Submitted Electronically via eRulemaking Portal

As comment to the proposed rule to list the Spring Pygmy Sunfish as Threatened it is my view that the regulatory burdens to both the Service and landowners is unnecessary in light of the current and pending Candidate Conservation Agreements with Assurances for the benefit of the species. Further, the Service has not addressed the deficiencies in the underlying data as outlined in my comment to the 90-day finding. See comment FWS-R4-ES-2010-0084-21 attached. The Critical Habitat as proposed tracks the CCAA currently in place. However, the Economic Analysis concedes key uncertainties which would result in a major underestimation of costs particularly if addition restrictions such as groundwater or surface water withdrawal limits are included. As such the Economic Analysis cannot be used under the terms of the ESA to support any measures beyond those in the current critical habitat proposal and/or the current CCAA. Additionally, the Economic Analysis points out that designation of Critical Habitat will not provide additional conservation measures for the species beyond those already in place. Accordingly, it seems the prudent course would be to withdraw the Threatened finding and designation of Critical Habitat for as long as the current and/or proposed CCAAs are in effect.