 Heindon Road,
Arcata, CA 95521; telephone 707–822–
7201; facsimile 707–822–8411.

For information about the final
designation in Sonoma, Marin, and San
Mateo Counties, contact Susan Moore,
Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Sacramento Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2800 Cottage Way, Suite W–
2605, Sacramento, CA 95825; telephone
916–414–6600; facsimile 916–414–6712.

For information about the final
designation in Orange and San Diego
Counties, contact Jim Bartel, Field
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife
Service Office, 6010 Hidden Valley
Road, Suite 101, Carlsbad, CA 92011;
telephone 760–431–9440; facsimile
760–431–5901.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Executive Summary
Why we need to publish a rule. This
is a final rule to revise the designation
of critical habitat for the endangered
tidewater goby. Under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act), any species
that is determined to be an endangered
or threatened species requires critical
habitat to be designated, to the
maximum extent prudent and
determinable. Designations and
revisions of critical habitat can only be
completed by issuing a rule. In total,
approximately 12,156 acres (ac) (4,920
hectares (ha)) of critical habitat for the
tidewater goby in California fall within
the boundaries of the critical habitat
designation.

We designated critical habitat for this
species in 2000 and again in 2008. As
part of a settlement agreement, we
agreed to reconsider the 2008
designation. A proposed rule to revise
the 2008 critical habitat designation was
published in the Federal Register on
October 19, 2011 (76 FR 64996). This
constitutes our final revised designation
for the tidewater goby.

We are making the following changes
to the critical habitat designation. The
2008 final critical habitat designation
(73 FR 5920) consisted of 44 units in Del
Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma,
Marin, San Mateo, Santa Cruz,
Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa
Barbara, Ventura, and Los Angeles
Counties, California, totaling 10,003 ac
(4,050 ha). In this final critical habitat
designation, we have designated 65
critical habitat units for the tidewater
goby throughout its range, including the
44 units designated in the 2008 final
rule. These units are essential for the
recovery of the tidewater goby as
described in the Recovery Plan for the
Tidewater Goby (Service 2005a;
Recovery Plan).

The basis for our action. Under the
Act, we must determine critical habitat
for any endangered or threatened
species to the maximum extent prudent
and determinable. We are required to
base the designation on the best
available scientific data after taking into
consideration the economic impact, the
impact on national security, and any
other relevant impact of specifying any
particular area as critical habitat. The
Secretary of the Department of the
Interior (Secretary) may exclude an area
from critical habitat if the benefits of
exclusion outweigh the benefits of
designation, unless the exclusion will
result in the extinction of the species.

We prepared an economic analysis. In
order to consider economic impacts, we
prepared a new analysis of the
economic impacts of the proposed
revised critical designation. We
announced the availability of the draft
economic analysis (DEA) in the Federal
Register on July 24, 2012 (77 FR 43222),
allowing the public to provide
comments on our analysis. We
considered all comments and
information received from the public
during the comment period,
incorporated the comments as
appropriate, and have completed the
final economic analysis (FEA)
concurrently with this final
determination. The economic analysis
did not identify any areas with
disproportionate costs associated with
the designation, and no areas were
excluded from the final designation
based on economic reasons.

Peer review and public comment. We
sought comments and information from
independent specialists to ensure that
our critical habitat designation is based
on scientifically sound data,
assumptions, and analyses. We had
invited these peer reviewers to comment
on our specific assumptions and
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8747 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations conclusions in the proposed revision of
the critical habitat designation. These
peer reviewers generally concurred with
our methods and conclusions and
provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions to
improve this final rule. Information we
received from peer review is
incorporated in this final revised
designation. We also considered all
comments and information received
from the public during the comment
period.

Previous Federal Actions
On April 15, 2009, the Natural
Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed
a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California
challenging a portion of the January 31,
2008, final rule that designated 44
critical habitat units in California (73 FR
5920, January 31, 2008). The lawsuit
challenged the Service’s failure to
include any unoccupied habitat and the
exclusion of some occupied habitat from
critical habitat designation, and the
failure to explain why unoccupied
habitat previously included in the 2000
designation was not included in the
2008 designation. In a consent decree
dated December 11, 2009, the U.S.

District Court: (1) Stated that the 44
critical habitat units should remain in
effect; (2) stated that the final rule
designating critical habitat was
remanded in its entirety for
reconsideration; and (3) directed the
Service to promulgate a revised critical
habitat rule that considers the entire
geographic range of the tidewater goby
and any currently unoccupied tidewater
goby habitat. The consent decree
requires that the Service submit
proposed and final revised rules to the
Federal Register no later than October
7, 2011, and November 27, 2012,
respectively. We published a proposed
revised critical habitat in the Federal
Register on October 19, 2011 (76 FR
64996). Information on the associated
draft economic analysis for the revised
proposed critical habitat was published
in the Federal Register on July 24, 2012
(77 FR 43222). At the request of the
Service on November 26, 2012, the U.S.

District Court granted a 60-day
extension to submit the final revised
rule to the Federal Register no later
than January 26, 2013. By publishing
this final revised designation we are
complying with the consent decree
established by the Court. For additional
information on previous Federal actions
please refer to the 1994 listing rule (59
FR 5494; February 4, 1994), and
previous critical habitat designation (73
FR 5920; January 31, 2008).

Background
It is our intent to discuss in this final
rule only those topics directly relevant
to the development and designation of
critical habitat for the tidewater goby
under the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

For more information on the biology
and ecology of the tidewater goby, refer
to the final listing rule published in the
Federal Register on February 4, 1994
(59 FR 5494). For information on
tidewater goby critical habitat, refer to
the proposed rules to designate critical
habitat for the tidewater goby published
in the Federal Register on August 3,
1999 (64 FR 42250), November 28, 2006
(71 FR 68914), and October 19, 2011 (76
FR 64996); and the subsequent final
critical habitat designations published
in the Federal Register on November 20,
2000 (65 FR 69693), and January 31,
2008 (73 FR 5920); and to our Recovery
Plan (Service 2005a), which is available
from the Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office (see
ADDRESSES section or http://
ecos.fws.gov). Information on the
associated draft economic analysis for
the proposed rule to revise critical
habitat was published in the Federal
Register on July 24, 2012 (77 FR 43222).

Species Description and Genetic/
Morphological Characteristics
The tidewater goby is a small,
elongate, gray-brown fish rarely
exceeding 2 inches (in) (5 centimeters
(cm)) in length. This species possesses
large pectoral fins, with the pelvic or
ventral fins joined to each other
beginning below the chest and belly and
from below the gill cover back to just
anterior of the anus. Male tidewater
gobies are nearly transparent with a
mottled brown upper surface. Female
tidewater gobies develop darker colors,
often black, on the body and dorsal and
anal fins. The tidewater goby is a short-
lived species; the lifespan of most
individuals appears to be about 1 year
(Irwin and Soltz 1984, p. 26; Swift et al.
1989, p. 4; Hellmair 2011, p. 5).

Various genetic markers demonstrate
that pronounced differences exist in the
genetic structure of the tidewater goby,
and that tidewater goby populations in
some locations are genetically distinct.

A study of mitochondrial DNA and
cytochrome b (molecular material used
in genetic studies) sequences from
tidewater gobies that were collected at
31 locations throughout the species’
geographic range has identified six
major phylogeographic (historical
processes that may be responsible for
the current geographic distributions)
units (Dawson et al. 2001, p. 1171).

These six regional units are the basis for
the recovery units in the Recovery Plan
(Service 2005a, p. 30), and include the
following areas: (1) Tillas Slough (Smith
River) in Del Norte County to Lagoon
Creek in Mendocino County (North
Coast (NC) Recovery Unit); (2) Salmon
Creek in Sonoma County to Bennett’s
Slough in Monterey County (Greater Bay
(GB) Recovery Unit); (3) Arroyo del Oso
to Morro Bay in San Luis Obispo County
(Central Coast (CC) Recovery Unit); (4)
San Luis Obispo Creek in San Luis
Obispo County to Rincon Creek in Santa
Barbara County (Conception (CO)
Recovery Unit); (5) Ventura River in
Ventura County to Topanga Creek in Los
Angeles County (Los Angeles-Ventura
(LV) Recovery Unit); and (6) San Pedro
Harbor in Los Angeles County to Los
Pen˜asquitos Lagoon in San Diego
County (South Coast (SC) Recovery
Unit).

A more recent study to gather genetic
distribution data for the tidewater goby
used a panel of novel microsatellite loci
(repeating sequences of DNA) assessed
in a first-order (unbound strands of
DNA) survey across its range (Earl et al.
2010, p. 104). More specifically, Earl et
al. (2010, p. 103) described 19 taxon-
specific microsatellite loci, and assessed
genetic variation across the tidewater
goby’s range relative to genetic
subdivision. The study concluded: (1)
Populations of tidewater goby in
northern San Diego County form a
highly divergent clade (a genetically
related group) with reduced genetic
variation that appears to merit status as
a separate species; (2) populations along
the mid-coast of California are
subdivided into regional groups, which
are more similar to each other than
different, contrary to conclusions from
previous mitochondrial sequence-based
studies (Dawson et al. 2001, p. 1176);
and (3) that tidewater goby dispersal
during the Pleistocene/Holocene sea
level rise (approximately 7,000 years
ago), followed by increased isolation
during the Holocene, formed a star
phylogeny (recent population formed
from a common ancestor) with
geographic separation in the
northernmost populations and some
local differentiation (Earl et al. 2010, p.
103). Genetic diversity among
populations within a species may be
important to long-term persistence
because it represents the raw material
for adapting to differing local conditions
and environmental stochasticity
(Frankham 2005, p. 754).

The conclusion that the populations
of the tidewater goby in the North Coast
Recovery Unit formed as a result of a
single recent episode of colonization of
newly formed habitats is supported by
McCraney et al. (2010, p. 3325). They
compared genetic variation of 13
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8748 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations naturally and artificially fragmented
populations of the tidewater goby in
northern California, including 8
Humboldt Bay populations and 5
coastal lagoon populations (Lake Earl,
Stone Lagoon, Big Lagoon, Virgin Creek,
and Pudding Creek), and reached
similar conclusions to Earl et al. (2010,
p. 113). McCraney et al. (2010, p. 3325)
also concluded that natural and
artificial habitat fragmentation caused
marked divergence among the tidewater
goby in the North Coast populations.

Their study showed that Humboldt Bay
populations, due to isolation by
manmade barriers, exhibited very high
levels of genetic differentiation between
populations, extremely low levels of
genetic diversity within populations,
and no migration among populations.

They concluded that this pattern makes
the Humboldt Bay populations of
tidewater goby vulnerable to extirpation
because artificial fragmentation and its
resulting genetic differentiation between
subpopulations, extremely low levels of
genetic diversity within subpopulations,
and lack of migration among the
subpopulations reduces fitness and
adaptive potential of a subpopulation
(McCraney et al. 2010, p. 3325). In
contrast, the study found that, while
coastal lagoon populations also
exhibited very high levels of genetic
differentiation between populations,
these populations displayed substantial
levels of genetic diversity within
populations indicating occasional
migration among lagoons (McCraney et
al. 2010, p. 3325). Populations in all
coastal lagoons, with the exception of
Lake Earl in Del Norte County, appear
to be stable and genetically healthy
(McCraney et al. 2010, p. 3325). The
Lake Earl population exhibited reduced
levels of genetic diversity in comparison
to similar coastal lagoon populations
(McCraney et al. 2010, p. 3324).

McCraney et al. (2010, p. 3324) suspects
that the reduced genetic diversity
detected within Lake Earl is likely due
to repeated population bottlenecks
(reduced genetic diversity due to
reduced population size) resulting from
regular artificial breaching of the
sandbar at the lagoon mouth.

To summarize, the conclusions from
these studies are:
(1) The species can be divided into six
phylogeographic units based upon
genetic similarities and differences.
(2) The tidewater goby to the south of
the gap between Los Angeles and
Orange Counties is probably a separate
species from populations to the north
based on its divergent genetic makeup.
(3) Natural and anthropogenic barriers
have contributed to genetic
differentiation among populations.
(4) Although genetic differences occur
between populations north of the Los
Angeles-Orange County line, they are
not as divergent as those populations
further south.
(5) Some north coast populations
exhibit significantly reduced genetic
diversity, reduced growth potential, and
reduced duration of spawning period.

These populations appear to be
vulnerable to extirpation.

Metapopulation Dynamics
Local populations of tidewater goby
are best characterized as
metapopulations (Lafferty et al. 1999a,
p. 1448; Smith, in litt. 2012). How a
metapopulation functions through time
is an important factor in the
conservation of the tidewater goby and
thus it is an important consideration in
the designation of critical habitat. As
such, using information primarily from
Groom et al. (2006, pp. 216–219, 383–
384, 424–428) and Primack (2006, pp.
285–287) and elsewhere as noted below,
we present the general concept of
metapopulation dynamics followed by a
discussion of its application to the
tidewater goby.

A metapopulation, in short, is a
population of populations (often
referred to as subpopulations). However,
because of variations in the rates of
birth, death, immigration, and
emigration, each population is not static
over time; as such, the interplay of a
metapopulation’s constituent
populations results in a dynamic
process of metapopulation maintenance.

Thus, definitions of the term
metapopulation within the scientific
literature often incorporate the dynamic
interaction of subpopulations, according
to Groom et al. (2006, p. 706) a
metapopulation consists of: ‘‘A network
of semi-isolated populations with some
level of regular or intermittent migration
and gene flow among them, in which
individual populations may go extinct
[become extirpated] but can then be
recolonized from other populations.’’
The Recovery Plan also incorporates
interpopulation interaction in its
definition of metapopulation: ‘‘several
to many subpopulations [of] tidewater
goby that are close enough to one
another that dispersing individuals
could be exchanged’’ (Service 2005a, p.

A–3).

Regarding this discussion, two points
in particular are important to note in
metapopulations: (1) Variability within
subpopulations, and (2) connectivity
between them through dispersing
individuals. As mentioned above,
subpopulations at different locations
within a metapopulation vary over time.

Because of intrinsic and extrinsic factors
(Soule´ and Simberloff 1986, pp. 27–28),
some populations at given locations
have high rates of growth in some years
and other populations decline or even
become extirpated. Yet, because
subpopulations within a
metapopulation are biologically
connected through dispersing
individuals, high-productivity
subpopulations (sources) may augment
the population size in low-productivity
subpopulations (sinks); moreover,
dispersing individuals may even
recolonize extirpated areas. In this way,
a metapopulation as a whole maintains
a greater level of stability over time than
its constituent subpopulations—in
effect, metapopulation dynamics
dampen the effects of variability. In
addition to bolstering subpopulations or
recolonizing extirpated areas, dispersing
individuals are also important for
maintaining gene flow between
subpopulations (genetic connectivity)
and thereby reducing the risk that
certain alleles may be lost as a result of
the extirpation of a subpopulation.

Moreover, the greater the number of
constituent subpopulations within a
metapopulation, the greater the
likelihood the effects of variability will
be attenuated in that metapopulation. In
short, because of metapopulation
dynamics, extirpation of a
subpopulation is not necessarily
permanent. This results in a situation
where constituent subpopulations
‘‘blink out’’ and ‘‘blink on’’ over time.

A metapopulation persists through time
because the rate of extirpation in
subpopulations is balanced by the rate
of recolonization. As a result,
occupancy of an area may change over
time.

The balance discussed above is in
large part dependent upon dispersal of
individuals. Ultimately, when the rate
of recolonization is reduced or
eliminated, the effects of the threats are
no longer dampened by metapopulation
dynamics. In such a case, each
constituent subpopulation becomes
increasingly or completely independent,
and extirpation of such a subpopulation
is likely to be permanent.

The pattern of extirpation and
recolonization observed in the tidewater
goby suggests that some tidewater goby
populations exhibit a metapopulation
dynamic where some populations
survive or remain viable by continually
exchanging individuals and
recolonizing after occasional
extirpations (Doak and Mills 1994, p.
619). Individual populations of
tidewater goby occupy coastal lagoons
and estuaries that are separated from
each other by land and, in most cases,
are separated from the open ocean by
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8749 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations sandbars, or other barriers. Very few
tidewater gobies have ever been
captured in the marine environment
(Swift et al. 1989, p. 7), which suggests
that this species rarely occurs in the
open ocean. Studies of the tidewater
goby suggest that some populations
persist on a consistent basis, while other
populations appear to experience
intermittent extirpations (local
extinctions) (Lafferty et al. 1999a, p.
1452). These extirpations may result
from one or a series of factors, such as
the drying up of the lagoon during
prolonged droughts (Lafferty et al.
1999a, p. 1451). Some of the areas
where the tidewater goby has been
extirpated apparently have been
recolonized by nearby populations
(those within approximately 6 miles
(mi) (10 kilometers (km))) (Lafferty et al.
1999a, p. 1451; Smith, in litt. 2012).

However, genetic research has revealed
tidewater gobies are capable of
dispersing up to 30 mi (48 km) (Jacobs
et al. 2005, p.52).

Lafferty et al. (1999b, p. 618)
monitored the postflood persistence of
several tidewater goby populations in
Santa Barbara and Los Angeles Counties
after the heavy winter floods of 1995.

All of the monitored populations
persisted after the floods, and no
significant changes in population sizes
were noted (Lafferty et al. 1999b, p.
621). However, tidewater goby
apparently colonized Can˜ada Honda in
Santa Barbara County after one flood
event (Lafferty et al. 1999b, p. 621). This
suggests that flooding—where the
barrier between the lagoon and the open
ocean is breached and tidewater goby
individuals are washed out to sea—may
sometimes have a positive effect, forcing
the dispersal of individuals and thereby
allowing for recolonization of habitats
where a tidewater goby population has
become extirpated or allowing for
genetic exchange between extant
populations.

Historical records and survey results
for several areas occupied by the
tidewater goby are available (Swift et al.
1989, pp. 18–19; Swift et al. 1994, pp.
8–16). These studies suggest that the
persistence of tidewater goby
populations is related to habitat size,
configuration, location, and proximity
to human development. In general, the
most stable and persistent tidewater
goby populations tend to occur in
lagoons and estuaries that are more than

2.5 ac (1 ha) in size, and that have
remained relatively unaffected by
human activities (Lafferty et al. 1999a,
pp. 1450–1453). Conversely, some
habitats less than 2.5 ac (1 ha) in size
have tidewater goby populations that
persist on a regular basis, such as
Can˜ada del Agua Caliente in Santa
Barbara County (Swift et al. 1997, p. 3).

We also note that some systems that are
affected or altered by human activities
also have relatively large and stable
populations; examples include Pismo
Creek in San Luis Obispo County, the
Santa Ynez River in Santa Barbara
County, and the Santa Clara River in
Ventura County. The best available
information suggests that the lagoons
and estuaries with persistent tidewater
goby populations likely serve as source
populations that provide individuals
that colonize adjacent locations with
intermittent populations (Lafferty et al.
1999a, p. 1452). However, a rangewide
metapopulation viability analysis for the
tidewater goby has not been conducted;
data from such a study would help
inform which tidewater goby
populations are source populations and
which are sinks, and allow for the
development of metapopulation-based
recovery objectives for the species. Until
data on demography and dynamics of
tidewater goby metapopulations are
available, the Recovery Plan for the
species calls for interim objectives that
emphasize consistent occupancy of
habitat capable of sustaining viable
tidewater goby populations (Service
2005a, p. 39).

Distribution
The known geographic range of the
tidewater goby is limited to the coast of
California (Eschmeyer et al. 1983, p.
262; Swift et al. 1989, p. 12). The
species historically occurred from
locations 3 mi (5 km) south of the
California—Oregon border (Tillas
Slough in Del Norte County) to 44 mi
(71 km) north of the United States—
Mexico border (Agua Hedionda Lagoon
in San Diego County). The available
documentation (Eschmeyer et al. 1983,
p. 262; Swift et al. 1989, p. 12) suggests
that the northernmost extent of the
current geographic range has not
changed over time. Tidewater goby
historically occurred in Agua Hedionda
Lagoon, but the site is currently
considered to be unoccupied. The
species’ southernmost, known, currently
occupied locality is the San Luis Rey
River, 5 mi (8 km) north of Agua
Hedionda Lagoon in San Diego County.

Although the northernmost extent of the
tidewater goby’s range has not changed
and the southernmost extent has
retracted by only 5 mi (8 km), its overall
distribution has become patchy and
fragmented along the coast. However, as
discussed above in the Metapopulation
Dynamics section, the occupancy of an
area may change overtime and, when
determining occupancy of an area, we
first look at the rangewide occupancy
for the species and then consider
potential connectivity and source areas
at the subpopulation or unit level.

The tidewater goby appears to be
naturally absent from several long (50 to
135 mi (80 to 217 km)) stretches of
coastline lacking lagoons or estuaries,
where steep topography or swift
currents may prevent the tidewater goby
from dispersing between adjacent
locations (Swift et al. 1989, p. 13; Earl
et al. 2010, p. 104). One such gap occurs
between the Eel River in Humboldt
County and the Ten Mile River in
Mendocino County. A second gap exists
between Davis Lake in Mendocino
County and Salmon Creek in Sonoma
County. Another large natural gap exists
between Monterey County and Arroyo
del Oso in San Luis Obispo County.

Habitat loss and other anthropogenic-
related factors have resulted in the
tidewater goby’s absence from several
locations where it historically occurred;
the extirpation of tidewater goby from
some of these locations has expanded
gaps and created additional gaps in the
species’ geographic distribution (Capelli
1997, p. 7). Two examples of
extirpations are San Francisco Bay in
San Francisco and Alameda Counties,
and Redwood Creek and Freshwater
Lagoon in Humboldt County.

Swift et al. (1989, p. 13) reported that,
as of 1984, tidewater goby occurred or
had been known to occur at 87
locations, including those at the extreme
northern and southern end of the
species’ historical geographic range. An
assessment of the species’ distribution
in 1993, using records that were limited
to the area between the Monterey
Peninsula in Monterey County and the
United States—Mexico border, found
the tidewater goby occurring at four
additional sites since 1984 (Swift et al.
1993, p. 129). Other locations have been
identified since 1993, and to date the
tidewater goby has been documented to
have occurred at 135 locations. Of these
135 locations, 21 (16 percent) are no
longer occupied by the tidewater goby.

Habitat
The lagoons, estuaries, backwater
marshes, and freshwater tributaries that
tidewater goby occupy are dynamic
environments subject to considerable
fluctuations on a seasonal and annual
basis. Typically, a sandbar forms in the
late spring as flow into a lagoon
declines enough to allow the ocean surf
to build up sand at the mouth of the
lagoon. Winter rains and increased
stream flows may bring in considerable
sediment and dramatically affect the
bottom profile and substrate
composition of a lagoon or estuary. Fine
mud and clay either move through the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8750 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations lagoon or estuary, or settle out in the
backwater marshes, while heavier sand
is left behind. High flows associated
with winter rains can scour out the
lagoon bottom to a lower level,
especially after breaching the mouth
sandbar, with sand building up again
after flows decline. These dynamic
processes result in wetland habitats
that, over time, move both up or down
coast, and inland or coastward.

The horizontal extent of the lentic
(pondlike) wetland habitat associated
with a particular tidewater goby locality
varies and is affected, in part, by local
precipitation patterns and topography.

In coastal areas where the topography is
steep and precipitation relatively low,
such as areas adjacent to the Santa Ynez
Mountains in Santa Barbara County, the
habitats occupied by tidewater goby
may be a few acres in size and only
extend a few hundred feet inland from
the ocean, with backwater marshes
small or absent. In other coastal settings
where topography is less steep and
precipitation is more abundant, surface
streams are larger, and coastal lagoons
or estuaries may be hundreds of acres in
size and extend many miles inland and
may include extensive backwater
marshes (for example, Lake Earl in Del
Norte County and Ten Mile River in
Mendocino County). Some occupied
locations, such as Bennett’s Slough in
Monterey County, receive water from
upstream areas on a year-round basis.

Such locations tend to possess wetland
habitats that are larger and can extend
inland for several miles. Other occupied
locations do not possess stream
channels or tributaries that provide a
considerable amount of water
throughout the summer or fall months.

Such locations, such as Little Pico Creek
in San Luis Obispo County, tend to
possess wetland habitats that extend
only a short distance inland.

Reproduction
The tidewater goby has been observed
to spawn in every month of the year
except December (Swenson 1999, p.
107). Reproduction tends to peak in late
April or May to July, and can continue
into November depending on seasonal
temperature and rainfall. Hellmair’s
(2011) findings reveal year-round
reproduction for some tidewater goby
populations that have high genetic
diversity and restricted spawning
periods for other populations with low
genetic diversity. Swenson (1995, p. 31)
has documented the spawning activities
of adult fish or the presence of egg
clutches at water temperatures between
48 and 77 degrees Fahrenheit (°F) (9 and
25 degrees Celsius (°C)). Spawning
tidewater gobies have been documented
to breed in water salinities between 1
and 30 parts per thousand (ppt)
(Swenson 1995, p. 31, Smith, in litt.
2012). However, tidewater gobies prefer
salinities less than 10 ppt (Moyle 2002,
p. 431).

Threats
The final listing rule for the tidewater
goby published in 1994 (59 FR 5494;
February 4, 1994) and the 5-year review
(Service 2007) state that this species is
threatened, or potentially threatened,
by: (1) Coastal development projects
that result in the loss or alteration of
coastal wetland habitat; (2) water
diversions and alterations of water flows
upstream of coastal lagoons and
estuaries that negatively impact the
species’ breeding and foraging activities;
(3) groundwater overdrafting; (4)
channelization of the rivers where the
species occurs; (5) discharge of
agricultural and sewage effluents; (6)
cattle grazing and feral pig activity that
results in increased sedimentation of
coastal lagoons and riparian habitats,
removal of vegetative cover, increased
ambient water temperatures, and
elimination of plunge pools and
undercut banks utilized by the tidewater
goby; (7) introduced species that prey
on the tidewater goby (e.g., bass
(Micropterus spp.), rainwater killifish
(Lucania parva), and crayfish
(Cambarus spp.)); (8) the inadequacy of
existing regulatory mechanisms; (9)
drought conditions that result in the
deterioration of coastal and riparian
habitats; and (10) competition with
introduced species, such as the
yellowfin goby (Acanthogobius
flavimanus) and chameleon goby
(Tridentiger trigonocephalus). Lastly,
loss of genetic diversity has also been
recently shown to threaten populations
of tidewater goby (McCraney et al. 2010,
Hellmair 2011).

Climate Change
Our analyses under the Endangered
Species Act include consideration of
ongoing and projected changes in
climate. The terms ‘‘climate’’ and
‘‘climate change’’ are defined by the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). ‘‘Climate’’ refers to the
mean and variability of different types
of weather conditions over time, with 30
years being a typical period for such
measurements, although shorter or
longer periods also may be used (IPCC
2007, p. 78). The term ‘‘climate change’’
thus refers to a change in the mean or
variability of one or more measures of
climate (e.g., temperature or
precipitation) that persists for an
extended period, typically decades or
longer, whether the change is due to
natural variability, human activity, or
both (IPCC 2007, p. 78). Various types
of changes in climate can have direct or
indirect effects on species. These effects
may be positive, neutral, or negative and
they may change over time, depending
on the species and other relevant
considerations, such as the effects of
interactions of climate with other
variables (e.g., habitat fragmentation)
(IPCC 2007, pp. 8–14, 18–19). In our
analyses, we use our expert judgment to
weigh relevant information, including
uncertainty, in our consideration of
various aspects of climate change.

In addition to the threats listed above,
tidewater goby populations are
threatened by global climate change. Sea
level rise and hydrological changes
associated with climate change are
having and will continue to have
significant effects on tidewater goby
habitat over the next several decades.

Sea level rise is a result of two
phenomena: thermal expansion
(increased sea water temperatures) and
global ice melt (Cayan et al. 2006, p. 5,
National Research Council 2012, p. 33).

Between 1897 and 2006, the observed
sea level rise has been approximately 2
millimeters (0.08 in) per year, or a total
of 20 cm (8 in) over that period
(Heberger et al. 2009, p. 6). Older
estimates projected that sea level rise
along the California coast would follow
a similar rate and reach 0.2–0.6 meters
(m) (0.7–2 feet (ft)) by 2100 (IPCC 2007).

Recent observations and models
indicate that those projections were
conservative and ignored some critical
factors, such as melting of the
Greenland and Antarctica ice sheets
(Heberger et al. 2009, p. 6; Rahmstorf
2010, p. 44). Heberger et al. (2009, p. 8)
have updated the sea level rise
projections for California to 1.0–1.4 m
(3.3–4.6 ft) by 2100, while Vermeer and
Rahmstorf (2009, p. 21530) calculate the
sea level rise globally at 0.57–1.9 m
(2.4–6.2 ft); in both cases, recent
estimates were more than twice earlier
projections. Combined with California’s
normal dramatic tidal fluctuations and
coincidental storms—the severity of the
latter is projected to increase with more
frequent El Nin˜o Southern Oscillations
due to increasing surface water
temperature (Cayan et al. 2006, p. 17)—
the effects of sea level rise are expected
to result in greater coastal erosion
(Scripps Institution of Oceanography
2012, p. 24) and reach farther inland
than previously anticipated (Cayan et al.
2006, pp. 48–49; Cayan et al. 2009, p.
40).

Park et al. (1989, pp. 1–52) projected
that, of the saltmarshes along the coast
of the contiguous United States: 30
percent would be lost with a 0.5-m (1.6-
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8751 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations ft) sea level rise, 46 percent with a 1-m
(3.3-ft) sea level rise, 52 percent with a
2-m (6.6-ft) sea level rise, and 65 percent
with a 3-m (9.8-ft) sea level rise. While
we cannot project directly to California
from the estimates of Park et al. (1989,
p. 1–52) who focused on the east coast
and Gulf coast of the United States, we
can anticipate that, with a projected
global sea level rise of up to almost 2 m
(6.6 ft), 46 to 65 percent of the
remaining coastal saltmarshes in
California would be lost by 2100.

Applying Heberger et al.’s (2009, p. 8)
more conservative estimates for
California to Park et al.’s calculations,
with a projected sea level rise of 1.0–1.4
m (3.3–4.6 ft) by 2100, somewhere
between 46 and 52 percent of the coastal
saltmarshes in California would be
inundated.

For the tidewater goby, sea level rise
estimates based on more recent
projections, combined with the effects
of storms and tidal fluctuations, have
the potential to transform coastal
lagoons into primarily saltwater bodies
(Cayan et al. 2006, pp. 34, 48–49). More
severe storms that are likely to result
from climate change (Cayan et al. 2006,
p. 17), especially along the northern
coast of California (Cayan et al. 2009, p.
38), combined with the higher than
normal sea levels, will breach lagoon
mouths more frequently from the ocean
side, allowing more saltwater intrusion,
altering the physical conditions of the
tidewater goby’s habitat (increased
salinity), and disrupting the tidewater
goby’s normal reproduction process that
requires closed lagoons and a specific
range of salinities. The conversion of
coastal lagoons and estuaries from
brackish to primarily saltwater bodies,
in addition to the inundation and
breaching of sandbars, would eliminate
habitat for tidewater goby in many
areas. For a species that exhibits
metapopulation dynamics and was
listed as endangered due to past habitat
loss and fragmentation of
metapopulations, the projection of
further habitat loss due to sea level rise
raises concerns for the tidewater goby’s
survival over the long term.

