[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 24 (Friday, February 4, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-2546]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: February 4, 1994]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of the Interior
_______________________________________________________________________
Fish and Wildlife Service
_______________________________________________________________________
50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determinations of
Endangered Status; Final Rules
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AB88
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Determination of
Endangered Status for the Tidewater Goby
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) determines endangered
status pursuant to the provisions of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act), for the tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius
newberryi). The tidewater goby is a fish that occurs in tidal streams
associated with coastal wetlands in California. Since 1900, the
tidewater goby has disappeared from nearly 50 percent of the coastal
lagoons within its historic range, including 74 percent of the lagoons
south of Morro Bay in central California. Only three populations
currently exist south of Ventura County. This rule implements the
protection and recovery provisions provided by the Act for the
tidewater goby.
EFFECTIVE DATE: March 7, 1994.
ADDRESSES: The complete file for this rule is available for inspection,
by appointment, during normal business hours at the Ventura Field
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2140 Eastman Avenue, suite 100,
Ventura, California 93003.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Benz at the above address (805/
644-1766).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) is a small fish,
rarely exceeding 50 millimeters (2 inches) standard length, and is
characterized by large pectoral fins and a ventral sucker-like disk
formed by the complete fusion of the pelvic fins. The tidewater goby
was first described as a new species (Gobius newberryi) by Girard
(1856), from specimens collected in the San Francisco Bay area. Based
on Girard's specimens, Gill (1862) reassigned Gobius newberryi to the
newly described genus Eucyclogobius (Eschmeyer 1990).
A member of the family Gobiidae, the tidewater goby is the only
species in the genus Eucyclogobius and is almost unique among fishes
along the Pacific coast of the United States in its restriction to
waters with low salinities in California's coastal wetlands. All life
stages of tidewater gobies are found at the upper end of lagoons in
salinities less than 10 parts per thousand (ppt); however, gobies from
two populations have been collected and reared in slightly higher
salinities (Ramona Swenson, University of California, Berkeley, in
litt. 1993). Although its closest relatives are marine species, the
tidewater goby does not have a marine life history phase. This lack of
a marine phase severely restricts the frequency of genetic exchange
between coastal lagoon populations and significantly lowers the
potential for natural recolonization of a locality once extirpated.
Studies by Crabtree (1985) noted that some populations of gobies have
differentiated genetically, indicating a long period of isolation.
Tidewater gobies have a short lifespan and seem to be an annual species
(Irwin and Stoltz 1984, Swift 1990), further restricting their
potential to recolonize habitats from which they have been extirpated.
The tidewater goby occurs in loose aggregations of a few to several
hundred individuals on the substrate in shallow water less than 1 meter
(3 feet) deep (Swift et al. 1989), although gobies have been observed
at depths of 1.5 to 2.3 meters (4.9 to 7.6 feet) (Dan Holland,
University of Southwestern Louisiana, in litt. 1993). Peak nesting
activities commence in late April through early May, when male gobies
dig a vertical nesting burrow 10 to 20 centimeters (4 to 8 inches) deep
in clean, coarse sand. Suitable water temperatures for nesting are 18
to 22 deg.C (75.6 to 79.6 deg.F) with salinities of 5 to 10 ppt. Male
gobies remain in the burrows to guard eggs, which are hung from the
ceiling and walls of the burrow until hatching. Larval gobies are found
midwater around vegetation until they become benthic (Swift et al.
1989). Although the potential for year round spawning exists, it is
probably unlikely because of seasonal low temperatures and disruptions
of lagoons during winter storms. Ecological studies performed at two
sites documented spawning occurring as early as the first week in
January (Swenson in litt. 1993). Although usually associated with
lagoons, the tidewater goby has been documented in ponded freshwater
habitats as far as 8 kilometers (5 miles) upstream from San Antonio
lagoon in Santa Barbara County (Irwin and Stoltz 1984).
