[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 244 (Friday, December 19, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 66584-66591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-33217]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 226
[Docket No. 971124276-7276-01; I.D. No. 110797B]
RIN 0648-AH88
Designated Critical Habitat; Green and Hawksbill Sea Turtles
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), NOAA, Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments; and notice of public
hearings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to designate critical habitat pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) for the threatened green turtle
(Chelonia mydas) to include waters extending seaward 3 nautical miles
(nm) [5.6 kilometers(km)] from the mean high water line of Culebra
Island, Puerto Rico (see Figure 1), and for the endangered hawksbill
turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) to include waters extending seaward 3
nm (5.6 km) from the mean high water line of Mona and Monito Islands,
Puerto Rico (see Figure 2). The designation of critical habitat
provides explicit notice to Federal agencies and to the public that
these areas and features are vital to the conservation of the species.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before February 17, 1998.
The public hearings on this proposed action are scheduled from 7
p.m. to 9 p.m. as follows:
1. Monday, January 26, 1998--Eugene Francis Conference Room,
Physics Building, University of Puerto Rico at Mayaguez, Palmeras Road,
Mayaguez, Puerto Rico.
2. Tuesday, January 27, 1998--Puerto Rico Department of Natural and
Environmental Resources, Central Office Auditorium, Munoz Rivera Avenue
(Bus Stop 3\1/2\), Puerta Tierra, Puerto Rico.
3. Thursday, January 29, 1998--Center for Multiple Use, Williamson
Street, Culebra, Puerto Rico.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for a copy of the environmental
assessment (EA) for this proposed rule should be addressed to Barbara
Schroeder, National Sea Turtle Coordinator, Office of Protected
Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michelle Rogers, 301-713-1401 or
Bridget Mansfield, 813-570-5312.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
On February 14, 1997, NMFS announced the receipt of a petition
presenting substantial information to warrant a review (62 FR 6934) to
designate critical habitat for green (Chelonia mydas) and hawksbill
(Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles to include all coastal waters
surrounding the islands of the Culebra archipelago. At that time, NMFS
also requested additional information concerning other areas in the
U.S. Caribbean where the designation of critical habitat for listed sea
turtles may be warranted.
Upon further review, NMFS has determined that substantial
information exists to warrant the designation of critical habitat for
green and hawksbill turtles in the Caribbean. Therefore, NMFS proposes
to designate critical habitat for the threatened green turtle to
include coastal waters surrounding Culebra Island, Puerto Rico, and for
the endangered hawksbill turtle to include coastal waters surrounding
Mona and Monito Islands, Puerto Rico (see Proposed Critical Habitat;
Geographic Extent section of this notice). This designation of critical
habitat for the hawksbill turtle complements the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) action which designated critical habitat for this
species to include all areas of beachfront on the west, south, and east
sides of Mona Island, as well as certain nesting beaches on Culebra,
Cayo Norte, and Culebrita in the Culebra archipelago (47 FR 27295, June
24, 1982).
In accordance with the July 18, 1977, Memorandum of Understanding
between NMFS and the USFWS, NMFS was given responsibility for sea
turtles while in the marine environment. Such responsibility includes
proposing and designating critical habitat. The designation of critical
habitat for sea turtles while on land is the jurisdiction of the USFWS;
therefore, this rule includes only marine areas.
Green and hawksbill turtles are largely restricted to tropical and
subtropical waters. Once abundant throughout the Caribbean, green and
hawksbill turtle populations have diminished to the point where they
may likely be extirpated from this area. The green turtle is listed as
threatened under the ESA, except for the Florida and Pacific coast of
Mexico breeding populations, which are listed as endangered. The
hawksbill turtle is listed as endangered throughout its range.
Additionally, green and hawksbill turtles, as well as other marine
turtle species, are protected internationally under the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES). Without these protections, it is highly unlikely that either
species, traditionally highly prized in the Caribbean for their flesh,
fat, eggs, and shell, would exist today.
The extensive seagrass beds of the Culebra archipelago support a
large juvenile population of green turtles. Researchers estimate that
over 150 juvenile green turtles are resident on Culebra seagrass beds
at any given time. Additionally, a small population of adult green
turtles have been documented in these waters (Collazo et al., 1992).