Summary of Changes From Previously
Designated Critical Habitat and 2011
Proposed Revised Critical Habitat
Designation
In this section we present the
differences between what was
designated in the January 31, 2008, final
rule (73 FR 5920), what was included in
the October 19, 2011, proposed rule (76
FR 64996), and what is included in this
final designation.

The 2008 final critical habitat
designation (73 FR 5920, January 31,
2008) consisted of 44 units in Del Norte,
Humboldt, Mendocino, Sonoma, Marin,
San Mateo, Santa Cruz, Monterey, San
Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura,
and Los Angeles Counties, California,
totaling 10,003 ac (4,050 ha). In this
final critical habitat designation, we
have designated 65 critical habitat units
for the tidewater goby throughout its
range, including the 44 units designated
in the 2008 final rule. Of the 21 new
units included in this designation, 5
units are within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing and 16
units are outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing (Table 1).

Of the 16 new units that are outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, 8 units are currently occupied
(Table 1). These 16 units are essential
for the conservation of the tidewater
goby as described in the Recovery Plan
(Service 2005a).

This final critical habitat designation
for the tidewater goby also differs from
our October 19, 2011 (76 FR 64996)
proposed rule. We reviewed and
considered comments from the public
and peer reviewers on the proposed
revised designation, and from the public
on the draft economic analysis
published on July 24, 2012 (77 FR
43222). As a result of comments
received, our final designation differs
from our proposed designation, as
follows:
(1) Based on information we received
in comments regarding our proposal to
designate unoccupied units, we revised
the language in the Criteria Used To
Identify Critical Habitat section of this
final rule to clarify our intent. In the
proposed rule we stated that, ‘‘We also
are proposing to designate specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time of listing that
were historically occupied, but are
presently unoccupied, because such
areas are essential for the conservation
of the species’’ (p. 65004). However, we
did not intend to limit the proposal to
only specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing that were
historically occupied. Our intent was to
consider all areas that are essential for
the conservation of the species and not
only those that were known to be
historically occupied; we were in error
when we included ‘‘that were
historically occupied, but are presently
unoccupied’’ in the proposed rule. We
proposed to designate six units that are
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time of listing
where the tidewater goby has not been
detected historically. These units are:

Pomponio Creek (SM–2), Bolinas
Lagoon (MAR–5), Arroyo de la Cruz
(SLO–1), Oso Flaco Lake (SLO–12),
Arroyo Sequit (LA–1), and Zuma
Canyon (LA–2). Subsequent to the
publication of the proposed rule,
tidewater gobies have been detected in
Pomponio Creek (SM–2) (Rischbieter, in
litt. 2012). These units are essential for
the conservation of the tidewater goby
as described in the Recovery Plan
(Service 2005a) and the unit
descriptions below.
(2) We revised and expanded our
discussion on tidewater goby
metapopulation dynamics and provided
a discussion on the effects of climate
change on the tidewater goby and its
habitat.
(3) Based on comments received from
the County of Santa Barbara pertaining
to unit SB–12, Arroyo Paredon Creek,
we reassessed the topography of the unit
as originally proposed and determined
that the gradient of the upper portion of
the unit was a barrier to tidewater
gobies. The unit now includes
approximately 3 ac (1 ha), a net decrease
of approximately 1 ac (less than 1 ha)
from the proposal.

Critical Habitat
Background
Critical habitat is defined in section 3
of the Act as:
(1) The specific areas within the
geographical area occupied by the
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) Which may require special
management considerations or
protection; and
(2) Specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
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 to use and
the use of all methods and procedures
that are necessary to bring an
endangered or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to 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, and
transplantation, and, in the
extraordinary case where population
pressures within a given ecosystem
cannot be otherwise relieved, may
include regulated taking.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8752 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Critical habitat receives protection
under section 7 of the Act through the
requirement that Federal agencies
ensure, in consultation with the Service,
that any action they authorize, fund, or
carry out is not likely to result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
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 non-
Federal 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) of the Act would apply, but even
in the event of a destruction or adverse
modification finding, the obligation of
the Federal action agency and the
landowner is not to restore or recover
the species, but to implement
reasonable and prudent alternatives to
avoid destruction or adverse
modification of critical habitat.

Under the first prong of the Act’s
definition of critical habitat, areas
within the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time it was listed
are included in a critical habitat
designation if they contain physical or
biological features (1) which are
essential to the conservation of the
species and (2) which may require
special management considerations or
protection. For these areas, critical
habitat designations identify, to the
extent known using the best scientific
and commercial data available, those
physical or biological features that are
essential to the conservation of the
species (such as space, food, cover, and
protected habitat). In identifying those
physical or biological features within an
area, we focus on the principal
biological or physical constituent
elements (primary constituent elements
that provide for a species’ life-history
processes, such as roost sites, nesting
grounds, seasonal wetlands, water
quality, tide, soil type) that, under the
appropriate species-specific
circumstances, are essential to the
conservation of the species.

Under the second prong of the Act’s
definition of critical habitat, we
designate critical habitat in areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time it is listed,
upon a determination that such areas
are essential for the conservation of the
species. For example, we may determine
that an area currently occupied by the
species but outside the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing is
essential for the conservation of the
species and include it in the critical
habitat designation. We designate
critical habitat in areas outside the
geographical area occupied by a species
only when a designation limited to its
range would be inadequate to ensure 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, other unpublished
materials, or experts’ opinions or
personal knowledge.

Habitat is dynamic, and species may
move from one area to another over
time. We recognize that critical habitat
designated at a particular point in time
may not include all of the habitat areas
that we may later determine are
necessary for the recovery of the
species. For these reasons, a critical
habitat designation does not signal that
habitat outside the designated area is
unimportant or may not be needed for
recovery of the species. Areas that are
important to the conservation of the
species, both inside and outside the
critical habitat designation, will
continue to be subject to: (1)
Conservation actions implemented
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act, (2)
regulatory protections afforded by the
requirement in section 7(a)(2) of the Act
for Federal agencies to insure their
actions are not likely to jeopardize the
continued existence of any endangered
or threatened species, and (3) the
prohibitions of section 9 of the Act if
actions occurring in these areas may
affect the species. Federally funded or
permitted projects affecting listed
species outside their designated critical
habitat areas may still result in jeopardy
findings in some cases. These
protections and conservation tools will
continue to contribute to recovery of
this species. 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 at the time of
these planning efforts calls for a
different outcome.

Physical or Biological Features
In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i)
and 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act and regulations
at 50 CFR 424.12, in determining which
areas within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing to designate as critical habitat,
we consider the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species and which may require
special management considerations or
protection. These 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, or
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 derive the specific physical or
biological features essential to tidewater
goby conservation from studies of this
species’ habitat, ecology, and life history
as described in the Critical Habitat
section of the proposed rule to revise
critical habitat published in the Federal
Register on October 19, 2011 (76 FR
64996), and in the information
presented below. Additional
information can be found in the final
listing rule published in the Federal
Register on February 4, 1994 (59 FR
5494), and the Recovery Plan for the
tidewater goby (Service 2005a). We have
determined that the tidewater goby
requires the following physical or
biological features:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8753 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Space for Individual and Population
Growth and for Normal Behavior
Saline Aquatic Habitat
The tidewater goby occurs in lagoons,
estuaries, and backwater marshes that
are adjacent to the Pacific Ocean (Wang
1982, p. 14; Irwin and Soltz 1984, p. 27;
Swift et al. 1989, p. 1; Swenson 1993,
p. 3; Moyle 2002, p. 431). The tidewater
goby is most commonly found in waters
with relatively low salinities, that is,
less than 10 to 12 parts per thousand
(ppt) (Swift et al. 1989, p. 7) (see below
for further details). This species can,
however, tolerate a wide range of
salinities and is frequently found in
coastal habitats with higher salinity
levels (Swift et al. 1989, p. 7; Worcester
1992, p. 106; Swift et al. 1997, pp. 15–
22); the species has been collected in
salinities as high as 42 ppt (Swift et al.
1989, p. 7). The species’ tolerance of
high salinities likely enables it to
withstand some exposure to the marine
environment, which has a salinity of
about 35 ppt, allowing it to recolonize
nearby lagoons and estuaries following
flood events (Swift et al. 1989, p. 7).

However, tidewater gobies have only
rarely been captured in the marine
environment (Swift et al. 1989, p. 7),
and they appear to enter the ocean only
when flushed out of lagoons, estuaries,
and river mouths by storm events or
human-caused breaches of sand bars.

Salinity tolerance studies indicate that
larval stages are largely intolerant of
high salinities whereas adult tidewater
gobies can tolerate higher salinities.

These findings suggest spawning in
saline conditions is unlikely to be
productive and that migration among
subpopulations is most likely the result
of adult tidewater goby movement
(Kinziger, in litt. 2012). The goal of the
Recovery Plan is to preserve the
diversity of habitats that occur within
the range of the species, the
metapopulation structure of the species,
and genetic diversity (Service 2005a, p.
28).

Water Depth, Velocity, and Temperature
The tidewater goby is most commonly
collected in water less than 6 ft (2 m)
deep (Wang 1982, pp. 4–5; Worchester
1992, p. 53). However, recently
tidewater gobies were collected in Big
Lagoon in Humboldt County during the
breeding season at a water depth of 15
ft (4.6 m) (Goldsmith, in litt. 2006a).

Whether use of these deeper waters is
confined to this locality or is more
widespread will require additional
sampling at various depths and
locations. The tidewater goby tends to
avoid currents and concentrate in slack-
water areas; this suggests it is less likely
to occur in areas with a steep gradient
or microhabitats that have a substantial
current. At Pescadero Creek in San
Mateo County, tidewater gobies were
absent from portions of the flowing
creek that had a surface velocity of 0.15
m per second (0.49 ft per second), and
the species was instead more densely
concentrated in nearby eddies with
lower water velocities (Swenson 1993,
p. 3). Backwater marshes may provide
important refuges that reduce the
likelihood that a substantial number of
tidewater gobies will be flushed out of
the lagoons or estuaries and into the
marine environment during heavy
winter floods (Lafferty et al. 1999b, p.
619). Evidence that increased flows can
eliminate the tidewater goby from a
locality is suggested by the elimination
of the tidewater goby from Waddell
Creek in Santa Cruz County following a
flood event in the winter of 1972–73
(Nelson as cited in Swift 1990, p. 2); this
creek had been channelized and no
longer afforded protection from high
flows during flood events. Likewise, the
channelization and elimination of
habitat lateral to the main stream
channel upstream of San Onofre Lagoon
in San Diego County probably led to the
flushing and extirpation of the tidewater
goby from this locality during a storm in
1993 (Swift et al. 1994, p. 22–23). The
importance of backwater marshes is also
highlighted by the fact that tidewater
gobies in these habitats can achieve a
greater size at maturity than in adjacent
lagoons and creeks (Swenson 1993, pp.
6–7).

Freshwater Habitat
The tidewater goby also occurs in
freshwater streams up-gradient and
tributary to brackish habitats; the
salinity of these freshwater streams is
typically less than 0.5 ppt. The available
documentation demonstrates that, in
some areas, tidewater goby can occur

1.6 to 7.3 mi (2.6 to 11.7 km) upstream
from the ocean environment (Irwin and
Soltz 1984, p. 27; Swift et al. 1997, p.
20; Goldsmith, in litt. 2006b). Within a
2-hour period, hundreds of tidewater
gobies have been observed to move
upstream of a fixed location into areas
in the Santa Ynez River 3.2 mi (5.1 km)
from the ocean in Santa Barbara County
(Swift et al. 1997, p. 20). The fact that
this many individuals were observed to
move through an area suggests that
freshwater tributaries in some riverine
systems provide important habitat for
individual and population growth. We
have reviewed a variety of documents to
determine how far tidewater gobies have
been detected upstream from the ocean.

Goldsmith (in litt. 2006b) found
tidewater gobies 1.6 to 2.0 mi (2.6 to 3.3
km) upstream from the ocean in the Ten
Mile River in Mendocino County; Swift
et al. (1997, p. 18) found tidewater
gobies 4.6 mi (7.3 km) upstream from
the ocean in the San Antonio River in
Santa Barbara County; Swift et al. (1997,
p. 20) found tidewater gobies at various
distances from 3.9 to 7.3 mi (6.2 to 11.7
km) upstream from the ocean in the
Santa Ynez River in Santa Barbara
County; and Holland (1992, p. 9) found
tidewater gobies 3 mi (5 km) upstream
from the ocean in the Santa Margarita
River in San Diego County. Collectively,
these data suggest the average maximum
distance tidewater gobies have been
detected upstream from the ocean in
medium to large rivers is approximately

4.0 mi (6.4 km). Other than high stream
gradient, the reasons for the variation in
upstream movement between one
locality and another have not been
determined; salinity could be an
important factor. Upstream salinity
levels may vary with time of year, tidal
cycles, storm events, and topography.

However, Swift et al. (1997, p. 26)
indicate that gradient and lack of
barriers (e.g., beaver dams, sills) are
more important factors than salinity to
upstream dispersal.

Sandbars
Many of the locations occupied by the
tidewater goby closely correspond to
stream drainages. Under natural
conditions, these stream drainages and
the marine environment collectively act
to produce sandbars that form a barrier
between the ocean and the lagoon,
estuary, backwater marsh, and
freshwater stream system (Habel and
Armstrong 1977, p. 39). These sandbars
tend to be present during the late spring,
summer, and fall seasons. The presence
of a sandbar can create a lower salinity
level (5 to 10 ppt) in the area up
gradient from the sandbar (Carpelan
1967, p. 324) than would otherwise
exist if there were no sandbar. The
tidewater goby is more commonly
associated with these lower salinity
levels than with the salinity levels that
occur in the ocean or an estuary without
a sandbar, that is, about 35 ppt (Swift
et al. 1989, p. 7). The formation of a
sandbar also creates more habitat for
aquatic organisms because water
becomes ponded behind the sandbar.

Artificial breaching of a sandbar tends
to result in a rapid decrease in water
levels, unlike natural breaching, and
increases the likelihood that adult
tidewater gobies, their nests, and their
fry could become stranded and die, or
become concentrated and subject to
greater levels of predation pressure by
birds or other predators. Natural
breaching events tend to occur during
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8754 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations the late winter and early spring when
tidewater goby breeding is at a low
point in the reproduction cycle.

Furthermore, tidewater gobies are likely
able to detect storm events due to the
increased inflow of fresh water that may
cause a natural breaching event and
swim upstream or take refuge in side
channels (Lafferty et al. 1999b, p. 619).

In Humboldt Bay and the Eel River
estuary in Humboldt County, a large
amount of salt and brackish marsh
habitat was historically eliminated
through the construction of levees and
drainage channels. As a result, several
of the locations occupied by the
tidewater goby do not contain natural
sandbars between the ocean and habitat
where the species is present. Instead,
manmade water control structures such
as tidegates and culverts exist between
tidal waters and the locations where
tidewater goby occur. These tidegates
have been in place for decades, and in
some cases they provide habitat
conditions similar to those created by
the presence of a seasonal sandbar. In
fact, most of the occupied tidewater
goby habitats in the Humboldt Bay-Eel
River estuaries are above tidegates.

Other examples where large amounts of
brackish marsh habitat have been lost
due to construction of levees and
drainage channels include the
tributaries to the San Francisco Bay,
Tomales Bay, Waddell Creek, Salinas
River, Goleta Slough, Santa Clara River,
and Mugu Lagoon.

Food
The tidewater goby feeds mainly on
macroinvertebrates (for example shrimp
and aquatic insects) (Irwin and Soltz
1984, p. 21–23; Swift et al. 1989, p. 6;
Swenson 1995, p. 87). The diets of adult
and juvenile tidewater gobies tend to
include the same relative abundance of
different invertebrate species (Swenson
and McCray 1996, p. 962). The
nonnative New Zealand mudsnails
(NZMS; Potamopyrgus antipodarum)
have been a seasonally important
component of the diet of tidewater
gobies in the northcoast region
(Hellmair et al. 2011, p. 1).

Cover or Shelter
A variety of native and nonnative fish
species and fish-eating bird species,
such as egrets (Egretta spp.) and herons
(e.g., great blue herons (Ardea
herodias)), prey on tidewater gobies.

Therefore, escape cover or shelter is
necessary to reduce the likelihood that
tidewater gobies will be preyed upon. A
species’ ability to persist when it is
subject to predation pressure frequently
depends on the presence of different
features that provide a greater level of
structure, which makes it more likely a
prey species will avoid predation
(Crowder and Cooper 1982, p. 1802;
Gilinsky 1984, p. 455). At locations
where the tidewater goby occurs,
submerged and emergent aquatic
vegetation has the potential to provide
cover from predators, and provide a
greater degree of habitat heterogeneity
or structure that would not otherwise
exist if the aquatic vegetation was
absent. Stable lagoons often possess
dense aquatic vegetation that frequently
consists of sago pondweed
(Potamogeton pectinatus) or widgeon
grass (e.g., Ruppia maritima and R.
cirrhosa). At some locations, juvenile
tidewater gobies are more prevalent in
areas with at least some submergent
vegetation as compared to other areas
with no or little vegetation (Wang 1984,
p. 16; Swenson 1994, p. 6; Trihey &
Associates, Inc. 1996, p. 11). It is
reasonable to assume that the presence
of submerged or emergent vegetation
reduces the likelihood that tidewater
gobies will be preyed upon by native
and nonnative species because this
vegetation provides cover and increases
the level of habitat heterogeneity in a
way that makes it more likely that
tidewater gobies will persist where they
co-occur with predators.

Aquatic vegetation may provide some
degree of shelter or refuge during flash
flood events (Lafferty et al. 1999b, p.
621). These refuges presumably would
result because the presence of
vegetation would create lower water
velocities than might otherwise occur in
unvegetated areas. Such refuges would
be especially important to fish species
that are not strong swimmers, such as
the tidewater goby.

Sites for Breeding, Reproduction, or
Rearing (or Development) of Offspring
The eggs of the tidewater goby are laid
in burrows that are excavated by male
fish. The available literature suggests
that burrows most commonly occur in
areas with relatively unconsolidated,
clean, coarse sand (Swift et al. 1989, p.
8), while other documents demonstrate
that burrows may also occasionally
occur in silt or mud (Wang 1982, p. 6).

Swenson (1995, p. 148) demonstrated
that tidewater gobies prefer a sandy
substrate in the laboratory. Male
tidewater gobies remain in the burrow
to guard the eggs attached to the burrow
ceiling and walls. Male tidewater gobies
care for the embryos for approximately
9 to 11 days until they hatch, rarely if
ever emerging from the burrow to feed
(Swift et al. 1989, p. 4). The tidewater
goby larvae occupy the water column
after the eggs hatch (Wang 1982, p. 15).

As they mature, they occupy the bottom
substrate. Worcester (1992, pp. 77–79)
found that larval tidewater gobies in
Pico Creek Lagoon in San Luis Obispo
County tended to use the deeper portion
of the lagoon, that is, depths of 29
inches (in) (73 centimeters (cm)) versus
17 in (42 cm).

Habitats Protected from Disturbance or
Representative of the Historical,
Geographical, and Ecological
Distributions of the Species
The majority of lagoons and estuaries
that currently support the tidewater
goby have experienced some level of
disturbance. The lagoons and estuaries
that support the tidewater goby range in
size from approximately 3.5 square
yards (3 m
2) of surface area to about
2,000 ac (800 ha). Most lagoons and
estuaries that support the tidewater
goby range from about 1.25 to 12.5 ac
(0.5 to 5 ha). Surveys of tidewater goby
locations and historical records indicate
that size, configuration, location, and
access by humans are all factors in the
persistence of populations of this
species (Swift et al. 1989, p. 15, 1994,
p. 26–27). Lagoons and estuaries smaller
than about 5 ac (2 ha) generally have
histories of extirpation or population
reduction to very low levels. These
small locations are also often within a
mile or so of another locality from
which recolonization could occur
following natural episodic catastrophic
events. The most stable or largest
populations today are in locations of
intermediate sizes, which range from 5
to 125 ac (2 to 50 ha). In many cases
these intermediate-sized locations likely
serve as source populations for the
smaller ephemeral sites (Lafferty et al.
1999b, p. 1452).

Primary Constituent Elements for
Tidewater Goby
Under the Act and its implementing
regulations, we are required to identify
the physical or biological features
essential to the conservation of the
tidewater goby within the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing,
focusing on the features’ primary
constituent elements. We consider
primary constituent elements to be the
elements of physical or biological
features that provide for a species’ life-
history processes that are essential to
the conservation of the species.

Based on our current knowledge of
the physical or biological features and
habitat characteristics required to
sustain the species’ life-history
processes, we determine that the
primary constituent element (PCE)
specific to the tidewater goby is:
(1) Persistent, shallow (in the range of
approximately 0.3 to 6.6 ft (0.1 to 2 m)),
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8755 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations still-to-slow-moving lagoons, estuaries,
and coastal streams with salinity up to
12 ppt, which provide adequate space
for normal behavior and individual and
population growth that contain one or
more of the following:
(a) Substrates (e.g., sand, silt, mud)
suitable for the construction of burrows
for reproduction;
(b) Submerged and emergent aquatic
vegetation, such as Potamogeton
pectinatus, Ruppia maritima, Typha
latifolia, and Scirpus spp., that provides
protection from predators and high flow
events; or
(c) Presence of a sandbar(s) across the
mouth of a lagoon or estuary during the
late spring, summer, and fall that closes
or partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
thereby providing relatively stable water
levels and salinity.

Special Management Considerations or
Protection
When designating critical habitat, we
assess whether the specific areas within
the geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing contain
features that are essential to the
conservation of the species and which
may require special management
considerations or protection. Special
management considerations or
protection may be necessary to
eliminate or reduce the magnitude of
threats that affect the physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the tidewater goby.

Threats identified in the final listing
rule for the tidewater goby include:
(1) Coastal development projects,
including proposed restoration projects
that involve elimination of backwaters
and loss or alteration of coastal wetland
habitat, which may be crucial for flood
refuge for the tidewater goby;
(2) water diversions and alterations of
water flows upstream of coastal lagoons
and estuaries that negatively impact the
species’ breeding and foraging habitat
and activities;
(3) groundwater overdrafting that
results in reduction of flows and
negatively impacts the species’ breeding
and foraging habitat and activities;
(4) channelization of habitats where
the species occurs that removes or
reduces quality of habitat;
(5) discharge of agricultural and
sewage effluents;
(6) cattle grazing and feral pig activity
that result in increased sedimentation of
coastal lagoons and riparian habitats,
remove vegetative cover, increase
ambient water temperatures, and
eliminate plunge pools and collapsed
undercut banks utilized by the tidewater
goby;
(7) introduced species that prey on
the tidewater goby (such as bass,
rainwater killifish, African clawed
frogs);
(8) the inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms;
(9) drought conditions that result in
the deterioration of coastal and riparian
habitats; and
(10) competition with introduced
species, such as the yellowfin goby and
chameleon goby.

For the purposes of this final rule, we
have combined the ‘‘water diversions
and alterations of water flows upstream
of coastal lagoons and estuaries that
negatively impact the species’ breeding
and foraging activities’’ threats category
with ‘‘drought conditions’’ and
‘‘groundwater overdrafting,’’ along with
the addition of artificial breaching of
sandbars, into one threat category. The
combined category is referred to as
‘‘water diversions, alterations of water
flows, artificial sandbar breaching, and
groundwater overdrafting that
negatively impact the species’ breeding
and foraging activities.’’ Similarly, we
have combined the two threat categories
of ‘‘introduced species that prey on the
tidewater goby (e.g., bass, African
clawed frogs)’’ and ‘‘competition with
introduced species such as the
yellowfin goby and chameleon goby’’
into one category called, ‘‘introduced
species that prey on, or compete with,
the tidewater goby (for example,
yellowfin goby, and bass).’’ We also
recognize that where special
management may be necessary,
regulatory mechanisms may need to be
added or amended by local, State, or
Federal governmental entities if
sufficient management is not achievable
through voluntary mechanisms.

The tidewater goby’s distribution
reflects a pattern of occupancy and
extirpation. The species requires refugia
under drought conditions and places to
recolonize under wetter conditions;
otherwise, the tidewater goby would be
relegated to existing only within those
few lagoons and estuaries large enough
to support it during periods of drought.

If the suitable localities that are
occupied during periods of normal
precipitation cease to function as
tidewater goby habitat due to
modification or destruction while the
localities are unoccupied, the
metapopulation dynamics may be
disrupted and the species may not be
able to respond by recolonizing
unoccupied localities under favorable
conditions. The tidewater goby is facing
numerous threats, including habitat loss
from multiple sources, habitat
fragmentation due to the loss of
‘‘stepping stone’’ localities between
subpopulations, predation and
nonnative competitors, alterations to
hydrology (sandbar breaching,
channelization, for example), changes in
water quality, stochastic events such as
drought, and the growing and inevitable
impact of sea level rise. While some of
these threats can singly have a
substantial impact on individual
tidewater goby subpopulations, in most
cases it is the combined impact that is
a threat to the species, especially in
light of global climate change. A more
detailed discussion of threats to the
tidewater goby can be found in the final
listing rule (59 FR 5494, February 4,
1994), and the final Recovery Plan
(Service 2005a, pp. 16–19).

We find that the components of the
PCE present within all the areas we are
designating as critical habitat may
require special management
considerations or protection due to
threats to the tidewater goby or its
habitat. Using current information
provided in the Recovery Plan (Service
2005a, Appendix E) and other
information in our files, we have
identified the components of the PCE
that may require special management
considerations or protection from
known threats within each of the critical
habitat units (see Critical Habitat
Designation and Table 2 below for a
unit-by-unit description). Some of the
special management actions that may be
needed for essential features of
tidewater goby habitat are briefly
summarized below.
(1) Implement measures to avoid,
minimize or mitigate direct and indirect
loss and modification of tidewater goby
habitat due to dredging, draining, and
filling of lagoons and estuaries.

Additional management actions should
be taken to restore historical tidewater
goby locations and potential habitats as
opportunities become available to
eliminate, minimize, or mitigate the
effects of existing structures and past
activities that have destroyed or
degraded tidewater goby habitat.
(2) Develop and implement measures
to minimize the adverse effects due to
channelization that can eliminate
crucial backwater habitats or other flood
refuges.
(3) Implement measures, such as best
management practices, for managing
excessive sedimentation in tidewater
goby habitat. Measures should be
implemented to control sedimentation
in tidewater goby habitat due to cattle
grazing, development, channel
modification, recreational activity, and
agricultural practices.
(4) Implement measures to prevent
further decrease in freshwater inflow,
water depth, and surface area within
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8756 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations tidewater goby habitat due to dams,
water diversions, and groundwater
pumping.
(5) Implement measures to avoid
anthropogenic breaching of lagoons and
use of pumping and other water control
structures to regulate water levels, to
maintain suitable habitat conditions
during the summer and fall when
tidewater goby reproduction is at its
highest and freshwater inflow is at its
lowest.
(6) Implement measures to improve
water quality degraded as a result of
agricultural runoff and effluent,
municipal runoff, golf course runoff,
sewage treatment effluent, cattle
grazing, development, oil spills, oil field
runoff, toxic waste, and gray-water
dumping. Also, measures should be
implemented to prevent further
degradation of the water quality due to
dikes, tidal gates, and other impedances
to the natural freshwater/saltwater
interface that alter the salinity regime in
some of the tidewater goby habitats.
(7) Implement measures to control the
abundance and distribution of
nonnative species.
(8) Implement measures to restore
genetic diversity within populations
where the natural metapopulation
dynamic will be unable to do so.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical
Habitat
As required by section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, we used the best scientific and
commercial data available to designate
critical habitat. We reviewed available
information pertaining to the habitat
requirements of this species. In
accordance with the Act and its
implementing regulation at 50 CFR
424.12(e), we considered whether
designating areas outside those
currently occupied as well as those
occupied at the time of listing are
essential to ensure the conservation of
the species. We are designating critical
habitat in areas within the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing in 1994. We also are
designating specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing because
such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.

In revising critical habitat for the
tidewater goby, we made extensive use
of the information in the Recovery Plan
(Service 2005a), and incorporated the
recovery goals and strategy identified in
the Recovery Plan for the development
of our revised designation. We also
reviewed other relevant information,
including peer-reviewed journal
articles, unpublished reports and
materials (for example, survey results
and expert opinions), the final listing
rule (59 FR 5494; February 4, 1994), the
2000 final critical habitat rule (65 FR
69693; November 20, 2000), the 2006
proposed critical habitat rule (71 FR
68914; November 28, 2006), the 2008
final critical habitat rule (73 FR 5920;
January 31, 2008), the 2011 proposed
critical habitat rule (76 FR 64996;
October 19, 2011), the 5-year review for
the tidewater goby (Service 2007), and
regional databases and GIS coverages,
for example, the California Natural
Diversity Database, and National
Wetlands Inventory maps. We analyzed
this information to identify: (1) Specific
areas within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing that
contain the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the tidewater goby and which may
require special management
considerations or protection, and (2)
criteria for specific areas outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing that are essential for the
conservation of the tidewater goby.

The Recovery Plan focuses on
preserving the diversity of tidewater
goby habitats throughout the range of
the species, preserving the natural
processes of recolonization and
population exchange (metapopulation
dynamics) that enable recovery
following natural episodic catastrophic
events, and preserving genetic diversity
(Service 2005a, p. 28). The conservation
of the environmental, morphological,
and genetic diversity across the range of
the species is an important
consideration in determining specific
areas on which are found the physical
or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and other
specific areas that are essential for the
conservation of the tidewater goby. For
example, a population’s ability to
successfully adapt to changing
environmental conditions is a function
of the population size and genetic
variation of the individuals at a given
location (Reed and Frankham 2003, p.
233).

Local adaptations to different
environmental conditions and
morphological differences are likely
linked to genetic variations among
populations. These features may in turn
be best protected by: (1) Identifying
areas that represent the range of
environmental, genetic, and
morphological diversity; and (2)
maximizing within these areas the
protection of contiguous environmental
gradients across which selection and
migration can interact to maintain
population viability and (adaptive)
genetic diversity (Moritz 2002, p. 238).

The Recovery Plan subdivides the
geographical distribution of the
tidewater goby into 6 recovery units,
encompassing a total of 26 subunits
defined according to genetic
differentiation and geomorphology. We
considered the conservation of the
tidewater goby in each of the recovery
units and subunits, as well as the
species as a whole, in our analysis.

Based on the information and
recommendations in the Recovery Plan,
we developed a conservation framework
and criteria to identify the specific
circumstances under which the
presence of the components of the PCE
within the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time of listing
provides the physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the tidewater goby, and additionally
what areas outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing are
essential for the conservation of the
species.

Areas Within the Geographical Area
Occupied at the Time of Listing
Within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing, the
specific areas meeting the criteria below
are designated as critical habitat in this
final rule because they provide the
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the tidewater
goby.
(1) Areas that support source
populations (populations where local
reproductive success is greater than
local mortality (Meffe and Carroll 1994,
p. 187)). For the purposes of this
designation, we identified areas
supporting source populations as those
that are currently occupied and have
been consistently occupied for 3 or
more consecutive years based on survey
data and published reports. Source
populations are more likely to be
capable of maintaining populations over
many years and are, therefore, capable
of providing individuals to recruit into
surrounding subpopulations.
(2) Areas that support subpopulations
within each metapopulation in addition
to source populations in the event that
the source population is extirpated due
to a natural episodic catastrophic event
such as a major flood or drought.
(3) Areas that provide connectivity
between metapopulations. These areas
are likely to act as ‘‘stepping stones’’
between more isolated populations, and
thereby contribute to metapopulation
persistence and genetic exchange. For
the purposes of this designation, we
generally identified locations that
provide connectivity as those within
approximately 6 mi (10 km) of another
location. However, we included a few
locations that exceeded 6 mi but were
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8757 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations within the maximum dispersal distance
as determined through genetic research
(Jacobs et al. 2005, p. 52) where there
were no other locations with suitable
habitat in that portion of the coast.