The tidewater goby is discontinuously distributed throughout
California, ranging from Tillas Slough (mouth of the Smith River) in
Del Norte County south to Agua Hedionda Lagoon in San Diego County.
Areas of precipitous coastlines that preclude the formation of lagoons
at stream mouths have created three natural gaps in the distribution of
the goby. Gobies are apparently absent from three sections of the coast
between: (1) Humboldt Bay and Ten Mile River, (2) Point Arena and
Salmon Creek, and (3) Monterey Bay and Arroyo del Oso.
Roughly 10 percent of the coastal lagoons presently containing
populations of tidewater goby are under Federal ownership. Over 40
percent of the remaining populations are either entirely or partly
owned and managed by the State of California. The remainder are
privately owned.
Previous Federal Action
The tidewater goby was first classified by the Service as a
category 2 species in 1982 (47 FR 58454). It was reclassified as a
category 1 candidate in 1991 (56 FR 58804) based on status and threat
information in Swift et al. (1989). Category 2 applies to taxa for
which information now in the possession of the Service indicates that
proposing to list as endangered or threatened is possibly appropriate,
but for which conclusive data on biological vulnerability and threats
are not currently available to support a listing proposal. Category 1
applies to taxa for which the Service has on file substantial
information on biological vulnerability and threats to support
proposals to list them as endangered or threatened species.
On October 24, 1990, the Service received a petition from Dr. Camm
Swift, Associate Curator of Fishes at the Los Angeles Museum of Natural
History, to list the tidewater goby as endangered (Swift 1990). The
petition, status surveys, and accompanying data describe the goby as
threatened because of past and continuing losses of coastal and
riparian habitats within its historic range. The Service's finding that
this petition presented substantial information that the requested
action may be warranted was published on March 22, 1991 (56 FR 12146).
Following this finding, the Service initiated a status review on the
tidewater goby.
Section 4(b)(3)(B) of the Endangered Species Act (Act), as amended
in 1982, requires the Secretary to make a finding within 12 months of
the date a petition is received as to whether or not the requested
action is warranted. On December 11, 1992, the Service published a
proposal to list the tidewater goby as an endangered species (57 FR
58770). The proposed rule constituted the 12-month finding that the
petitioned action was warranted.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
In the December 11, 1992 proposed rule, all interested parties were
requested to submit factual reports or information that might
contribute to the development of a final determination. Appropriate
Federal and State agencies, county governments, scientific
organizations, and other interested parties were contacted and
requested to comment. Newspaper notices were published in The Los
Angeles Times on January 1, 1993, The San Francisco Sunday Examiner and
Chronicle on January 3, 1993, and The San Diego Union-Tribune on
February 4, 1993. The public comment period ended on February 9, 1993.
A total of 548 comments were received. The Service received one letter
from a Federal agency, three letters from State offices, and five from
city or county agencies. Five hundred and ten of the comments were post
cards from individuals urging support for the listing of the species.
The Service received 29 letters from individuals and private
organizations. Of those, only one expressed an opinion in opposition to
listing the tidewater goby as endangered.
The National Park Service (Santa Monica Mountains National
Recreation Area) stated support for the listing of the tidewater goby
as endangered and suggested locations within the recreation area
boundaries that may be candidates for reintroduction of the species.
The National Park Service also sought assistance from the Service in
determining potential habitat locations on lands not under public
ownership that may be acquired under its land acquisition program.
Three California State agencies offered comments. The Topanga-Las
Virgenes Resource Conservation District, a subdivision of State
government, expressed full support for the listing of the goby. The
California Coastal Commission stated, ``The acute vulnerability of the
tidewater goby to man-induced changes of estuarine habitat makes the
development of comprehensive management strategies and plans, including
development of recovery plans, for this species imperative.'' The
California Department of Fish and Game submitted information pertaining
to a project to reestablish a population of tidewater gobies on Waddell
Creek Lagoon. The population was reintroduced in the fall of 1991 and
subsequently sampled in November 1992. Gobies were reported from three
sites in the lagoon. The Department will continue to obtain information
on that population as it is surveyed.