On November 10, 1993, the USFWS designated Culebra seagrass beds as
Resource Category 1, recognizing these seagrasses as critical foraging
habitat for juvenile green turtles (USFWS, 1993). The USFWS mitigation
policy classifies habitats into different resource categories according
to their importance on a national or ecoregional scale. This
classification provides guidance to the USFWS, NMFS, action agencies,
and private developers that mitigation may be necessary if impacts to
these habitats are anticipated. Resource Category 1 designation
recognizes the habitat as unique and irreplaceable on a national or
ecoregional level and states that loss of the habitat is not
acceptable.
Green turtles nest sporadically on Puerto Rico's beaches. Green
turtle nests have been observed on the main island of Puerto Rico, as
well as on Mona and Vieques Islands, and have been reported
periodically on Culebra Island (Bacon et al., 1984; Carr, 1978;
Pritchard and Stubbs, 1981). The natal beaches of Culebra's juvenile
green turtles and the location of their nesting beaches are unknown.
The coastal waters of Culebra provide habitat for hawksbill and
leatherback turtles as well. Hawksbill turtles forage extensively on
the nearby reefs, and both hawksbills and leatherbacks use Culebra's
coastal waters to access nesting beaches. Culebra and St. Croix
[[Page 66585]]
beaches have the greatest density of leatherback nests within U.S.
waters.
Mona and Monito Islands are uninhabited natural reserves managed by
the Puerto Rico Department of Natural and Environmental Resources. The
waters surrounding Mona Island are one of the few known remaining
locations in the Caribbean where hawksbill turtles occur with
considerable density (Diez and van Dam, 1996). Researchers have shown
that the large juvenile population of hawksbill turtles around Mona and
Monito are long term residents, exhibiting strong site fidelity for
periods of at least several years (Diez, 1996). Mona Island supports
the largest population of nesting hawksbill turtles in the U.S.
Caribbean. During the most recent nesting season, a record 354 nests
and 288 false crawls were recorded from July 31, 1996, to January 17,
1997 (Diez, 1996).
Additionally, the waters surrounding Mona Island support a small
green turtle population, which possibly is surviving only because of
Mona's remoteness and the full-time presence of Puerto Rico Department
of Natural and Environmental Resources fisheries/wildlife enforcement
personnel. Limited green turtle nesting still occurs on Mona Island.
Use of the term ``essential habitat'' within this Notice refers to
critical habitat as defined by the ESA and should not be confused with
the requirement to describe and identify Essential Fish Habitat (EFH)
pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management
Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et sec.
Definition of Critical Habitat
Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as ``(i)
the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species
* * * on which are found those physical or biological features (I)
essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require
special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific
areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species * * * upon
a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the
conservation of the species.'' (see 16 U.S.C. 1532(5)(A)). The term
``conservation,'' as defined in section 3(3) of the ESA, means ``* * *
to use and 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.'' (see 16 U.S.C. 1532(3)).
In designating critical habitat, NMFS must consider the
requirements of the species, including: (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
of offspring; and, generally, (5) habitats that are protected from
disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and
ecological distributions of the species (see 50 CFR 424.12(b)).
In addition to these factors, NMFS must focus on and list the known
physical and biological features (primary constituent elements) within
the designated area(s) that are essential to the conservation of the
species and that may require special management considerations or
protection. These essential features may include, but are not limited
to, breeding/nesting areas, food resources, water quality and quantity,
and vegetation and soil types (see 50 CFR 424.12(b)).
Consideration of Economic, Environmental and Other Factors
The economic, environmental, and other impacts of a critical
habitat designation have been considered and evaluated. NMFS identified
present and anticipated activities that (1) may adversely modify the
areas being considered for designation and/or (2) may be affected by a
designation. An area may be excluded from a critical habitat
designation if NMFS determines that the overall benefits of exclusion
outweigh the benefits of designation, unless the exclusion will result
in the extinction of the species (see 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(2)).
The impacts considered in this analysis are only those incremental
impacts specifically resulting from a critical habitat designation,
above the economic and other impacts attributable to listing the
species or resulting from other authorities. Since listing a species
under the ESA provides significant protection to a species' habitat, in
many cases the economic and other impacts resulting from the critical
habitat designation, over and above the impacts of the listing itself,
are minimal (see Significance of Designating Critical Habitat section
of this proposed rule). In general, the designation of critical habitat
highlights geographical areas of concern and reinforces the substantive
protection resulting from the listing itself.