Areas Outside the Geographical Area
Occupied at the Time of Listing
We have determined that the specific
areas within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing alone are
not sufficient to meet the recovery goals
for the species because:
(1) The Recovery Plan recommends a
targeted program of introduction and
reintroduction of tidewater gobies into
suitable habitat to minimize the chance
of local extirpations resulting in
extinction of a broader metapopulation
(see the Metapopulation Dynamics
section, above, for details) and resultant
loss of its unique genetic traits (Service
2005a, p. 29);
(2) There has been loss and
degradation (see the Threats section,
above, for details) of habitat throughout
the species’ range since the time of
listing;
(3) We anticipate a further loss of
habitat in the future due to sea-level rise
resulting from climate change (see the
Climate Change section, above, for
details); and
(4) The species needs habitat areas
that are arranged spatially in a way that
will maintain connectivity and allow
dispersal within and between units (see
the Metapopulation Dynamics section,
above, for details).

One example of the need to designate
areas outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing is where
distances between areas occupied at the
time of listing may make it difficult for
tidewater goby to disperse from one area
to the next. Another example is to help
prevent the extirpation of a
metapopulation in which only one or
two occupied sites remain. These areas
that are outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing include
locations that are currently occupied
and, in a few cases, ones that were
historically occupied. In some
unoccupied areas, the habitat would
require some management: For example,
restoration of a natural breaching
regime, exotic predator management, or
freshwater inflow enhancement.

Therefore, for areas outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, those meeting the criteria
below are designated as critical habitat
in this final rule because they are
essential for the conservation of the
species.
(1) Areas of aquatic habitat in coastal
lagoons and estuaries with still-to-slow-
moving water that allow for the
conservation of viable metapopulations
under varying environmental
conditions, such as, for example,
drought.
(2) Areas that provide connectivity
between source populations or may
provide connectivity in the future.

These areas are likely to act as ‘‘stepping
stones’’ between more isolated
populations, and thereby contribute to
metapopulation persistence and genetic
exchange. For the purposes of this
designation, we generally identified
locations that provide connectivity as
those within approximately 6 mi (10
km) of another location.
(3) Additional areas that may be more
isolated but may represent unique
adaptations to local features (habitat
variability, hydrology, microclimate).

For example, the Eel River (HUM–4) is
essential for the conservation of
tidewater goby because it possesses
ecological characteristics that are
important in maintaining the species’
ability to adapt to changing
environments, including the ability to
disperse into higher channels and marsh
habitat during severe flood events.

By applying the two sets of criteria to
the 26 recovery subunits described in
the Recovery Plan, we have identified
45 critical habitat units within the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing that we
have determined contain the physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the tidewater goby and
which may require special management
considerations or protection, and 20
critical habitat units outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing that we
have determined are essential for the
conservation of the species. Please see
Table 1, below, for the occupancy status
of each of the 65 critical habitat units.

As emphasized throughout this rule
and the Recovery Plan, the conservation
of the tidewater goby is dependent on
maintaining the metapopulation
dynamics of the species, and we have
therefore designated all those locations
that we determined are essential for
achieving that goal. In order to maintain
metapopulation dynamics, we have
determined that some locations where
tidewater gobies have never been found
or have not been found in recent years
are essential for the conservation of the
species. It should be noted, however,
that some subpopulations within a
metapopulation tend to decline or
disappear periodically due to events
such as drought and severe flooding, but
then reappear or increase in abundance
during more optimal conditions.

However, surveys to determine the
presence or absence of tidewater gobies
are not usually conducted every year,
and therefore the presence of tidewater
gobies may have been missed. For
example, tidewater gobies were known
to occur in the San Luis Rey River in
1958. However, the river has only been
surveyed five times in the last 65 years
since 1958, and tidewater gobies were
found in 2010.

As discussed previously, a
metapopulation is generally considered
to consist of several distinct but related
subpopulations that are within dispersal
distance of each other. Although the
individual subpopulations may
sometimes disappear, the
metapopulation as a whole is often
stable because immigrants from one
population (which may, for example, be
experiencing a population boom) are
likely to re-colonize habitat which has
been left open by the extirpation of
another population as long as the
habitat still remains. They may also
emigrate to a small population and
rescue that population from extirpation.

In a metapopulation dynamic,
connectivity of source populations is
crucial, and locations considered
unoccupied may serve this purpose.

Although no single tidewater goby
subpopulation may be able to guarantee
the long-term survival of this species,
the combined effect of many
sporadically connected subpopulations
may. Therefore, although a particular
location may not be occupied at one
point in time, or even for long periods
of time, that location may be important
for maintaining the connectivity
between subpopulations, and hence
contribute to the species’ overall
survival and conservation. For example,
although tidewater gobies have not been
detected in Arroyo del la Cruz, it is
within dispersal distance of Arroyo del
Corral, which is considered currently to
be occupied in critical habitat. Arroyo
de la Cruz is located approximately 2.0
mi (3.2 km) north of the Arroyo de
Corral. Arroyo de la Cruz provides
habitat for tidewater gobies that disperse
from Arroyo del Corral, which may
serve to decrease the risk of extirpation
of this metapopulation through
stochastic events. Arroyo de la Cruz is
one of two locations with suitable
habitat within the Central Coast
Recovery Subunit (CC 1), as described
in the Recovery Plan. Therefore,
although tidewater gobies have not been
detected at Arroyo de la Cruz, we
consider this area to be essential to the
conservation of the species because it
contributes to ensuring the viability of
the metapopulation because if the
subpopulation within the Arroyo de
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8758 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Corral unit (SLO–2) is extirpated, the
entire metapopulation would be lost.

The process of making exclusions
under Section 4(b)(2) considers the
extent to which habitat restoration
would be necessary to support the
species in areas currently unoccupied.

Where restoration is not likely due to
cost or other factors, the benefits in
terms of conservation value may not be
as strong. Restoration activities would
benefit all of the critical habitat units in
this designation, and some form of
restoration will be necessary to support
the successful reintroduction or
recolonization of the tidewater goby in
the units that are unoccupied. For
example, some of the unoccupied
locations need improvements to water
quality, barrier removal, exotic species
management (e.g., Walker Creek, Salinas
River, Arroyo de la Cruz, Oso Flaco
Lake, etc.). However, designation of
critical habitat does not mandate
restoration or management of any areas.

However, we determined it is feasible to
restore all of the unoccupied habitat
designated in this rule to the point
where it can support gobies and we
avoided designating unoccupied areas
that are highly degraded or fragmented
and not likely restorable (e.g., Los
Angeles River, Mugu Lagoon). Such
areas provide little or no long-term
conservation value, and are not essential
for the conservation of the species.

Mapping
After determining the lagoons and
estuaries necessary for the conservation
of the tidewater goby by applying
criteria outlined above, the boundaries
of each critical habitat unit were
mapped. Unit boundaries were based on
several factors, including species
occurrence data that demonstrated
where tidewater gobies have been
observed, the presence of barriers and
stream gradients that limit tidewater
goby movements, and the presence and
extent of the essential physical or
biological features.

The geographic extent of each critical
habitat unit was delineated, in part,
using existing digital data. To determine
the lateral boundaries of each critical
habitat unit, we most frequently relied
on the Pacific Institute global climate
change model and National Wetland
Inventory (NWI) maps that were
prepared by the Service in 2006. The
NWI maps are based on the Cowardin
classification system (Cowardin et al.
1979, pp. 1–103). The Service has
adopted this classification system as its
official standard to describe wetland
and deepwater habitats. Specifically, the
following wetland types based on
Cowardin (1979, p. 5) were used to
delineate unit boundaries: Lake,
Estuarine and Marine Deepwater,
Estuarine and Marine Wetland,
Freshwater Pond, Freshwater Emergent
Wetland, Freshwater Forested/Shrub
Wetland, and Riverine. These wetland
types have, or are likely to have,
components of the PCE at various times
throughout the year, depending on the
season and environmental factors such
as storm or drought events. In some
cases, we used existing anthropogenic
structures, such as concrete or riprap
channel linings that occur within
wetland habitat types, to delineate the
lateral boundaries of units. To a lesser
extent, we also used aerial imagery from
the National Agricultural Imagery
Program (NAIP) to delineate the lateral
boundaries of a critical habitat unit
where insufficient NWI data were
available.

The precise location of tidewater goby
habitat at a particular locality may vary
on a daily, seasonal, and annual basis;
the habitats occupied by tidewater goby
exist in a dynamic environment that
varies over time. For example, the size
and lateral extent of a coastal lagoon or
estuary varies with daily tide cycles.

Flood events may also change the
precise location where surface water
exists within a given lagoon, estuary,
backwater marsh, or freshwater
tributary. Therefore, it is appropriate to
delineate each critical habitat unit to
encompass the entire area that may be
occupied by tidewater goby on a daily,
seasonal, or annual basis. This was
accomplished by using the boundaries
delineated on the NWI maps to
determine the lateral extent of each unit.

The delineation of the farthest
upstream extent of a particular critical
habitat unit was determined using one
of four features that include:
(1) The average distance that
tidewater gobies are known to move
upstream from the ocean (4.0 mi (6.4
km)),
(2) the presence of barriers, such as
culverts that may prevent tidewater
gobies from moving upstream,
(3) the presence of a vertical drop, for
example more than 4 to 8 in (10 to 20
cm) high, or steep gradient that
precludes tidewater gobies from
swimming upstream or can act as a
barrier that makes it less likely
tidewater gobies will be able to swim
upstream (Swift et al. 1997, p. 20)), or
(4) limited surface water in the
tributary up-gradient from the lagoon or
estuary.

Each of the above features describes a
barrier to upstream movement;
therefore, the upstream extent of a
particular unit was determined by
whichever barrier was identified first
through the mapping process regardless
of whether or not components of the
PCE were still present above it.

When determining critical habitat
boundaries within this final rule, we
made every effort to avoid including
developed areas such as lands covered
by bridges, docks, and other structures
because such lands cannot provide
habitat for the tidewater goby. 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
lands. Any such lands inadvertently left
inside critical habitat boundaries shown
on the maps of this final rule have been
excluded by text in the rule and are not
designated as critical habitat. Therefore,
a Federal action involving these lands
will not trigger section 7 consultation
with respect to critical habitat and the
requirement of no adverse modification
unless the specific action may affect
adjacent critical habitat.

The critical habitat designation is
defined by the map or maps, as
modified by any accompanying
regulatory text, presented at the end of
this document in the rule portion. We
include more detailed information on
the boundaries of the critical habitat
designation in the preamble of this
document. We will make the
coordinates or plot points or both on
which each map is based available to
the public on http://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.

FWS–R8–ES–2011–0085, on our
Internet sites at http://www.fws.gov/
ventura/, and at the field office
responsible for the designation (see
FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT above).

We are designating as critical habitat
lands that we have determined are
within the geographical area occupied at
the time of listing and contain sufficient
physical or biological features to
support life-history processes essential
to the conservation of the species, and
lands outside of the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing that we
have determined are essential for the
conservation of tidewater goby.

Units within the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing are
designated based on sufficient elements
of physical or biological features being
present to support tidewater goby life
processes. Some units contain all of the
identified elements of physical or
biological features and support multiple
life processes. Some units contain only
some elements of the physical or
biological features necessary to support
the tidewater goby’s particular use of
that habitat.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8759 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Final Critical Habitat Designation
We are designating 65 units as critical
habitat for tidewater goby (see Table 1
below). The critical habitat areas
described below constitute our best
assessment at this time of areas that
meet the definition of critical habitat.

TABLE 1—O CCUPANCY OF TIDEWATER GOBY BY DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS Unit Name Within the geographical area
occupied at time of listing? Currently occupied 1
DN–1 ..................................................................... Tillas Slough (Smith River) Yes ........................ ................. Yes.

DN–2 ..................................................................... Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa ....... Yes ....................... .................. Yes.

HUM–1 .................................................................. Stone Lagoon ...................... Yes ................... ...................... Yes.

HUM–2 .................................................................. Big Lagoon .......................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

HUM–3 .................................................................. Humboldt Bay ...................... Yes ................... ...................... Yes.

HUM–4 .................................................................. Eel River .............................. No ............... ........................... Yes.

MEN–1 .................................................................. Ten Mile River ..................... Yes .................. ....................... Yes.

MEN–2 .................................................................. Virgin Creek ........................ Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

MEN–3 .................................................................. Pudding Creek .................... Yes .................... ..................... Yes.

MEN–4 .................................................................. Davis Lake and Manchester State Park Ponds.

Yes ......................................... Yes.

SON–1 .................................................................. Salmon Creek ..................... Yes .................... ..................... Yes.

MAR–1 .................................................................. Estero Americano ................ Yes ..................... .................... Yes.

MAR–2 .................................................................. Estero de San Antonio ........ Yes ........................ ................. Yes.

MAR–3 .................................................................. Walker Creek ...................... No .................... ...................... No.

MAR–4 .................................................................. Lagunitas (Papermill) Creek No .......................... ................ Yes.

MAR–5 .................................................................. Bolinas Lagoon 2 ................. No .......................................... No.

MAR–6 .................................................................. Rodeo Lagoon ..................... Yes .................... ..................... Yes.

SM–1 ..................................................................... San Gregorio Creek ............ Yes ..................... .................... Yes.

SM–2 ..................................................................... Pomponio Creek ................. No ..................... ..................... Yes.

SM–3 ..................................................................... Pescadero-Butano Creek .... Yes ......................... ................ Yes.

SM–4 ..................................................................... Bean Hollow Creek (Arroyo de Los Frijoles).

Yes ......................................... Yes.

SC–1 ..................................................................... Waddell Creek ..................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SC–2 ..................................................................... Scott Creek ......................... No ................ .......................... Yes.

SC–3 ..................................................................... Laguna Creek ...................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SC–4 ..................................................................... Baldwin Creek ..................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SC–5 ..................................................................... Moore Creek ....................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SC–6 ..................................................................... Corcoran Lagoon ................ Yes .................... ..................... Yes.

SC–7 ..................................................................... Aptos Creek ........................ Yes ................ ......................... Yes.

SC–8 ..................................................................... Pajaro River ........................ Yes ............... .......................... Yes.

MN–1 .................................................................... Bennett Slough .................... Yes .................. ....................... Yes.

MN–2 .................................................................... Salinas River ....................... No ................. ......................... No.

SLO–1 ................................................................... Arroyo de la Cruz 2 .............. No .......................................... No.

SLO–2 ................................................................... Arroyo del Corral ................. Yes .................. ....................... Yes.

SLO–3 ................................................................... Oak Knoll Creek (Arroyo La- guna).

Yes ......................................... Yes.

SLO–4 ................................................................... Little Pico Creek .................. Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SLO–5 ................................................................... San Simeon Creek .............. Yes ...................... ................... Yes.

SLO–6 ................................................................... Villa Creek ........................... Yes .............. ........................... Yes.

SLO–7 ................................................................... San Geronimo Creek .......... Yes ........................ ................. Yes.

SLO–8 ................................................................... Toro Creek .......................... Yes ................ ......................... Yes.

SLO–9 ................................................................... Los Osos Creek .................. No ..................... ..................... Yes.

SLO–10 ................................................................. San Luis Obispo Creek ....... Yes ......................... ................ Yes.

SLO–11 ................................................................. Pismo Creek ........................ Yes .................. ....................... Yes.

SLO–12 ................................................................. Oso Flaco Lake 2 ................. No .......................................... No.

SB–1 ..................................................................... Santa Maria River ............... Yes ................... ...................... Yes.

SB–2 ..................................................................... Can ˜ada de las Agujas ......... Yes ......................................... Yes.

SB–3 ..................................................................... Can ˜ada de Santa Anita ....... Yes ......................................... Yes.

SB–4 ..................................................................... Can ˜ada de Alegria .............. Yes ......................................... Yes.

SB–5 ..................................................................... Can ˜ada de Agua Caliente ... Yes ......................................... Yes.

SB–6 ..................................................................... Gaviota Creek ..................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

SB–7 ..................................................................... Arroyo Hondo ...................... No .................. ........................ Yes.

SB–8 ..................................................................... Winchester-Bell Canyon ...... Yes ....................... .................. Yes.

SB–9 ..................................................................... Goleta Slough ..................... No .................. ........................ Yes.

SB–10 ................................................................... Arroyo Burro ........................ No ................. ......................... Yes.

SB–11 ................................................................... Mission Creek-Laguna Channel.

Yes ......................................... Yes.

SB–12 ................................................................... Arroyo Paredon ................... No .................... ...................... Yes.

VEN–1 ................................................................... Ventura River ...................... Yes ................. ........................ Yes.

VEN–2 ................................................................... Santa Clara River ................ Yes ................... ...................... Yes.

VEN–3 ................................................................... J Street Drain-Ormond La- goon.

Yes ......................................... Yes.

VEN–4 ................................................................... Big Sycamore Canyon ........ No .......................... ................ Yes.

LA–1 ...................................................................... Arroyo Sequit 2 .................... No .......................................... No.

LA–2 ...................................................................... Zuma Creek 2 ...................... No .......................................... No.

LA–3 ...................................................................... Malibu Lagoon ..................... Yes ................ ......................... Yes.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8760 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 1—O CCUPANCY OF TIDEWATER GOBY BY DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT UNITS—Continued Unit Name Within the geographical area
occupied at time of listing? Currently occupied 1
LA–4 ...................................................................... Topanga Creek ................... No ................... ....................... Yes.

OR–1 ..................................................................... Aliso Creek .......................... No ............... ........................... No.

SAN–1 ................................................................... San Luis Rey River ............. No ...................... .................... Yes. 1 Based on the Recovery Plan and subsequent survey information where available. 2 Tidewater gobies have never been recorded from this location; however, regularly scheduled monitoring of these subpopulations has not been conducted.

The approximate area of each critical
habitat unit is shown in Table 2.

TABLE 2—C RITICAL HABITAT UNITS DESIGNATED FOR THE TIDEWATER GOBY AND KNOWN THREATS THAT MAY REQUIRE

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS OR PROTECTION OF THE ESSENTIAL PHYSICAL OR BIOLOGICAL FEATURES

FOR UNITS WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OCCUPIED BY THE SPECIES AT THE TIME OF LISTING Unit name Federal
ac (ha)
State
ac (ha)
Local
ac (ha)
Private
ac (ha)
Total 1
ac (ha)
Known threats
that may re-
quire special
management
considerations
or protection
of the essen-
tial features 2
DN–1: Tillas Slough (Smith River) ........... 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 21 (8) 21 (8) 2, 3, 5 DN–2: Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa ................. 0 (0) 2,335 (945) 0 (0) 348 (141) 2,683 (1,086) 1, 2, 4 HUM–1: Stone Lagoon ............................ 0 (0) 653 (264) 0 (0) 0 (0) 653 (264) 4 HUM–2: Big Lagoon ................................ 0 (0) 1,527 (618) 0 (0) 2 (1) 1,529 (619) 2, 4 HUM–3: Humboldt Bay ............................ 652 (264) 61 (24) 45 (18) 81 (33) 839 (339) 1, 3, 4, 5 HUM–4: Eel River .................................... 0 (0) 5 (2) 0 (0) 34 (13) 39 (15) N/A MEN–1: Ten Mile River ........................... 0 (0) 17 (7) 0 (0) 56 (23) 73 (30) 4 MEN–2: Virgin Creek ............................... 0 (0) 2 (1) 0 (0) 2 (1) 4 (2) 1, 4 MEN–3: Pudding Creek ........................... 0 (0) 10 (4) 1 (1) 6 (2) 17 (7) 1, 2, 4 MEN–4: Davis Lake and Manchester
State Park Ponds ................................. 0 (0) 29 (12) 0 (0) 0 (0) 29 (12) 4 SON–1: Salmon Creek ............................ 0 (0) 47 (19) 14 (6) 47 (19) 108 (44) 1, 2, 4, 5 MAR–1: Estero Americano ...................... 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 465 (188) 465 (188) 1, 4, 5 MAR–2: Estero De San Antonio .............. 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 285 (115) 285 (115) 1, 2, 4, 5 MAR–3: Walker Creek ............................. 0 (0) 9 (4) 0 (0) 109 (44) 118 (48) N/A MAR–4: Lagunitas (Papermill) Creek ...... 318 (129) 459 (186) 0 (0) 221 (90) 998 (405) N/A MAR–5: Bolinas Lagoon .......................... 29 (12) 0 (0) 1,048 (424) 37 (15) 1,114 (451) N/A MAR–6: Rodeo Lagoon ........................... 40 (16) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 40 (16) 1 SM–1: San Gregorio Creek ..................... 0 (0) 33 (13) 0 (0) 12 (5) 45 (18) 1, 3 SM–2: Pomponio Creek ........................... 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 6 (2) 7 (3) N/A SM–3: Pescadero-Butano Creek ............. 0 (0) 241 (97) 0 (0) 4 (2) 245 (99) 1, 3, 4 SM–4: Bean Hollow Creek (Arroyo de
Los Frijoles) .......................................... 0 (0) 3 (1) 0 (0) 7 (3) 10 (4) 1, 2 SC–1: Waddell Creek .............................. 0 (0) 39 (16) 0 (0) 36 (14) 75 (30) 2, 3, 4 SC–2: Scott Creek ................................... 0 (0) 66 (27) 6 (2) 2 (1) 74 (30) N/A SC–3: Laguna Creek ............................... 0 (0) 26 (11) 0 (0) 0 (0) 26 (11) 2, 4 SC–4: Baldwin Creek ............................... 0 (0) 27 (11) 0 (0) 0 (0) 27 (11) 2, 4 SC–5: Moore Creek ................................. 15 (6) 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 15 (6) 2, 4 SC–6: Corcoran Lagoon .......................... 0 (0) 1 (1) 6 (2) 21 (8) 28 (11) 1, 4 SC–7: Aptos Creek .................................. 0 (0) 9 (4) 0 (0) 0 (0) 9 (4) 1, 3, 4 SC–8: Pajaro River .................................. 0 (0) 158 (64) 11 (4) 46 (19) 215 (87) 1, 3, 4 MN–1: Bennett Slough ............................. 0 (0) 108 (44) 5 (2) 54 (22) 167 (68) 1, 2, 3, 4 MN–2: Salinas River ................................ 195 (79) 33 (13) 1 (1) 237 (96) 466 (189) N/A SLO–1: Arroyo de la Cruz ....................... 0 (0) 25 (10) 0 (0) 8 (3) 33 (13) N/A SLO–2: Arroyo del Corral ........................ 0 (0) 4 (2) 0 (0) 1 (1) 5 (3) 1, 5 SLO–3: Oak Knoll Creek (Arroyo La-
guna) .................................................... 0 (0) 4 (2) 0 (0) 1 (1) 5 (3) 1, 3 SLO–4: Little Pico Creek ......................... 0 (0) 2 (1) 0 (0) 7 (3) 9 (4) 5 SLO–5: San Simeon Creek ..................... 0 (0) 17 (7) 0 (0) 0 (0) 17 (7) 2, 4, 5 SLO–6: Villa Creek .................................. 0 (0) 14 (6) 0 (0) 1 (1) 15 (7) 1, 2, 4, 5 SLO–7: San Geronimo Creek .................. 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 5 SLO–8: Toro Creek .................................. 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 8 (3) 9 (4) 2, 3, 4 SLO–9: Los Osos Creek .......................... 0 (0) 62 (25) 1 (1) 10 (4) 73 (30) N/A SLO–10: San Luis Obispo Creek ............ 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (1) 28 (11) 31 (12) 1, 2, 3, 4 SLO–11: Pismo Creek ............................. 0 (0) 14 (6) 1 (1) 5 (2) 20 (9) 1, 3, 4 SLO–12: Oso Flaco Lake ........................ 0 (0) 165 (67) 0 (0) 6 (2) 171 (69) N/A SB–1: Santa Maria River ......................... 0 (0) 0 (0) 42 (17) 432 (174) 474 (192) 1, 2, 4, 5 VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8761 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations TABLE 2—C RITICAL HABITAT UNITS DESIGNATED FOR THE TIDEWATER GOBY AND KNOWN THREATS THAT MAY REQUIRE

SPECIAL MANAGEMENT CONSIDERATIONS OR PROTECTION OF THE ESSENTIAL PHYSICAL OR BIOLOGICAL FEATURES FOR UNITS WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL AREA OCCUPIED BY THE SPECIES AT THE TIME OF LISTING—Continued Unit name Federal
ac (ha)
State
ac (ha)
Local
ac (ha)
Private
ac (ha)
Total 1
ac (ha)
Known threats
that may re-
quire special
management
considerations
or protection
of the essen-
tial features 2
SB–2: Can˜ada de las Agujas .................. 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 1 (1) 1, 4 SB–3: Can˜ada de Santa Anita ................ 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (1) 3 (1) 4 SB–4: Can˜ada de Alegria ........................ 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 2 (1) 2 (1) 1, 2, 4, 5 SB–5: Can˜ada de Agua Caliente ............ 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 1 (1) 1, 4 SB–6: Gaviota Creek ............................... 0 (0) 10 (4) 0 (0) 1 (1) 11 (5) 1, 3, 4, 5 SB–7: Arroyo Hondo ................................ 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 1 (1) N/A SB–8: Winchester-Bell Canyon ............... 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) 5 (2) 6 (3) 2, 4 SB–9: Goleta Slough ............................... 0 (0) 0 (0) 164 (66) 26 (10) 190 (76) N/A SB–10: Arroyo Burro ................................ 0 (0) 0 (0) 3 (1) 0 (0) 3 (1) N/A SB–11: Mission Creek-Laguna Channel 0 (0) 3 (1) 4 (2) 0 (0) 7 (3) 1, 3, 4 SB–12: Arroyo Paredon ........................... 0 (0) 1 (1) 1 (1) 1 (1) 3 (3) N/A VEN–1: Ventura River ............................. 0 (0) 25 (10) 16 (7) 9 (4) 50 (20) 1, 2, 3, 4 VEN–2: Santa Clara River ....................... 0 (0) 199 (80) 14 (6) 110 (44) 323 (130) 1, 2, 3, 4 VEN–3: J Street Drain-Ormond Lagoon .. 0 (0) 5 (2) 49 (20) 67 (27) 121 (49) 1, 2, 3, 4 VEN–4: Big Sycamore Canyon ............... 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) N/A LA–1: Arroyo Sequit ................................. 0 (0) 1 (1) 0 (0) 0 (0) 1 (1) N/A LA–2: Zuma Canyon ................................ 0 (0) 0 (0) 5 (2) 0 (0) 5 (2) N/A LA–3: Malibu Lagoon ............................... 0 (0) 41 (17) 1 (1) 22 (9) 64 (27) 1, 2, 3, 4 LA–4: Topanga Creek .............................. 0 (0) 4 (1) 0 (0) 2 (1) 6 (2) N/A OR–1: Aliso Creek ................................... 0 (0) 0 (0) 8 (3) 6 (2) 14 (5) N/A SAN–1: San Luis Rey River .................... 0 (0) 3 (1) 49 (20) 4 (2) 56 (23) N/A Total 1 ................................................ 1,249 (506) 6,501 (2,636) 1,501 (611) 2,905 (1,177) 12,156 (4,920) ............ ............

Note: Area sizes may not sum due to rounding.
1 Area estimates in ac (ha) reflect the entire area within the critical habitat unit boundaries. Area estimates are rounded to the nearest whole in- teger that is equal to or greater than 1.
2 Codes of known threats that may require special management considerations or protection of the essential physical or biological features are as follows:

1. Coastal development projects that result in the loss or alteration of coastal wetland habitat affecting the PCE components 1a, 1b, or 1c.

2. Water diversions, alterations of water flows, and groundwater overdrafting upstream of coastal lagoons and estuaries that negatively impact the species’ breeding and foraging activities and the PCE components 1a or 1b.

3. Channelization of habitats where the species occurs affecting the PCE components 1a, 1b, or 1c.

4. Nonpoint- and point-source pollution or discharge of agricultural and sewage effluents that are likely to impact the species’ health or breed- ing and foraging activities and the PCE.

5. Cattle grazing that results in increased sedimentation of coastal lagoons and riparian habitats, removes vegetative cover, increases ambient water temperatures, and eliminates plunge pools and undercut banks utilized by tidewater goby affecting the PCE.

N/A—Not applicable because location is outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing.

We present brief descriptions of all
units, and reasons why they meet the
definition of critical habitat for
tidewater goby, below. The first two or
three letters in the code for each critical
habitat unit description reflect the
county where the unit occurs: DN = Del
Norte, HUM = Humboldt, MEN =
Mendocino, SON = Sonoma, MAR =
Marin, SM = San Mateo, SC = Santa
Cruz, MN = Monterey, SLO = San Luis
Obispo, SB = Santa Barbara, VEN =
Ventura, LA = Los Angeles, OR =
Orange, and SAN = San Diego. In Tables
1 and 2 above, these units are listed in
sequential order from north to south.

For the purposes of this document, the
term ‘‘local ownership’’ refers to land
owned or managed by a city, county, or
municipal government entity.

DN–1: Tillas Slough
DN–1 consists of 21 ac (8 ha) of
private lands. This unit is located in Del
Norte County, approximately 3.0 mi (4.8
km) west of the community of Smith
River and 8.0 mi (12.8 km) north of Lake
Earl/Lake Tolowa (DN–2), which is also
the next nearest extant subpopulation.

DN–1 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit supports the
northernmost tidewater goby
subpopulation. DN–1 will support the
recovery of the tidewater goby
subpopulation within the North Coast
Recovery Unit. This unit is important
for maintaining the tidewater goby
metapopulation in the region, and plays
an important role in dispersal of the
tidewater goby, which could prove vital
if certain factors, such as climate
change, adversely impact the tidewater
goby habitat locally or to the south. A
culvert that serves as a grade control
structure, which mutes the tide cycle,
provides relatively stable water levels in
this unit (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8762 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations DN–2: Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa
DN–2 consists of 2,683 ac (1,086 ha).

This unit is located in Del Norte County,
approximately 3 mi (4.8 km) north of
the town of Crescent City. The unit
consists of 2,335 ac (945 ha) of State
lands and 348 ac (140 ha) of private
lands. This unit includes two
contiguous lagoons (Lake Tolowa and
Lake Earl), referred to collectively as
Lake Earl. DN–2 is located 8.0 mi (12.8
km) south of (DN–1), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

DN–2 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in DN–2 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit.

DN–2 is representative of extensive
coastal lagoons and bays north of Cape
Mendocino formed over uplifting
Holocene sediments on broad flat
coastal benches. These coastal benches
include an intricate network of estuaries
and other channels that are features
essential to the conservation of the
tidewater goby because they provide
refugia during seasonal floods and
breeding habitat through the full range
of drought cycles. The water level and
salinity within the lagoon varies
seasonally and annually in response to:
(a) Periods of high precipitation or
drought within its watershed; (b) the
timing, duration, and frequency of
breaching events; (c) the water level in
the lagoon at the time of breaching; and
(d) ocean tidal cycles during and
immediately following a breach. As a
result of natural and human-induced
environmental changes, including
artificial breaching, maximum water
depth within Lake Earl/Lake Tolowa
varies during an annual cycle from less
than 5 ft (1.5 m) deep to more than 10
ft (3 m) deep. The distribution of
tidewater goby and the PCE within Lake
Earl/Lake Tolowa changes in response
to these dynamic short-term habitat
conditions; over a multiyear cycle,
tidewater goby may persist and breed
anywhere within the lagoon. McCraney
et al. (2010) indicate that artificial
breaching activities may be reducing
genetic diversity in this subpopulation
by repeated bottlenecking.

