[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 140 (Friday, July 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37667-37669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-18027]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Availability of the Record of Decision (ROD) Document on the
Issuance of an Incidental Take Permit To Allow Incidental Take of the
Threatened Desert Tortoise by Clark County, Nevada
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice advises the public that a decision has been made
to issue an incidental take permit to allow incidental take of the
threatened desert tortoise (Gopherus agassizii) in Clark County, Nevada
and that the Record of Decision is available.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dolores Savignano, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 1500 North Decatur Boulevard, #01, Las Vegas, Nevada
89108 or Carlos Mendoza, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4600 Kietzke
Lane, Building C, Room 125, Reno, Nevada 89502.
Individuals wishing copies of this ROD should contact the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (Service) offices listed above. Copies of the ROD
have been sent to all agencies and individuals who previously received
copies of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements (EIS) and
to all others who have already requested copies.
DECISION: The Service's decision is to issue an incidental take permit,
pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act), for incidental take of desert tortoises to the County
of Clark, the cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson,
Mesquite, and Boulder City, and Nevada Department of Transportation
resulting in implementation of the Preferred Alternative, the Clark
County Desert Conservation Plan (CCDCP), as it is described in the
Final EIS for Issuance of a Permit to Allow Incidental Take of Desert
Tortoises by Clark County, Nevada. This decision is based on a thorough
review of the alternatives and their environmental consequences.
RATIONALE FOR DECISION: Implementation of the CCDCP has been selected
as the Preferred Alternative based on consideration of a number of
environmental and social factors. These factors include: (1) Proposed
mitigation in the CCDCP will benefit desert tortoise
[[Page 37668]]
recovery by implementing actions recommended in the Desert Tortoise
(Mojave Population) Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan); (2) the majority of
incidental take will occur within the Las Vegas Valley, where a viable
population of desert tortoises cannot be maintained over the long term;
and (3) the proposed permit would allow incidental take of desert
tortoise in areas not proposed for recovery and would provide the
opportunity for more orderly development within the Las Vegas Valley by
removing the constraint of having to avoid the patchy distribution of
desert tortoise habitat.
Clark County, the cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson,
Mesquite, and Boulder City, and the Nevada Department of Transportation
(NDOT) (Applicants) propose to collect funds through imposition of a
$550-per-acre fee for disturbance of non-Federal lands throughout Clark
County and areas disturbed as a result of NDOT activities in desert
tortoise habitat. Subsequently, the Applicants propose to expend $1.35
million per year, and up to $1.65 million per year for the first 10
years, to minimize and mitigate the potential loss of desert tortoise
habitat. It is anticipated that the majority of these funds will be
used to implement mitigation measures as described in the CCDCP. In
addition, funds will be provided to State and Federal resource managers
for implementing desert tortoise recovery measures recommended in the
Recovery Plan, and for planning and managing lands both within and
outside of desert wildlife management areas. The desert tortoise is
only part of the desert ecosystem, and unless the various species of
plants and animals which co-inhabit that system are likewise preserved,
the status of the desert tortoise is likely to decline. Therefore, the
needs of other plant and wildlife resources will be addressed, possibly
avoiding the need to list these species as threatened or endangered
under the Act in the future. The Applicants also propose to purchase a
conservation easement of more than 85,000 acres of non-Federal land in
Clark County that preserves, protects, and assures the management and
study of the conservation values, and in particular the habitat of the
desert tortoise.
To minimize the impacts of take, the Applicants propose to provide
a free pick-up and collection service for desert tortoises encountered
in harm's way within Clark County. These desert tortoises will be made
available for beneficial uses such as translocation studies and
programs, research, education, zoos, museums, or other programs
approved by the Service and Nevada Division of Wildlife. Sick or
seriously injured desert tortoises will be humanely euthanized. NDOT
will incorporate specific measures into its operations to avoid or
minimize impacts to desert tortoises. Clark County will also implement
a public information and education program intended to benefit the
desert tortoise and the desert ecosystem.
The underlying purpose or goal of the proposed action is to support
a program designed to ensure the continued existence of the species,
while resolving potential conflicts that may arise from otherwise
lawful private and public improvement projects.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
A. Background
On April 2, 1990, the Service issued a final rule (55 FR 12178)
that determined the desert tortoise to be a threatened species under
the Act. This regulation became effective on the date of its
publication in the Federal Register. Because of its listing as a
threatened species, the desert tortoise is protected by the Act's
prohibition against ``taking.'' The Act defines ``take'' to mean: to
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect, or to attempt to engage in such conduct. ``Harm'' is further
defined by regulation as any act that kills or injures wildlife,
including significant habitat modification or degradation where it
actually kills or injures wildlife by significantly impairing essential
behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR
17.3).