Impacts attributable to listing include those resulting from the
``take'' prohibitions contained in section 9 of the ESA and associated
regulations. ``Take,'' as defined in the ESA means to harass, harm,
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to
attempt to engage in any such conduct (see 16 U.S.C. 1532(19)). Harm
can occur through destruction or modification of habitat (whether or
not designated as critical) that significantly impairs essential
behaviors, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering.
Significance of Designating Critical Habitat
The designation of critical habitat does not, in and of itself,
restrict human activities within an area or mandate any specific
management or recovery action. A critical habitat designation
contributes to species conservation primarily by identifying critically
important areas and by describing the features within those areas that
are essential to the species, thus alerting public and private entities
to the area's importance. Under the ESA, the only regulatory impact of
a critical habitat designation is through the provisions of section 7.
Section 7 applies only to actions with Federal involvement (e.g.,
authorized, funded, conducted), and does not affect exclusively state
or private activities.
Under the section 7 provisions, a designation of critical habitat
would require Federal agencies to ensure that any action they
authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to adversely modify or
destroy the designated critical habitat. Activities that adversely
modify or destroy critical habitat are defined as those actions that
``appreciably diminish the value of critical habitat for both the
survival and recovery'' of the species (see 50 CFR 402.02). Regardless
of a critical habitat designation, Federal agencies must ensure that
their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of
the listed species. Activities that jeopardize a species are defined as
those actions that ``reasonably would be expected, directly or
indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival
and recovery'' of the species (see 50 CFR 402.02). Using these
definitions, activities that destroy or adversely modify critical
habitat may also be likely to jeopardize the species. Therefore, the
protection provided by a critical habitat designation generally
duplicates the protection provided under the section 7 jeopardy
provision.
A designation of critical habitat, in addition to emphasizing and
alerting public and private entities to the critical importance of said
habitat to listed species, provides a clear indication to Federal
agencies regarding when section
[[Page 66586]]
7 consultation is required, particularly in cases where the action
would not result in direct mortality, injury, or harm to individuals of
a listed species (e.g., an action occurring within the critical area
when a migratory species is not present). The critical habitat
designation, describing the essential features of the habitat, also
assists Federal action agencies in determining which activities
conducted outside the designated area are subject to section 7 (i.e.,
activities that may affect essential features of the designated area).
For example, discharge of sewage or disposal of waste material, or
construction activities that could lead to soil erosion and increased
sedimentation in waters in or adjacent to a critical habitat area may
affect an essential feature of the designated habitat (water quality)
and would be subject to the provisions of section 7 of the ESA.
A critical habitat designation will also assist Federal agencies in
planning future actions since the designation establishes, in advance,
those habitats that will be given special consideration during section
7 consultations. With a designation of critical habitat, potential
conflicts between projects and endangered or threatened species can be
identified and possibly avoided early in the agency's planning process.
Another indirect benefit of a critical habitat designation is that
it helps focus Federal, state, and private conservation and management
efforts in such areas. Management efforts may address special
considerations needed in critical habitat areas, including conservation
regulations to restrict private as well as Federal activities. The
economic and other impacts of these actions would be considered at the
time of those proposed regulations and, therefore, are not considered
in the critical habitat designation process. Other Federal, state, and
local laws or regulations, such as zoning or wetlands protection, may
also provide special protection for critical habitat areas.
Process for Designating Critical Habitat
Developing a proposal for critical habitat designation involves
three main considerations. First, the biological needs of the species
are evaluated and habitat areas and features that are essential to the
conservation of the species are identified. If alternative areas exist
that would provide for the conservation of the species, such
alternatives are also identified. Second, the need for special
management considerations or protection of the area(s) or features are
evaluated. Finally, the probable economic and other impacts of
designating these essential areas as ``critical habitat'' are
evaluated. After considering the requirements of the species, the need
for special management, and the impacts of the designation, the
proposed critical habitat designation is published in the Federal
Register for comment. The final critical habitat designation,
considering comments on the proposal and impacts assessment, is
published within one year of the proposed rule. Final critical habitat
designations may be revised, using the same process, as new information
becomes available.
A description of the critical habitat, need for special management,
impacts of designating critical habitat, and the proposed action are
described in the following sections for green and hawksbill sea
turtles.