On an intermittent basis, DN–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the
majority of the late spring, summer, and
fall that closes or partially closes the
lagoon or estuary, and thereby provides
relatively stable conditions during those
times (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

HUM–1: Stone Lagoon
HUM–1 consists of 653 ac (264 ha).

This unit is located in Humboldt
County, approximately 11 mi (18 km)
north of the City of Trinidad. The unit
consists entirely of State lands. HUM–
1 is located 3.1 mi (5.0 km) north of Big
Lagoon (HUM–2), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

HUM–1 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in HUM–1 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, HUM–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the
majority of the late spring, summer, and
fall that closes or partially closes the
lagoon or estuary, and thereby provides
relatively stable conditions (PCE 1c).

PCE 1a and 1b occur throughout the
unit, although their precise location
during any particular time period may
change in response to seasonal
fluctuations in precipitation and tidal
inundation. The physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species in this unit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats described
in Table 2. Please see Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

HUM–2: Big Lagoon
HUM–2 consists of 1,529 ac (619 ha).

This unit is located in Humboldt
County, approximately 7 mi (11 km)
north of the City of Trinidad. The unit
consists of 1,527 ac (618 ha) of State
lands and 2 ac (1 ha) of private lands.

HUM–2 is located 3.1 mi (5.0 km) south
of Stone Lagoon (HUM–1), which is also
the nearest extant subpopulation.

HUM–2 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in HUM–2 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit.

Mark and recapture surveys for
tidewater goby were conducted by
Humboldt State University in a large
cove near the State Park boat ramp in
Big Lagoon during the fall of 2008, 2009,
and 2010, to estimate the minimum
tidewater goby subpopulation for each
year (Hellmair 2011, p. 47). Results
indicate that, in 2008, the tidewater
goby subpopulation was approximately
21,000 individuals. In 2009, the
subpopulation was approximately 1.7 to

3.4 million individuals in the cove. In
2010, the subpopulation was
approximately 30,000 individuals in the
same cove. Based on the results of this
research, which estimated that the
subpopulation fluctuated between
21,000 and 1.7–3.4 million individuals,
and the relatively large size of the
lagoon, Big Lagoon likely has the largest
and most robust tidewater goby
subpopulation in northern California.

The results of the study also reflect how
variable tidewater goby subpopulation
numbers can be from year to year in a
given location.

On an intermittent basis, HUM–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the
majority of the late spring, summer, and
fall that closes or partially closes the
lagoon or estuary, and thereby provides
relatively stable conditions during those
times (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

HUM–3: Humboldt Bay
HUM–3 consists of 839 ac (339 ha).

This unit is located in Humboldt
County, within an approximate 8-mi
(13-km) radius to the north, south, and
west of the City of Eureka. The unit
consists of 652 ac (264 ha) of Federal
lands, 61 ac (24 ha) of State lands, 45
ac (18 ha) of local lands, and 81 ac (33
ha) of private lands. HUM–3 is located

18.4 mi (29.7 km) north of the Eel River
(HUM–4), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation. HUM–3 was
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8763 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations occupied at the time of listing. The
tidewater goby subpopulation in HUM–
3 is likely a source population, which is
important in maintaining the
metapopulation dynamics, and hence
the long-term viability, of the North
Coast Recovery Unit. This
subpopulation may provide essential
demographic and genetic support to
HUM–4, especially after periods of
extreme floods, for example, after the
1964 ‘‘Christmas Flood,’’ when the
subpopulation of tidewater goby at the
Eel River estuary may have been
extirpated.

Humboldt Bay and its adjacent
marshes and estuaries are a complex
mixture of natural and human-made
aquatic features that have experienced
many decades of human-induced
changes. These changes include the
construction of levees, tidegates,
culverts, and other water control
structures, and extensive dredging of
sandbars. Surrounding the Bay itself is
a generally broad bench historically
dominated by mudflats, tidal marshes,
estuarine channels, and brackish
marshes. Substantial portions of these
habitats were converted to agricultural,
urban, and industrial uses in recent
history, resulting in the loss of as much
as 10,000 ac (4,047 ha) of potentially
suitable tidewater goby habitat. This
critical habitat unit consists of a
complex of interconnected estuary
channels and tidegates along the eastern
edge of Humboldt Bay, which
collectively mimic, on a much-reduced
scale, suitable habitat for tidewater
goby. Many of these channels and
marshes are themselves the result of
changes to historical habitats, and
depend on specific, yet generally
undocumented, management activities,
such as dredging or sandbar breaches,
for their continued function.

To address the dynamic variability of
these habitats resulting from seasonal
and inter-annual precipitation
differences, we have included both the
actual known locations where the
tidewater goby has been documented, as
well as portions of those channels
contiguous to, and upchannel or
downchannel from, occupied habitat.

We have not designated Humboldt Bay
proper as critical habitat, nor have we
proposed major channels subject to
substantial daily tidal fluctuations, as
tidewater gobies are not known to breed
there. Similarly, we have not designated
channels that are discontiguous with
occupied habitat, nor have we included
intervening marsh or agricultural lands
that may occasionally be flooded during
severe winter storm events.

Based on several recent surveys, we
have found that the precise locations of
tidewater goby use within the channel
complex during any particular year may
change in response to variations in
precipitation and channel hydrology.

We anticipate that the persistence of the
tidewater goby source population
within this unit may require protection
of lagoons and estuaries that are not
occupied every year, but collectively
support a source population through an
interconnected complex of channels and
shallow water habitats. That is, any of
the several known occupied locations
within a channel complex may be used
by tidewater goby during various years
in response to dynamic habitat
conditions during seasonal, annual, and
longer term climatic cycles, such as
drought.

PCE 1c (a sandbar(s) across the mouth
of a lagoon or estuary) is not likely to
occur within this unit because a
navigable, dredged channel with a
permanent open connection to the
ocean is maintained on a regular basis.

PCE 1a and 1b occur throughout the
unit, although their precise location
during any particular time period may
change in response to seasonal
fluctuations in precipitation and tidal
inundation. The physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species in this unit may require
special management considerations or
protection to address threats described
in Table 2. Please see Special
Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

HUM–4: Eel River
This unit is located in Humboldt
County, approximately 4.0 mi (6.5 ha)
northwest of the City of Ferndale. The
unit consists of two subunits, totaling 5
ac (2 ha) of State lands and 34 ac (13
ha) of private lands.

Both subunits are outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing but are now
occupied. The Eel River estuary is
similar to Humboldt Bay (HUM–3) in
that tidewater goby subpopulations have
been found in isolated populations in
severely and artificially fragmented
habitats, which are often found behind
tidegates, culverts, and other manmade
structures. In Humboldt Bay (HUM–3),
McCraney et al. (2010, p. 3315) found
that artificial fragmentation reduced
dispersal and gene flow in these
subpopulations. The same may be true
for the Eel River estuary subpopulations
with isolated populations that are
genetically distinct from each other.

Therefore, until additional information
is available regarding population
genetics, distribution, and other
parameters, we consider these two
areas, the Eel River North Area
(Subunit-4a) and the Eel River South
Area (Subunit–4b), to be distinct from
each other. Artificially fragmented
habitats in the Eel River estuary may
have genetically isolated or weakened
populations of tidewater goby, as has
been identified in Humboldt Bay
(HUM–3) (McCraney et al. 2010, p.
3315). Current and proposed estuarine
restoration projects in the Eel River
estuary may improve dispersal of
tidewater goby, increase genetic
diversity, and aid in recovery of the
species in these locations as well.

Subunit-4a (Eel River North Area)
Subunit-4a encompasses
approximately 16 ac (6 ha), and consists
of 5 ac (2 ha) of State lands and 11 ac
(4 ha) of private lands. Subunit-4a is
located 3.3 mi (5.3 km) north of
Subunit-4b, which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation. This subunit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it possesses ecological
characteristics that are important in
maintaining the species’ ability to adapt
to changing environments, including the
ability to disperse into higher channels
and marsh habitat during severe flood
events. The Eel River delta includes a
large, complex estuary with a network
of diked and natural slough channels
with suitable tidewater goby habitat.

The Eel River delta contains many small
unsurveyed slough channels and other
backwater areas that provide suitable
habitat for tidewater goby, but it also
contains larger channels open to direct
tidal influence that do not provide
suitable habitat and are not included in
this subunit. This subunit consists of
backwater channels and immediately
adjacent marsh contiguous to the
known-occupied habitat.

This unit is subject to infrequent, yet
severe, flooding from the nearby Eel
River proper. The major flood event of
1964 (‘‘Christmas Flood’’), and other
major floods during the past century,
may have severely altered habitat in
most channels, including those
currently occupied. Tidewater goby may
have survived the flood and resulting
loss of habitat in the refugia provided in
upper channels and swales.

Alternatively, the species may have
been extirpated at the Eel River delta
during those severe events, and become
reestablished through recolonization by
individuals from Humboldt Bay
populations (HUM–3). Of particular
importance, the Eel River location is at
the north end of one of the largest
natural geographic gaps in the tidewater
goby’s geographic range. The gap
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8764 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations extends to the Ten Mile River
(Mendocino County) to the south,
representing a coastline distance in
excess of 135 mi (217 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. Although Subunit-
4a is outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing, it does
possess the PCE that is needed to
support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, Subunit-4a possesses
a sandbar across the mouth of the
lagoon or estuary during the majority of
the late spring, summer, and fall that
closes or partially closes the lagoon or
estuary, and thereby provides relatively
stable conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and
1b occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation.

Subunit-4b (Eel River South Area)
Subunit-4b encompasses
approximately 23 ac (9 ha), and consists
entirely of private lands. Subunit-4b is
located 3.3 mi (5.3 km) south of
Subunit-4a, which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation. This subunit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it possesses ecological
characteristics that are important in
maintaining the species’ ability to adapt
to changing environments, including the
ability to disperse into higher channels
and marsh habitat during severe flood
events. The Southern Eel River delta
includes a large complex estuary with a
network of diked and natural slough
channels, and other backwater areas that
provide suitable habitat for tidewater
goby. It also contains larger channels
open to direct tidal influence that do not
provide suitable habitat and are not
included in this unit. This unit consists
of backwater channels and immediately
adjacent marsh contiguous to the
known-occupied habitat.

This unit is subject to infrequent, yet
severe, flooding from the nearby Eel
River proper. The major flood event of
1964 (‘‘Christmas Flood’’), and other
major floods during the past century,
may have severely altered habitat in
most channels, including those
currently occupied. Tidewater goby may
have survived the flood and resulting
loss of habitat in the refugia provided in
upper channels and swales.

Alternatively, the species may have
been extirpated at the Eel River delta
during those severe events, and become
reestablished through recolonization by
individuals from Humboldt Bay
populations (HUM–3). Of particular
importance, the Eel River location is at
the north end of one of the largest
natural geographic gaps in the tidewater
goby’s geographic range. The gap
extends to the Ten Mile River
(Mendocino County) to the south,
representing a coastline distance in
excess of 135 mi (217 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. Although Subunit-
4b was outside the geographical area
occupied at the time of listing, it does
possess the PCE that is needed to
support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, Subunit-4b possesses
a sandbar across the mouth of the
lagoon or estuary during the majority of
the late spring, summer, and fall that
closes or partially closes the lagoon or
estuary, and thereby provides relatively
stable conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and
1b occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation.

MEN–1: Ten Mile River
MEN–1 consists of 73 ac (30 ha). This
unit is located in Mendocino County,
approximately 9.0 mi (14.5 km) north of
the Town of Fort Bragg. The unit
consists of 17 ac (7 ha) of State lands
and 56 ac (23 ha) of private lands.

MEN–1 is located 5.6 mi (8.9 km) north
of the Virgin Creek (MEN–2), which is
also the nearest extant subpopulation.

MEN–1 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in MEN–1 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit. Furthermore, this unit is the
largest block of habitat along the coast
of Mendocino County, and is the first
location on the southern end of one of
the longest stretches of unsuitable
habitat in the species’ range (previously
described under HUM–4). Thus, this
unit is important to connect
subpopulations within Mendocino
County. South of Ten Mile River, only
three other small isolated locations
(MEN–2, 3, 4) occupied by the tidewater
goby are known to exist across the more
than 100 miles of rugged coastline
between MEN–1 and SON–1 in south
coastal Sonoma County.

On an intermittent basis, MEN–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MEN–2: Virgin Creek
MEN–2 consists of 4 ac (2 ha). This
unit is located in Mendocino County,
approximately 3.5 mi (5.6 km) north of
the Town of Fort Bragg. The unit
consists of 2 ac (1 ha) of State lands and
2 ac (1 ha) of private lands. MEN–2 is
located 1.2 mi (2.0 km) north of Pudding
Creek (MEN–3), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

MEN–2 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The tidewater
goby subpopulation in MEN–2 is likely
a source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, MEN–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MEN–3: Pudding Creek
MEN–3 consists of 17 ac (7 ha). This
unit is located in Mendocino County,
approximately 2.5 mi (4.0 km) north of
the town of Fort Bragg. The unit consists
of 10 ac (4 ha) of State lands, 1 ac (less
than 1 ha) of local lands, and 6 ac (2 ha)
of private lands. MEN–3 is located 1.2
mi (2.0 km) south of Virgin Creek
(MEN–2), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

MEN–3 was occupied by the
tidewater goby at the time of listing.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8765 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations This unit allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within the North Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, MEN–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MEN–4: Davis Lake and Manchester
State Park Ponds
MEN–4 consists of 29 ac (12 ha). This
unit is located in Mendocino County,
approximately 1.2 mi (1.9 ha) west of
the community of Manchester. The unit
consists entirely of State lands. MEN–4
is located 32.4 mi (52.2 km) south of
Pudding Creek (MEN–3), which is also
the nearest extant subpopulation.

MEN–4 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The tidewater
goby subpopulation in MEN–4 is likely
a source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the North Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, MEN–4
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SON–1: Salmon Creek
SON–1 consists of 108 ac (44 ha). This
unit is located in Sonoma County,
approximately 7 mi (11.3 km) south of
the community of Jenner. The unit
consists of 47 ac (19 ha) of State lands,
14 ac (6 ha) local lands, and 47 ac (19
ha) of private lands. SON–1 is located

5.3 mi (8.5 km) north of the Estero
Americano unit (MAR–1), which is also
the nearest extant subpopulation.

SON–1 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The
geological feature known as Bodega
Head separates Salmon Creek and Estero
Americano, and could reduce the
exchange of tidewater goby between
these two locations. The tidewater goby
population in this unit is likely a source
population, and is therefore important
for maintaining metapopulation
dynamics. This critical habitat unit
provides habitat for a tidewater goby
subpopulation that is important to the
conservation of one of the genetically
distinct recovery units as described in
the Recovery Plan (Dawson et al. 2001,
p. 1172). Maintaining this unit will
reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Greater Bay
Area Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SON–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MAR–1: Estero Americano
MAR–1 consists of 465 ac (188 ha).

This unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 3.5 mi (5.7 km) south of
Bodega Bay. The unit consists entirely
of private lands. MAR–1 is located 2.2
mi (3.5 km) north of the Estero de San
Antonio (MAR–2), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

MAR–1 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The tidewater
goby subpopulation in MAR–1 is likely
a source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Greater Bay Area
Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, MAR–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MAR–2: Estero de San Antonio
MAR–2 consists of 285 ac (115 ha).

This unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 5.6 mi (9 km) south of
Bodega Bay. The unit consists entirely
of private lands. MAR–2 is located 2.2
mi (3.5 km) south of the Estero
Americano (MAR–1), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

MAR–2 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. This critical
habitat unit supports a source
population of tidewater goby that likely
provides individuals that are recruited
into surrounding subpopulations. Given
the close proximity of the MAR–1 and
MAR–2 units and the dispersal
capabilities of tidewater goby, it is likely
that the two subpopulations have
exchanged individuals in the past and
will continue to exchange individuals in
the future. Exchange between these
subpopulations would bolster the
continued sustainable existence of the
two subpopulations, which would,
together with unit SON–1, provide for
natural colonization of available, but is
considered to be currently unoccupied,
estuaries within the region south of the
Russian River and north of Point Reyes.

This critical habitat unit provides
habitat for a tidewater goby population
that is important to the conservation of
one of the genetically distinct recovery
units as described in the Recovery Plan
(Dawson et al. 2001, p. 1172).

Maintaining this unit will reduce the
chance of losing the tidewater goby
within the Greater Bay Area Recovery
Unit, and help conserve genetic
diversity within the species.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8766 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations On an intermittent basis, MAR–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MAR–3: Walker Creek
MAR–3 consists of 118 ac (48 ha).

This unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 2.5 mi (4 km) southwest
of the Town of Tomales. The unit
consists of 9 ac (4 ha) of State lands and
109 ac (44 ha) of private lands. MAR–
3 is located 4.6 mi (7.4 km) southeast of
the Estero de San Antonio unit (MAR–
2), which is also the nearest extant
subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing and is not considered to be
currently occupied. However, tidewater
gobies were collected at Walker Creek in
1897, but were not found in sampling
efforts conducted in 1996 or 1999
(Service 2005a, p. C–8). This unit is
identified in the Recovery Plan as a
potential reintroduction site, and could
provide habitat for maintaining the
tidewater goby metapopulation in the
region. MAR–3 is essential for the
conservation of the species because
establishing a tidewater goby population
in this unit will support the recovery of
the tidewater goby population within
the Greater Bay Area Recovery Unit and
help facilitate additional colonization of
currently unoccupied locations.

Although MAR–3 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. PCE 1a and
1b occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation.

MAR–4: Lagunitas (Papermill) Creek
MAR–4 consists of 998 ac (405 ha).

This unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 20.5 mi (33 km) south of
Bodega Bay. The unit consists of 318 ac
(129 ha) of Federal lands, 459 ac (186
ha) of State lands, and 221 ac (90 ha) of
private lands. MAR–4 is located 15.5 mi
(25.0 km) south of the Estero de San
Antonio unit (MAR–2), which is also
the nearest extant subpopulation.

Records indicate tidewater goby
occurred at this location historically.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but recent surveys have
confirmed that the unit is currently
occupied. This unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it is
the only known location of the
tidewater goby to remain within the
greater Tomales Bay area. Without this
subpopulation, there would be no
source population within dispersal
distance of Tomales Bay to maintain the
metapopulation dynamics of
subpopulations within the area.

Tomales Bay is designated as ‘‘wetlands
of significant importance’’ under the
International Convention on Wetlands
(http://sanctuarysimon.org/farallones/
sections/estuaries/overview.php).

Although MAR–4 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. We
do not have information that confirms
that PCE 1c (a sandbar(s) across the
mouth of the lagoon or estuary) is
present within this unit on at least an
intermittent basis. However, PCE 1a and
1b occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation.

MAR–5: Bolinas Lagoon
MAR–5 consists of 1,114 ac (451 ha).

This unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 0.5 mi (0.81 km) east of
the community of Bolinas. The unit
consists of 29 ac (12 ha) of Federal
Lands, 1,048 ac (424 ha) of local lands,
and 37 ac (15 ha) of private lands.

MAR–5 is located 9.4 mi (15.1 km)
northwest of the Rodeo Lagoon unit
(MAR–6), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing and is not known to be
currently occupied, and there are no
historical tidewater goby records for this
location. However, this unit is essential
for the conservation of the species
because it provides suitable habitat
within potential dispersal distance of
nearby occupied units, is identified in
the Recovery Plan as a potential
introduction site, and could help
maintain tidewater goby
metapopulations in the region. Bolinas
Lagoon is designated as ‘‘wetlands of
significant importance’’ under the
International Convention on Wetlands
(http://sanctuarysimon.org/farallones/
sections/estuaries/overview.php ).If a
tidewater goby subpopulation is
established in this unit, MAR–5 unit
will support the recovery of the
tidewater goby population within the
Greater Bay Recovery Unit and help
facilitate colonization of currently
unoccupied locations.

Although MAR–5 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. We do not
have information that confirms that PCE
1c (a sandbar(s) across the mouth of the
lagoon or estuary) is present within this
unit on at least an intermittent basis.

However, PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

MAR–6: Rodeo Lagoon
MAR–6 consists of 40 ac (16 ha). This
unit is located in Marin County,
approximately 3.8 mi (6 km) north of
San Francisco. The unit consists
entirely of Federal lands. MAR–6 is
located 9.4 mi (15.1 km) south of
Bolinas Lagoon (MAR–5), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, San
Gregorio Creek (SM–1), by 36 mi (58
km).

MAR–6 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. MAR–6 is the
only known location where the
tidewater goby remains within the
greater San Francisco Bay Area. This
critical habitat unit provides habitat for
a tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). It also provides
habitat for a subpopulation of tidewater
goby that could disperse to other
adjoining habitats. Maintaining this unit
will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby in the Greater Bay
Recovery Unit and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, MAR–6
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8767 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SM–1: San Gregorio Creek
SM–1 consists of 45 ac (18 ha). This
unit is located in San Mateo County,
approximately 28 mi (45 km) south of
the San Francisco–San Mateo County
line. The unit consists of 33 ac (13 ha)
of State lands and 12 ac (5 ha) of private
lands. SM–1 is located 1.5 mi (2.4 km)
north of Pomponio Creek (SM–2), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, Pescadero–
Butano Creek (SM–3), by 3.8 mi (6.1
km).

SM–1 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). This unit is noted
for high densities of tidewater goby
(Swenson 1993, p. 3).

On an intermittent basis, SM–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SM–2: Pomponio Creek
SM–2 consists of 7 ac (3 ha). This unit
is located in San Mateo County,
approximately 3.5 mi (5.6 km) north of
the community of Pescadero. The unit
consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of State
lands and 6 ac (2 ha) of private lands.

SM–2 is located 1.5 mi (2.4 km) south
of the San Gregorio Creek unit (SM–1),
which is also the nearest extant
subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat for
the species, allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations from nearby units, supports
gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics in the region.

Although SM–2 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
supports tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, SM–2 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SM–3: Pescadero–Butano Creek
SM–3 consists of 245 ac (99 ha). This
unit is located in San Mateo County,
approximately 32.0 mi (51.0 km) south
of the San Francisco–San Mateo County
line. This unit consists of 241 ac (97 ha)
of State lands and 4 ac (2 ha) of private
lands. SM–3 is located 2.2 mi (3.5 km)
south of Pomponio Creek (SM–2), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, in Bean
Hollow Creek (SM–4), by 3.0 mi (4.8
km).

SM–3 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. This unit allows
for connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations, and thereby
supports gene flow and metapopulation
dynamics within the Greater Bay Area
Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SM–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring and early fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SM–4: Bean Hollow Creek (Arroyo de
Los Frijoles)
SM–4 consists of 10 ac (4 ha). This
unit is located in San Mateo County,
approximately 34.8 mi (56.0 km) south
of the San Francisco–San Mateo County
line. The unit consists of 3 ac (1 ha) of
State lands and 7 ac (3 ha) of private
lands. SM–4 is located approximately

3.0 mi (4.8 km) south of the Pescadero–
Butano Creek (SM–3), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

SM–4 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. Maintaining this
unit, together with the two units to the
north, will reduce the chance of losing
the tidewater goby along this important
coastal range and allow for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, thereby supporting gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within the Greater Bay Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SM–4
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–1: Waddell Creek
SC–1 consists of 75 ac (30 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 18 mi (29 km) northwest
of the city of Santa Cruz. The unit
consists of 39 ac (16 ha) of State lands
and 36 ac (14 ha) of private lands. SC–
1 is located approximately 5.0 mi (8.0
km) north of the Scott Creek (SC–2),
which is also the nearest extant
subpopulation. This unit is at the
northern extent of this metapopulation
as described in the Recovery Plan.

Tidewater gobies were present in low
numbers in 1991 through 1996, but were
not detected during surveys from 1997
to 2000 (Service 2005a, p. C–12).

Tidewater gobies were again detected
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00023 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8768 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations during surveys in August 2012
(Rischbieter, in litt. 2012).

SC–1 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. This unit provides
habitat for tidewater gobies dispersing
from Scott Creek (SC–2), which may
serve to decrease the risk of extirpation
of this metapopulation through
stochastic events. This unit allows for
connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations, and thereby
supports gene flow and metapopulation
dynamics within the Greater Bay Area
Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SC–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–2: Scott Creek
SC–2 consists of 74 ac (30 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 11.8 mi (19.0 km)
northwest of the City of Santa Cruz. The
unit consists of 66 ac (27 ha) of State
lands, 6 ac (2 ha) of local lands, and 2
ac (1 ha) of private lands. SC–2 is
located 5.0 mi (8.0 km) south of
Waddell Creek (SC–1), and is separated
from the nearest extant subpopulation to
the south, in Laguna Creek (SC–3), by

6.0 mi (9.6 km).

SC–2 is outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, but is considered to be currently
occupied. This unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it
provides habitat for the species, allows
for connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations from nearby units,
supports gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
Greater Bay Area Recovery Unit.

Although SC–2 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
supports tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, SC–2 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SC–3: Laguna Creek
SC–3 consists of 26 ac (11 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 7.5 mi (12.0 km) west of
the City of Santa Cruz. The unit consists
entirely of State lands. SC–3 is located

6.0 mi (9.6 km) south of Scott Creek
(SC–2), the nearest extant population to
the north, and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Baldwin Creek (SC–4), by 2.0
mi (3.2 km).

SC–3 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby population that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). Together with
Baldwin Creek (SC–4) to the south, this
unit helps conserve the genetic diversity
of the species.

On an intermittent basis, SC–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–4: Baldwin Creek
SC–4 consists of 27 ac (11 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 6 mi (9.7 km) west of the
City of Santa Cruz. The unit consists
entirely of State lands. SC–4 is located

2.0 mi (3.2 km) south of Laguna Creek
(SC–3), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, Lombardi Creek (not designated
as critical habitat), by 0.7 mi (1.2 km).

SC–4 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
population in this unit is likely a source
population and is, therefore, important
for maintaining metapopulation
dynamics. This critical habitat unit
provides habitat for a tidewater goby
population that is important to the
conservation of one of the genetically
distinct recovery units as described in
the Recovery Plan (Dawson et al. 2001,
p. 1172) and, together with Laguna
Creek (SC–3) to the north, helps
conserve genetic diversity within the
species.

On an intermittent basis, SC–4
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–5: Moore Creek
SC–5 consists of 15 ac (6 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 2.0 mi (3.2 km) west of
the City of Santa Cruz. The unit consists
entirely of Federal lands. SC–5 is
located 4.0 mi (6.4) south of Baldwin
Creek. SC–5 is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
north, Younger Lagoon (not designated
as critical habitat), by 0.5 mi (0.8 km).

SC–5 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Greater Bay
Area Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SC–5
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00024 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8769 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–6: Corcoran Lagoon
SC–6 consists of 28 ac (11 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 3 mi (4.8 km) east of the
City of Santa Cruz. This unit consists of
1 ac (less than 1 ha) of State lands, 6 ac
(2 ha) of local lands, and 21 ac (8 ha)
of private lands. SC–6 is located 4.0 mi
(6.4 km) south of Moore Creek (SC–5),
and the unit is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Moran Lake (not designated as
critical habitat), by 0.7 mi (1.1 km).

SC–6 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby population that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Greater Bay
Area Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SC–6
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–7: Aptos Creek
SC–7 consists of 9 ac (4 ha). This unit
is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km)
southwest of the City of Aptos. The unit
consists entirely of State lands. SC–7 is
located 4.1 mi (6.6 km) east of Corcoran
Lagoon (SC–6), and is separated from
the nearest extant subpopulation to the
north, Moran Lake (not designated as
critical habitat), by 4.2 mi (6.75 km).

SC–7 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. The tidewater goby
population in SC–7 is likely a source
population, which is important in
maintaining metapopulation dynamics,
and hence the long-term viability, of the
Greater Bay Area Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SC–7
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SC–8: Pajaro River
SC–8 consists of 215 ac (87 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Cruz County,
approximately 5 mi (8 km) southwest of
the City of Watsonville. The unit
consists of 158 ac (64 ha) of State lands,
11 ac (4 ha) of local lands, and 46 ac (19
ha) of private lands. SC–8 is located 9.7
mi (15.6 km) south of Aptos Creek (SC–
7), and is separated from the nearest
extant subpopulation to the south, in
Bennett Slough (MN–1), by 3.0 mi (4.7
km).

SC–8 was occupied by tidewater goby
at the time of listing. Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Greater Bay
Area Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SC–8
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MN–1: Bennett Slough
MN–1 consists of 167 ac (68 ha). This
unit is located in Monterey County,
approximately 3.7 mi (6 km) northwest
of the Town of Castroville. This unit
consists of 108 ac (44 ha) of State lands,
5 ac (2 ha) of local lands, and 54 ac (22
ha) of private lands. MN–1 is located 4.1
mi (6.6 km) south of the Pajaro River
(SC–8), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, Moro Cojo Slough (not
designated as critical habitat), by 1.3 mi
(2.1 km).

MN–1 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The tidewater
goby population in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby population that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172), and maintaining it
will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Greater Bay
Area Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

PCE 1c (a sandbar(s) across the mouth
of lagoon or estuary) is not likely to
occur within this unit because it has a
navigable, dredged channel with a
permanent open connection to the
ocean that is maintained on a regular
basis. However, PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

MN–2: Salinas River
MN–2 consists of 466 ac (189 ha).

This unit is located in Monterey County,
approximately 7.5 mi (12 km) north of
the City of Seaside. The unit consists of
195 ac (79 ha) of Federal lands, 33 ac
(13 ha) of State lands, 1 ac (less than 1
ha) of local lands, and 237 ac (96 ha) of
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8770 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations private lands. Unit MN–2 is located 4.0
mi (8.0 km) south of the Bennett Slough
unit (MN–1).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing and is not considered to be
currently occupied; however, this unit
is essential for the conservation of the
species. Tidewater gobies were last
collected here in 1951, but were not
present during surveys in 1991, 1992,
and 2004 (Service 2005a, p. C–16). This
unit is identified in the Recovery Plan
as a potential reintroduction site. This
unit would provide habitat for tidewater
goby that disperse from Bennett Slough
and Moro Cojo Slough, either through
natural means or by reintroduction,
which may serve to decrease the risk of
extirpation of this metapopulation
through stochastic events. This unit will
also allow for connectivity between
tidewater goby source populations, and
thereby support gene flow and
metapopulation dynamics within the
Greater Bay Area Recovery Unit. Lastly,
this unit is one of only three locations
in Monterey County that have harbored
tidewater goby and is one of the two
subpopulations in the metapopulation
as described in the Recovery Plan.

Therefore, this unit is especially
important for ensuring the viability of
the metapopulation.

Although MN–2 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, MN–2 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SLO–1: Arroyo de la Cruz
SLO–1 consists of 33 ac (13 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 8.0 mi (13.0 km)
northwest of San Simeon. The unit
consists of 25 ac (10 ha) of State lands
and 8 ac (3 ha) of private lands. SLO–
1 is located approximately 2.0 mi (3.2
km) north of the Arroyo de Corral unit
(SLO–2), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing and is not known to be
currently occupied, and there are no
historical tidewater goby records for this
location. However, this unit is essential
for the conservation of the species
because it provides habitat to nearby
units and is identified in the Recovery
Plan as a potential introduction site, and
could provide habitat for maintaining
the tidewater goby metapopulation in
the region.

