[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 105 (Wednesday, June 2, 1999)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 29618-29622]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-13958]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 226

[Docket No. 990525143-9143-01; I.D. 120197A]
RIN 0648-AM41


Designated Critical Habitat; Proposed Revision of Critical 
Habitat for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: NMFS proposes to revise critical habitat for Snake River 
spring/summer chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), pursuant to 
the Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973. After a review of the best 
available scientific information, NMFS concludes that Napias Creek 
Falls constitutes a naturally impassable migrational barrier for Snake 
River spring/summer chinook salmon. Therefore, NMFS proposes to exclude 
areas above Napias Creek Falls from designated critical habitat because 
such areas are outside the species' current and historic range.

DATES: Comments must be received by August 2, 1999. Requests for 
additional public hearings must be received by July 19, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Requests for information concerning this action should be 
submitted to Chief, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, 525 NE Oregon 
Street, Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Garth Griffin, Protected Resources 
Division, Northwest Region, (503) 231-2005 or Chris Mobley, Office of 
Protected Resources, (301) 713-1401.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    On June 27, 1991, NMFS proposed the listing of Snake River spring/
summer chinook salmon as a threatened species under the ESA (56 FR 
29542). The final determination listing Snake River spring/summer 
chinook salmon as a threatened species was published on April 22, 1992 
(57 FR 14653), and corrected on June 3, 1992 (57 FR 23458). Critical 
habitat was designated on December 28, 1993 (58 FR 68543). In that 
document, NMFS designated all river reaches presently or historically 
accessible to listed spring/summer chinook salmon (except river reaches 
above impassable natural falls, and Dworshak and Hells Canyon Dams) in 
various hydrologic units as critical habitat (58 FR 68543). Napias 
Creek, the area in question, occurs within one of these designated 
hydrologic units (Middle Salmon-Panther, USGS Hydrologic Unit 
17060203).
    On January 6, 1997, the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) received 
a petition from Meridian Gold Company (Meridian) to revise critical 
habitat for Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon in Napias Creek, a 
tributary to Panther Creek which flows into the Salmon River in central 
Idaho. In accordance with section 4(b)(3)(D) of the ESA, NMFS issued a 
determination on April 28, 1997, that the petition presented 
substantial scientific information indicating that a revision may be 
warranted (62 FR 22903). In that document, NMFS solicited information 
and comments from interested parties concerning the petitioned action.
    On September 16, 1997, Meridian submitted additional information in 
support of its petition. Specifically, Meridian submitted three new 
reports entitled: (1) ``Ability of Salmon and Steelhead to Pass Napias 
Creek Falls''; (2) ``Investigation of Physical Conditions at Napias 
Creek Falls''; and (3) ``Historical and Ethnographic Analysis of Salmon 
Presence in the Leesburg Basin, Lemhi County, Idaho.'' This new 
information was added to the administrative record and was considered 
by NMFS in its 12-month determination published on January 30, 1998 (63 
FR 4615).
    On January 30, 1998, NMFS determined the petitioned action was not 
warranted since available information indicated the falls was likely 
passable to chinook salmon at some flows and that the presence of 
relict indicator species indicated historical usage by anadromous 
species (63 FR 4615). NMFS also concluded that habitat above Napias 
Creek Falls contained unique features that may aid in the conservation 
and recovery of listed salmonid species (63 FR 4615). However, NMFS did 
not address the question of whether or not habitat above the falls was 
essential for recovery of the species since it concluded that the area 
was within the species' current range (63 FR 4615; see also 50 CFR 
424.12(e) which states that areas outside of the

[[Page 29619]]

species' current range shall be designated only when the species' 
current range is inadequate for conservation purposes).
    Subsequent to NMFS' January 30, 1998, determination, Meridian 
submitted a ``petition for reconsideration,'' providing additional data 
and analyses concerning the likelihood that Napias Creek Falls 
constitutes a naturally impassable barrier to anadromous salmonid 
migration (Meridian 1998a, 1998b; Chapman 1998). While NMFS' ESA 
implementing regulations do not provide a process for reconsidering 
findings on petitions, NMFS nonetheless agreed in a letter dated July 
31, 1998, to consider Meridian's new information and provide Meridian 
with a written determination regarding its findings (NMFS, 1998a; 
Meridian, 1998d). On October 30, 1998, NMFS staff met with Meridian 
representatives to discuss the new technical information and its 
interpretations (NMFS, 1998b).
    On December 29, 1998, Meridian expressed its desire to withdraw its 
``petition for reconsideration'' stating that it interpreted NMFS' 
continuing treatment of the area as critical habitat as a denial of its 
petition (Meridian, 1998c). However, at the time of that letter, NMFS 
had not yet reached a conclusion regarding the additional information 
submitted by Meridian, nor had NMFS provided Meridian with a written 
determination on the matter as it had committed to do in its July 31, 
1998, letter (NMFS, 1998a).
    While Meridian now seeks to withdraw its additional information 
concerning Napias Creek Falls, NMFS concludes this information is part 
of the best scientific information available regarding whether this 
area constitutes critical habitat for the species. Therefore, in 
accordance with section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA, NMFS bases the 
conclusions in this proposal on Meridian's new information. NMFS 
likewise considered this information in its recent proposed rule to 
designate critical habitat for Snake River steelhead (64 FR 5740, 
February 5, 1999).

