WSP12675 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!' 002703 W AIS Document Retfieval shoreline (Yavapai County, AZ); approximately 5 miles along the upper portion of Wet Beaver Creek, removed due to lack of potential for suitable habitat to develop (Yavapai County, AZ); approximately 14 miles along the upper portion of West Clear Creek, removed due to lack of potential for suitable habitat to develop (Yavapai County, AZ); approximately 20 miles along the Rio Grande, removed due to lack 9f potential for suitable habitat to,develop (Bernalillo County, NM). The Service did not consider omissions for other reasons or additions to the critical habitat proposed in 1993 because imposed time constraints and lack of resources made this impracticable. This does, not, however, preclude the Service from considering further omissions and additions to critical habitat for this species at some time in the future as resources allow. Issue 5: Existing regulatory mechanisms and agency management plans targeted at listed species provide adequate protection. Service Response: The Service agrees that some existing regulatory mechanisms and management plans provide conservation benefits to the flycatcher. As mentioned in Issue 1, the U.S. Marine Corps and the State of California have both worked with the Service to develop ecosystem-oriented conservation plans that the Service believes will be highly effective in providing for the conservation needs of the southwestern willow flycatcher at Camp Pendleton and in portions of San Diego and Orange counties. Although designation of critical habitat should not impose any additional restrictions on actions consistent with the management agreements in these areas now or in the future, they do not cover sufficient area to provide adequate protection for the' species as a whole. Furthermore, the Service is obliged to comply with a Court order to designate critical habitat for the flycatcher. provisions of section 404 of the Clean Water Act do not specifically protect the southwestern willow flycatcher or its habitat, but do provide some protectiop to the aquatic and riparian ecosystems of which it is a part. Section 404 also provides for mitigation for destruction of these habitats, although even temporary destruction and subsequent replacement of important riparian habitat may adversely affect the southwestern willow flycatcher. Regardless of the possible conservation benefits of the Clean Water Act, however, this designation is required by Court order. - Issue 6: The Service is required to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act in designating critical habitat. Service Response: An Environmental Assessment (EA) and a draft Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) have been prepared for this rule in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.3 (see following section entitled National Environmental Policy Act). The EA and FONSI are available upon request from the Field Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES above) . [[Page 39137]] Issue 7: Designation of critical habitat would result in loss of revenues that local communities derive from use of public lands; critical habitat will adversely affect State, Municipal, and private lands. Service Response: Critical habitat only applies to Federal actions on Federal lands or Federally-permitted actions on private lands. The economic analysis provided in this final rule demonstrates that there will be no adverse economic effects above the effects that would result from the listing of the species. Issue 8: Riparian habitats are in a constant state of change, making any boundaries established under critical habitat also subject to change; lateral boundaries of critical habitat do not meet regulatory requirements because they are difficult to interpret and change seasonally; the constituent elements of critical habitat for the southwestern willow flycatcher have not been adequately described. Service Response: The upstream/downstream boundaries established Tuesday, July 22, 1997 Page 14 of21 2:05 PM