This unit will provide habitat for
tidewater goby that disperse from
Arroyo del Corral through introduction
of the species, which may serve to
decrease the risk of extirpation of this
metapopulation through stochastic
events. This unit is one of two locations
with suitable habitat within the Central
Coast Recovery Subunit (CC 1), as
described in the Recovery Plan.

Therefore, this unit is especially
important for ensuring the viability of
the metapopulation because if the
subpopulation within the Arroyo de
Corral unit (SLO–2) is extirpated, the
entire metapopulation would be lost.

Although SLO–1 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. SLO–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation.

SLO–2: Arroyo del Corral
SLO–2 consists of 5 ac (3 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 6 mi (9.7 km)
northwest of San Simeon. The unit
consists of 4 ac (2 ha) of State lands and
1 ac (less than 1 ha) of private lands.

SLO–2 is located 2 mi (3.2 km) south of
Arroyo de la Cruz (SLO–1) and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, Oak Knoll
Creek (SLO–3), by 4.3 mi (6.9 km).

SLO–2 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Central Coast
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–3: Oak Knoll Creek (Arroyo
Laguna)
SLO–3 consists of 5 ac (3 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 2 mi (3.2 km)
northwest of San Simeon. The unit
consists of 4 ac (2 ha) of State lands and
1 ac (less than 1 ha) of private lands.

SLO–3 is located 4.3 mi (6.9 km) south
of Arroyo del Corral (SLO–2) and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, in Arroyo
de Tortuga (not designated as critical
habitat), by 0.5 mi (0.8 km).

SLO–3 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within the Central Coast Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–4: Little Pico Creek
SLO–4 consists of 9 ac (4 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 6.7 mi (10.8 km)
northwest of the Town of Cambria. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8771 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations unit consists of 2 ac (1 ha) of State lands
and 7 ac (3 ha) of private lands. SLO–
4 is located 3.7 mi (5.9 km) south of Oak
Knoll Creek (SLO–3). The unit is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the north, in Broken
Bridge Creek (not designated as critical
habitat), by 1.4 mi (2.2 km).

SLO–4 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in SLO–4 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Central Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–4
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–5: San Simeon Creek
SLO–5 consists of 17 ac (7 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 3.3 mi (5.3 km)
northwest of the Town of Cambria. The
unit consists entirely of State lands.

SLO–5 is located 3.8 mi (6.1 km) south
of Little Pico Creek (SLO–4), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, in Santa
Rosa Creek (not designated as critical
habitat), by 2.6 mi (4.2 km).

SLO–5 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in SLO–5 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Central Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–5
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–6: Villa Creek
SLO–6 consists of 15 ac (7 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 9.6 mi (15.4 km)
southeast of Cambria. The unit consists
of 14 ac (6 ha) of State lands and 1 ac
(less than 1 ha) of private lands. SLO–
6 is located 12.3 mi (19.8 km) south of
San Simeon Creek (SLO–5), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, in San
Geronimo Creek (SLO–7), by 2.3 mi (3.7
km).

SLO–6 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Central Coast
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–6
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–7: San Geronimo Creek
SLO–7 consists of 1 ac (less than 1
ha). This unit is located in San Luis
Obispo County, approximately 7.6 mi
(12.2 km) northwest of the Town of
Morro Bay, and approximately 1.4 mi
(2.5 km) west of the Town of Cayucos.

The unit consists entirely of State lands.

SLO–7 is located 2.3 mi (3.7 km) south
of Villa Creek (SLO–6), and is separated
from the nearest extant subpopulation to
the south, in Cayucos Creek (not
designated as critical habitat), by 1.5 mi
(2.4 km).

SLO–7 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in SLO–7 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Central Coast Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SLO–7
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–8: Toro Creek
SLO–8 consists of 9 ac (4 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 2.3 mi (3.7 km)
south of the Town of Cayucos. The unit
consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of State
lands and 8 ac (3 ha) of private lands.

SLO–8 is located 5 mi (8.0 km) south of
San Geronimo Creek (SLO–7), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the north, in Old
Creek (not designated as critical
habitat), by 1.8 mi (2.9 km).

SLO–8 was occupied at the time of
listing. Maintaining this unit will
reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Central Coast
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species. On
an intermittent basis, SLO–8 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8772 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–9: Los Osos Creek
SLO–9 consists of 73 ac (30 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, within the Town of Baywood.

The unit consists of 62 ac (25 ha) of
State lands, 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of local
lands, and 10 ac (4 ha) of private lands.

The unit is separated from the nearest
extant subpopulation to the north, in
Toro Creek (SLO–8), by 8.0 mi (12.8
km). Tidewater gobies were present
during surveys in 2001 (Service 2005a,
p. C–21). Prior to the observations in
2001, tidewater goby had not been seen
here since 1981 (Service 2005a, p. C–
21).

Therefore, SLO–9 is outside the
geographical area occupied by the
species at the time of listing but is
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat to
nearby units and is identified in the
Recovery Plan as a potential
introduction site, and could provide
habitat for maintaining the tidewater
goby metapopulation in the region.

Maintaining this unit will also reduce
the chance of losing the tidewater goby
within the Central Coast Recovery Unit.

Although SLO–9 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby.

PCE 1c (a sandbar(s) across the mouth
of lagoon or estuary) is not likely to
occur within this unit because it has a
navigable channel with an open
connection to Morro Bay, which is
dredged on a regular basis. However,
PCE 1a and 1b occur throughout the
unit, although their precise location
during any particular time period may
change in response to seasonal
fluctuations in precipitation and tidal
inundation.

SLO–10: San Luis Obispo Creek
SLO–10 consists of 31 ac (12 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, within the Town of Avila
Beach. The unit consists of 3 ac (1 ha)
of local lands, and 28 ac (11 ha) of
private lands. The unit is separated from
the nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Pismo Creek (SLO–11), by 7.0
mi (11.2 km).

SLO–10 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). On an intermittent
basis, SLO–10 possesses a sandbar
across the mouth of the lagoon or
estuary during the late spring, summer,
and fall that closes or partially closes
the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation. The physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species in this unit
may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–11: Pismo Creek
SLO–11 consists of 20 ac (9 ha). This
unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, within the Town of Pismo
Beach. The unit consists of 14 ac (6 ha)
of State lands, 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of
local lands, and 5 ac (2 ha) of private
lands. SLO–11 is located 7 mi (11.2 km)
south of San Luis Obispo Creek (SLO–
10). The unit is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Arroyo Grande Creek (not
designated as critical habitat), by 2.6 mi
(4.2 km).

SLO–11 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in SLO–11 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Conception Recovery
Unit. On an intermittent basis, SLO–11
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SLO–12: Oso Flaco Lake
SLO–12 consists of 171 ac (69 ha).

This unit is located in San Luis Obispo
County, approximately 5 mi (8.0 km)
northwest of the City of Santa Maria.

The unit consists of 165 ac (67 ha) of
State lands and 6 ac (2 ha) of private
lands. The unit is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, the Santa Maria River (SB–1), by
4 mi (6.4 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing and is not known to be
currently occupied, and there are no
historical tidewater goby records for this
location. However, this unit is essential
for the conservation of the species
because it provides habitat to nearby
units and is identified in the Recovery
Plan as a potential introduction site, and
could provide habitat for maintaining
the tidewater goby metapopulation in
the region. This unit will provide
habitat for tidewater goby that disperse
from Arroyo Grande Creek and the
Santa Maria River, either through
natural means or by introduction, which
may serve to decrease the risk of
extirpation of this metapopulation
through stochastic events. This unit
would also allow for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics in
this region. Although tidewater goby
may be presently precluded from this
location due to water quality
impairments, the California Regional
Water Control Board is currently
working with the Service to remedy
these impairments. Therefore, we
anticipate the habitat at this location
will be suitable for tidewater goby in the
future and have determined that this
unit is essential for the conservation of
the species as described above.

Although SLO–12 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, SLO–12 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8773 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SB–1: Santa Maria River
SB–1 consists of 474 ac (192 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 13 mi (21 km) west of the
City of Santa Maria. The unit consists of
42 ac (17 ha) of local lands and 432 ac
(175 ha) of private lands. SB–1 is
located 4 mi (6.4 km) south of Oso Flaco
Lake (SLO–12), and is separated from
the nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Shuman Canyon (not
designated as critical habitat; see
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the
Act—Vandenberg Air Force Base section
below), by 8.6 mi (13.9 km).

SB–1 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in this unit is likely a
source population and is, therefore,
important for maintaining
metapopulation dynamics. This critical
habitat unit provides habitat for a
tidewater goby subpopulation that is
important to the conservation of one of
the genetically distinct recovery units as
described in the Recovery Plan (Dawson
et al. 2001, p. 1172). Maintaining this
unit will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Conception
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, SB–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–2: Can˜ada de las Agujas
SB–2 consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha).

This unit is located in Santa Barbara
County, approximately 7.2 mi (11.6 km)
west of Gaviota. The unit consists
entirely of private lands. SB–2 is located

38.8 mi (62.5 km) south of the Santa
Maria River (SB–1), and is separated
from the nearest extant subpopulation to
the south, in Arroyo El Bulito (not
designated as critical habitat), by 0.4 mi
(0.7 km).

SB–2 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within Conception Recovery Unit.

Furthermore, this unit, and units SB–3,
SB–4, SB–5, and SB–6, likely act as a
metapopulation as defined in the
Background section. These units are no
more than 2.0 mi (3.3 km) from each
other, which facilitates higher dispersal
rates between sites. Because these units
are of relatively small size in area (1 to
9 ac (less than 1 to 4 ha)), they are more
susceptible to drying or shrinking due to
drought conditions, which increases the
likelihood of local extirpation. Lastly,
because these units are small, they are
likely to be dependent upon some
degree of periodic exchange of tidewater
goby between units for any one unit to
persist over time. Therefore, designation
of critical habitat at these five locations
is necessary for the conservation of the
tidewater goby along the Gaviota Coast
in Santa Barbara County.

On an intermittent basis, SB–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–3: Can˜ada de Santa Anita
SB–3 consists of 3 ac (1 ha). This unit
is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 5.2 mi (8.4 km) west of
Gaviota. The unit consists entirely of
private lands. SB–3 is located 2.0 mi
(3.2 km) south of Can˜ada de las Agujas
(SB–2), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
north, in Can˜ada del Agua (not
designated as critical habitat), by 0.4 mi
(0.7 km).

SB–3 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit is important to the
conservation of the species because it
allows for connectivity between
tidewater goby source populations, and
thereby supports gene flow and
metapopulation dynamics within the
Conception Recovery Unit.

Furthermore, as described above in SB–
2, this unit, and units SB–2, SB–4, SB–
5, and SB–6, likely act as a
metapopulation as defined in the
Background section, and designation of
critical habitat at these five locations is
necessary for the conservation of the
tidewater goby along the Gaviota Coast
in Santa Barbara County.

On an intermittent basis, SB–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–4: Can˜ada de Alegria
SB–4 consists of 2 ac (1 ha). This unit
is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 3.2 mi (5.1 km) west of
Gaviota. The unit consists entirely of
private lands. SB–4 is located 2.0 mi
(3.3 km) south of Can˜ada de Santa Anita
(SB–3), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Can˜ada del Agua Caliente (SB–
5), by 1.1 mi (1.8 km).

SB–4 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit is important to the
conservation of the species because it
allows for connectivity between
tidewater goby source populations, and
thereby supports gene flow and
metapopulation dynamics in this region.

Furthermore, as described above in SB–
2, this unit, and units SB–2, SB–3, SB–
5, and SB–6, likely act as a
metapopulation as defined in the
Background section, and designation of
critical habitat at these five locations is
necessary for the conservation of the
tidewater goby along the Gaviota Coast
in Santa Barbara County.

On an intermittent basis, SB–4
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8774 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–5: Can˜ada del Agua Caliente
SB–5 consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha).

This unit is located in Santa Barbara
County, approximately 2.1 mi (3.4 km)
west of Gaviota. This unit consists
entirely of private lands. SB–5 is located

1.1 mi (1.8 km) south of Can˜ada de
Alegria (SB–4), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

SB–5 was occupied at the time of
listing. This critical habitat unit
provides habitat for a tidewater goby
subpopulation that is important to the
conservation of one of the genetically
distinct recovery units as described in
the Recovery Plan (Dawson et al. 2001,
p. 1172). This unit helps conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

This unit also allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics in
this region. Furthermore, as described
above in SB–2, this unit, and units SB–
2, SB–3, SB–4, and SB–6, likely act as
a metapopulation as defined in the
Background section, and designation of
critical habitat at these five locations is
necessary for the conservation of the
tidewater goby along the Gaviota Coast
in Santa Barbara County.

On an intermittent basis, SB–5
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–6: Gaviota Creek
SB–6 consists of 11 ac (5 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 0.8 mi (1.3 km) west of
Gaviota. This unit consists of 10 ac (4
ha) of State lands and 1 ac (less than 1
ha) of private lands. SB–6 is located 1.5
mi (2.4 km) south of Can˜ada del Agua
Caliente (SB–5), which is also the
nearest extant subpopulation.

SB–6 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit is important to the
conservation of the species because
maintaining it will reduce the chance of
losing the tidewater goby within the
Conception Recovery Unit. It also
allows for connectivity between
tidewater goby source populations, and
thereby supports gene flow and
metapopulation dynamics in this region.

Furthermore, as described above in SB–
2, this unit, and units SB–2, SB–3, SB–
4, and SB–5, likely act as a
metapopulation as defined in the
Background section, and designation of
critical habitat at these five locations is
necessary for the conservation of the
tidewater goby along the Gaviota Coast
in Santa Barbara County.

On an intermittent basis, SB–6
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–7: Arroyo Hondo
SB–7 consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha).

This unit is located in Santa Barbara
County, approximately 5.0 mi (8.0 km)
east of Gaviota. This unit consists
entirely of private lands. SB–7 is located

5.0 mi (8.0 km) south of Gaviota Creek
(SB–6), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Arroyo Quemado (not
designated as critical habitat), by 1.3 mi
(2.0 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat to
nearby units and could provide habitat
for maintaining the tidewater goby
metapopulation within the Conception
Recovery Unit. Maintaining this unit
will reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the Conception
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

Although SB–7 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
supports tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, SB–7 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SB–8: Winchester/Bell Canyon
SB–8 consists of 6 ac (3 ha). This unit
is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 2.2 mi (3.5 km) west of
the community of El Encanto Heights.

The unit consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha)
of local lands and 5 ac (2 ha) of private
lands. SB–8 is located 6.0 mi (9.6 km)
north of Goleta Slough (SB–9), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the north, Tecolote
Canyon (not designated as critical
habitat), by 0.3 mi (0.4 km).

SB–8 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit is important to the
conservation of the species because it
allows for connectivity between
tidewater goby source populations, and
thereby supports gene flow and
metapopulation dynamics in this region.

On an intermittent basis, SB–8
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8775 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–9: Goleta Slough
SB–9 consists of 190 ac (76 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
within the City of Goleta. The unit
consists of 164 ac (66 ha) of local lands
and 26 ac (10 ha) of private lands. SB–
9 is located 6.0 mi (9.6 km) south of
Winchester/Bell Canyon (SB–8), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the north, Devereux
Slough (not designated as critical
habitat), by 4.0 mi (6.4 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is currently occupied.

This unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it
provides habitat for the species, allows
for connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations from nearby units,
supports gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
Conception Recovery Unit.

Although SB–9 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, SB–9 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SB–10: Arroyo Burro
SB–10 consists of 3 ac (1 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
approximately 3.6 mi (5.8 km) west of
the City of Santa Barbara. The unit
consists entirely of local lands. SB–10 is
located 4.0 mi (6.4 km) north of Mission
Creek–Laguna Channel (SB–11), which
is also the nearest extant subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat for
the species, allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations from nearby units, supports
gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
Conception Recovery Unit.

Although SB–10 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, SB–10 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SB–11: Mission Creek–Laguna Channel
SB–11 consists of 7 ac (3 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
within the City of Santa Barbara. The
unit consists of 3 ac (1 ha) of State lands
and 4 ac (2 ha) of local lands. SB–11 is
located 4.0 mi (6.4 km) south of Arroyo
Burro (SB–10), and is separated from the
nearest extant subpopulation to the
south, in Sycamore Creek (not
designated as critical habitat), by 1.0 mi
(1.5 km).

SB–11 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in SB–11 is likely a
source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the Conception Recovery
Unit.

On an intermittent basis, SB–11
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

SB–12: Arroyo Paredon
SB–12 consists of 3 ac (1 ha). This
unit is located in Santa Barbara County,
within the City of Santa Barbara. The
unit consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of
State lands, 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of local
lands, and 1 ac (less than 1 ha) of
private lands. SB–12 is located 8.0 mi
(12.8 km) south of Mission Creek-
Laguna Channel (SB–11), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the south, in
Carpinteria Creek (not designated as
critical habitat), by 2.7 mi (4.3 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat for
the species, allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations from nearby units, supports
gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
Conception Recovery Unit.

Although SB–12 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, SB–12 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

VEN–1: Ventura River
VEN–1 consists of 50 ac (21 ha). This
unit is located in Ventura County,
within the City of Ventura. The unit
consists of 25 ac (10 ha) of State lands,
16 ac (7 ha) of local lands, and 9 ac (4
ha) of private lands. VEN–1 is located

4.3 mi (7.0 km) north of the Santa Clara
River (VEN–2), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

VEN–1 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby population
in this unit is likely a source population
and is, therefore, important for
maintaining metapopulation dynamics.

This critical habitat unit provides
habitat for a tidewater goby
subpopulation that is important to the
conservation of one of the genetically
distinct recovery units as described in
the Recovery Plan (Dawson et al. 2001,
p. 1172). Maintaining this unit will
reduce the chance of losing the
tidewater goby within the LA/Ventura
Recovery Unit, and help conserve
genetic diversity within the species.

On an intermittent basis, VEN–1
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8776 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

VEN–2: Santa Clara River
VEN–2 consists of 323 ac (130 ha).

This unit is located in Ventura County,
approximately 4 mi (6.4 km) southeast
of the City of Ventura. This unit consists
of 199 ac (80 ha) of State lands, 14 ac
(6 ha) of local lands, and 110 ac (44 ha)
of private lands. VEN–2 is located 4.3
mi (7.0 km) south of the Ventura River
unit (VEN–1), which is also the nearest
extant subpopulation.

VEN–2 was occupied by tidewater
goby at the time of listing. The tidewater
goby subpopulation in VEN–2 is likely
a source population, which is important
in maintaining metapopulation
dynamics, and hence the long-term
viability, of the LA/Ventura Recovery
Unit Recovery Unit. This unit is known
to have tens of thousands of tidewater
goby during certain times of the year
(Dellith, pers. comm. 2010), and is
considered one of the largest tidewater
goby populations in southern California.

On an intermittent basis, VEN–2
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

VEN–3: J Street Drain–Ormond Lagoon
VEN–3 consists of 121 ac (49 ha). This
unit is located in Ventura County,
approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) east of Port
Hueneme. This unit consists of 5 ac (2
ha) of State lands, 49 ac (20 ha) of local
lands, and 67 ac (27 ha) of private lands.

VEN–3 is located 4.3 mi (6.9 km) south
of the Santa Clara River (VEN–2), which
is also the nearest extant subpopulation.

VEN–3 was occupied at the time of
listing. This unit allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within the LA/Ventura Recovery Unit.

On an intermittent basis, VEN–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

VEN–4: Big Sycamore Canyon [Note that
the Recovery Plan refers to this location
as ‘‘Sycamore Canyon’’]
VEN–4 consists of 1 ac (less than 1
ha). This unit is located in Ventura
County, approximately 12.0 mi (19.3
km) northwest of the City of Malibu.

The unit consists entirely of State lands.

VEN–4 is located 5.0 mi (8.0 km) north
of Arroyo Sequit (LA–1), and is
separated from the nearest extant
subpopulation to the north, in the
Calleguas Creek (not designated as
critical habitat), by 5.0 mi (8.0 km).

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is considered to be
currently occupied. This unit is
essential for the conservation of the
species because it provides habitat for
the species, allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations from nearby units, supports
gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
LA/Ventura Recovery Unit.

Although VEN–4 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, VEN–4 possesses
a sandbar across the mouth of the
lagoon or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

LA–1: Arroyo Sequit
LA–1 consists of 1 ac (less than 1 ha).

This unit is located in Los Angeles
County, approximately 7.5 mi (12.0 km)
northwest of the City of Malibu. The
unit consists entirely of State lands. LA–
1 is located 5.0 mi (8 km) south of Big
Sycamore Canyon (VEN–4), which is the
nearest extant subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, is not known to be currently
occupied, and there are no historical
tidewater goby records for this location.

However, this unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it is
identified in the Recovery Plan as a
potential introduction site, and could
provide habitat for maintaining the
tidewater goby metapopulation in the
region. This unit will provide habitat for
tidewater goby that may be introduced,
which may serve to decrease the risk of
extirpation of this metapopulation
through stochastic events. This unit
would also allow for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations, and thereby supports gene
flow and metapopulation dynamics
within the LA/Ventura Recovery Unit.

Although LA–1 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, LA–1 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

LA–2: Zuma Canyon
LA–2 consists of 5 ac (2 ha). This unit
is located in Los Angeles County,
approximately 7.5 mi (12.0 km)
northwest of the City of Malibu. The
unit consists entirely of local lands
administered by Los Angeles County.

LA–2 is located 6.8 mi (11 km) south of
Arroyo Sequit (LA–1), and is separated
from the nearest extant subpopulation to
the south, in the Malibu Lagoon (LA–3),
by 10.0 mi (16.0 km).

LA–2 is outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, is not known to be currently
occupied, and there are no historical
tidewater goby records for this location.

However, this unit is essential for the
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8777 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations conservation of the species because it
could provide habitat to nearby
occupied units and is identified in the
Recovery Plan as a potential
introduction site, and it could provide
habitat for maintaining the tidewater
goby metapopulation within the LA/
Ventura Recovery Unit. This unit will
provide habitat for tidewater goby that
are introduced, which may serve to
decrease the risk of extirpation of this
metapopulation through stochastic
events. This unit would also allow for
connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations, and thereby
supports gene flow and metapopulation
dynamics within the LA/Ventura
Recovery Unit.

Although LA–2 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, LA–2 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

LA–3: Malibu Lagoon
LA–3 consists of 64 ac (27 ha). This
unit is located in Los Angeles County,
approximately 0.6 mi (1 km) east of
Malibu Beach. The unit consists of 41 ac
(27 ha) of State lands, 1 ac (less than 1
ha) of local lands, and 22 ac (9 ha) of
private lands. LA–3 is located 6.0 mi
(9.6 km) north of Topanga Canyon (LA–
4), which is also the nearest extant
subpopulation.

LA–3 was occupied at the time of
listing. The tidewater goby
subpopulation in LA–3 is likely a source
population, which is important in
maintaining metapopulation dynamics,
and hence the long-term viability, of the
LA/Ventura Recovery Unit. LA–3
supports one of the two remaining
extant populations of tidewater goby
within Los Angeles County.

On an intermittent basis, LA–3
possesses a sandbar across the mouth of
the lagoon or estuary during the late
spring, summer, and fall that closes or
partially closes the lagoon or estuary,
and thereby provides relatively stable
conditions (PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b
occur throughout the unit, although
their precise location during any
particular time period may change in
response to seasonal fluctuations in
precipitation and tidal inundation. The
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species in this
unit may require special management
considerations or protection to address
threats described in Table 2. Please see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section of this rule for a
discussion of the threats to tidewater
goby habitat and potential management
considerations.

LA–4: Topanga Creek
LA–4 consists of 6 ac (2 ha). This unit
is located in Los Angeles County,
approximately 5.5 mi (8.9 km)
northwest of the City of Santa Monica.

The unit consists of 4 ac (1 ha) of State
lands and 2 ac (1 ha) of private lands.

LA–4 is located 6.0 mi (9.6 km) south
of Malibu Lagoon (LA–3), which is also
the nearest extant subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but is currently occupied.

Tidewater gobies were first detected at
this locality in 2001 (Service 2005a, p.

C–30). Tidewater goby in Topanga Creek
are probably derived from fish that
dispersed from Malibu Creek. This unit
is essential for the conservation of the
species because it allows for
connectivity between tidewater goby
source populations, and thereby
supports gene flow and metapopulation
dynamics within the LA/Ventura
Recovery Unit. This location is one of
the two remaining locations in Los
Angeles County known to be occupied
by tidewater goby.

Although LA–4 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, LA–4 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

OR–1: Aliso Creek
OR–1 consists of 14 ac (5 ha). This
unit is located in Orange County, within
the City of Laguna Beach. The unit
consists of 8 ac (3 ha) of local lands and
6 ac (2 ha) of private lands. OR–1 is
located 13.5 mi (21.7 km) north of the
San Mateo Creek (not designated as
critical habitat, see Application of
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act—Marine Corps
Base Camp Pendleton section below),
which supports the nearest extant
subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, and is not known to be
currently occupied. OR–1 was last
known to be occupied in 1977 (Swift et
al. 1989, p. 1). The reason for the
extirpation of the historical
subpopulation at this site is unknown.

However, this unit is essential for the
conservation of the species because it
would aid recovery of the tidewater
goby in the genetically unique South
Coast Recovery Unit. The Recovery Plan
notes that the species should be
reintroduced into as many localities as
possible to the north and south of MCB
Camp Pendleton (Service 2005a, p. G–
16). Aliso Creek is identified in the
Recovery Plan as a potential
reintroduction site (Service 2005a, p. G–
20). If tidewater goby become
established at this location, this unit’s
primary function would be to help
maintain the genetic diversity of the
Southern Coast Recovery Unit
(especially Recovery Subunit SC1).

Moreover, a level of population
redundancy would help prevent the
extirpation of a metapopulation in
which only one or two occupied sites
remain, which is the case for Recovery
Subunit SC1.

Although OR–1 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing and is not currently occupied,
it does possess the PCE that is needed
to support tidewater goby. On an
intermittent basis, OR–1 possesses a
sandbar across the mouth of the lagoon
or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

SAN–1: San Luis Rey River
SAN–1 consists of 56 ac (23 ha). This
unit is located in San Diego County,
within the City of Oceanside. The unit
consists of 3 ac (1 ha) of State lands, 49
ac (20 ha) of local lands, and 4 ac (2 ha)
of private lands. SAN–1 is located
approximately 2.5 mi (4.0 km) south of
the Santa Margarita River (not
designated as critical habitat; see
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the
Act—Marine Corps Base Camp
Pendleton section below), which
supports the nearest known extant
subpopulation.

This unit is outside the geographical
area occupied by the species at the time
of listing, but tidewater gobies were
detected at this location in 2010
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8778 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (Lafferty 2010, not paginated), which
indicates that this location is one of the
suite of occupied and intermittently
occupied locations that contributes to
tidewater goby metapopulation on MCB
Camp Pendleton. This unit is essential
for the conservation of the species
because it serves as one of a limited
number of locations that contribute
toward metapopulation dynamics of the
genetically unique South Coast
Recovery Unit. As discussed in the
Metapopulation Dynamics section, the
number of subpopulations is important
to the long-term stability of a
metapopulation. As such, SAN–1 will
help the species to survive and support
the recovery of the tidewater goby
population within the South Coast
Recovery Unit, even potentially
facilitating natural recolonization of
currently unoccupied locations to the
south. The Recovery Plan notes that the
species should be reintroduced into as
many localities as possible to the north
and south of MCB Camp Pendleton
(Service 2005a, p. G–16). The San Luis
Rey River was identified in the
Recovery Plan as a potential
reintroduction site (Service 2005a, p. G–
20). Prior to 2010, tidewater gobies were
last detected in this unit in 1958
(Lafferty, pers. comm. 2010). This unit
now represents the southernmost
occupied area of the species’
distribution, and is important for
maintaining the tidewater goby
metapopulation in the region.

Although SAN–1 is outside the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing, it does possess the PCE that
is needed to support tidewater goby. On
an intermittent basis, SAN–1 possesses
a sandbar across the mouth of the
lagoon or estuary during the late spring,
summer, and fall that closes or partially
closes the lagoon or estuary, and thereby
provides relatively stable conditions
(PCE 1c). PCE 1a and 1b occur
throughout the unit, although their
precise location during any particular
time period may change in response to
seasonal fluctuations in precipitation
and tidal inundation.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation
Section 7 Consultation
Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires
Federal agencies, including the Service,
to ensure that any action they fund,
authorize, or carry out is not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of
any endangered species or threatened
species or result in the destruction or
adverse modification of designated
critical habitat of such species. In
addition, section 7(a)(4) of the Act
requires Federal agencies to confer with
the Service on any agency action that is
likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of any species proposed to be
listed under the Act or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of
proposed critical habitat.

Decisions by the 5th and 9th Circuit
Courts of Appeals have invalidated our
regulatory 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, 442 (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 continue to serve its intended
conservation role for the species.

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. Examples of actions that are
subject to the section 7 consultation
process are actions on State, tribal,
local, or private lands that require a
Federal permit (such as a permit from
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers under
section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1251 et seq.) or a permit from the
Service under section 10 of the Act) or
that involve some other Federal action
(such as funding from the Federal
Highway Administration, Federal
Aviation Administration, or the Federal
Emergency Management Agency).

Federal actions not affecting listed
species or critical habitat, and actions
on State, tribal, local, or private lands
that are not federally funded or
authorized, do not require section 7
consultation.

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 critical habitat; or
(2) A biological opinion for Federal
actions that may affect, or are likely to
adversely affect, listed species or critical
habitat.

When we issue a biological opinion
concluding that a project is likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of a
listed species and/or destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat, we
provide reasonable and prudent
alternatives to the project, if any are
identifiable, that would avoid the
likelihood of jeopardy and/or
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat. We define ‘‘reasonable
and prudent alternatives’’ (at 50 CFR
402.02) as alternative actions identified
during consultation that:
(1) Can be implemented in a manner
consistent with the intended purpose of
the action,
(2) Can be implemented consistent
with the scope of the Federal agency’s
legal authority and jurisdiction,
(3) Are economically and
technologically feasible, and
(4) Would, in the Director’s opinion,
avoid the likelihood of jeopardizing the
continued existence of the listed species
and/or avoid the likelihood of
destroying or adversely modifying
critical habitat.

Reasonable and prudent alternatives
can vary from slight project
modifications to extensive redesign or
relocation of the project. Costs
associated with implementing a
reasonable and prudent alternative are
similarly variable.

Regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require
Federal agencies to reinitiate
consultation on previously reviewed
actions in instances where 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 sometimes may 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.

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. Activities that may destroy or
adversely modify critical habitat are
those that alter the physical or
biological features to an extent that
appreciably reduces the conservation
value of critical habitat for tidewater
goby. As discussed above, the role of
critical habitat is to support life-history
needs of the species and provide for the
conservation of the species.

Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us
to briefly evaluate and describe, in any
proposed or final regulation that
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8779 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations designates critical habitat, activities
involving a Federal action that may
destroy or adversely modify such
habitat, or that may be affected by such
designation.