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 of Commerce (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)).
    Defining specific river reaches that constitute critical habitat 
for chinook salmon, and anadromous fish species in general, is 
difficult to do because of NMFS' imperfect understanding of the 
species' freshwater distribution, both current and historical, and the 
lack of comprehensive sampling efforts dedicated to monitoring these 
species. Given this scientific uncertainty, NMFS' approach to 
designating critical habitat for chinook salmon is to designate all 
areas currently and historically accessible to the species within the 
range of the ESU. NMFS believes this inclusive approach to designating 
critical habitat is appropriate because it: (1) recognizes the species' 
extensive use of diverse habitats and underscores the need to account 
for all of the habitat types supporting the species' juvenile and adult 
freshwater and estuarine life stages; and (2) takes into account the 
natural variability in the species' habitat use; and (3) recognizes 
data limitations and scientific uncertainty that exist concerning the 
distribution and habitat usage of the listed species.

Process for Defining Critical Habitat

    Developing a proposed critical habitat designation involves three 
main considerations. First, the biological needs of the species are 
evaluated, and essential habitat areas and features are identified. 
Second, the need for special management considerations or protection of 
the area(s) or features identified 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, a notification of the proposed critical habitat is 
published in the Federal Register for comment. The final critical 
habitat designation, considering comments on the proposal and impacts 
assessment, is typically published within 1 year of the proposed rule. 
Final critical habitat designations may be revised as new information 
becomes available.
    At this time, new information exists that indicates a revision in 
NMFS' final critical habitat designation is warranted. A discussion of 
this information follows.

Analysis of Available Information

    Two lines of evidence indicate that areas above Napias Creek Falls 
do not constitute critical habitat for the listed species. This 
evidence includes: (1) current passage conditions at the falls; and (2) 
surveys of current and historic salmonid presence above the falls.

Current Passage Conditions at Napias Creek Falls

    On September 16, 1997, Meridian submitted the results of several 
studies conducted to determine the ability of chinook salmon to migrate 
above Napias Creek Falls. One study evaluated the geomorphology of the 
falls, while another study assessed the potential for fish passage 
using the methods of Powers and Orsborn as described in ``Analysis of 
Barriers to Upstream Fish Migration'' (Bonneville Power Administration, 
1984). A third study entitled ``Ability of Salmon and Steelhead to Pass 
Napias Creek Falls'' analyzed information and conclusions of the 
preceding two studies and concluded that ``Napias Creek Falls is an 
absolute barrier to upstream migration of salmon and steelhead in 
Napias Creek'' (Meridian, 1997). NMFS analyzed Meridian's studies which 
indicated that the falls was a historic barrier to chinook salmon 
passage in the January 30, 1998, determination (63 FR 4615, 4617). NMFS 
also conducted its own passage assessment of Napias Creek Falls.
    On May 29, 1998, and dates thereafter, Meridian commented on NMFS' 
passage assessment and provided additional explanation of its own prior 
analyses (Meridian 1998a, 1998b; Chapman 1998). NMFS analyzed these 
comments in a memo entitled ``Analysis of Meridian Gold Company's May 
29, 1998, Submittal Concerning Chinook Salmon Passage Conditions at 
Napias Creek Falls'' (NMFS 1998c). In this memo, NMFS concluded that 
while Meridian's May 29, 1998, submittal provides additional 
information regarding the passage issue at Napias Creek Falls, such 
information does not change NMFS' original conclusion reached in its 
November 21, 1997, analysis (NMFS, 1997). Specifically, NMFS concluded 
that Napias Creek Falls is likely passable to listed chinook salmon 
under certain flow conditions (NMFS, 1998c).
    However, NMFS recognizes that it is difficult to determine whether 
the falls

[[Page 29620]]

constitutes an ``effective'' migrational barrier to the species, thus, 
precluding the species from colonizing areas above the falls (see NMFS, 
1999). NMFS believes that current and historic usage information is 
informative on the question of whether or not the falls constitutes an 
effective migrational barrier for the species. From such information, 
one can infer whether Napias Creek Falls effectively constitutes a 
migrational barrier for the species and, therefore, is outside the 
species' current and historic range.