Five letters of information were received from city or county
agencies. Two of these, one from the County of Santa Barbara Resource
Management Department and one from the City of Santa Cruz, detailed
population occurrences that were already known to the Service. Two
letters from the cities of San Buenaventura and Santa Barbara cited
possible impacts to goby habitat due to proposed or ongoing projects.
These letters listed threats that are discussed under Factor A in the
``Summary of Factors Affecting the Species'' section. The Santa Barbara
County Flood Control and Water Conservation District stated support for
listing, but expressed concerns regarding the designation of critical
habitat.
The Environmental Defense Center identified three issues concerning
the proposed rule.
Issue 1: The critical habitat finding failed to meet the standards
of section 4 of the Endangered Species Act and under Northern Spotted
Owl v. Lujan, 758 F. Supp. 621 (W.D. Wash. 1991).
Service Response: The Service concurs that critical habitat should
be designated for the tidewater goby. Information needed to complete
required economic impact analyses consists of identifying Federal
actions that might be precluded or modified by the destruction/adverse
modification standard but not by the jeopardy standard. Moreover, it
will be necessary to describe how these actions may be modified by
application of the destruction/adverse modification standard. This
information will provide a basis for analyses on the economic effects
of designating critical habitat.
Issue 2: Without critical habitat, the Service lacks jurisdiction
to prevent or modify certain actions affecting the tidewater goby.
Service Response: Although in some cases critical habitat may
provide protection otherwise unavailable through the jeopardy standard,
jurisdiction is available through the jeopardy standard and section 9,
both of which may be aggressively applied to protect listed species.
Issue 3: The Service should at minimum propose the Santa Ynez
estuary as critical habitat now.
Service Response: The Service intends to propose as critical
habitat all tidewater goby habitat that may be essential to the
species' conservation, as opposed to the piecemeal approach advocated
in the recommendation to propose one estuary. In the interim, the Santa
Ynez estuary is owned by the U.S. Air Force, which is subject to the
section 7(a)(1) affirmative conservation mandate and the prohibitions
against jeopardy contained in section 7(a)(2).
Summary of Factors Affecting the Species
After a thorough review and consideration of all information
available, the Service has determined that the tidewater goby should be
classified as an endangered species. Procedures found at section 4 of
the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and regulations (50
CFR part 424) promulgated to implement the listing provisions of the
Act were followed. A species may be determined to be an endangered or
threatened species due to one or more of the five factors described in
section 4(a)(1). These factors and their application to the tidewater
goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi) are as follows:
A. The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of its habitat or range. Coastal development projects that
result in the loss of coastal saltmarsh habitat are currently the major
factor adversely affecting the tidewater goby. Coastal marsh habitats
have been drained and reclaimed for residential and industrial
developments. Waterways have been dredged for navigation and harbors
resulting in permanent and direct losses of wetland habitats, as well
as indirect losses due to associated changes in salinity. Coastal road
construction projects have severed the connection between marshes and
the ocean, resulting in unnatural temperature and salinity profiles
that the tidewater goby cannot tolerate.
Furthermore, upstream water diversions adversely affect the
tidewater goby by altering downstream flows, thereby diminishing the
extent of marsh habitats that occurred historically at the mouths of
most rivers and creeks in California. Alterations of flows upstream of
coastal lagoons have already changed the distribution of downstream
salinity regimes. Since the tidewater goby has relatively narrow
salinity tolerances, changes in salinity distributions due to upstream
water diversions may adversely affect both the size and distribution of
goby populations (D. Holland, Univ. of Southwestern Louisiana, pers.
comm., 1991).
Historically, the tidewater goby occurred in at least 87 of
California's coastal lagoons (Swift et al. 1989). Since 1900, it has
disappeared from approximately 50 percent of formerly occupied lagoons.