Activities that may affect critical
habitat, when carried out, funded, or
authorized by a Federal agency, should
result in consultation for the tidewater
goby. These activities include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Actions that would channelize or
divert water reducing the amount of
space that is available for individual
and population growth and normal
behavior, and reduce or eliminate sites
for breeding, reproduction, and rearing
(or development) of offspring.
(2) Actions that would substantially
alter the natural hydrologic regime
upstream of the designated critical
habitat units. Such activities could
include, but are not limited to, ground
water pumping or surface water
diversion activities, construction of
impoundments or flood control
structures, or the release of water in
excess of levels that historically
occurred. These activities could result
in atypical reduction or increases in the
amount of water that is present in the
aquatic habitats that tidewater goby
occupy, and alter salinity conditions
that support this species.
(3) Actions that would substantially
alter the channel morphology of the
designated critical habitat units, or the
areas up-gradient from these units. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, channelization projects, road
and bridge projects, removal of
substrates, destruction and alteration of
riparian vegetation, reduction of
available floodplain, and removal of
gravel or floodplain terrace materials.

These activities could result in
increased water velocities and flush
large numbers of tidewater goby into the
ocean especially during flood events.
(4) Actions that would result in the
discharge of agricultural and sewage
effluents, or chemical or biological
pollutants into the aquatic habitats
where tidewater goby occur. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, grazing, fertilizer application,
sewage treatment, pesticide application,
and herbicide application. These
activities could degrade the water
quality where tidewater goby live,
introduce toxic substances that can
poison individual fish, adversely affect
fish immune systems, and decrease the
amount of oxygen in aquatic habitats
where the species occurs.
(5) Actions that would cause atypical
levels of sedimentation in coastal
wetland habitats or remove vegetative
cover that stabilizes stream banks. Such
activities could include, but are not
limited to, grazing or mining activities,
road construction projects, off-road
vehicle use, and other watershed and
floodplain-disturbance activities. These
activities could have the potential to
alter the amount and composition of the
substrate in the habitats where tidewater
goby occur, and thereby affect the
species’ ability to construct breeding
burrows.
(6) Actions that would result in the
artificial breaching of lagoon habitats.

Such activities could include, but are
not limited to, lagoon breaching for
mosquito control, flood management,
and recreational opportunities such as
creating surf breaks. These activities
could reduce the amount of space that
is available for individual and
population growth; strand and desiccate
tidewater goby adults, fry, or eggs; and
increase the risk they will be preyed
upon by native or nonnative predators
as they become concentrated and
exposed as water levels drop.
(7) Actions that would create barriers
that prevent tidewater goby from
accessing areas they would normally be
able to access. These activities, which
may include, but are not limited to,
water diversions, road crossings, and
sills. These activities could reduce the
amount of space that is available for
individual and population growth, and
reduce the number and extent of sites
for breeding, reproduction, and rearing
(or development) of offspring.

Exemptions
Application of Section 4(a)(3) of the Act
The Sikes Act Improvement Act of
1997 (Sikes Act) (16 U.S.C. 670a)
required each military installation that
includes land and water suitable for the
conservation and management of
natural resources to complete an
integrated natural resources
management plan (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.

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 101 of the Sikes Act (16
U.S.C. 670a), if the Secretary determines
in writing that such plan provides a
benefit to the species for which critical
habitat is proposed for designation.’’
We consulted with the military on the
development and implementation of
INRMPs for installations with listed
species. We analyzed INRMPs
developed by military installations
located within the range of the critical
habitat designation for tidewater goby to
determine if they are exempt under
section 4(a)(3) of the Act. The following
areas are Department of Defense lands
with completed, Service-approved
INRMPs within the areas identified as
meeting the definition of critical habitat.

Approved INRMPs
Vandenberg Air Force Base (VAFB)
and Marine Corps Base (MCB) Camp
Pendleton have approved INRMPs. The
U.S. Air Force and Marine Corps (on
VAFB and MCB Camp Pendleton,
respectively) have committed to
working closely with us, and the State
(California Department of Fish and
Game (CDFG) and California
Department of Parks and Recreation
(CDPR)) with regard to lands leased by
MCB Camp Pendleton, to continually
refine the existing INRMPs as part of the
Sikes Act’s INRMP review process.

Based on our review of the INRMPs for
these military installations, and in
accordance with section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of
the Act, we have determined that the
lands within these installations
identified as meeting the definition of
critical habitat are subject to the
INRMPs, and that conservation efforts
identified in these INRMPs will provide
a benefit to the tidewater goby (see the
following sections that detail this
determination for each installation).

Therefore, lands within these
installations are exempt from critical
habitat designation under section
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8780 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act. We are not
including approximately 727 ac (294 ha)
of habitat on VAFB, and approximately
1,156 ac (468 ha) of habitat on MCB
Camp Pendleton, in this critical habitat
designation because of this exemption.

Table 3 below provides approximate
areas (ac, ha) of lands that meet the
definition of critical habitat, but are
exempt from designation under section
4(a)(3)(B) of the Act.

TABLE 3—E XEMPTIONS FROM CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION FOR THE TIDEWATER GOBY UNDER SECTION 4(A)(3) OF

THE ACT
Specific area
Areas meeting the defi-
nition of critical habitat in
acres
(Hectares)
Areas exempted in
acres
(Hectares)
Shuman Canyon ...................................................................................................................... 16 (7) 16 (7) San Antonio Creek .................................................................................................................. 63 (25) 63 (25) Santa Ynez River ..................................................................................................................... 638 (258) 638 (258) Can˜ada Honda ......................................................................................................................... 4 (2) 4 (2) Jalama Creek ........................................................................................................................... 6 (2) 6 (2) San Mateo Creek ..................................................................................................................... 73 (30) 73 (30) San Onofre .............................................................................................................................. 20 (8) 20 (8) Las Flores/Las Pulgas Creek .................................................................................................. 36 (14) 36 (14) Hidden Lagoon ........................................................................................................................ 39 (16) 39 (16) Aliso Canyon ............................................................................................................................ 65 (26) 65 (26) French Lagoon ......................................................................................................................... 60 (24) 60 (24) Cockleburr Canyon .................................................................................................................. 74 (30) 74 (30) Santa Margarita River .............................................................................................................. 789 (319) 789 (319) Totals ......................................................................................................................... ....... 1,883 (762) 1,883 (762) Vandenberg Air Force Base
VAFB is headquarters for the 30th
Space Wing, the Air Force’s Space
Command unit that operates VAFB and
the Western Test Range/Pacific Missile
Range. VAFB operates as an aerospace
center supporting west coast launch
activities for the Air Force, Department
of Defense, National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, and commercial
contractors. The three primary
operational missions of VAFB are to
launch, place, and track satellites in
near-polar orbit; to test and evaluate the
intercontinental ballistic missile
systems; and to support aircraft
operations in the western range. VAFB
lies on the south-central California
coast, approximately 275 mi (442 km)
south of San Francisco, 140 mi (225 km)
northwest of Los Angeles, and 55 mi (88
km) northwest of Santa Barbara. The
99,100-ac (40,104-ha) base extends
along approximately 42 mi (67 km) of
Santa Barbara County coast, and varies
in width from 5 to 15 mi (8 to 24 km).

The VAFB INRMP was prepared to
provide strategic direction to ecosystem
and natural resources management on
VAFB. The long-term goal of the INRMP
is to integrate all management activities
in a manner that sustains, promotes, and
restores the health and integrity of
VAFB ecosystems using an adaptive
management approach. The INRMP was
designed to: (1) Summarize existing
management plans and natural
resources literature pertaining to VAFB;
(2) identify and analyze management
goals in existing plans; (3) integrate the
management goals and objectives of
individual plans; (4) support base
compliance with applicable regulatory
requirements; (5) support the integration
of natural resource stewardship with the
Air Force mission; and (6) provide
direction for monitoring strategies.

VAFB completed an INRMP in 2011,
which benefits the tidewater goby by:
(1) Avoiding the tidewater goby and its
habitat, whenever possible, in project
planning; (2) scheduling activities that
may affect tidewater goby outside of the
peak breeding period (March to July); (3)
coordinating with VAFB water quality
staff to prevent degradation and
contamination of aquatic habitats; and
(4) prohibiting the introduction of
nonnative fishes into streams on-base
(VAFB 2011, Tab D, p. 15). Furthermore,
VAFB’s environmental staff reviews
projects and enforces existing
regulations and orders that, through
their implementation, avoid and
minimize impacts to natural resources,
including the tidewater goby and its
habitat. In addition, VAFB’s INRMP
protects aquatic habitats for the
tidewater goby by excluding cattle from
wetlands and riparian areas through the
installation and maintenance of fencing.

Habitat features essential to the
conservation of the tidewater goby exist
on VAFB, and activities occurring on
VAFB are currently being conducted in
a manner that minimizes impacts to
tidewater goby habitat. This military
installation has an approved INRMP
that provides a benefit to the tidewater
goby, and VAFB has committed to work
closely with the Service and the CDFG
to continually refine their existing
INRMP as part of the Sikes Act’s INRMP
review process. Based on the above
considerations, and in accordance with
section 4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have
determined that conservation efforts
identified in the 2011 INRMP for VAFB
provide a benefit to the tidewater goby
and its habitat. This includes habitat
located in the following areas: Shuman
Canyon, San Antonio Creek, Santa Ynez
River, Can˜ada Honda, and Jalama Creek.

Therefore, lands subject to the INRMP
for VAFB, which includes the lands
leased from the Department of Defense
by other parties, are exempt from
critical habitat designation under
section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act, and we are
not including approximately 727 ac (294
ha) of habitat in this critical habitat
designation because of this exemption.

Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton
MCB Camp Pendleton is the Marine
Corps’ premier amphibious training
installation, and its only west coast
amphibious assault training center. The
installation has been conducting air,
sea, and ground assault training since
World War II. MCB Camp Pendleton
occupies over 125,000 ac (50,586 ha) of
coastal southern California in the
northwest corner of San Diego County.

Aside from nearly 10,000 ac (4,047 ha)
that are developed, most of the
installation consists of undeveloped
land used for training. MCB Camp
Pendleton is situated between two major
metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, 82 mi
(132 km) to the north, and San Diego,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8781 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 38 mi (61 km) to the south. Nearby
communities include Oceanside to the
south, Fallbrook to the east, and San
Clemente to the northwest. Aside from
a portion of the installation’s border that
is shared with the San Mateo
Wilderness Area and the Fallbrook
Naval Weapons Station, the surrounding
land use is urban development, rural
residential development, and
agricultural farming and ranching. The
largest single leaseholder on the
installation is California State Parks,
which includes a 50-year real estate
lease granted on September 1, 1971, for
2,000 ac (809 ha) that encompass San
Onofre State Beach.

The MCB Camp Pendleton INRMP is
a planning document that guides the
management and conservation of
natural resources under the
installation’s control. The INRMP was
prepared to assist installation staff and
users in their efforts to conserve and
rehabilitate natural resources consistent
with the use of MCB Camp Pendleton to
train Marines and set the agenda for
managing natural resources on MCB
Camp Pendleton. MCB Camp Pendleton
completed its INRMP in 2001, followed
by a revised and updated version in
2007 to address conservation and
management recommendations within
the scope of the installation’s military
mission, including conservation
measures for tidewater goby (MCB
Camp Pendleton 2007, Appendix F,
Section F.22, pp. F–78–F–85).

Additionally, according to the 2007
INRMP, California State Parks is
required to conduct its natural resources
management consistent with the
philosophies and objectives of the
revised 2007 INRMP (MCB Camp
Pendleton 2007, Chapter 2, p. 31).

The tidewater goby receives
programmatic protection from training
and other installation activities within
the estuarine component of its habitat,
as outlined and required in both the
Estuarine and Beach Ecosystem
Conservation Plan and the Riparian
Ecosystem Conservation Plan (MCB
Camp Pendleton 2007, Appendices B
and C, respectively). Management and
protection measures that benefit the
tidewater goby identified in Appendix B
of the INRMP include, but are not
limited to, the following: (1)
Maintaining connectivity of beach and
estuarine ecosystems with riparian and
upland ecosystems; (2) promoting
natural hydrological processes to
maintain estuarine water quality and
quantity; and (3) maximizing the
probability of tidewater goby
metapopulation existence within the
lagoon complex (MCB Camp Pendleton
2007, Appendix B, pp. B5–B7).

Management and protection measures
that benefit tidewater goby identified in
Appendix C of the INRMP include, but
are not limited to, the following: (1)
Eliminating nonnative invasive species
(such as Arundo donax (giant reed)) on
the installation and off the installation
in partnership with upstream
landowners to enhance ecosystem
value; (2) providing viable riparian
corridors and promoting connectivity of
native riparian habitats; (3) providing
for unimpeded hydrologic and
sedimentary floodplain dynamics to
support the maintenance and
enhancement of biota; (4) maintaining
natural floodplain processes and extent
of these areas by avoiding and
minimizing further permanent loss of
floodplain habitats; (5) maintaining to
the maximum extent possible natural
flood regimes; (6) maintaining to the
extent practicable stream and river
flows needed to support riparian
habitat; (7) monitoring and maintaining
groundwater levels and basin
withdrawals to avoid loss and
degradation of habitat quality; (8)
restoring areas to their original
condition after disturbance, such as
following project construction or fire
damage; and (9) promoting increased
tidewater goby populations in
watersheds through perpetuation of
natural ecosystem processes and
programmatic instruction application
for avoidance and minimization of
impacts (MCB Camp Pendleton 2007,
Appendix C, pp. C5–C8).

Current environmental regulations
and restrictions apply to all threatened
and endangered species on the
installation (including tidewater goby)
and are provided to all users of ranges
and training areas to guide activities and
protect the species and its habitat. First,
specific conservation measures are
applied to the tidewater goby and its
habitat that include: (1) Controlling
nonnative animal species (such as
bullfrogs) and nonnative plant species
(such as Arundo donax and Rorippa
spp. (watercress)); and (2) restricting
military-related traffic use within
riparian areas to existing roads, trails,
and crossings. Second, MCB Camp
Pendleton’s environmental security staff
review projects and enforce existing
regulations and orders that, through
their implementation, avoid and
minimize impacts to natural resources,
including the tidewater goby and its
habitat. Third, MCB Camp Pendleton
provides training to personnel on
environmental awareness for sensitive
resources on the base, including the
tidewater goby and its habitat. As a
result of these regulations and
restrictions, activities occurring on MCB
Camp Pendleton are currently
conducted in a manner that minimizes
impacts to tidewater goby habitat.

MCB Camp Pendleton’s INRMP also
benefits tidewater goby through ongoing
monitoring and research efforts. The
installation conducts monitoring of
tidewater goby populations at least once
every 3 years, and also conducts
monitoring to determine impacts of
relocation of effluent infiltration ponds
(MCB Camp Pendleton 2007, Appendix
B, p. B8). Data are provided to all
necessary personnel through MCB Camp
Pendleton’s GIS database on sensitive
resources and in their published
resource atlas. Additionally, MCB Camp
Pendleton collaborated with the U.S.

Geological Survey’s Biological
Resources Division to develop and
implement a rigorous science-based
monitoring protocol for tidewater goby
populations throughout the installation,
including monitoring water quality
variables at all historically occupied
sites regardless of current occupation
status (Lafferty 2010, pp. 10–11).

Based on the above considerations,
and in accordance with section
4(a)(3)(B)(i) of the Act, we have
determined that conservation efforts
identified in the 2007 INRMP for MCB
Camp Pendleton provide a benefit to the
tidewater goby and its habitat. This
includes habitat located in the following
areas: San Mateo Creek, San Onofre
Creek, Las Flores/Las Pulgas Creek,
Hidden Lagoon, Aliso Canyon, French
Lagoon, Cockleburr Canyon, and Santa
Margarita River (names of areas follow
those used in the Recovery Plan (Service
2005a, pp. B21–22)). Therefore, lands
subject to the INRMP for MCB Camp
Pendleton, which includes the lands
leased from the Department of Defense
by other parties, are exempt from
critical habitat designation under
section 4(a)(3)(B) of the Act, and we are
not including approximately 1,156 ac
(468 ha) of habitat in this critical habitat
designation because of this exemption.

Exclusions
Application of Section 4(b)(2) of the Act
Section 4(b)(2) of the Act states that
the Secretary shall designate and make
revisions to 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
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8782 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations 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. The statute on its face, as well
as 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
in making that determination.

Exclusions Based on Economic Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
consider the economic impacts of
specifying any particular area as critical
habitat. In order to consider economic
impacts, we prepared a draft economic
analysis of the proposed critical habitat
designation (Industrial Economics
Incorporated (IEc) 2012). The draft
analysis, dated March 16, 2012, was
made available for public review from
July 24, 2012, through August 23, 2012
(77 FR 43222). Following the close of
the comment period, a final analysis of
the potential economic effects of the
designation was developed taking into
consideration the public comments and
any new information.

The intent of the final economic
analysis (FEA) is to quantify the
economic impacts of all potential
conservation efforts for tidewater goby;
some of these costs will likely be
incurred regardless of whether we
designate critical habitat (baseline). The
economic impact of the final critical
habitat designation is analyzed by
comparing scenarios both ‘‘with critical
habitat’’ and ‘‘without critical habitat.’’
The ‘‘without critical habitat’’ scenario
represents the baseline for the analysis,
considering protections already in place
for the species (for example, under the
Federal listing and other Federal, State,
and local regulations). The baseline,
therefore, represents the costs incurred
regardless of whether critical habitat is
designated. The ‘‘with critical habitat’’
scenario describes the incremental
impacts associated specifically with the
designation of critical habitat for the
species. The incremental conservation
efforts and associated impacts are those
not expected to occur absent the
designation of critical habitat for the
species. In other words, the incremental
costs are those attributable solely to the
designation of critical habitat above and
beyond the baseline costs; these are the
costs we consider in the final
designation of critical habitat. The
analysis looks retrospectively at
baseline impacts incurred since the
species was listed, and forecasts both
baseline and incremental impacts likely
to occur with the designation of critical
habitat.

The FEA also addresses how potential
economic impacts are likely to be
distributed, including an assessment of
any local or regional impacts of habitat
conservation and the potential effects of
conservation activities on government
agencies, private businesses, and
individuals. The FEA measures lost
economic efficiency associated with
residential and commercial
development and public projects and
activities, such as economic impacts on
water management and transportation
projects, Federal lands, small entities,
and the energy industry.

Decisionmakers can use this
information to assess whether the effects
of the designation might unduly burden
a particular group or economic sector.

Finally, the FEA looks retrospectively at
costs that have been incurred since 1994
(year of the species’ listing) (59 FR
5494), and considers those costs that
may occur in the 20 years following the
designation of critical habitat, which
was determined to be the appropriate
period for analysis because limited
planning information was available for
most activities to forecast activity levels
for projects beyond a 20-year timeframe.

The FEA quantifies economic impacts of
tidewater goby conservation efforts
associated with the following categories
of activity: (1) Water management, (2)
cattle grazing, (3) transportation (roads,
highways, bridges), (4) utilities (oil and
gas pipelines), (5) residential,
commercial, and industrial
development, and (6) natural resource
management.

Baseline protections for the tidewater
goby address a broad range of habitat
threats within a significant portion of
the proposed critical habitat area. A key
consideration in the incremental
analysis is that, where tidewater goby
critical habitat overlaps with steelhead
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) critical habitat,
steelhead conservation measures would
be sufficiently protective for tidewater
goby as well, and, therefore, few
incremental project modification costs
are anticipated in these areas. Across
the designation, incremental costs
primarily include costs of
administrative efforts associated with
new and reinitiated consultations to
consider adverse modification of critical
habitat for tidewater goby. In addition,
only minor incremental project
modification costs are forecast to result
from critical habitat. This result is
attributed to the following key findings:
(1) Baseline protections exist for
tidewater goby, (2) steelhead critical
habitat overlaps with a large portion of
the unoccupied units, and (3) minimal
economic activity occurs on private
lands in the study area.

In total, the incremental impacts to all
economic activities are estimated to be
$558,000 over the 20-year timeframe, or
$49,300 on an annualized basis
(assuming a 7 percent discount rate).

Approximately 98 percent of these
incremental costs result from
administrative costs of considering
adverse modification in section 7
consultations.

Incremental conservation efforts are
estimated to be $11,500 over the 20-year
timeframe or $1,090 on an annualized
basis (both assuming a 7 percent
discount rate). These include the costs
of adding the tidewater goby to the
environmental impact reports (EIR)
required for projects that are being
proposed in critical habitat unit MAR–
5 Bolinas Lagoon and SLO–12 Oso Flaco
Lake, as well as additional surveying for
tidewater goby in Oso Flaco Lake. Our
economic analysis did not identify any
disproportionate costs that are likely to
result from the designation.

After considering the economic
impacts, the Secretary is not exercising
his discretion to exclude any areas from
this designation of critical habitat for
the tidewater goby based on economic
impacts.

A copy of the FEA with supporting
documents may be obtained by
contacting the Ventura Fish and
Wildlife Office (see
ADDRESSES) or by
downloading from the Internet at
http://www.regulations.gov.

Exclusions Based on National Security
Impacts
In preparing this final rule, we have
exempted from the designation of
critical habitat those Department of
Defense lands subject to completed
INRMPs determined to provide a benefit
to the tidewater goby. We have also
determined that the remaining lands
within the designation of critical habitat
for the species are not owned or
managed by the Department of Defense,
and, therefore, we anticipate no impact
on national security. Consequently, the
Secretary is not exercising his discretion
to exclude any areas from this final
designation based on impacts on
national security.

Exclusions Based on Other Relevant
Impacts
Under section 4(b)(2) of the Act, we
consider any other relevant impacts, in
addition to economic impacts and
impacts on national security. We
consider a number of factors, including
whether the landowners have developed
any HCPs or other management plans
for the area, or whether there are
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8783 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations conservation partnerships that would be
encouraged by designation of, or
exclusion from, critical habitat. In
addition, we look at any tribal issues,
and consider the government-to-
government relationship of the United
States with tribal entities. We also
consider any social impacts that might
occur because of the designation.

In preparing this final rule, we have
determined that there are currently no
HCPs or other management plans for
tidewater goby, and the final
designation does not include any tribal
lands or trust resources. We anticipate
no impact on tribal lands, partnerships,
or HCPs from this critical habitat
designation. Accordingly, the Secretary
is not exercising his discretion to
exclude any areas from this final
designation based on other relevant
impacts.

Summary of Comments and
Recommendations
We requested written comments from
the public on the proposed revised
designation of critical habitat for the
tidewater goby during two comment
periods. The first comment period
associated with the publication of the
proposed rule (76 FR 64996) opened on
October 19, 2011, and closed on
December 19, 2011. We also requested
comments on the proposed revised
critical habitat designation and
associated draft economic analysis
during a comment period that opened
July 24, 2012, and closed on August 23,
2012 (77 FR 43222). We did not receive
any requests for a public hearing. We
also contacted appropriate Federal,
State, and local agencies; scientific
organizations; and other interested
parties and invited them to comment on
the proposed rule and draft economic
analysis during these comment periods.

During the first comment period, we
received 10 comment letters directly
addressing the proposed revised critical
habitat designation. During the second
comment period, we received three
comment letters addressing the
proposed revised critical habitat
designation or the draft economic
analysis. All substantive information
provided during comment periods has
either been incorporated directly into
this final determination or addressed
below. Comments received were
grouped into four general issues
specifically relating to the proposed
revised critical habitat designation for
tidewater goby, and are addressed in the
following summary and incorporated
into the final rule as appropriate.

Peer Review
In accordance with our peer review
policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR
34270), we solicited expert opinions
from seven knowledgeable individuals
with scientific expertise that included
familiarity with the species, the
geographic region in which the species
occurs, and conservation biology
principles associated with tidewater
goby. We received responses from four
of the peer reviewers.

We reviewed all comments received
from the peer reviewers for substantive
issues and new information regarding
critical habitat for the tidewater goby.

The peer reviewers generally concurred
with our methods and conclusions and
provided additional information,
clarifications, and suggestions to
improve the final critical habitat rule.

Peer reviewer comments are addressed
in the following summary and
incorporated into the final rule as
appropriate.

Peer Reviewer Comments
(1) Comment: Two peer reviewers
suggested that the proposed critical
habitat designation contained too few
areas to allow for establishment of a
more continuous metapopulation
dynamic in the north coast and central
coast regions.

Our Response: We agree with the
reviewers that it is important to
maintain metapopulation dynamics
throughout the range of the tidewater
goby, including the north coast and
central coast regions. Accordingly, we
included connectivity in our criteria for
determining critical habitat (see Criteria
Used To Identify Critical Habitat
section), and we designated those sites
that are an integral part of
metapopulation dynamics.

Section 3(5)(C) of the Act states that,
except in particular circumstances
determined by the Secretary, critical
habitat shall not include the entire
geographical area that can be occupied
by the threatened or endangered
species. It is not the intent of the Act to
designate critical habitat for every
population and every documented
historical location of a species, nor is it
the intent to designate all areas
supporting metapopulations as critical
habitat. We have considered all existing
and potential habitat for the tidewater
goby, and using the best scientific and
commercial data available, we have
designated all areas that meet the
definition of critical habitat. However,
the purpose of critical habitat
designations is not to signal that habitat
outside the designation is unimportant
or may not contribute to recovery of the
species, and we also recognize that the
designation of critical habitat may not
include all of the habitat that may
eventually be determined to be
necessary for the recovery of the
tidewater goby. Also, areas outside the
final revised critical habitat designation
will continue to be subject to
conservation actions implemented
under section 7(a)(1) of the Act,
regulatory protections afforded by the
section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard, and
the prohibitions of section 9 of the Act.

These protections and conservation
tools will continue to contribute to
recovery of this species.
(2) Comment: One peer reviewer
suggested that we give consideration in
our PCE to habitats that tidewater goby
must periodically traverse, but that are
otherwise unoccupied, and that we
expand the PCE to include population
connectivity allowing for
metapopulation dynamics to function.

Our Response: Expanding the PCE to
include areas of the ocean and large
bays (Humboldt Bay and San Francisco
Bay) would not address the threat of
fragmentation because isolation of the
components of a metapopulation is the
result of the loss of locations (i.e.,
lagoons, estuaries, saltmarshes, etc.) that
support tidewater goby. When a location
is lost, the distance between the
components of a metapopulation may be
too great to allow the species to disperse
through otherwise inhospitable
conditions. Furthermore, we are not
aware of any threats to these stretches
of coastline within the Pacific Ocean
that need special management in terms
of tidewater goby dispersal within and
between metapopulations.

Consequently, designating areas of the
ocean and large bays to accommodate
this dispersal would not be essential to
the conservation of the species, nor
would it be practical.
(3) Comment: Two peer reviewers
recommended that we designate
subunits within Humboldt Bay unit
(HUM–3) in a manner similar to the
approach used for the Eel River unit
(HUM–4). The peer reviewers’ reasoning
for this approach includes: (a) Research
indicates that a metapopulation
dynamic may not be currently occurring
within Humboldt Bay (McCraney et al.
2010) due to isolation by tidegates and
other artificial features theoretically
rendering each location occupied by
tidewater gobies as a separate
subpopulation. (Available evidence
indicates that these subpopulations are
isolated from one another and are not
continuously distributed despite their
relatively close proximity (McCraney et
al. 2010).); and (b) the extent of
connectivity between Humboldt Bay to
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00039 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8784 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations nearby areas such as the Eel River is
uncertain. The reviewers noted that,
because of the great distance
(approximately 18.4 mi (29.6 km))
between Humboldt Bay and the Eel
River, genetic exchange is unlikely to
occur naturally. Therefore, the
reviewers stated it is important to
identify separate units in Humboldt Bay
and reestablish connectivity between
those locations.

Our Response: We respectfully
disagree with the two peer reviewers.

We have designated Humboldt Bay
(HUM–3) as a single, large unit because
of the relatively close proximity of the
locations that are occupied by tidewater
goby within the bay. Although as the
reviewers pointed out these locations
may be threatened by reduced genetic
and life-history diversity, assigning
subunits (or not) will not increase (or
decrease) the level of protection under
the Act for the tidewater goby. Rather,
at this time the threats to the habitat at
these locations are the same or similar
and conservation of the species will be
better served by including them in a
single unit.

In contrast to Humboldt Bay (HUM–
3), we identified Eel River unit (HUM–
4) as consisting of two subunits because
of the greater separation of the subunits
within the Eel River unit, and because
the southern Eel River subunit was only
recently discovered and the
metapopulation dynamic between the
two subunits is unclear.
(4) Comment: Two peer reviewers
suggested that we consider an
additional threat to the tidewater goby
and its habitat involving projects
categorized as habitat restoration. The
reviewers noted that it is not uncommon
for proposed estuary and lagoon
alterations to include ‘‘restoration’’
projects that are proposed to ‘‘restore
connectivity’’ or ‘‘improve water
quality.’’ These projects sometimes
involve elimination of backwaters,
which may be crucial for flood refuge
for the tidewater goby, because they
may have poor water quality in late
summer.

Our Response: We acknowledge that
coastal lagoon restoration projects may
be a threat to tidewater goby habitat. As
such, we have added language in this
rule to reflect this potential threat (see
Special Management Considerations or
Protection section above).

Federal Agency Comments
(5) Comment: The U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers (ACOE) opposed designating
locations as critical habitat that were
unoccupied at the time of listing
regardless of their historical or current
occupancy (see Table 1 for a list of
locations that were unoccupied at the
time of listing). The ACOE also opposed
designating locations that are not
currently occupied even if they were
occupied at the time of listing (see Table
1), and are opposed to designating those
that have never been known to be
occupied (areas that meet this criteria
are footnoted in Table 1). They contend
that the lack of detection of tidewater
gobies in an area is an indication that
the habitat is not suitable for this
species. For this reason, the ACOE
requested the Service withdraw the
proposed rule, revise it, and then
recirculate the proposed rule for more
comments.

Our Response: We respectfully
disagree with the ACOE’s contention
that the lack of detection of tidewater
gobies in an area is an indication that
the habitat is not suitable for this
species. The lack of detection of
tidewater gobies in a particular area
does not necessarily indicate that
suitable habitat is not present or in some
cases could not be restored. As
summarized below, we used the best
available scientific data to identify the
specific areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat, and we are
appropriately designating those areas.

We developed criteria for determining
the specific areas within the
geographical area occupied at the time
of listing that have the physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the tidewater goby.

These criteria consist of the following:
(1) Areas that support source
populations (populations where local
reproductive success is greater than
local mortality (Meffe and Carroll 1994,
p. 187)). For the purposes of this
designation, we identified areas
supporting source populations as those
that are currently occupied and have
been consistently occupied for 3 or
more consecutive years based on survey
data and published reports. Source
populations are more likely to be
capable of maintaining populations over
many years and are, therefore, capable
of providing individuals to recruit into
surrounding subpopulations.
(2) Areas that support subpopulations
within each metapopulation in addition
to source populations in the event that
the source population is extirpated due
to a natural episodic catastrophic event
such as a major flood or drought.
(3) Areas that provide connectivity
between metapopulations. These areas
are likely to act as ‘‘stepping stones’’
between more isolated populations, and
thereby contribute to metapopulation
persistence and genetic exchange. For
the purposes of this designation, we
generally identified locations that
provide connectivity as those within
approximately 6 mi (10 km) of another
location.

After determining the specific areas
within the geographical area occupied at
the time of listing that have the physical
or biological features essential to the
conservation of the tidewater goby, we
concluded that they were not adequate
to ensure the conservation of the
species. Therefore, we developed
criteria for determining the specific
areas outside the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time it is
listed that are essential for the
conservation of the species. In some
cases, these areas were known to be
historically occupied but not occupied
at the time of listing. Others were not
occupied at the time of listing but are
currently occupied, while a few areas
have never been known to be occupied.