Surveys of Current and Historic Salmonid Presence

    Meridian conducted two studies to determine if, historically, 
chinook salmon were observed above Napias Creek Falls. The first study 
reviewed historical accounts of chinook salmon occurring above Napias 
Creek Falls (Meridian, 1997a). Meridian states that reviews of 
historical and independent ethnographic research document that salmon 
or steelhead were not observed or caught above Napias Creek Falls and, 
therefore, the fish were not historically present in this area. A 
second study reviews the genesis of Napias Creek Falls and concludes 
that the falls are a natural feature and not the result of development 
activities near the area (Meridian, 1997b).
    Meridian's studies and the opinions of Federal and state resource 
agencies (i.e., U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and Idaho Department of 
Fish and Game (IDFG)) indicate that areas above Napias Creek Falls are 
outside the range of listed chinook salmon and do not constitute 
critical habitat for the species (USFS, 1996; IDFG undated); however, 
this conclusion is in conflict with comments from a USFS fishery 
biologist. In a report dated February 8, 1996, Bruce Smith, Salmon and 
Challis National Forest Fisheries Biologist, concludes that Napias 
Creek historically contained chinook salmon (Smith, 1996a). Smith also 
states that areas above Napias Creek Falls currently contain relict 
indicator species (Smith, 1996a), indicating pre-historic accessibility 
of this area to anadromous salmonid species (Smith, 1996b).
    In its January 30, 1998, determination, NMFS found Smith's analysis 
persuasive on the question of the historical presence of chinook salmon 
above Napias Creek Falls primarily based on Smith's identification of 
relict indicator species above the falls (63 FR 4615; 4617). However, 
Meridian points out in their recently submitted study that while relict 
indicator species such as rainbow trout and bull trout occur above the 
falls, other native species (e.g., mountain whitefish, westslope 
cutthroat trout, scuplins, and dace) do not presently occur above the 
falls, indicating that salmonids in the area may have been the result 
of hatchery plantings or other introductions (Chapman, 1998). This 
explanation is supported by the presence of other nonnative fish 
species above the falls (i.e., brook trout), and the history of 
stocking activities in Napias Creek (Smith, 1996a).

Interpretation of Available Scientific Data

    While NMFS concludes that Napias Creek Falls is most likely 
passable to chinook salmon at certain flows, it is difficult to predict 
the likelihood that this species would colonize areas above the falls 
if present in sufficient numbers in Napias Creek. The presence of 
relict indicator species (e.g., rainbow trout) above the falls suggests 
historic usage by anadromous species; however, the origin of these 
indicator species is uncertain. The presence of nonnative species and 
the absence of other common native species suggest that such indicator 
species may be the result of hatchery plantings or other introductions. 
Historical records of hatchery plantings by IDFG support this 
conclusion. Furthermore, historical surveys indicate that in recent 
history (since the 1930s), chinook salmon have not occurred above the 
falls, supporting the conclusion that the falls effectively constitutes 
a migrational barrier for the species.
    After reconsidering its prior analysis in light of new information 
provided by Meridian, NMFS concludes that the best available scientific 
information indicates that habitat above Napias Creek Falls is outside 
the current range of listed spring/summer chinook salmon and, 
therefore, does not constitute critical habitat for the species. This 
conclusion is supported by NMFS' assessment of available scientific 
data and the independent opinions of other Federal and state resource 
agencies (USFS, 1996; IDFG, undated). The apparent lack of historic 
usage of this area by chinook salmon also indicates that this area is 
not essential for conservation of the species. This conclusion is 
consistent with NMFS' previous spring/summer chinook salmon critical 
habitat finding that the species' current range is likely adequate for 
conservation purposes (See 58 FR 68543, Final Designation of Critical 
Habitat for Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon).
    NMFS recognizes that scientific uncertainty remains regarding its 
conclusion that areas above Napias Creek Falls do not constitute 
critical habitat for listed spring/summer chinook salmon. Specifically, 
uncertainty remains regarding whether chinook salmon could establish a 
naturally reproducing population above the falls if they were present 
in sufficient numbers in Napias Creek, or if chinook salmon 
historically inhabited areas above Napias Creek Falls. To resolve 
remaining uncertainties, NMFS requests comments and information 
regarding its proposed determination (See Public Comments Solicited).
    Even though scientific uncertainty remains regarding NMFS' 
conclusion, chinook salmon do not now occur in Napias Creek and, 
therefore, habitat above the falls would not likely be used by the 
species in the near-term even if it were accessible. Therefore, if this 
proposal is finalized, the long-term risk of harm to the species is 
lessened by the fact that NMFS may revise its determination in the 
future if additional information indicates that areas above Napias 
Creek Falls constitute critical habitat for the species.
    While NMFS concludes that areas above Napias Creek Falls do not 
constitute critical habitat for chinook salmon, NMFS believes that 
Napias Creek constitutes an important source of dilution water within 
the Panther Creek system (63 FR 4615 and 4618, January 30, 1998). Any 
degradation of dilution flows from Napias Creek would likely hinder 
efforts to reestablish anadromous species in Panther Creek (63 FR 4615 
and 4618, January 30, 1998). Consequently, NMFS intends to carefully 
evaluate any proposed impacts on Napias Creek water quality to ensure 
that the survival and recovery of listed species are not jeopardized.