A rangewide status survey conducted in 1984 found that 22 historic
populations of tidewater goby had been extirpated (Swift et al. 1989).
Only 5 years later, a status survey documented the disappearance of an
additional 21 populations. In the San Francisco Bay area, 9 of 10
previously identified populations have disappeared (Swift et al. 1989,
1990). Losses in the southern part of the State have been the greatest,
including 74 percent of the coastal lagoons south of Morro Bay. Three
populations currently remain south of Ventura County. Since 1989, three
additional tidewater goby populations have been lost in San Luis Obispo
and Santa Cruz Counties (Swift et al. 1989, 1990). Five small
populations have been rediscovered since 1984, but the overall losses
indicate a decline of 35 percent rangewide in 6 years (Holland 1991a,
1991b, 1991c; Swift et al. 1991).
Of the 43 remaining populations of tidewater gobies identified by
Swift et al. (1990), most are small and threatened by a variety of
human and natural factors. According to Swift et al. (1990), only eight
extant localities contain populations that are considered large enough
and free enough from habitat degradation to be safe for the immediate
future. These areas are all located north of San Francisco Bay. The
remaining lagoons are so small or modified that tidewater goby
populations are restricted in distribution and vulnerable to
elimination (Swift et al. 1989, 1990). The number of extirpated
localities of gobies has left remaining populations so widely separated
throughout most of the species' range that recolonization is unlikely.
Several specific proposed and ongoing coastal development
activities threaten habitats supporting tidewater gobies, including
road widening and bridge replacement projects along Highway 101, water
diversion projects in San Luis Obispo County, expansion of several
State Park Recreation areas in Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo
Counties, and hotel and golf course developments in San Luis Obispo and
Marin Counties.
In addition to these specific threats, the tidewater goby is
vulnerable throughout its remaining range because of the loss of
coastal marsh, as noted above, and because of other effects of water
diversions as well. In addition to restricting the goby's overall range
by altering downstream salinities, water diversions and alterations of
water flows may negatively impact the species' breeding and foraging
activities. Gobies in southern and central California breed primarily
in sand/mud substrates and apparently avoid areas that contain large
amounts of decaying vegetation (Holland 1991b). Reductions in water
flows may allow aggressive plant species to colonize the otherwise bare
sand/mud substrates of coastal lagoon margins, thus degrading the
habitat quality for the goby. Decreases in stream flows also reduce the
deep stream pools utilized by gobies venturing upstream from lagoons.
In San Luis Obispo County alone, the effects of drought, either
directly or exacerbated by upstream water diversions, have been
responsible for the extirpation of at least three populations of gobies
between 1986 to 1990 (K. Worcester, California Department of Fish and
Game, pers. comm., 1991).
The tidewater goby is also adversely affected by groundwater
overdrafting and discharge of agricultural and sewage effluents. For
example, in Santa Barbara County, increased groundwater pumpage and
siltation from topsoil runoff in the San Antonio Creek drainage has
significantly affected areas immediately upstream of occupied goby
habitat (i.e., Barka Slough) (C. Swift, Los Angeles County Museum of
Natural History, pers. comm., 1991). Enrichment by agricultural and
sewage effluents may cause algal blooms and deoxygenation that restrict
habitable areas of lagoons utilized by tidewater gobies, especially in
summer (Swift et al. 1989). The potential for these factors to degrade
remaining goby habitats has also been noted at all three extant
localities south of Ventura County (D. Holland, pers. comm., 1991) and
at several sites along the central California coast (T. Taylor,
California State Parks and Recreation, pers. comm., 1991; K. Worcester,
pers. comm., 1991).
The tidewater goby is further threatened by channelization of the
rivers it inhabits. Because most of the goby's localities have been
moderately to extremely channelized, winter floods scour the species
out of the restricted channelized areas where no protection is afforded
from such high flows. This type of event was responsible for the
disappearance of gobies from Waddell Creek lagoon in the winter 1972-73
(C. Swift, pers. comm., 1991).