The criteria for determining the
specific areas outside the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing that
are essential for the conservation of the
tidewater goby are:
(1) Areas of aquatic habitat in coastal
lagoons and estuaries with still-to-slow-
moving water that allow for the
conservation of viable metapopulations
under varying environmental
conditions, such as, for example,
drought.
(2) Areas that provide connectivity
between source populations or may
provide connectivity in the future.

These areas are likely to act as ‘‘stepping
stones’’ between more isolated
populations, and thereby contribute to
metapopulation persistence and genetic
exchange. For the purposes of this
designation, we generally identified
locations that provide connectivity as
those within approximately 6 mi (10
km) of another location.
(3) Additional areas that may be more
isolated but may represent unique
adaptations to local features (habitat
variability, hydrology, microclimate).

The areas outside the geographical
area occupied at the time of listing that
were selected for designation are
essential for the conservation of the
tidewater goby for various reasons
depending on their location. Some of
these areas are essential because they
provide habitat for maintaining
tidewater goby metapopulations where
the distances between units that were
occupied at the time of listing make it
difficult for tidewater goby to disperse.

Other areas are essential to help prevent
the extirpation of a metapopulation in
which only one or two occupied sites
remain. As discussed in the
Metapopulation Dynamics section, the
number of subpopulations is important
to the long-term stability of a
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00040 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8785 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations metapopulation. Furthermore, some of
these areas were selected or expanded to
take into account sea-level rise as
projected by climate change models.

All of these areas have also been
identified in the Recovery Plan as being
important for the conservation of the
species. As mentioned previously, the
goal of the Recovery Plan is to preserve
the diversity of habitats that occur
within the range of the species, the
metapopulation structure of the species,
and genetic diversity (Service 2005a, p.
28).
(6) Comment: The ACOE
recommended that we remove sites that
are 1 ac (0.4 ha) or less from the
designation because the proposed rule
states that these locations tend not to be
suitable for breeding. These sites
include San Geronimo Creek (SLO–7),
Can˜ada de las Agujas (SB–2), Can˜ada
del Agua Caliente (SB–5), Arroyo Hondo
(SB–7), Big Sycamore Canyon (VEN–4),
and Arroyo Sequit (LA–1). The ACOE
also commented that the extent of the
designation on Aliso Creek (OR–1)
extends beyond a barrier and the unit
should be revised.

Our Response: While there is a
general trend for sites 1 ac (0.4 ha) or
less not to be suitable for breeding there
are some important exceptions; for
example San Geronimo Creek (SLO–7)
is a source population, as evidenced by
its tidewater goby population’s
persistence during severe drought
conditions (Swift et al. 1991, p. 33), that
is capable of maintaining its current
population levels and capable of
providing individuals to recruit into
subpopulations found in adjacent areas
despite being less than 1 ac (0.4 ha) in
area. Additionally, suitable breeding
habitat was not the only criteria we used
in selecting units to be included in the
designation. We also considered
important connectivity sites that are an
integral part of metapopulation
dynamics. Without maintaining the
connectivity between source
populations, we are likely to see entire
metapopulations become extirpated,
which would hinder recovery. The
remaining locations 1 ac (0.4 ha) or less
that the commenter recommended be
removed are important connectivity
sites and meet the definition of critical
habitat.

In regard to the potential barrier on
unit OR–1 (Aliso Creek), we reviewed
our information on the extent of the
designation and the specific site
identified as a barrier. After further
review and discussion with the ACOE,
the area was more appropriately
characterized as a grade control
structure about 2–3 ft (0.6–2 m) in
height (T. Keeney, Senior Ecologist,
Corps, pers. comm. 2013). Based on the
Service’s evaluation of the information
on the site and review of the our record
for this designation, we determined the
subject location corresponds to a riffle
area we are already aware of on Aliso
Creek. We have determined the riffle
area does not present a barrier to fish
passage.
(7) Comment: The ACOE stated that
the San Luis Rey River (SAN–1) does
not contain the PCE as described in the
proposed rule. Specifically, this
commenter claimed that PCE 1a, 1b, and
1c have not been met. The ACOE also
commented that the upstream limit of
the unit is not appropriate.

Our Response: To designate critical
habitat within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, we are required to identify the
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species. We
have determined the specific areas
within the geographical area occupied at
the time of listing that contain the PCE
essential to the conservation of the
species and have included these areas in
the designation. When designating
critical habitat outside the geographical
area occupied by a species at the time
it was listed, we are required to
determine that such areas are essential
for the conservation of the species; the
presence of one or more PCE(s) is not
required by the Act to designate such
areas as critical habitat. Unit SAN–1 is
outside the geographical area occupied
by the tidewater goby at the time of
listing; thus, the presence of the PCE is
not required.

Although the presence of the PCE is
not required in this case, we include the
San Luis Rey in the designation of
critical habitat because (1) it is
identified in the recovery plan as a
potential site for reintroduction (see
Table G–1 in the recovery plan); (2) the
site was naturally recolonized in 2010
and is now considered occupied; and (3)
it is essential for the conservation of the
species because it serves as one of a
limited number of locations that
contribute toward metapopulation
dynamics of the genetically unique
South Coast Recovery Unit (Service
2005a, pp. 32–39).

Natural recolonization of the San Luis
Rey in 2010 shows that a
metapopulation dynamic is still
occurring within the suite of occupied
and potentially occupiable sites within
the recovery plan’s South Coast
Recovery Unit. The natural
recolonization of the San Luis Rey River
by tidewater goby in 2010 further
demonstrates the area is capable of
supporting the species and possesses
the PCE needed to support the tidewater
goby. As discussed in the
Metapopulation Dynamics section, the
number of subpopulations is important
to the long-term stability of a
metapopulation. As such, SAN–1 will
help the species to survive and will help
support the recovery of the tidewater
goby population within the South Coast
Recovery Unit, even potentially
facilitating natural recolonization of
currently unoccupied locations to the
south. This unit now represents the
southernmost occupied area of the
species’ distribution, and is important
for maintaining the tidewater goby
metapopulation in the region.

With regard to the delineation of the
proposed critical habitat boundary, the
Service reviewed information in its files
used to develop the designation.

Available information indicates the
upstream boundary of unit SAN–1 was
determined, in part, to account for
expected sea-level rise. The upstream
extent of the unit in the San Luis Rey
River included almost all the area
predicted to be inundated by the ‘‘Mean
Higher High Water (MHHW) 2100’’
model. The MHHW 2100 model is a
GIS-based model predicting the area
inundated after a 1.4-meter sea-level
rise—the scenario for year 2100. Given
the timeframe of the model’s projection,
the critical habitat boundary does
extend beyond what is currently estuary
in order to accommodate predicted
changes in estuarine and riverine
habitats over time.
(8) Comment: Implying that the San
Luis Rey River (SAN–1) should not be
designated as critical habitat or should
be excluded under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act, the ACOE noted that the area is
part of the City of Oceanside’s proposed
Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan/
Natural Communities Conservation Plan
(HCP/NCCP) and that the area will also
be managed per the ACOE-proposed
Adaptive Habitat Management Plan
(AHMP) for the San Luis Rey River
Flood Risk Management Project.

Our Response: Based on our review of
the best available data, the San Luis Rey
River should be designated as critical
habitat for the tidewater goby. Per
section 3(5)(A)(ii) of the Act and its
implementing regulations, designating
critical habitat outside the geographical
area occupied by the tidewater goby at
the time of listing is based upon a
determination that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species. As explained in the unit
description for SAN–1, we have made
that determination. However, under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act, the Secretary
may exclude any area from critical
habitat if he determines that the benefits
of such exclusion outweigh the benefits
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00041 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8786 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations of specifying such area as part of the
critical habitat.

Collaborative processes, such as those
mentioned by the commenter, can
benefit listed and sensitive species,
including the tidewater goby. When
considering whether a current land
management or conservation plan (HCPs
as well as other types) provides
adequate management or protection for
the tidewater goby and its habitat, we
consider a number of factors, including,
but not limited to, the following:
(1) Whether the plan is complete and
provides the same or better level of
protection from adverse modification or
destruction than that provided through
a consultation under section 7 of the
Act;
(2) Whether there is a reasonable
expectation that the conservation
management strategies and actions will
be implemented for the foreseeable
future and effective, based on past
practices, written guidance, or
regulations; and
(3) Whether the plan provides
adaptive management and conservation
strategies and measures consistent with
currently accepted principles of
conservation biology.

We have been working with the City
of Oceanside for several years; however,
the City’s HCP/NCCP plan is not yet
finalized. The City’s plan will be an
individually permitted Subarea Plan
under the Multiple Habitat Conservation
Program (MHCP). The MHCP
Subregional Plan, finalized in 2003, is a
comprehensive, multiple jurisdictional
planning program in northwestern San
Diego County (SANDAG 2003, entire). It
serves as the ‘‘umbrella’’ document for
individual Subarea Plans under its
jurisdiction. The combination of the
MHCP Subregional Plan and the City’s
Subarea Plan will serve as a multiple
species HCP pursuant to Section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The MHCP
Subregional Plan does not address the
tidewater goby. At the time this rule was
prepared, the City of Oceanside had no
plans to include the tidewater goby in
its Subarea Plan, and the City has
indicated it is not likely to seek
coverage for the goby in the near future.

Thus, at this time, we have found no
basis to support exclusion of the area.

The AHMP for the San Luis Rey River
Flood Risk Management Project is being
developed as part of a flood control
project on the lower San Luis Rey River.

The ACOE consulted with us on this
project to address impacts to several
federally listed species; however, the
tidewater goby was not one of them
(Service 2005b, entire; Service 2006,
entire). At the time this rule was
prepared, the AHMP had not been
finalized, and the geographical scope of
the AHMP, as currently planned, will be
the portion of the lower San Luis Rey
River that is upstream of the Interstate
5 bridge. Only 19 ac (8 ha), or 33
percent, of the area designated as
critical habitat for the tidewater goby in
SAN–1 is above the bridge; the
remainder is downstream. More
importantly, the AHMP does not
address the tidewater goby.

Therefore, after considering the
proposed HCP/NCCP and AHMP plans,
the Secretary is not exercising his
discretion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act to exclude unit SAN–1 from the
final revised designation of critical
habitat. We will continue to work with
the City of Oceanside and the ACOE on
the respective plans, including
addressing the tidewater goby and unit
SAN–1 should the parties deem it
appropriate to do so.

Comments From States
Section 4(i) of the Act states, ‘‘the
Secretary shall submit to the State
agency a written justification for his
failure to adopt regulations consistent
with the agency’s comments or
petition.’’ We received no comments
from the State regarding the proposal to
designate critical habitat for the
tidewater goby.

Public Comments
Public Comments on Criteria Used To
Identify Critical Habitat
(9) Comment: Several commenters
opposed designating locations as critical
habitat that were unoccupied at the time
of listing (see Table 1 for a list of
locations that were unoccupied at the
time of listing). One commenter
opposed designating locations that are
not currently occupied (see Table 1),
and one commenter opposed
designating locations that have never
been known to be occupied (see Table
1).

Our Response: Please refer to our
response to Comment 5 above.
(10) Comment: One commenter
opposed designating the Salinas River
(MN–2) because a resource plan is
under development for that area, which
would provide for conservation of the
species.

Our Response: Please refer to our
response to Comment 8 above for the
types of factors we consider when
evaluating the conservation benefits
provided by a land management or
conservation plan (HCPs as well as
other types).

At this time, we have not received a
complete final resource management
plan for the Salinas River, and the
Secretary is not exercising his discretion
under section 4(b)(2) of the Act to
exclude unit MN–2 from the final
revised designation of critical habitat.
(11) Comment: One commenter
opposed expanding critical habitat in
Can˜ada de Alegria (SB–4) because the
Service has concurred with a 2009
petition that downlisting the species to
threatened is warranted.

Our Response: In our 90-day finding
on a petition to downlist the tidewater
goby from endangered to threatened, we
determined that the petition presented
substantial scientific or commercial
information indicating that the
petitioned action may be warranted and
that we would conduct a review of the
status of the species (76 FR 3069;
January 19, 2011). This determination
was based in part on our 5-year review
of the species. Section 4(b)(3)(A) of the
Act (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A)) requires
that we make a finding on whether a
petition to list, delist, or reclassify a
species presents substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.

We are to base this finding on
information provided in the petition,
supporting information submitted with
the petition, and information otherwise
available in our files. Our standard for
substantial scientific or commercial
information within the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) with regard to a 90-
day petition finding is ‘‘that amount of
information that would lead a
reasonable person to believe that the
measure proposed in the petition may
be warranted’’ (50 CFR 424.14(b)). If we
find that substantial scientific or
commercial information meeting the
above definition was presented, we are
required to promptly conduct a species
status review, which we subsequently
summarize in our 12-month finding.

However, we have not yet made a final
determination as to whether or not the
downlisting of the tidewater goby is
warranted. More importantly, regardless
of the status of threatened or
endangered, we are still required under
the Act to designate critical habitat.
(12) Comment: One commenter
requested that we exclude private lands
in Arroyo de la Cruz (SLO–1), Arroyo
del Corral (SLO–2), Oak Knoll Creek
(SLO–3), and Little Pico Creek (SLO–4)
from the designations because an
existing conservation easement and
associated management plan includes
those areas.

Our Response: We value our
partnerships with Federal and State
agencies and local jurisdictions.

Collaborative processes, such as those
mentioned by the commenter, can
benefit listed and sensitive species,
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8787 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations including the tidewater goby. Please
refer to our response to Comment 8
above for the types of factors we
consider when evaluating the
conservation benefits provided by a
current land management or
conservation plan (HCPs as well as
other types).

As noted in the Recovery Plan and
Table 2, threats that may require special
management in these units include:
highway construction, which may
remove aquatic habitat, and grazing of
aquatic and riparian habitats. These
threats do not appear to be adequately
addressed in the conservation easement
and associated management plan. After
considering the existing conservation
easement and associated management
plan, the Secretary is not exercising his
discretion under section 4(b)(2) of the
Act to exclude units SLO–1, SLO–2,
SLO–3, and SLO–4 from the final
revised designation of critical habitat.
(13) Comment: One commenter
questioned why we expanded critical
habitat by 1 ac (0.4 ha) in Can˜ada de
Alegria (SB–4) and requested that we
exclude this additional area from the
final designation because it is protected
by a preserve.

Our Response: We value our
partnerships with Federal and State
agencies and local jurisdictions.

Collaborative processes, such as those
mentioned by the commenter, can
benefit listed and sensitive species,
including the tidewater goby. Please
refer to our response to Comment 8
above for the types of factors we
consider when evaluating the
conservation benefits provided by a
current land management or
conservation plan (HCPs as well as
other types).

As noted in the Recovery Plan and
Table 2, threats that may require special
management in this additional area
include: roadway maintenance that may
affect aquatic habitat, upstream water
diversions, alterations of water flows,
groundwater overdrafting, and upstream
grazing of aquatic and riparian habitats.

These threats do not appear to be
adequately addressed in the
management of the preserve. After
considering the preserve, the Secretary
is not exercising his discretion under
section 4(b)(2) of the Act to exclude the
additional area in unit SB–4 from the
final revised designation of critical
habitat.
(14) Comment: One commenter is
opposed to designating critical habitat
in the Goleta Slough (SB–9) because of
a belief that drainages within the slough
do not have the PCE for the tidewater
goby.

Our Response: To designate critical
habitat within the geographical area
occupied by the species at the time of
listing, we are required to identify the
physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species. We
have determined the specific areas
within the geographical area occupied at
the time of listing that contain the PCE
essential to the conservation of the
species and have included these areas in
this designation. When designating
critical habitat outside the geographical
area occupied by a species at the time
it was listed, we are required to
determine that such areas are essential
for the conservation of the species; the
presence of one or more PCE(s) is not
required by the Act to designate such
areas as critical habitat. Unit SB–9 is
outside the geographical area occupied
by the tidewater goby at the time of
listing; thus, the presence of the PCE is
not required. Although the presence of
the PCE is not required in this case, we
do note in our discussion of SB–9 that
it appears that SB–9 possesses the PCE
needed to support the tidewater goby.

SB–9 is essential for the conservation of
the species because it provides habitat
for the species, allows for connectivity
between tidewater goby source
populations from nearby units, supports
gene flow, and provides for
metapopulation dynamics within the
Conception Recovery Unit. As discussed
in the Metapopulation Dynamics
section, the number of subpopulations
is important to the long-term stability of
a metapopulation. As such, SB–9 will
help the species to survive and will help
support the recovery of the tidewater
goby population within the Conception
Recovery Unit.
(15) Comment: One commenter stated
that designated critical habitat should
not extend beyond the lower 750 feet of
Arroyo Paredon Creek (SB–12) because
suitable habitat for the tidewater goby
does not exist upstream of this reach
and the stream gradient is too steep.

Our Response: In response to this
comment, we reexamined the
boundaries of unit SB–12. Based on
information we obtained from a field
investigation and recently available
high-resolution LiDAR (Light Detection
and Ranging) elevation data, we have
identified a steep gradient that could act
as a barrier to upstream dispersal and
refuge for tidewater goby. Therefore, we
have revised the upstream limit of the
unit and removed those areas that we
determined are not accessible to
tidewater goby downstream of the
gradient, and thus not part of the critical
habitat unit. The changes resulted in a
net decrease of approximately 1 ac (less
than 1 ha) for the designated area in unit
SB–12 (see Summary of Changes From
Previously Designated Critical Habitat
and 2011 Proposed Revised Critical
Habitat Designation section for more
information).

Public Comments Regarding Legal or
Policy Compliance
(16) Comment: One commenter stated
that laws enacted since the time of
listing have reduced the need for critical
habitat designation. One commenter
also claimed that threats to the
tidewater goby have been reduced or the
nature of the threat is less serious than
originally believed to be the case;
therefore, the need for critical habitat is
reduced.

Our Response: Although the
combined effectiveness of existing laws
and regulations, including the
protections afforded a listed species
under the Act, have substantially
reduced large-scale habitat loss and
alteration, numerous small-scale
projects do have an effect on tidewater
goby habitat. Furthermore, while some
threats to the tidewater goby have been
reduced, numerous threats to the
species and its habitat still exist. While
some of these threats can singly have a
substantial impact on individual
tidewater goby localities, in most cases
it is the cumulative impact that has and
will continue to threaten the species.

Regardless, the tidewater goby remains
listed as an endangered species and
therefore designation of critical habitat
is required under section 4(a)(3)(A) of
the Act.
(17) Comment: One commenter claims
that provisions of the Act have been
ignored by including areas of habitat
that ‘‘can be occupied,’’ even though
there is no evidence that such areas are
essential for the conservation of the
species. Furthermore, one commenter,
citing 16 U.S.C. 1533(a)(3), disputes the
legality to designate unoccupied critical
habitat based on speculation that it may
be needed in the future.

Our Response: We are required by the
Act to designate areas that are essential
for the conservation of the species.

Conservation is defined as ‘‘the use of
all methods and procedures, which are
necessary to bring an endangered
species or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to this chapter are no longer
necessary’’ (16 U.S.C. 1532(3)). Because
the designation of critical habitat is thus
focused on the future recovery of listed
species, it is by necessity a forward-
looking exercise. Therefore, we are
designating critical habitat, based on the
best available science, to ensure
tidewater goby recovery is not
precluded, even if this designation is
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8788 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations made in response to a future threat to
the species or the need to restore habitat
so that the species may be reintroduced
there. The areas designated as critical
habitat in this rule are essential for the
conservation of the tidewater goby for
various reasons depending on their
location. Some of these areas are
essential because they provide habitat
for maintaining tidewater goby
metapopulations where the distances
between units that were occupied at the
time of listing make it difficult for
tidewater goby to disperse. Other areas
are essential to help prevent the
extirpation of a metapopulation in
which only one or two occupied sites
remain. As discussed in the
Metapopulation Dynamics section, the
number of subpopulations is important
to the long-term stability of a
metapopulation. In addition to serving
as ‘‘stepping stones’’ between
subpopulations, these areas have also
been identified in the Recovery Plan as
being important for the conservation of
the species because they would serve as
a buffer, decreasing the vulnerability of
an entire metapopulation to natural
episodic catastrophic events,
maintaining its genetic diversity, and
increasing its probability of persistence.
(18) Comment: One commenter
suggested we provide site-specific
explanations for why we did not
propose some occupied sites and some
of the potential reintroduction sites
identified in the Recovery Plan.

Our Response: The 2005 Recovery
Plan lists all areas known to be
occupied or to have been historically
occupied or to have the potential for
being occupied if habitat is restored.

However, it is not the intent of the Act
to designate critical habitat for every
population and every documented
historical location of a species. Rather,
the Act requires that we designate only
specific areas within the geographical
area occupied by the species, at the time
it is listed in accordance with the Act,
on which are found those physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species and which
may require special management
considerations or protection. In
addition, the Act requires that we
determine whether specific areas
outside the geographical area occupied
by the species at the time it is listed are
essential for the conservation of the
species.

In the Criteria Used To Identify
Critical Habitat section above, we used
the best scientific and commercial data
available to set out the criteria for
identifying the areas that meet the
requirements of the Act. These criteria
include: areas that support source
populations; areas that support
subpopulations in addition to source
populations within each
metapopulation; areas that provide
connectivity between metapopulations;
areas of aquatic habitat in coastal
lagoons and estuaries with still-to-slow-
moving water that allow for the
conservation of viable metapopulations
under varying environmental
conditions; areas that provide
connectivity between source
populations or may provide
connectivity in the future; and
additional areas that may be more
isolated but may represent unique
adaptations to local features. We
applied these criteria to all existing and
potential habitat for the tidewater goby
in this designation, and have designated
the areas that meet the definition of
critical habitat. In some cases we
included areas recommended as
potential introduction and
reintroduction sites that, because of
their location, could provide important
connectivity. In addition, occupied
areas outside the final revised critical
habitat designation will continue to be
subject to conservation actions
implemented under section 7(a)(1) of
the Act, regulatory protections afforded
by the section 7(a)(2) jeopardy standard,
and the prohibitions of section 9 of the
Act. These protections and conservation
tools will continue to contribute to
recovery of this species.
(19) Comment: One commenter
suggested the final revised critical
habitat designation should not interrupt
ongoing management plans and
projects, and should not require
reinitiation of consultation for existing
permits and consultations.

Our Response: Because the critical
habitat designation only applies to
actions that are authorized, funded, or
carried out by a Federal agency, ongoing
management plans and projects may be
unaffected by the final designation.

Only those plans and projects where a
Federal agency has continuing
discretionary authority may be affected.

The regulations that implement section
7(a)(2) of the Act require reinitiation of
formal consultation when certain
criteria are met, including when a new
species is listed or critical habitat is
designated that may be affected by the
action (50 CFR 402.16). Therefore, we
cannot formulate the final rule to
eliminate the requirement to reinitiate
formal consultation when an ongoing
project under continuing Federal
discretionary authority may affect the
designated critical habitat. However, if
an ongoing management plan or project
upon which we had previously
consulted would not have an adverse
effect on the designated critical habitat,
reinitiation would not be required.

Public Comments Regarding Threats to
the Species
(20) Comment: One commenter
disputed the listing of the tidewater
goby based on a lack of scientific
research on threats to tidewater goby.

Our Response: The final rule to list
the tidewater goby was published in the
Federal Register on February 4, 1994
(59 FR 5494). The final rule determined
the tidewater goby to be an endangered
species in part because of past and
continuing losses of coastal and riparian
habitats within the historical range of
the species. Since the publication of the
final listing rule, we have published a
recovery plan for the species (2005), and
a 5-Year Review (2007), both of which
contain a threats analysis describing
threats to the species and present the
best available scientific information
regarding the status of the species.
(21) Comment: One commenter
opposed the expansion of critical
habitat, and has a specific issue with the
citation of ‘‘cattle grazing and feral pig
activity that results in increased
sedimentation of coastal lagoons and
riparian habitats, removal of vegetative
cover, increased ambient water
temperatures and elimination of plunge
pools and undercut banks utilized by
the tidewater goby’’ as a threat.

Our Response: Threats to the
tidewater goby due to poor livestock
grazing practices are well-documented
in the scientific literature. Adverse
effects occur through watershed
alteration and subsequent changes in
the natural flow regime, sediment
production, and stream channel
morphology (Platts 1990, pp. I–9–I–11;
Belsky et al. 1999, pp. 1–3, 8–10;
Service 2001, pp. 50–67). Livestock
grazing can destabilize stream channels
and disturb riparian ecosystem
functions (Platts 1990, pp. I–9–I–11;
Armour et al. 1991, pp. 7–10; Tellman
et al. 1997, pp. 20–21, 33, 47, 101–102;
Wyman et al. 2006, pp. 5–7).

Furthermore, improper livestock grazing
can negatively affect tidewater goby
through removal of riparian vegetation
(Propst et al. 1986, p. 3; Clary and
Webster 1989, p. 1; Clary and Medin
1990, p. 1; Schulz and Leininger 1990,
p. 295; Fleishner 1994, pp. 631– 633,
635–636), which can result in reduced
bank stability and higher water
temperatures (Kauffman and Krueger
1984, pp. 432–434; Platts and Nelson
1989, pp. 453, 455; Fleishner 1994, pp.
635–636; Belsky et al. 1999, pp. 2–5, 9–
10). Livestock grazing can also cause
increased sediment in the stream
channel due to streambank trampling
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8789 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations and riparian vegetation loss (Weltz and
Wood 1986, pp. 364–368; Pearce et al.
1998, pp. 302, 307; Belsky et al. 1999,
p. 10). Livestock can physically alter the
streambank through trampling and
shearing, leading to bank erosion
(Trimble and Mendel 1995, pp. 243–
244; Belsky et al. 1999, p. 1). In
combination, loss of riparian vegetation
and bank erosion can alter channel
morphology, including increased
erosion and deposition, increased
sediment loads, downcutting, and an
increased width-to-depth ratio, all of
which lead to a loss of tidewater goby
habitat components. Lastly, livestock
grazing management also continues to
include construction and maintenance
of open stocktanks, which are often
stocked with nonnative aquatic species
that are harmful to tidewater goby if
they escape or are transported to waters
where the tidewater goby occurs. In
some cases, stocktanks are used to stock
nonnative fish for sportfishing, or they
may support other nonnative aquatic
species such as African clawed frogs, or
bullfrogs. In cases where stocktanks are
in close proximity to live streams, they
may occasionally be breached or
flooded, resulting in nonnative fish
escaping from the stocktank and
entering stream habitats (Hedwall and
Sponholtz 2005, pp. 1–2; Stone et al.
2007, p. 133).
(22) Comment: One commenter stated
that we have neglected to take the
benefits of grazing into consideration
and have omitted mention of the effects
of feral pigs throughout the proposed
rule with the one exception of the first
mention on page 64999. The commenter
also states that the censure of cattle
grazing and its effects on the tidewater
goby discounts an entire body of
scientific work, which has determined
that proper monitoring and grazing of
riparian zones has helped to provide
habitat for the tidewater goby.

Our Response: We acknowledge that
improved livestock grazing practices
have reduced impacts to native fishes
including the tidewater goby. However,
although adverse effects are less than in
the past, livestock grazing within
watersheds where tidewater goby and
its habitat are located continues to cause
adverse effects, and on Federal lands,
improvements occurred primarily by
discontinuing grazing in riparian and
stream corridors (Service 1997, pp. 121–
129, 137–141; Service 2001, pp. 50–67).

Furthermore, we do recognize that feral
pigs are a threat in this final critical
habitat rule (see ‘‘Threats’’ section), the
final listing rule (59 FR 5494), and the
Recovery Plan (Service 2005, p. 16).
(23) Comment: One commenter
suggested that, in lieu of designating
critical habitat, we should implement
existing grazing programs and Federal
programs to minimize impacts to
habitat.

Our Response: Please refer to our
response to Comment 21 above. Impacts
from livestock grazing on species such
as the tidewater goby are decreasing due
to improved management on Federal
lands. However, implementation of the
existing grazing programs and Federal
programs only minimizes impacts to a
certain extent, and livestock grazing
within watersheds where tidewater goby
and its habitat is located continues to
cause adverse effects.
(24) Comment: One commenter
implied that eliminating grazing
activities from areas designated as
critical habitat will not improve
tidewater goby habitat or recover the
species.

Our Response: Although we are not
suggesting in this critical habitat
designation for the tidewater goby that
all livestock grazing activities be
eliminated from critical habitat, studies
on Federal lands found that
improvements occurred primarily by
discontinuing grazing in riparian and
stream corridors (Service 1997, pp. 121–
129, 137–141; Service 2001, pp. 50–67).

Public Comments Regarding Climate
Change
(25) Comment: One commenter
suggested we augment the connection
we draw between the designation of
unoccupied critical habitat and the
threat of global warming.

Our Response: We agree and have
added a discussion on climate change in
the ‘‘Background’’ section accordingly.
(26) Comment: One commenter states
there is a discrepancy in the proposed
rule regarding the expansion of critical
habitat in anticipation of sea-level rise.

The commenter points out that we have
stated in the 5-Year Review (Service
2007) that information currently
available on the effects of global climate
change is not sufficiently precise to
determine what additional areas, if any,
may be appropriate to include in the
revised critical habitat designation for
this species to address the effects of
climate change.

Our Response: We have added a
discussion on climate change in the
‘‘Background’’ section of this rule that
includes information on sea level rise
published subsequent to the 5-year
review.

Substantial advances in our ability to
predict changes that will occur as a
result of climate change such as sea
level rise have been made since the
publication of the 5-year review in 2007.

For example, between 1897 and 2006,
the observed sea level rise has been
approximately 2 millimeters (0.08 in)
per year, or a total of 20 cm (8 in) over
that period (Heberger et al. 2009, p. 6).

Estimates prior to the 2007 5-year
review projected that sea level rise along
the California coast would follow a
similar rate and reach 0.2–0.6 m (0.7–2
ft) by 2100 (IPCC 2007). Observations
and modeling conducted since the 2007
5-year review indicate that earlier
projections were conservative and
ignored some critical factors, such as
melting of the Greenland and Antarctica
ice sheets (Heberger et al. 2009, p. 6).

Heberger et al. (2009, p. 8) have updated
the sea level rise projections for
California to 1.0–1.4 m (3.3–4.6 ft) by
2100, while Vermeer and Rahmstorf
(2009, p. 21530) calculate the sea level
rise globally at 0.57–1.9 m (2.4–6.2 ft);
in both cases, recent estimates were
more than twice earlier projections.

Based on the information above and
in the ‘‘Background’’ section, sea levels
have been rising and are continuing to
rise. Rising sea levels will affect the
tidewater goby and its habitat in several
ways. Many coastal lagoons and
estuaries where tidewater goby occur
will be converted from brackish to
primarily saltwater bodies. In addition,
more severe storms that are likely to
result from climate change (Cayan et al.
2009, p. 38), combined with the higher
than normal sea levels, will breach sand
bars at lagoon mouths more frequently.

Therefore, it is appropriate to include
the threat of global climate change as a
basis for the designation of critical
habitat units for the tidewater goby.

Comments Related to the Draft
Economic Analysis
(27) Comment: One commenter
expressed concern over the use of
annualized values in the DEA. This
comment suggests that the use of values
annualized over a 20-year period
mischaracterizes the impact of the
proposed rule because all costs will be
one-time costs.

Our Response: The DEA adopts the
standard practice of reporting both
present value and annualized impacts.