Critical Habitat of the Green Turtle
Biological information for listed green turtles can be found in the
Recovery Plan for U.S. Population of Atlantic Green Turtle (NMFS and
USFWS, 1991), the most recent green turtle status review (NMFS in
prep.), and the Federal Register notices of proposed and final listing
determination (see 40 FR 21982, May 20, 1975; 43 FR 32800, July 28,
1978). These documents include information on the status of the
species, its life history characteristics and habitat requirements, as
well as projects, activities and other factors affecting the species.
While the precise space requirements for populations of green
turtles are unknown, globally this species is primarily restricted to
tropical and subtropical waters. In U.S. Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico
waters, green turtles are found from Massachusetts to Texas and in the
U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. Caribbean populations of green
turtles have diminished significantly from historical levels, primarily
due to the directed turtle fishery that existed prior to their listing
under the ESA. Additionally, researchers have documented that habitat
loss is a primary factor slowing the recovery of the species throughout
its range. Degradation of seagrass beds has slowed recovery of green
turtles in the Caribbean due to reduced carrying capacity of seagrass
meadows (Williams, 1988). Therefore, the extent of habitat required for
foraging green turtles is likely to be increasing due to the reduced
productivity of remaining seagrass beds.
Seagrasses are the principal dietary component of juvenile and
adult green turtles throughout the Wider Caribbean region (Bjorndal,
1995). The seagrass beds of Culebra consist primarily of turtle grass
(Thalassia testudinum). While seagrasses are distributed throughout
temperate and tropical latitudes, turtle grass beds are a tropical
phenomenon. In the Caribbean, turtle grass beds consist primarily of
turtle grass, but may include other species of seagrass such as manatee
grass (Syringodium filiforme), shoal grass (Halodule wrightii), and sea
vine (Halophila decipiens), as well as several species of algae
including green algae of the genera Halimeda, Caulerpa, and Udotea.
The natal beaches of Culebra's juvenile green turtles have not yet
been identified. After emerging from nests on natal beaches, post-
hatchlings may move into offshore convergence zones for an undetermined
length of time (Carr, 1986). Upon reaching approximately 25 to 35 cm
carapace length, juvenile green turtles enter benthic feeding grounds
in relatively shallow, protected waters (Collazo et al., 1992).
The importance of the Culebra archipelago as green turtle
developmental habitat has been well documented. Researchers have
established that Culebra coastal waters support juvenile and subadult
green turtle populations and have confirmed the presence of a small
population of adults (Collazo et al., 1992). These findings, together
with information obtained from studies conducted in the U.S. Virgin
Islands, have reaffirmed the importance of developmental habitats
throughout the eastern portion of the Puerto Rican Bank (Collazo et
al., 1992). Additionally, the coral reefs and other topographic
features within these waters provide green turtles with shelter during
interforaging periods that serve as refuge from predators.
Culebra seagrasses provide foraging habitat for many valuable
species. In addition to green turtles, the commercially important queen
conch (Strombus gigas) and coral reef bony fishes (Class Osteichthyes),
such as parrotfish (Sparisoma spp.), grunts (Haemulon spp.), porgies or
sea breams (Archosargus rhomboidalis), and others, utilize this
important habitat. Culebra's seagrass beds also provide habitat for the
endangered west Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus) and several species
of cartilaginous fishes (Class Chondrichthyes). Additionally, seagrass
beds beneficially modify the physical, chemical, and geological
properties of coastal areas. They provide nutrients, primary energy,
and habitats that help sustain coastal fisheries resources while
enhancing biological diversity and wildlife (Vicente and Tallevast,
1992).
[[Page 66587]]
Critical Habitat of the Hawksbill Turtle
Biological information for listed hawksbill turtles can be found in
the Recovery Plan for the Hawksbill Turtle in the U.S. Caribbean,
Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico (NMFS and USFWS, 1993), the Hawksbill
Turtle Status Review (NMFS, 1995), and the Federal Register notice of
final listing determination (see 35 FR 8495, June 2, 1970). These
documents include information on the status of the species, its life
history characteristics and habitat requirements, as well as projects,
activities, and other factors affecting the species.
The hawksbill turtle occurs in tropical and subtropical waters of
the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans. The species is widely
distributed in the Caribbean Sea and western Atlantic Ocean. Within the
United States, hawksbills are most common in Puerto Rico and its
associated islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Florida.