Expected Economic Impacts

    Section 4(b)(2) of the ESA requires NMFS to consider the economic 
impact of specifying any particular areas as critical habitat. However, 
section 4(b)(1)(A) of the ESA prohibits NMFS from considering economic 
impacts associated with species listings. Consequently, when 
designating critical habitat, NMFS considers only the incremental 
economic impacts associated with the designation above the economic 
impacts attributable to the listing of the species or authorities other 
than the ESA. Incremental impacts result from special management 
activities in those areas, if any, outside the present distribution of 
the listed species that NMFS has determined to be essential for the 
conservation of the species.
    For this Evolutionarily Significant Unit (ESU), NMFS determines 
that the

[[Page 29621]]

present geographic extent of the species' freshwater and estuarine 
range is likely sufficient to provide for conservation of the species. 
Since NMFS believes that virtually all ``adverse modification'' 
determinations pertaining to critical habitat would also result in 
``jeopardy'' conclusions under section 7 consultations of the ESA 
(i.e., as a result of the species being listed), the designation of 
critical habitat is not expected to result in significant incremental 
restrictions on Federal agency activities. Critical habitat designation 
will, therefore, result in few, if any, additional economic effects 
beyond those that may be attributable to the listing and other 
statutes.
    The USFS and U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (COE) manage areas of 
critical habitat for this ESU, both as it is now designated and as 
proposed for revision. COE and other Federal agencies that may be 
involved with funding or permits for projects in critical habitat areas 
may also be affected by this designation. Since the proposed revision 
will result in eliminating areas above Napias Creek Falls from 
designated critical habitat, the impact of this action on these Federal 
agencies should be minimal.

Proposed Determination

    After reconsidering its prior analysis and analyzing new 
information and analyses submitted by Meridian, NMFS concludes that 
Napias Creek Falls constitutes a naturally impassable migrational 
barrier for Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon and, therefore, is 
outside the species' range. While the falls may be passable to chinook 
salmon at certain flows, available historical evidence suggests that 
this species has not navigated this falls in the recent past, nor is it 
likely do so in the future. NMFS specifically requests data and 
analyses to address remaining scientific uncertainty associated with 
this conclusion (See Public Comments Solicited).

Public Comments Solicited

    To ensure that NMFS' final determination is based on the best 
available scientific data as required by the ESA, NMFS solicits 
comments from the public, other governmental agencies, the scientific 
community, industry, and any other interested parties on the following 
issues: (1) The sufficiency of the evidence supporting NMFS' 
determination that Napias Creek Falls constitutes a naturally 
impassable migrational barrier for chinook salmon; (2) the existence of 
any evidence that may address the potential for fish passage above the 
falls, such as historic accounts indicating chinook salmon or other 
anadromous salmonids occurred above Napias Creek Falls, data or reports 
analyzing the likelihood that chinook salmon or other anadromous 
salmonids would migrate above Napias Creek Falls if present in Napias 
Creek, or information pertaining to the origin of rainbow trout or 
other residualized anadromous species above Napias Creek Falls (e.g., 
hatchery stocking records); and (3) other information indicating 
whether areas above Napias Creek Falls do or do not constitute critical 
habitat for the species. NMFS will analyze all comments and information 
received prior to issuing a final determination.