Incremental project modification costs
are assigned to the year in which they
are assumed to occur. In cases where the
timing of project modification costs is
unknown, the DEA conservatively
assumes that the costs occur in the first
year of the study period. For example,
the incorporation of tidewater goby into
two habitat conservation plans in units
MAR–5 and SLO–12 is assumed to
occur immediately following the
designation of critical habitat in year
2012. Species surveying in unit SLO–12
is assumed to occur every 2 years
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8790 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations beginning in 2012. Lacking information
on when administrative impacts due to
potential section 7 consultations will
occur, the DEA assumes these costs are
spread evenly over the 20-year analysis
period.
(28) Comment: One commenter
asserted that the DEA fails to mention
compliance costs, such as the cost of
fencing riparian grazing areas that may
be required as a result of consultation.

Our Response: As described in
Section 2.4.4 of the DEA, we are
unlikely to request additional
conservation efforts to avoid the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat compared to efforts to
avoid jeopardy of the species. As a
result, project modifications such as
fencing are considered baseline impacts
in areas occupied by the tidewater goby.

While these types of project
modifications are discussed in the DEA
(see Exhibit 3–1), baseline impacts are
not monetized in the DEA. In areas not
considered occupied by the tidewater
goby, potential incremental project
modifications are identified through
communication with land managers and
are described and monetized in the
DEA. We did not identify any areas
where incremental project modifications
to grazing activities would be expected
to occur as a result of critical habitat
designation for the tidewater goby.
(29) Comment: One commenter
expressed concern that the designation
of critical habitat could result in
increased State regulation. This
comment suggests that the DEA should
consider potential indirect impacts of
additional conservation measures
requested by State agencies.

Our Response: Chapter 2 of the DEA
acknowledges the potential for several
types of indirect impacts, including
increased State and local regulation.

There is no indication that States or
local agencies will change the types of
conservation efforts requested following
the designation of critical habitat for the
tidewater goby. In addition, we believe
that the public is well aware of areas
considered to be critical habitat given
the lengthy history of the designation
and the existence of the tidewater goby
recovery plan. As a result, the DEA does
not anticipate any costs associated with
increased State regulation.
(30) Comment: One commenter noted
that Del Norte County has suffered
economically in recent years, in part
due to cumulative effects of regulatory
restrictions. This comment implies that
the designation of critical habitat for the
tidewater goby would have a substantial
economic impact on the County.

Our Response: As described in
Section 2.4.4 of the DEA, we are
unlikely to request additional
conservation efforts to avoid the
destruction or adverse modification of
critical habitat compared to efforts to
avoid jeopardy of the species. Because
all critical habitat within Del Norte
County is considered occupied by the
tidewater goby, no incremental
conservation measures are anticipated.

The DEA does forecast administrative
impacts associated with the additional
consideration of adverse modification of
critical habitat in three section 7
consultations within Del Norte County
over a 20-year period. Appendix A of
the DEA identifies Del Norte County as
a small governmental jurisdiction and
evaluates the likelihood that these
incremental administrative impacts will
substantially affect the County’s
economy. For this analysis, the DEA
makes the conservative assumption that
all three forecast consultations will
occur in the same year, and concludes
that impacts will not exceed one percent
of annual County revenues.

Required Determinations
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866 and 13563)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) in the Office of
Management and Budget will review all
significant rules. The Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has
determined that this rule is not
significant.

Executive Order 13563 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 while calling
for improvements in the nation’s
regulatory system to promote
predictability, to reduce uncertainty,
and to use the best, most innovative,
and least burdensome tools for
achieving regulatory ends. The
executive order directs agencies to
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice for the public
where these approaches are relevant,
feasible, and consistent with regulatory
objectives. E.O. 13563 emphasizes
further that regulations must be based
on the best available science and that
the rulemaking process must allow for
public participation and an open
exchange of ideas. We have developed
this rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.

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 (5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.), 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
effects of the rule on small entities
(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.

The SBREFA amended the RFA to
require Federal agencies to provide a
certification statement of the factual
basis for certifying that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.

In this final rule, we are certifying that
the critical habitat designation for
tidewater goby will not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

The following discussion explains our
rationale.

According to the Small Business
Administration, small entities include
small organizations, such as
independent nonprofit organizations;
small governmental jurisdictions,
including school boards and city and
town governments that serve fewer than
50,000 residents; as well as small
businesses. Small businesses include
manufacturing and mining concerns
with fewer than 500 employees,
wholesale trade entities with fewer than
100 employees, retail and service
businesses with less than $5 million in
annual sales, general and heavy
construction businesses with less than
$27.5 million in annual business,
special trade contractors doing less than
$11.5 million in annual business, and
agricultural businesses with annual
sales less than $750,000. To determine
if potential economic impacts on these
small entities are significant, we
consider the types of activities that
might trigger regulatory impacts under
this rule, as well as the types of project
modifications that may result. In
general, the term ‘‘significant economic
impact’’ is meant to apply to a typical
small business firm’s business
operations.

To determine if the rule could
significantly affect a substantial number
of small entities, we consider the
number of small entities affected within
particular types of economic activities
(for example, water management,
transportation and utilities, livestock
grazing, natural resource management).

We apply the ‘‘substantial number’’ test
individually to each industry to
determine if certification is appropriate.

However, the SBREFA does not
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00046 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8791 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations explicitly define ‘‘substantial number’’
or ‘‘significant economic impact.’’
Consequently, to assess whether a
‘‘substantial number’’ of small entities is
affected by this designation, this
analysis considers the relative number
of small entities likely to be impacted in
an area. In some circumstances,
especially with critical habitat
designations of limited extent, we may
aggregate across all industries and
consider whether the total number of
small entities affected is substantial. In
estimating the number of small entities
potentially affected, we also consider
whether their activities have any
Federal involvement.

Designation of critical habitat only
affects activities authorized, funded, or
carried out by Federal agencies. Some
kinds of activities are unlikely to have
any Federal involvement and so will not
be affected by critical habitat
designation. In areas where the species
is present, Federal agencies already are
required to consult with us under
section 7 of the Act on activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out that may
affect the tidewater goby. Federal
agencies also must consult with us if
their activities may affect critical
habitat. Designation of critical habitat,
therefore, could result in an additional
economic impact on small entities due
to the requirement to reinitiate
consultation for ongoing Federal
activities (see Application of the
‘‘Adverse Modification Standard’’
section).

In our final economic analysis (FEA)
of the critical habitat designation, we
evaluated the potential economic effects
on small business entities resulting from
conservation actions related to the
designation of critical habitat. The
analysis is based on the estimated
impacts associated with the rulemaking
as described in Chapters 1 through 6
and Appendix A of the analysis and
evaluates the potential for economic
impacts related to: (1) Water
management; (2) cattle grazing; (3)
transportation (roads, highways,
bridges); (4) utilities (oil and gas
pipelines); (5) residential, commercial,
and industrial development; and (6)
natural resource management.

As described in Chapters 4 and 5 of
the FEA, estimated incremental impacts
consist primarily of administrative costs
and time delays associated with section
7 consultation. The Service and the
Federal action agency are the only
entities with direct compliance costs
associated with this proposed critical
habitat designation, although small
entities may participate in section 7
consultation as an applicant. It is
therefore possible that the small entities
may spend additional time considering
critical habitat during section 7
consultation for the tidewater goby. The
FEA indicated that the incremental
impacts potentially incurred by small
entities are limited to development,
natural resource management,
transportation, utilities, and water
management activities.

Chapter 5 of the FEA discusses the
potential for proposed revised critical
habitat to affect development through
additional costs of section 7
consultation. These costs are borne by
developers and existing landowners,
depending on whether developers are
able to pass all or a portion of their costs
back to landowners in the form of lower
prices paid for undeveloped land. Of the
total number of entities engaged in land
subdivision and residential,
commercial, industrial and institutional
construction, nearly 99 percent are
small entities.

Whether individual developers are
affected depends on the specific
characteristics of a particular land
parcel as well as the availability of land
within the affected region. If land is not
scarce, the price of a specific parcel will
likely incorporate any regulatory
restrictions on that parcel. Therefore,
any costs associated with conservation
efforts for tidewater goby will likely be
reflected in the price paid for the parcel.

In this case, the costs of conservation
efforts are ultimately borne by the
current landowner in the form of
reduced land values. Many of these
landowners may be individuals or
families that are not legally considered
to be businesses.

If, however, land in the affected
region is scarce, or the characteristics of
the specific parcel are unique, the price
of a parcel may not incorporate
regulatory restrictions associated with
that parcel. In this case, the project
developer may be required to incur the
additional costs associated with the
section 7 consultation process. To
understand the potential impacts on
small entities, we conservatively
assumed that all of the private owners
of developable lands affected by
proposed revised critical habitat
designation are developers.

In Chapter 5 of the FEA, we estimated
that a total of 20 formal, informal, and
technical assistance consultations, plus
one reinitiation, may require additional
effort to consider adverse modification
of revised critical habitat. Assuming that
each consultation is undertaken by a
separate entity, we estimate that 21
developers may be affected by the
designation. For purposes of this
analysis, and because nearly 99 percent
of developers in the study area are
small, we assume that all 21 are small
entities. These developers represent less
than 0.1 percent of small developers in
the study area.

Excluding costs borne by Federal
agencies, costs per consultation range
from $260 for technical assistance to
$1,800 for reinitiation of a formal
consultation. Because we were unable to
identify the specific entities affected,
the impact relative to those entities’
annual revenues or profits is unknown.

However, assuming the average small
entity has annual revenues of
approximately $5.1 million, this
maximum annualized impact of $1,800
represents less than 0.1 percent of
annual revenues.

The consultation history for natural
resource management projects suggests
that these projects are generally
undertaken by Federal and State
agencies, or County departments. The
DEA estimated incremental
administrative costs for section 7
consultation on natural resource
management in every County except
Orange County. Only one of these
entities, Del Norte County, meets the
threshold for small governmental
jurisdiction. Del Norte County is
anticipated to incur administrative costs
associated with addressing adverse
modification in approximately three
consultations, including one
reinitiation. Even if all consultations
occur in the same year, total impacts to
Del Norte County will be less than 1
percent of the County’s annual revenue.

The consultation history for tidewater
goby includes several consultations
regarding utilities and oil and gas
development. In Chapter 5 of the FEA,
we estimate that 24 consultations
involving utility activities will occur
during the 20-year period. Based on the
overall percentage of all small entities in
the study area (56 percent), we
estimated that 14 of the 24 total entities
that will be affected over the 20-year
period are small entities. Excluding
costs to Federal agencies, the cost per
entity of addressing adverse
modification in section 7 consultation
ranges from $260 for technical
assistance to $880 for a formal
consultation (no reinitiations are
predicted for utility activities.). Because
we are unable to identify the specific
entities affected, the impact relative to
those entities’ annual revenues or
profits is unknown. However, assuming
the average small entity in this industry
has annual revenues of approximately
$9.3 million, this maximum annualized
impact of $880 represents less than 0.01
percent of annual revenues.

Chapter 5 of the FEA also discusses
the potential for water management
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00047 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8792 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations activities to be affected by the
designation. Over the 20-year period, we
estimate that 125 consultations
involving water management activities,
including reinitiations, will occur.

Based on the overall percentage of all
small entities in the study area (83
percent), we estimate that 104 of the 125
total entities that will be affected over
the 20-year period are small entities.

Excluding costs to Federal agencies, the
cost per entity of addressing adverse
modification in section 7 consultation
ranges from $260 for technical
assistance to $1,800 for reinitiation of a
formal consultation. Because we are
unable to identify the specific entities
affected, the impact relative to those
entities’ annual revenues or profits is
unknown. However, assuming the
average small entity in this industry has
annual revenues of approximately $5.0
million, this maximum annualized
impact of $1,800 represents less than 0.1
percent of annual revenues.

The DEA also concludes that none of
the government entities with which we
might consult on tidewater goby for
transportation or recreation meet the
definitions of small as defined by the
Small Business Act (SBE) (IEC 2012, p.

A–6); therefore, impacts to small
government entities due to
transportation and recreation are not
anticipated. A review of the
consultation history for tidewater goby
suggests that future section 7
consultations on livestock grazing (for
example, ranching operations) are
unlikely, and as a result are not
anticipated to be affected by the critical
habitat designation (IEC 2012, p. 5–13).

Please refer to the DEA for a more
detailed discussion of potential
economic impacts.

In summary, we considered whether
this designation would result in a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.

Based on the above reasoning and
currently available information, we are
certifying that the designation of critical
habitat for tidewater goby will not have
a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities,
and a regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required.

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use—
Executive Order 13211
Executive Order 13211 (Actions
Concerning Regulations That
Significantly Affect Energy Supply,
Distribution, or Use) requires agencies
to prepare Statements of Energy Effects
when undertaking certain actions. OMB
has provided guidance for
implementing this Executive Order that
outlines nine outcomes that may
constitute ‘‘a significant adverse effect’’
when compared to not taking the
regulatory action under consideration.

Chapter 5 of the economic analysis
discusses the potential for critical
habitat to affect utilities through the
additional cost of considering adverse
modification in section 7 consultation.

Excluding the portion of administrative
costs accruing to Federal agencies, we
forecast incremental costs of less than
$9,700 over 20 years to be incurred by
the energy and utility industry for
section 7 consultations. In annualized
terms, this represents less than $500
annually. The additional costs are
unlikely to increase the costs of energy
production or distribution in the United
States in excess of one percent.

The economic analysis finds that
none of the nine outcomes are relevant
to this analysis. Thus, based on
information in the economic analysis,
energy-related impacts associated with
tidewater goby conservation activities
within critical habitat are not expected.

As such, the designation of critical
habitat 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.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)
In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et
seq.), 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 tribal 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
tribal 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; Aid to Families with
Dependent Children 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 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. 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) We do not believe that this rule
will significantly or uniquely affect
small governments because it would not
produce a Federal mandate of $100
million or greater in any year; that is, it
is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act. The FEA concludes only Del Norte
County meets the threshold for small
governmental jurisdiction. Del Norte
County is anticipated to incur
administrative costs associated with
addressing adverse modification in
approximately three consultations,
including one reinitiation. Even if all
consultations occur in the same year,
total impacts to Del Norte County will
be less than one percent of the County’s
annual revenue, which was $65 million
in 2012. Consequently, we do not
believe that the critical habitat
designation would significantly or
uniquely affect small government
entities. As such, a Small Government
Agency Plan is not required.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8793 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Takings—Executive Order 12630
In accordance with Executive Order
12630 (Government Actions and
Interference with Constitutionally
Protected Private Property Rights), we
have analyzed the potential takings
implications of designating critical
habitat for tidewater goby in a takings
implications assessment. As discussed
above, the designation of critical habitat
affects only Federal actions. Although
private parties that receive Federal
funding, assistance, or 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. The FEA has concluded
that this critical habitat designation
does not affect landowner actions that
do not require Federal funding or
permits, nor does it preclude
development of habitat conservation
programs or issuance of incidental take
permits to permit actions that do require
Federal funding or permits to go
forward. The takings implications
assessment concludes that this
designation of critical habitat for
tidewater goby does not pose significant
takings implications for lands within or
affected by the designation.

Federalism—Executive Order 13132
In accordance with Executive Order
13132 (Federalism), this rule does not
have significant Federalism effects. A
federalism impact summary statement is
not required. In keeping with
Department of the Interior and
Department of Commerce policy, we
requested information from, and
coordinated development of, this
critical habitat designation with
appropriate State resource agencies in
California. We solicited but did not
receive comments from the California
Department of Parks and Recreation,
California Department of Fish and
Game, California Coastal Conservancy,
and California Coastal Commission. The
designation of critical habitat for the
tidewater goby may impose nominal
additional regulatory restrictions to
those currently in place and, therefore,
may have some incremental impact on
State and local governments and their
activities. The designation may have
some benefit to these governments in
that the areas that contain the physical
or biological features essential to the
conservation of the species are more
clearly defined, and the elements of the
features 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 occur.

However, it may assist local
governments in long-range planning
(rather than having them 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), the Office
of the Solicitor has determined that the
rule does not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the applicable
standards set forth in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of the Order. We are designating
critical habitat in accordance with the
provisions of the Act. To assist the
public in understanding the habitat
needs of the species, the rule identifies
the elements of physical or biological
features essential to the conservation of
the species. The designated areas of
critical habitat are presented on maps,
and the rule provides several options for
the interested public to obtain more
detailed location information, if desired.

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 (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
pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act (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)).

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), Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments), and the Department of
the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our 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 within the geographical area
occupied by the tidewater goby at the
time of listing that contain the features
essential for conservation of the species,
and no tribal lands outside the
geographical area occupied by the
tidewater goby at the time of listing that
are essential for the conservation of the
species. Therefore, we are not
designating critical habitat for the
tidewater goby on tribal lands.

References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
is available on the Internet at http://
www.regulations.gov and upon request
from the, Ventura Fish and Wildlife
Office (see

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).

Author(s)
The primary authors of this
rulemaking are the staff members of the
Ventura Fish and Wildlife Office.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements,
Transportation.

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8794 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations Regulation Promulgation
■ Accordingly, we 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; 1531–
1544; and 4201–4245 unless otherwise noted.
■ 2. In § 17.95(e), revise the entry for
‘‘Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius
newberryi)’’, to read as follows:
§ 17.95 Critical habitat—fish and wildlife.
* * * * *
(e) Fishes.
* * * * *
Tidewater Goby (Eucyclogobius
newberryi)
(1) Critical habitat units are depicted
for Del Norte, Humboldt, Mendocino,
Sonoma, Marin, San Mateo, Santa Cruz,
Monterey, San Luis Obispo, Santa
Barbara, Ventura, Los Angeles, Orange,
and San Diego Counties, California, on
the maps below.
(2) Within these areas, the primary
constituent element of the physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of tidewater goby consist
of persistent, shallow (in the range of
approximately 0.3 to 6.6 ft (0.1 to 2 m)),
still-to-slow-moving lagoons, estuaries,
and coastal streams with salinity up to
12 parts per thousand (ppt), which
provides adequate space for normal
behavior and individual and population
growth that contain:
(i) Substrates (e.g., sand, silt, mud)
suitable for the construction of burrows
for reproduction;
(ii) Submerged and emergent aquatic
vegetation, such as Potamogeton
pectinatus, Ruppia maritima, Typha
latifolia, and Scirpus spp., that provides
protection from predators and high flow
events; or
(iii) Presence of a sandbar(s) across
the mouth of a lagoon or estuary during
the late spring, summer, and fall that
closes or partially closes the lagoon or
estuary, thereby providing relatively
stable water levels and salinity.
(3) Critical habitat does not include
manmade structures (such as bridges,
docks, aqueducts, and other paved
areas) and the land on which they are
located existing within the legal
boundaries on March 8, 2013.
(4) Critical habitat map units. Data
layers defining map units were created
for most units using National Wetlands
Inventory (NWI) data (both published
data available over the Internet and in
publication provisional data). Where
NWI data was lacking, unit boundaries
were digitized directly on imagery from
the Department of Agriculture’s
National Aerial Imagery Program data
(NAIP) acquired in 2005. Critical habitat
units were mapped using Universal
Transverse Mercator (UTM), zones 10
and 11. The maps in this entry, as
modified by any accompanying
regulatory text, establish the boundaries
of the critical habitat designation. The
coordinates or plot points or both on
which each map is based are available
to the public at the Service’s internet
site, http://www.fws.gov/ventura/,
http://www.regulations.gov at Docket
No. FWS–R8–ES–2011–0085, and at the
field office responsible for this
designation. You may obtain field office
location information by contacting one
of the Service regional offices, the
addresses of which are listed at 50 CFR

2.2. (5) Index map of critical habitat units
for the tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius
newberryi) in Northern California
follows:

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3 8795 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (6) Unit DN 1: Tillas Slough, Del
Norte County California. Map of Units
DN 1 and DN 2 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.008</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8796 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (7) Unit DN 2: Lake Talawa/Lake Earl,
Del Norte County, California. Map of
Unit DN 1 and DN 2 is provided at
paragraph (6) of this entry.
(8) Unit HUM 1: Stone Lagoon,
Humboldt County California. Map of
Units HUM 1 and HUM 2 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.009</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8797 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (9) Unit HUM 2: Big Lagoon,
Humboldt County, California. Map of
Units HUM 1 and HUM 2 is provided
at paragraph (8) of this entry.
(10) Unit HUM 3: Humboldt Bay,
Humboldt County, California. Map
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.010</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8798 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (11) Subunit HUM 4a: Eel River North
Area. Map of Subunits HUM 4a and
HUM 4b follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.011</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8799 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (12) Subunit HUM 4b: Eel River South
Area. Map of Subunits HUM 4a and
HUM 4b is provided at paragraph (11)
of this entry.
(13) Unit MEN 1: Tenmile River,
Mendocino County, California. Map of
Units MEN 1, MEN 2, and MEN 3
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.012</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8800 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (14) Unit MEN 2: Virgin Creek,
Mendocino County, California. Map of
Units MEN 1, MEN 2, and MEN 3 is
provided at paragraph (13) of this entry.
(15) Unit MEN 3: Pudding Creek,
Mendocino County, California. Map of
Units MEN 1, MEN 2, and MEN 3 is
provided at paragraph (13) of this entry.
(16) Unit MEN 4: Davis Lake and
Manchester Sate Park Ponds,
Mendocino
County, California. Map follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.013</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8801 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (17) Unit SON 1: Salmon Creek,
Sonoma County California. Map of
Units SON 1, MAR 1, MAR 2, MAR 3,
and MAR 4 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00057 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.014</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8802 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (18) Unit MAR 1: Estero Anericano,
Marin County, California. Map of Units
SON 1, MAR 1, MAR 2,MAR 3 and
MAR 4 is provided at paragraph (17) of
this entry.
(19) Unit MAR 2: Estero de San
Antonio, Marin County, California. Map
of Units SON 1, MAR 1, MAR 2, MAR
3, and MAR 4 is provided at paragraph
(17) of this entry.
(20) Unit MAR 3: Walker Creek, Marin
County, California. Map of Units SON 1,
MAR 1, MAR 2, MAR 3, and MAR 4 is
provided at paragraph (17) of this entry.
(21) Unit MAR 4: Lagunitas
(Pepermill) Creek, Marin County,
California. Map of Units SON 1, MAR 1,
MAR 2, MAR 3, and MAR 4 is provided
at paragraph (17) of this entry.
(22) Unit MAR 5: Bolinas Lagoon,
Marin County, California. Map of Units
MAR 5 and MAR 6 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00058 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.015</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8803 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (23) Unit MAR 6: Rodeo Lagoon,
Marin County, California. Map of Units
MAR 5 and MAR 6 is provided at
paragraph (21) of this entry.
(24) Unit SM 1: San Gregorio Creek,
San Mateo County, California. Map of
Units SM 1, SM 2, SM 3, and SM 4
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00059 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.016</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8804 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (25) Unit SM 2: Pomponio Creek, San
Mateo County, California. Map of Units
SM 1, SM 2, SM 3, and SM 4 is provided
at paragraph (24) of this entry.
(26) Unit SM 3: Pescadero-Butano
Creeks, San Mateo County, California.

Map of Units SM 1, SM 2, SM 3, and
SM 4 is provided at paragraph (24) of
this entry.
(27) Unit SM 4: Bean Hollow Creek,
San Mateo County, California. Map of
Units SM 1, SM 2, SM 3, and SM 4 is
provided at paragraph (24) of this entry.
(28) Index map of critical habitat units
for the tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius
newberryi) in Southern California
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00060 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.017</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8805 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (29) Unit SC 1: Waddell Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Unit SC
1, SC 2, SC 3, and SC 4 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00061 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.018</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8806 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (30) Unit SC 2: Scott Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 1, SC 2, SC 3, and SC 4 is provided
at paragraph (29) of this entry.
(31) Unit SC 3: Laguna Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 1, SC 2, SC 3, and SC 4 is provided
at paragraph (29) of this entry.
(32) Unit SC 4: Baldwin Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 1, SC 2, SC 3, and SC 4 is provided
at paragraph (29) of this entry.
(33) Unit SC 5: Moore Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 5, SC 6, and SC 7 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00062 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.019</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8807 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (34) Unit SC 6: Corcoran Lagoon,
Santa Cruz County, California. Map of
Units SC 5, SC 6, and SC 7 is provided
at paragraph (33) of this entry.
(35) Unit SC 7: Aptos Creek, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 5, SC 6, and SC 7 is provided at
paragraph (33) of this entry.
(36) Unit SC 8: Pajaro River, Santa
Cruz County, California. Map of Units
SC 8, MN 1, and MN 2 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00063 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.020</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8808 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (37) Unit MN 1: Bennett Slough,
Monterey County, California. Map of
Units SC 8, MN 1, and MN 2 is provided
at paragraph (36) of this entry.
(38) Unit MN 2: Salinas River,
Monterey County, California. Map of
Units SC 8, MN 1, and MN 2 is provided
at paragraph (36) of this entry.
(39) Unit SLO 1: Arroyo de la Cruz,
San Luis Obispo County, California.

Map of Unit SLO 1, SLO 2, SLO 3, SLO
4, and SLO 5 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00064 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.021</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8809 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (40) Unit SLO 2: Arroyo del Corral,
San Luis Obispo County, California.

Map of Units SLO 1, SLO 2, SLO 3, SLO
4 and SLO 5 is provided at paragraph
(39) of this entry.
(41) Unit SLO 3: Oak Knoll Creek, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 1, SLO 2, SLO 3, SLO 4 and
SLO 5 is provided at paragraph (39) of
this entry.
(42) Unit SLO 4: Little Pico Creek, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 1, SLO 2, SLO 3, SLO 4 and
SLO 5 is provided at paragraph (39) of
this entry.
(43) Unit SLO 5: San Simeon Creek,
San Luis Obispo County, California.

Map of Units SLO 1, SLO 2, SLO 3, SLO
4 and SLO 5 is provided at paragraph
(39) of this entry.
(44) Unit SLO 6: Villa Creek, San Luis
Obispo County, California. Map of Units
SLO 6, SLO 7, SLO 8 and SLO 9 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.022</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8810 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (45) Unit SLO 7: San Geronimo Creek,
San Luis Obispo County, California.

Map of Units SLO 6, SLO 7, SLO 8, and
SLO 9 is provided at paragraph (44) of
this entry.
(46) Unit SLO 8: Toro Creek, San Luis
Obispo County, California. Map of Units
SLO 6, SLO 7, SLO 8, and SLO 9 is
provided at paragraph (44) of this entry.
(47) Unit SLO 9: Los Osos Creek, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 6, SLO 7, SLO 8, and SLO 9
is provided at paragraph (44) of this
entry.
(48) Unit SLO 10: San Luis Obispo
Creek, San Luis Obispo County,
California. Map of Units SLO 10, SLO
11, SLO 12, and SB 1 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.023</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8811 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (49) Unit SLO 11: Pismo Creek, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 10, SLO 11, SLO 12, and SB
1 is provided at paragraph (48) of this
entry.
(50) Unit SLO 12: Oso Flaco Lake, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 10, SLO 11, SLO 12, and SB
1 is provided at paragraph (48) of this
entry.
(51) Unit SB 1: Santa Maria River, San
Luis Obispo County, California. Map of
Units SLO 10, SLO 11, SLO 12, and SB
1 is provided at paragraph (48) of this
entry.
(52) Unit SB 2: Can˜ada de las Agujas,
Santa Barbara County, California. Map
of Units SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6,
and SB 7 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.024</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8812 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (53) Unit SB 3: Can˜ada de Santa
Anita, Santa Barbara County, California.

Map of Units SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5,
SB 6, and SB 7 is provided at paragraph
(52) of this entry.
(54) Unit SB 4: Can˜ada de Alegria,
Santa Barbara County, California. Map
of Units SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6,
and SB 7 is provided at paragraph (52)
of this entry.
(55) Unit SB 5: Can˜ada del Agua
Caliente, Santa Barbara County,
California. Map of Units SB 2, SB 3, SB
4, SB 5, SB 6, and SB 7 is provided at
paragraph (52) of this entry.
(56) Unit SB 6: Gaviota Creek, Santa
Barbara County, California. Map of
Units SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, and
SB 7 is provided at paragraph (52) of
this entry.
(57) Unit SB 7: Arroyo Hondo, Santa
Barbara County, California. Map of
Units SB 2, SB 3, SB 4, SB 5, SB 6, and
SB 7 is provided at paragraph (52) of
this entry.
(58) Unit SB 8: Winchester-Bell
Canyon, Santa Barbara County,
California. Map of SB 8, SB 9, and SB
10 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.025</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8813 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (59) Unit SB 9: Goleta Slough, Santa
Barbara County, California. Map of
Units SB 8, SB 9, and SB 10 is provided
at paragraph (58) of this entry.
(60) Unit SB 10: Arroyo Burro, Santa
Barbara County, California. Map of
Units SB 8, SB 9, and SB 10 is provided
at paragraph (58) of this entry.
(61) Unit SB 11: Mission Creek—
Laguna Channel, Santa Barbara County,
California. Map of Units SB 11 and SB
12 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.026</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8814 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (62) Unit SB 12: Arroyo Paredon,
Santa Barbara County, California. Map
of Units SB 11 and SB 12 is provided
at paragraph (61) of this entry.
(63) Unit VEN 1: Ventura River,
Ventura County, California. Map of VEN
1, VEN 2, and VEN 3 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00070 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.027</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8815 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (64) Unit VEN 2: Santa Clara River,
Ventura County, California. Map of
Units VEN 1, VEN 2, and VEN 3 is
provided at paragraph (63) of this entry.
(65) Unit VEN 3: J Street Drain—
Ormond Lagoon, Ventura County,
California. Map of Units VEN 1, VEN 2,
and VEN 3 is provided at paragraph (63)
of this entry.
(66) Unit VEN 4: Big Sycamore
Canyon, Ventura County, California.

Map of Units VEN 1, LA 1, and LA 2
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.028</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8816 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (67) Unit LA 1: Arroyo Sequit, Los
Angeles County, California. Map of
Units VEN 4, LA 1, and LA 2 is
provided at paragraph (66) of this entry.
(68) Unit LA 2: Zuma Canyon, Los
Angeles County, California. Map of
Units VEN 4, LA 1, and LA 2 is
provided at paragraph (66) of this entry.
(69) Unit LA 3: Malibu Creek, Los
Angeles County, California. Map of
Units LA 3, and LA 4 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.029</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8817 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (70) Unit LA 4: Topanga Creek, Los
Angeles County, California. Map of
Units LA 3, and LA 4 is provided at
paragraph (69) of this entry.
(71) Unit OR 1: Aliso Creek, Orange
County, California. Map of Unit OR 1
follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00073 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.030</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
8818 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations (72) Unit SAN 1: San Luis Rey River,
San Diego County, California. Map of
Unit SAN 1 follows:

VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00074 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.031</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3
Aliso Creek (OR·1) Orange County, California
i Kilometers
012
Scale 1!14S,OOO
• ~
N
nDEWATER GOaT
camCAL HABITAT
WATER
ROADS
8819 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 25 / Wednesday, February 6, 2013 / Rules and Regulations * * * * * Dated: November 26, 2012.

Eileen Sobeck,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fish and
Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2013–02057 Filed 2–5–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Mar<15>2010 21:13 Feb 05, 2013 Jkt 229001 PO 00000 Frm 00075 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 9990 E:\FR\FM\06FER3.SGM 06FER3 ER06FE13.032</GPH>
srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with RULES3

← All documents from this meeting