The Service, however, may issue permits to carry out otherwise
lawful activities involving take of endangered and threatened wildlife
under certain circumstances. Regulations governing permits are in 50
CFR 17.22, 17.23, and 17.32. For threatened species, such permits are
available for scientific purposes, enhancing the propagation or
survival of the species, economic hardship, zoological exhibition or
educational purposes, incidental taking, or special purposes consistent
with the purposes of the Act.
On July 24, 1991, the Service issued a permit under authority of
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act (PRT-756260) to Clark County and the
cities of Las Vegas, North Las Vegas, Henderson, and Boulder City, for
the incidental take of 3,710 desert tortoises on up to 22,352 acres of
habitat within the Las Vegas Valley and Boulder City in Clark County,
Nevada. The permit application was accompanied by the Short-Term
Habitat Conservation Plan for the Desert Tortoise in the Las Vegas
Valley, Clark County, Nevada, and an implementation agreement that
identified specific measures to minimize and mitigate the effects of
the action on desert tortoises. The primary purpose of this permit was
to allow time to complete a long-term plan.
On August 1, 1994, the Service amended the incidental take permit
and extended the expiration date by one year (to July 31, 1995). The
amendment authorized the disturbance of 8,000 additional acres of
desert tortoise habitat within the existing permit area, but did not
authorize an increase in the number of desert tortoises allowed to be
taken under the existing permit. Additional measures to minimize and
mitigate the effects of the amendment were also identified.
Upon completion of the CCDCP (long-term plan), the Applicants
submitted an application to the Service for a permit to incidentally
take desert tortoises, pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act, in
association with various proposed public and private projects in Clark
County, Nevada. The proposed permit would allow incidental take of
desert tortoises for a period of 30 years, resulting from development
on up to 113,900 acres of non-Federal lands within Clark County,
Nevada. The permit application was received September 28, 1994, and was
accompanied by the CCDCP, which serves as the Applicant's habitat
conservation plan and details their proposed measures to minimize,
monitor, and mitigate the impacts of the proposed take on the desert
tortoise.
B. Key Issues
Through public scoping and with input from various agencies and
individuals, key issues were identified. Potential consequences, in
terms of adverse impacts and benefits associated with the
implementation of each alternative selected for detailed analysis, were
described and thoroughly examined in the Draft and Final EIS. The
Service received 13 letters of comment on the Draft EIS which focused
on the following subject areas.
--Survey and removal of desert tortoises
--Translocation of tortoises to a sanctuary
--Euthanasia of tortoises
--Measurable criteria for short-term and long-term conservation goals
--Tortoise adoption
--Effects to other species and resources
--Financing to implement the CCDCP
Appendix A of the Final EIS contains copies of all comments
received and responses to all comments received. The
[[Page 37669]]
Final EIS was revised, where appropriate, based on public comment and
review. Issues and potential consequences have remained identical from
the draft to the final EIS.
C. Alternatives
Of the eight alternatives considered, two alternatives were
evaluated in detail. Issuance of the permit with the mitigating,
minimizing, and monitoring measures outlined in the CCDCP is the
Service's preferred alternative and is discussed above. The Final EIS
outlined alternative measures that were considered, but not in detail,
by the Service. The other alternative selected for detailed evaluation
was a No Action alternative. The No Action alternative would benefit
individual desert tortoises on non-Federal lands in the short-term,
however, it has been determined that viable populations of desert
tortoises will not persist in the urban areas over the long-term. The
No Action alternative would, therefore, not provide the benefits of the
long-term recovery efforts for the desert tortoise identified in the
CCDCP. The No Action alternative was not identified as the preferred
alternative because it would diffuse existing regional conservation
planning efforts for the desert tortoise and possibly concentrate
activity on individual project needs, not meet the purpose and needs of
the Applicants, and not provide the long-term benefits to the desert
tortoise. Additionally, the No Action alternative could result in
adverse impacts to the social environment within Clark County due to
constraints on land-use activities that would impact the desert
tortoise.
Dated: July 11, 1995.
Thomas Dwyer,
Deputy Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 95-18027 Filed 7-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
