[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 82 (Friday, April 26, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18618-18619]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10358]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Availability of a Revised Habitat Conservation Plan and
Supplement to a Previously Circulated Environmental Assessment
Evaluating Proposed Issuance of Incidental Take Permit PRT-803743 to
the City of Poway and Its Redevelopment Agency in San Diego County, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The City of Poway and its Redevelopment Agency (applicants)
have applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for an
incidental take permit (PRT-803743) pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act). The application
package includes a Subarea Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and
Implementing Agreement (IA). The proposed incidental take would occur
as a result of habitat disturbance associated with residential and
limited municipal development in the City of Poway, San Diego County,
California.
The requested permit would authorize the incidental take of 4
animal species listed as endangered and 2 animal species listed as
threatened. The applicants also have requested coverage for an
additional 37 unlisted, sensitive species (11 plant, 26 animal),
including three proposed endangered species. Of these 43 species, 22
are known to occur within the City of Poway. The June 21, 1995, Notice
of Availability (60 FR 32337) inadvertently omitted mention of the
remaining 21 species. These 21 species either are not known to occur
within Poway or the impacts of the HCP on the species were considered
to be insignificant (discountable, minor in relationship to the species
as a whole, or not reasonably expected to occur). The HCP proposes to
conserve all 43 species according to standards required for listed
species under the Act. The applicant has requested that all 43 species
be included in the permit. In the event that any of the 43 species that
are currently unlisted become listed in the future, the permit would
take effect upon the listing of those species.
An Environmental Assessment/Initial Study Mitigated Negative
Declaration (EA/IS) for the proposed permit issuance and draft Subarea
HCP was circulated for public review in June, 1995, in accordance with
the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and California
Environmental Quality Act regulations (60 FR 32337). On August 15,
1995, the Poway City Council approved the Subarea HCP with the
stipulation that participation in the HCP by private property owners
would be optional, and not mandatory as originally proposed. Private
property owners who do not wish to be included in the Subarea HCP and
want to develop their property in a manner that would result in take of
a listed species would obtain development approvals through the
traditional endangered species permit process under either section 10
or section 7 of the Act. A supplemental EA has been prepared to
evaluate the effects of changing the plan from mandatory to voluntary
private landowner participation. The Subarea HCP also has been revised
accordingly and an errata sheet prepared. This notice advises the
public that the supplemental EA and revised HCP are available for
review and comment. All comments received, including names and
addresses, will become part of the administrative record and may be
made available to the public. This notice is provided pursuant to
section 10(c) of the Act and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).
DATES: Written comments should be received on or before May 28, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments regarding the adequacy of the supplemental EA and
revised HCP should be addressed to Mr. Gail Kobetich, Field Supervisor,
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2730 Loker Avenue West, Carlsbad, CA
92008; FAX (619) 431-9618.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Nancy Gilbert, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, at the above address, telephone (619) 431-9440.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Documents
Copies of the Supplemental EA and HCP errata sheet will be sent to
everyone on the original distribution list or who commented on the
permit application during the initial public comment period. Other
individuals who wish to receive copies of the supplemental EA or
revised HCP for review should immediately contact Ms. Gilbert. Copies
of the supplemental EA, Subarea HCP, HCP errata sheet, and original
permit application also may be viewed by appointment, during normal
business hours, at the above address.
Background
The EA/IS, circulated in June 1995, evaluated four alternatives
including the proposed action (issuance of the incidental take permit).
The three alternatives to the proposed action are summarized below and
incorporated by reference in the supplemental EA, but analysis of these
alternatives is not repeated in the supplemental EA. Under the No
Action Alternative, the proposed HCP would not be implemented. The
applicants would either avoid take of listed species within the
planning area, or apply for individual 10(a)(1)(B) permits on a
project-by-project basis. Existing land use and environmental
regulations would apply to all projects proposed within the planning
area. Existing regulatory practices require mitigation for impacts to
sensitive species and habitats resulting in lands being set aside for
open-space preservation; however, greater habitat fragmentation would
likely occur under the No Action Alternative than the Proposed
Alternative because the lands set aside for open-space preservation
would not be assembled in a coordinated preserve system. Under a 100
Percent Preservation of Mitigation Area Alternative, all identified
habitat and species within the Mitigation Area would be preserved.
Development would be prohibited within the proposed Mitigation Area
boundary except on already disturbed areas where such development would
not impact the viability of the proposed Mitigation Area. Under the
Modified Mitigation Area Alternative, the proposed Mitigation Area
boundary would consist only of lands already preserved in Poway; i.e.,
cornerstone lands as identified in the Subarea HCP, parcels purchased
for mitigation of the Scripps-Poway Parkway Extension project, and
slopes over 45 percent within the Mitigation Area.
Under the Proposed Alternative, changing participation in the
Subarea HCP from mandatory to optional for private property owners
could modestly increase impacts to native vegetation and species, as
well as fragmentation in biological core and linkage areas important to
overall preserve design. However, existing regulations that afford
protection to listed species would reduce these effects. In cases where
private property owners choose not to participate in the Subarea HCP,
preservation of open space and avoidance or mitigation for biological
impacts would still occur in accordance
[[Page 18619]]
with local, State, and Federal regulations, but possibly in a less
organized, more piece-meal fashion. Consistent standards may not be
followed, and open space linkages may be more difficult to plan,
assemble, and maintain. In many cases, however, participation in the
voluntary HCP is likely to benefit landowners in terms of time and
money relative to obtaining individual permits under the Act, resulting
in a strong incentive for owners of parcels supporting listed species
to participate in the Subarea HCP. Given the large amount of public
land dedicated as biological open space in Poway, the relatively low
level of habitat impacts expected on private lands, and the strength of
existing local, State, and Federal environmental protection
regulations, adverse effects on listed species of changing the Subarea
HCP to optional participation for private property owners are expected
to be minimal.
Dated: April 22, 1996.
Thomas J. Dwyer,
Deputy Regional Director, Region 1, Portland, Oregon.
[FR Doc. 96-10358 Filed 4-25-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