International commerce in hawksbill shell, or ``bekko,'' is
considered the most significant factor endangering hawksbill turtle
populations around the world. Despite international trade protections
under CITES, trade in hawksbill shell continues. The illegal take of
hawksbills at sea has not yet been fully quantified, but it is a
continuing and serious problem.
Juvenile hawksbills are thought to lead a pelagic existence before
recruiting to benthic feeding grounds at a size of approximately 25 cm
straight carapace length (Meylan and Carr, 1982). Coral reefs, like
those found in the waters surrounding Mona and Monito Islands, are
widely recognized as the primary foraging habitat of juvenile,
subadult, and adult hawksbill turtles. This habitat association is
directly related to the species' highly specific diet of sponges
(Meylan, 1988). Gut content analysis conducted on hawksbills collected
from the Caribbean suggest that a few types of sponges make up the
major component of their diet, despite the prevalence of other sponges
on the coral reefs where hawksbills are found (Meylan, 1984). Vicente
(1993) observed similar feeding habits in hawksbills foraging
specifically in Puerto Rico. Additionally, the ledges and caves of the
reef provide shelter for resting and refuge from predators.
The hawksbill's dependence on coral reefs for shelter and food
links its well-being directly to the condition of reefs. Destruction of
coral reefs due to deteriorating water quality and vessel anchoring,
striking, or grounding is a growing problem.
The coral reefs of Mona and Monito Islands are among the few known
remaining locations in the Caribbean where hawksbill turtles occur with
considerable density (Diez and van Dam, 1996). Recent genetic studies
indicate that this resident population of immature hawksbills comprises
individuals from multiple nesting populations in the Wider Caribbean.
These data indicate that the conservation of the juvenile population of
hawksbill turtles at Mona can contribute to sustaining healthy nesting
populations throughout the Caribbean Region (Bowen et al., 1996).
Additionally, data on hawksbill turtle diet composition and foraging
behavior suggest that this high-density hawksbill population may play a
significant role in maintaining sponge species diversity in the
nearshore benthic communities of Mona and Monito Islands (van Dam and
Diez, 1997).
Hawksbills utilize both low- and high-energy nesting beaches in
tropical oceans of the world. Both insular and mainland nesting sites
are known. Hawksbills will nest on small pocket beaches and, because of
their small body size and great agility, can traverse fringing reefs
that limit access by other species.
Nesting within the southeastern United States occurs principally in
Puerto Rico and in the U.S. Virgin Islands, the most important sites
being Mona Island in Puerto Rico and Buck Island Reef National Monument
in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Mona Island supports the largest population
of nesting hawksbill turtles in the U.S. Caribbean. Considerable
nesting also occurs on the beaches of Culebra, Vieques, and mainland
Puerto Rico, as well as St. Croix, St. John, and St. Thomas.
Need for Special Management Considerations or Protection
In order to assure that the essential areas and features described
in previous sections are maintained or restored, special management
measures may be needed. Activities that may require special management
considerations for listed green and hawksbill turtle foraging and
developmental habitats include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Vessel traffic--Propeller dredging and anchor mooring severely
disrupt benthic habitats by crushing coral, breaking seagrass root
systems, and severing rhizomes. Propeller dredging and anchor mooring
in shallow areas are major disturbances to even the most robust
seagrasses. Trampling of seagrass beds and live bottom, a secondary
effect of recreational boating, also disturbs seagrasses and coral.
(2) Coastal construction--The development of marinas and private or
commercial docks in inshore waters can negatively impact turtles
through destruction or degradation of foraging habitat. Additionally,
this type of development leads to increased boat and vessel traffic
which may result in higher incidences of propeller- and collision-
related mortality.
(3) Point and non-point source pollution--Highly colored, low
salinity sewage discharges may provoke physiological stress upon
seagrass beds and coral communities and may reduce the amount of
sunlight below levels necessary for photosynthesis. Nutrient over-
enrichment caused by inorganic and organic nitrogen and phosphorous
from urban and agricultural run-off and sewage can also stimulate algal
growth that can smother corals and seagrasses, shade rooted vegetation
and diminish the oxygen content of the water.
(4) Fishing activities--Incidental catch during commercial and
recreational fishing operations is a significant source of sea turtle
mortality. Additionally, the increased vessel traffic associated with
fishing activities can result in the destruction of habitat due to
propeller dredging and anchor mooring.
