WSP07668 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Federal Register / Vol. 59, No. 54 / Monday, March 21, 1994' Rules and Regt;.laiions habitat was prudent and determinable and therefore in compliance with the Act. The Service had no alternative but to designate critical habitat for the razorback sucker. Because the intent of the Act is "'" .. '" to provide a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depen:: !;lay be conserved ..... '* I" the Service also decided to propose critical habitat for the Colorado squawfish, humpback chub, and bonytail chub. The four endangered Colorado River fish species coexist in the Basin and much of their habitat overlaps, . On May 7, 1992, the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund on behalf of the Colorado Wildlife Federation, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Four Corners Action Coalition, Colorado Environmental Coalition, Taxpayers for the Animas River, and Sierra Club filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court (Court), Colorado, against the Service for failure to. designate critical habitat for the razorback sucker, On August 18, 1992, a motion for summary judgment was filed requesling the Court to order publication of a final rule to designate critical habitat within 90 days, On October. 27, 1992, the Court ruled.that the Service had violated the Act by failing to designate critical habitat when the razorback sucker was listed, The . Court ordered the Service to publish a proposed rule within 90 days designaling critical habitat for the. . razorback sucker using presently available information,andto publish a final rule a! the earliest time permitted- by the Act and its regulations. To.take no action towards designation of critical habitat would continue to place the Service in violation of the Act and was not a feasible alternative. The Service published .the proposed rule to designate critical habitat on January 29, 1993 (58 FR 6578). At that time, the Service had not completed an economic analysis or a biological support document. The Service published the Draft Biological Support Docwnent for public review on September 15, 1993, and reopened the public comment period (58'FR48351). On September 21,1993, the Court held a hearing on the Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund "Motion For A Timetable For Publication Of Final Rule" on the designation of critical habitat. On November 19, 1993, the Court directed the Service (1) not to submit an interim final rule, (2) to provide a 60.day comment period for the -economic analysis, (3) to provide notice of the ttxclusion process and request comments, and (4) to publish the final rule by March 15,1994. Notice of availabilitv of the Economic Analysis, an Overview of the Proposed Cr:tic<ll Habitat Designation, and a request for public comments were made in the Federal Register on November 12, 1993 (58 FR'5997), and in a November 9, 1993,Ietter sent to interested parties, The public comment period closed on January 11, 1994. On january 18, 1994, the Service conducted the exclusion process, assessing all the infonnation pertinent to a decision to exclude areas from designation as critical habitat for economic or other relev~t reasons. Recovery Planning Recovery plans have been written for three of the four listed Colorado River fishes. The Colorado Squawfisli Recovery Plan was approved on March 16,1978, and revised on August 6, 1991 (USFWS 1991), The Humpback Chub Recovery Plan was approved on August 22,1979, with a first revision on May 15, 1984, and a second revision on September 19, 1990 (USFWS 1990b). The Bonytail Chub Recovery Plan was approved on May 16, 1984, with a revised plan approved September 4, 1990 (USFWS 1990a).Recovery goals contained in these recovery plans have been used in identifying and evalualing critical habitat for these three species. A recovery plan for the razorback sucker has not been completed, - Determination of Critical Habitat Definition of Critical Habitat "Critical habitat," as defined in section 3(5)(A) of the Act, means: "(i) the specific areas within the . geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed * * '*, on which are found those physical or biological features (I) essential to the conservation of the species and (IT) . which may require special management considerations or protection; and (Ii) specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by a species at the time it is listed * * '*, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the . species." The term "conservation," as defined in section 3(3) of the Act, means: ". . . the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the . measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary." In the case of critical habitat, conservation represents the areas required to recover a species to the point of delisling (Le.. the species is recovered and is removed from the list of endangered and threatened species), In this context, critical habitat 13377 preserves options for a species' eventual recovery. Section 3(5)(C) further states that: "Except in those circumstances determined by the Secretary, critical habitat shall not include the entir. geographical area which can be occupied by the threatened or endangered species." Role of Critical Hobitat in Species Conservation The designation of critical habitat will not, by itself, lead to recovery but is one of several measures available to contribute to conservation of a species. Critical habitat helps focus conservation activities by identifying areas that contain essential habitat features (primary constituent elements] regardless of whether or not the areas are currently occupied by the listed species. Such designations alert Federal agencies, States, the public, and other entities about the importance of an area for the conservation of a listed species. Critical habitat also identifies areas that may require special management or protection. Areas designated es critical habitat receive protection under section 7 of the Act with regaid to actions carried out, funded, or authorized b" a Federal agency that are likely to . " adversely modify or destroy critical habitat. Section 7 requires that Federal agencies consult on their actions that may affect critical habitat and insure that their actions are not likely to destroy or adversely modify critical habitat. . . Designation of an area as critical habitat only affects Federal actions that may occur in the area. Designation does not create a management plan for a listed species. Designation does nol automatically prohibit certain actions, establish numerical population goals, prescribe specific management actions (inside or outside of critical habitat), nor does it have a direct effect on habitat not designated as critical habitat. However, critical habitet may provide added protection for areas designated and thus assist in achieving recovery. Areos Outside of Critical Habitat Areas outside of critical habitat that contain one or more of the primary constituent elements may still be important for conservation of a species. Also, some areas do not contain all of the constituent elements and may have those missing elements restored in the future. Such areas also may be important for the long-term recovery of the species even if they were not designated as critical habitat. Areas not designated as critical habitat also may be of value in maintaining ecosystem integrity and supporting other species,