Finally, cattle grazing and feral pig activity present a threat to
the existence of the tidewater goby. These activities have resulted in
increased sedimentation of coastal lagoons and riparian habitats,
removal of vegetative cover, increased ambient water temperatures, and
elimination of plunge pools and collapsed undercut banks utilized by
tidewater gobies. In San Luis Obispo County, increased sedimentation
into Morro Bay has significantly accelerated the conversion of wetland
habitats to upland habitats (Josselyn et al. 1989). Presently, cattle
continue to graze freely both upstream and in many of the coastal
lagoons supporting tidewater gobies (K. Worcester, pers. comm., 1991).
B. Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes. Not known to be applicable.
C. Disease or predation. Over the past 20 years, at least 60
species of exotic fishes have been introduced to the western United
States, 59 percent of which are predatory (Hayes and Jennings 1986,
Jennings 1988). The introduction of exotic predators to southern
California waters has been facilitated by the interbasin transport of
water (e.g., California Aqueduct). Introduced predators, particularly
centrarchid fishes, may have contributed to the elimination of the
tidewater goby from several localities in California (Swift et al.
1989). The present day absence of the tidewater goby from the San
Francisco delta area may well be explained by the presence of
introduced predators such as striped bass (Morone saxatilis) and native
predators including the Sacramento perch (Archoplites interruptus)
(Swift et al. 1989, 1990). Two of the most recent disappearances of
gobies from San Luis Obispo County (Old Creek) and San Diego County
(San Onofre Creek) are likely due to the presence of exotic largemouth
bass (Micropterous salmoides) and green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus),
respectively. Natural predation on gobies by rainbow trout
(Oncorhynchus mykiss) has been documented (Swift et al. 1989). Other
non-native predators, specifically crayfish (Cambarus spp.) and
mosquitofish (Gambusia spp.), may also threaten goby populations
through direct predation on adults, larvae, or eggs.
D. The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms. Section 10 of
the Rivers and Harbors Act and section 404 of the Clean Water Act
regulate the placement of dredge and fill materials into waters of the
United States. Under section 404, nationwide permits, which undergo
minimal public and agency review, can be issued for projects involving
less than 10 acres of waters of the United States and adjacent
wetlands, unless a listed species may be adversely affected. Individual
permits, which are subject to more extensive review, are required for
projects that affect greater than 10 acres.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) is the agency responsible
for administering the section 10 and section 404 programs. The Service,
as part of the section 404 review process, provides comments on both
predischarge notices for nationwide permits and public notices for
individual permits. The Service's comments are only advisory, although
procedures exist for elevation when disagreements between the agencies
arise. In practice, the Corps' actions under section 10 and section 404
are insufficient to protect the tidewater goby.
Most projects within the range of the tidewater goby considered in
this proposal may require approval from the Corps as currently
described in section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Projects proposed in
coastal lagoons may also require a permit under section 10 of the
Rivers and Harbors Act. Federal listing of this species requires
Federal agencies to insure their actions are not likely to jeopardize
the tidewater goby's continued existence or destroy or adversely modify
any habitat that is designated as critical.
The National Environmental Policy Act and California Environmental
Quality Act require an intensive environmental review of projects that
may adversely affect Federal candidate species. However, project
proponents are not required to avoid impacts to these species, and
proposed mitigation measures are frequently not adequately implemented.
As with section 404 permits, the Service's comments through these
environmental review processes are only advisory.
The California Coastal Act regulates the approval of developments
within the coastal zone. Although a significant slowing in wetland
losses has occurred, the continued loss and degradation of coastal
wetlands since the California Coastal Act was enacted in 1974 attests
to the limitations of this legislation.
E. Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence. By far, the most significant natural factor adversely
affecting the tidewater goby is drought and resultant deterioration of
coastal and riparian habitats. California has recently experienced 5
consecutive years of lower than average rainfall. These drought
conditions, when combined with human induced water reductions (i.e.,
diversions of water from streams, excessive groundwater withdrawals),
have degraded coastal and riparian ecosystems and have created
extremely stressful conditions for most aquatic species. Formerly large
populations of tidewater gobies have declined in numbers because of the
reduced availability of suitable lagoon habitats (i.e., San Simeon
Creek, Pico Creek), others disappeared when the lagoons dried (i.e.,
Santa Rosa Creek). In San Luis Obispo County alone, 6 of 20 populations
of tidewater gobies were extirpated between 1984 and 1989 because of
drought, water diversions, and pollution (K. Worcester, pers. comm.,
1991).
Habitat degradation and losses of the tidewater goby from weather
related phenomena commonly occur due to the restriction of the species
to coastal lagoon systems and its dependence on freshwater inflows.
Events such as river flooding and heavy rainfall have been reported to
destroy goby burrows and wash gobies out to sea. Storm surges that
enter a lagoon may also adversely affect entire goby populations by
rapidly changing its salinity.
The tidewater goby was undoubtedly subjected to such natural flood
events even before major human alteration of drainage basins. As
mentioned under Factor A, channelization and urbanization have
increased the frequency and perhaps the intensity of such flood events.
In addition, populations of gobies are becoming more isolated from one
another as intervening populations are extirpated, thus further
decreasing the likelihood of successfully colonizing and reestablishing
a population lost to a ``natural'' flood.
Competition with introduced species is a potential threat to the
tidewater goby. Although problems have not been documented so far, the
spread of two introduced oriental gobies (yellowfin goby (Acanthogobius
flavimanus) and chameleon goby (Tridentiger trigonocephalus)) may have
a detrimental effect on the tidewater goby. According to Swift et al.
(1990), the chameleon goby was recently found in Pyramid Lake, probably
imported with central California water. If this goby becomes
established in the Santa Clara River as other imported species have
(e.g., prickly sculpin (Cottus asper)), the tidewater goby population
at the mouth of the Santa Clara River may be at risk.
The Service has carefully assessed the best scientific and
commercial information available regarding the past, present, and
future threats faced by this species in determining to make this rule
final. The tidewater goby has been extirpated from nearly 50 percent of
the lagoons within its historic range, including 74 percent of the
lagoons south of Morro Bay. Forty-three populations remain; however,
only six are large in number and reasonably free from immediate
threats. Based on this evaluation, the preferred action is to list the
tidewater goby as endangered. The tidewater goby has experienced a
substantial decline throughout its historic range and faces threats
indicating that this downward trend is likely to continue. This species
lives within specific habitat zones that have been, and will continue
to be, targeted for development and degradation by human activities.
The goby is extremely vulnerable to adverse habitat modification and
water quality changes. The tidewater goby is in imminent danger of
extinction throughout its range and requires the full protection of
listing as endangered under the Act to survive. For reasons discussed
below, the Service is not proposing to designate critical habitat for
this fish species at this time.
Critical Habitat
Section 4(a)(3) of the Act, as amended, requires that, to the
maximum extent prudent and determinable, the Secretary designate
critical habitat concurrently with determining a species to be
endangered or threatened. Furthermore, the Service is to designate
critical habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial
data available after taking into consideration the economic and other
relevant impacts of specifying an area as critical habitat (16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(2)). In the case of the tidewater goby, critical habitat is not
presently determinable. A final designation of critical habitat
requires detailed information on the possible economic effects of such
a designation. The Service does not currently have sufficient
information needed to perform the economic analysis. A delay in the
determination to list the species to gather additional information and
perform analyses would not serve the needs of the species. Information
is needed on actions that may be proposed within tidewater goby habitat
and the degree to which a designation of critical habitat may affect
these actions over and above effects associated with listing the goby
as endangered (i.e., the jeopardy standard alone). It will also be
necessary to determine how and to what extent application of the
destruction/adverse modification standard will change various Federal
actions. These data will be used in the economic analyses to determine
the economic effects of critical habitat designation.