(5) Dredge and fill activities--Dredging activities result in
direct destruction or degradation of habitat as well as incidental take
of turtles. Channelization of inshore and nearshore habitat and the
disposal of dredged material in the marine environment can destroy or
disturb seagrass beds and coral reefs.
(6) Habitat restoration--Habitat restoration may be required to
mitigate the destruction or degradation of habitat that can occur as a
result of the activities previously discussed. Additionally, habitat
degradation resulting from episodic natural stresses such as hurricanes
and tropical storms may require special mitigation measures.
Activities That May Affect Critical Habitat
A wide range of activities funded, authorized, or carried out by
Federal agencies may affect the critical habitat requirements of listed
green and hawksbill turtles. These include, but are not limited to,
authorization by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for beach
renourishment, dredge and fill activities, coastal construction such as
the construction of docks and marinas, and installation of submerged
pipeline; actions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to manage
freshwater discharges into waterways; regulation of
[[Page 66588]]
vessel traffic by the U.S. Coast Guard; U.S. Navy activities;
authorization of oil and gas exploration by the Minerals Management
Service; authorization of changes to state coastal zone management
plans by NOAA's National Ocean Service; and management of commercial
fishing and protected species by NMFS.
The Federal agencies that will most likely be affected by this
critical habitat designation include the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; the U.S. Coast Guard, the
U.S. Navy, the Minerals Management Service, and NOAA. This designation
will provide clear notification to these agencies, private entities,
and the public of the existence of marine critical habitat for listed
green and hawksbill turtles in the U.S. Caribbean, of the boundaries of
the habitat, and of the protection provided for that habitat by the
section 7 consultation process. This designation will also assist these
agencies and others in evaluating the potential effects of their
activities on listed green and hawksbill turtles and their critical
habitat and in determining when consultation with NMFS would be
appropriate.
Expected Economic Impacts of Designating Critical Habitat
The economic impacts to be considered in a critical habitat
designation are the incremental effects of critical habitat designation
above the economic impacts attributable to listing or attributable to
authorities other than the ESA (see Consideration of Economic,
Environmental and Other Factors section of this proposed rule).
Incremental impacts result from special management activities in areas
outside the present distribution of the listed species that have been
determined to be essential to the conservation of the species. However,
NMFS has determined that the present range of both species contains
sufficient habitat for their conservation. Therefore, NMFS finds that
there are no incremental impacts associated with this critical habitat
designation.
Proposed Critical Habitat; Geographic Extent
NMFS is proposing to designate the waters surrounding Culebra,
Mona, and Monito Islands, Puerto Rico, as critical habitat necessary
for the continued survival and recovery of green and hawksbill sea
turtles in the region. Proposed critical habitat for listed green
turtles includes waters extending seaward 3 nm (5.6 km) from the mean
high water line of Culebra Island, Puerto Rico. These waters include
Culebra's outlying Keys including Cayo Norte, Cayo Ballena, Cayos
Geniqui, Isla Culebrita, Arrecife Culebrita, Cayo de Luis Pena, Las
Hermanas, El Mono, Cayo Lobo, Cayo Lobito, Cayo Botijuela, Alcarraza,
Los Gemelos, and Piedra Steven (see Figure 1). Culebra Island lies
approximately 16 nm (29.7 km) east of the northeast coast of mainland
Puerto Rico. The area in general is bounded north to south by
18 deg.24' North to 18 deg.14' North and east to west by 65 deg.11'
West and 65 deg.25' West.
Proposed critical habitat for listed hawksbill turtles includes
waters extending seaward 3 nm (5.6 km) from the mean high water line of
Mona and Monito Islands, Puerto Rico. (see Figure 2). Mona Island lies
approximately 39 nm (72 km) west of the southwest coast of mainland
Puerto Rico. The area in general is bounded north to south by
18 deg.13' North to 18 deg.00' North and east to west by 67 deg.48'
West and 68 deg.01' West.
Note: Figures 1 and 2 will not be published in the Code of
Federal Regulations.