Public Hearings

    Joint Department of Commerce and Interior 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 list species or to designate critical 
habitat (50 CFR 424.16(c)(3)). Requests for public hearings must be 
received by July 19, 1999.

References

    A complete list of all references cited herein and maps describing 
the range of proposed Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon are 
available upon request (see ADDRESSES).

Classification

    This proposed rule has been determined to be not significant for 
purposes of Executive Order 12866.
    NMFS proposes to designate only the current range of this ESU as 
critical habitat. This current range encompasses a wide range of 
habitat, including tributary streams, as well as mainstem, off-channel 
and estuarine areas. Areas not included in this proposed redesignation 
include marine habitats in the Pacific Ocean and areas above impassable 
natural barriers (e.g., long-standing, natural waterfalls). NMFS 
concludes that the currently accessible areas within the species' range 
are the minimum habitat necessary to ensure the species' conservation 
and recovery. The proposed action would revise critical habitat for the 
listed ESU to realign critical habitat with the current range of the 
ESU. Having determined that Napias Creek Falls constitutes a naturally 
impassable barrier for Snake River spring/summer chinook, NMFS proposes 
to remove the habitat above the Falls from designated critical habitat.
    Since NMFS is designating the current range of the listed species 
as critical habitat, 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 to result in the destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat (ESA section 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 the 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 small businesses, organizations, and 
governments.
    Meridian owns and operates Beartrack Mine, which is adjacent to 
Upper Napias Creek (Napias Creek above the Falls), within the Salmon 
National Forest. NMFS is not aware of any other business operating in 
Upper Napias Creek whose operations might adversely modify potential 
salmon habitat. The proposed action would reduce the ESU's critical 
habitat, by eliminating Upper Napias Creek from critical habitat. To 
the extent that Meridian may be impacted by the current designation of 
Upper Napias Creek as critical habitat, the proposed reduction of 
critical habitat would lessen Meridian's economic burden, if any, from 
that impact.
    Accordingly, the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of 
Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small 
Business Administration that the proposed critical habitat designation, 
if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a 
substantial number of small entities, as described in the Regulatory 
Flexibility Act.
    This proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information 
requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
    NMFS has determined that Environmental Assessments or an 
Environmental Impact Statement, as defined under the authority of the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared for 
this

[[Page 29622]]

critical habitat designation. See Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 
1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S. Ct. 698 (1996).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 226

    Endangered and threatened species, Incorporation by reference.

    Dated: May 26, 1999.
Andrew A. Rosenberg,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
    For the reasons set out 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. In Sec. 226.205, paragraph (b) is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 226.205  Critical habitat for Snake River sockeye salmon, Snake 
River fall chinook salmon and Snake River spring/summer chinook salmon.

* * * * *
    (b) Snake River Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus 
tshawytscha). Geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to 
include the Columbia River from a straight line connecting the west end 
of the Clatsop jetty (south jetty, Oregon side) and the west end of the 
Peacock jetty (north jetty, Washington side) and including all Columbia 
River estuarine areas and river reaches proceeding upstream to the 
confluence of the Columbia and Snake Rivers; all Snake River reaches 
from the confluence of the Columbia River upstream to Hells Canyon Dam. 
Critical habitat also includes river reaches presently or historically 
accessible (except reaches above impassable natural falls (including 
Napias Creek Falls), and Dworshak and Hells Canyon Dams) to Snake River 
spring/summer chinook salmon in the following hydrologic units: Hells 
Canyon, Imnaha, Lemhi, Little Salmon, Lower Grande Ronde, Lower Middle 
Fork Salmon, Lower Salmon, Lower Snake-Asotin, Lower Snake-Tucannon, 
Middle Salmon-Chamberlain, Middle Salmon-Panther, Pahsimeroi, South 
Fork Salmon, Upper Middle Fork Salmon, Upper Grande Ronde, Upper 
Salmon, Wallowa. Critical habitat borders on or passes through the 
following counties in Oregon: Baker, Clatsop, Columbia, Gillium, Hood 
River, Morrow, Multnomah, Sherman, Umatilla, Union, Wallowa, Wasco; the 
following counties in Washington: Asotin, Benton, Clark, Columbia, 
Cowlitz, Franklin, Garfield, Klickitat, Pacific, Skamania, Wahkiakum, 
Walla, Whitman; and the following counties in Idaho: Adams, Blaine, 
Custer, Idaho, Lemhi, Lewis, Nez Perce, Valley.
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 99-13958 Filed 6-1-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F