Available Conservation Measures
Conservation measures provided to species listed as endangered or
threatened under the Endangered Species Act include recognition,
recovery actions, requirements for Federal protection, and prohibitions
against certain activities. Recognition through listing encourages and
results in conservation actions by Federal, State, and private
agencies, groups, and individuals. The Endangered Species Act provides
for possible land acquisition and cooperation with the States and
requires that recovery actions be carried out for all listed species.
The protection required of Federal agencies and the prohibitions
against taking and harm are discussed, in part, below.
Section 7(a) of the Act, as amended, requires Federal agencies to
evaluate their actions with respect to any species that is proposed or
listed as endangered or threatened and with respect to its critical
habitat, if any is being designated. Regulations implementing this
interagency cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR
part 402. Section 7(a)(2) requires Federal agencies to ensure that
activities they authorize, fund, or carry out are not likely to
jeopardize the continued existence of such a species or to destroy or
adversely modify its critical habitat. If a Federal action may affect a
listed species or its critical habitat, the responsible Federal agency
must enter into formal consultation with the Service.
A number of Federal agencies or departments control lands that
support the tidewater goby. These include the Department of Defense
(U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Navy, U.S. Air Force, and U.S.
Marine Corps), Department of Agriculture (U.S. Forest Service), and
Department of the Interior (National Park Service and U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service). Federal actions that may be affected by this
determination would be the funding or authorization of projects within
the species' habitat, including the construction of roads, bridges, and
dredging projects subject to section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33
U.S.C. 1344 et seq.) and section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of
1899 (33 U.S.C. 401 et seq.), and special use permits. Other Federal
actions that are subject to environmental review under the National
Environmental Policy Act would also require consultation with the
Service. Projects on federally owned land would also be subject to the
provisions of section 7 of the Endangered Species Act.
The Act and implementing regulations found at 50 CFR 17.21 set
forth a series of general prohibitions and exceptions that apply to all
endangered wildlife. These prohibitions, in part, would make it illegal
for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to take
(includes harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap,
capture, or collect; or attempt any of these), import or export,
transport in interstate or foreign commerce in the course of commercial
activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate or foreign commerce
any listed species. It also is illegal to possess, sell, deliver,
carry, transport, or ship any such wildlife that has been taken
illegally. Certain exceptions apply to agents of the Service and State
conservation agencies.
The Act and 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.23 also provide for the issuance of
permits to carry out otherwise prohibited activities involving
endangered wildlife species under certain circumstances. Such permits
are available for scientific purposes, to enhance the propagation or
survival of the species, for incidental take in connection with
otherwise lawful activities, and for economic hardship under certain
circumstances. Requests for copies of the regulations on listed plants
and wildlife and inquiries regarding them may be addressed to the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, Permit Branch, 911 N.E.
11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181, telephone 503/231-6241, FAX
503/231-6243.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Fish and Wildlife Service has determined that an Environmental
Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement, as defined under the
authority of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be
prepared in connection with regulations adopted pursuant to section
4(a) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. A notice
outlining the Service's reasons for this determination was published in
the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein, as well as others,
is available upon request from the Ventura Field Office (see ADDRESSES
section).
Authors
The primary authors of this final rule are Donna C. Brewer, Cathy
Brown, and Thomas Davidson of the Ventura Field Office (see ADDRESSES
section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations, is amended 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; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding the following species, in
alphabetical order under the group FISHES, to the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife to read as follows:
Sec. 17.12 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate population
---------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When listed Critical Special
Common name Scientific name threatened habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Fishes
* * * * * * *
Goby, tidewater.......... Eucyclogobius newberryi. U.S.A. (CA)............. Entire.................. E 527 NA NA
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dated: January 31, 1994.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 94-2546 Filed 2-3-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