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
[[Page 66589]]
Figure 1--Critical Habitat for Green Turtles. Critical Habitat
Includes Waters Extending Seaward 3 nm (5.6 km) From the Mean High
Water Line of Isla de Culebra (Culebra Island), Puerto Rico
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19DE97.018
[[Page 66590]]
Figure 2--Critical Habitat for Hawksbill Turtles. Critical Habitat
Includes Waters Extending Seaward 3 nm (5.6 km) From the Mean High
Water Line of Isla de Mona (Mona Island) and Isla Monito (Monito
Island), Puerto Rico
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP19DE97.019
BILLING CODE 3510-22-C
[[Page 66591]]
Public Comments Solicited
NMFS is soliciting information, comments and/or recommendations on
any aspect of this proposed rule from all concerned parties (see
ADDRESSES). NMFS will consider all information, comments, and
recommendations received before reaching a final decision.
Department of Commerce ESA implementing regulations state that the
Secretary ``shall promptly hold at least one public hearing if any
person so requests within 45 days of publication of a proposed
regulation to designate critical habitat.'' (see 50 CFR 424.16(c)(3)).
Public hearings on the proposed rule provide the opportunity for the
public to give comments and to permit an exchange of information and
opinion among interested parties. NMFS encourages the public's
involvement in such ESA matters.
The public hearings on this proposed action have been scheduled for
the month of January, 1998 (see DATES). Interested parties will have an
opportunity to provide oral and written testimony at the public
hearings. These hearings are physically accessible to people with
disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other aids
should be directed to Bridget Mansfield (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Classification
The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA (AA) has determined
that this rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order
(E.O.) 12866.
This rule does not contain a collection-of-information requirement
for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
NMFS proposes to designate only areas within the current range of
these sea turtle species as critical habitat; therefore, this
designation will not impose any additional requirements or economic
effects upon small entities, beyond those which may accrue from section
7 of the ESA. Section 7 requires Federal agencies to insure that any
action they carry out, authorize, or fund is not likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of any listed species or result in the
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat (ESA
Sec. 7(a)(2)). The consultation requirements of section 7 are
nondiscretionary and are effective at the time of species' listing.
Therefore, Federal agencies must consult with NMFS and ensure their
actions do not jeopardize a listed species, regardless of whether
critical habitat is designated.
In the future, should NMFS determine that designation of habitat
areas outside either species' current range is necessary for
conservation and recovery, NMFS will analyze the incremental costs of
that action and assess its potential impacts on small entities, as
required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Until that time, a more
detailed analysis would be premature and would not reflect the true
economic impacts of the proposed action on local businesses,
organizations, and governments.
Accordingly, the Assistant General Counsel for Legislation and
Regulation of the Department of Commerce has certified to the Chief
Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration that the
proposed rule, if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact
of a substantial number of small entities, as described in the
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
The AA has determined that the proposed designation is consistent
to the maximum extent practicable with the approved Coastal Zone
Management Program of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. This
determination will be submitted for review by the responsible state
agency under section 307 of the Coastal Zone Management Act.
NOAA Administrative Order 216-6 states that critical habitat
designations under the ESA are categorically excluded from the
requirement to prepare an EA or an environmental impact statement.
However, in order to more clearly evaluate the impacts of the proposed
critical habitat designation, NMFS has prepared an EA. Copies of the
assessment are available on request (see ADDRESSES).
References
The complete citations for the references used in this document can
be obtained by contacting Michelle Rogers, NMFS (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 226
Endangered and threatened species.
Dated: December 15, 1997.
David L. Evans,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 226 is
proposed to be amended as follows:
PART 226--DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT
1. The authority citation for part 226 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1533.
2. Sections 226.72 and 226.73 are added to subpart D to read as
follows:
Sec. 226.72 Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas).
(a) Culebra Island, Puerto Rico--Waters surrounding the island of
Culebra from the mean high water line seaward to 3 nautical miles (5.6
km). These waters include Culebra's outlying Keys including Cayo Norte,
Cayo Ballena, Cayos Geniqui, Isla Culebrita, Arrecife Culebrita, Cayo
de Luis Pena, Las Hermanas, El Mono, Cayo Lobo, Cayo Lobito, Cayo
Botijuela, Alcarraza, Los Gemelos, and Piedra Steven.
(b) [Reserved]
Sec. 226.73 Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata).
(a) Mona and Monito Islands, Puerto Rico--Waters surrounding the
islands of Mona and Monito, from the mean high water line seaward to 3
nautical miles (5.6 km).
(b) [Reserved]
[FR Doc. 97-33217 Filed 12-18-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
