[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 32 (Wednesday, February 16, 2000)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 7764-7787]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-3553]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 226

[Docket No. 990128036-0025-02; I.D. 012100E]
RIN 0648-AG49


Designated Critical Habitat: Critical Habitat for 19 
Evolutionarily Significant Units of Salmon and Steelhead in Washington, 
Oregon, Idaho, and California

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

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS is designating critical habitat for 19 evolutionarily 
significant units (ESUs) of chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), chum 
(O. keta), coho (O. kisutch), and sockeye salmon (O. nerka) and 
steelhead trout (O. mykiss) previously listed under the Endangered 
Species Act (ESA). Critical habitat occurs in the states of Washington, 
Oregon, Idaho, and California and encompasses accessible reaches of all 
rivers (including estuarine areas and tributaries) within the range of 
each listed ESU. Critical habitat is also designated in Ozette Lake for 
that sockeye salmon ESU. The areas described in this final rule 
represent the current freshwater and estuarine range of the listed 
species. For all ESUs, critical habitat includes all waterways, 
substrate, and adjacent riparian zones below longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least 
several hundred years). After considering public comments and reviewing 
additional scientific information, NMFS has modified various aspects of 
the proposed designations, including a revised description of adjacent 
riparian zones and the exclusion of Indian lands from critical habitat. 
The economic (and other) impacts resulting from this critical habitat 
designation are expected to be minimal.

DATES: This rule is effective March 17, 2000. The incorporation by 
reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the 
Director of the Federal Register as of June 4, 1999.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the USGS publication and maps may be obtained from 
the USGS, Map Sales, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225. Copies may be 
inspected at NMFS, Protected Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street--
Suite 500, Portland, OR 97232-2737, or NMFS, Office of Protected 
Resources, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, or at the 
Office of the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 
700, Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: In Washington, Oregon, or Idaho, 
contact Garth Griffin (Portland) at (503) 231-2005. In California, 
contact Craig Wingert (Long Beach) at (562) 980-4021.
    Reference materials regarding this critical habitat designation can 
be obtained via the internet at www.nwr.noaa.gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    During the past 3 years, NMFS has published final listing 
determinations for numerous ESUs of salmon and steelhead throughout the 
Pacific Northwest and California. Although critical habitat has been 
designated for several of these ESUs, final designations are still 
pending for 19 ESUs of five species: (1) Puget Sound, Lower Columbia 
River, Upper Willamette River, Upper Columbia River spring-run, 
California Central Valley spring-run, and California Coastal chinook 
salmon ESUs (63 FR 11482, March 9, 1998); (2) Hood Canal summer-run and 
Columbia River chum salmon ESUs (63 FR 11774, March 10, 1998); (3) 
Ozette Lake sockeye salmon ESU (63 FR 11750, March 10, 1998); (4) 
Oregon Coast coho salmon ESU (64 FR 24998, May 10, 1999); and (5) 
Southern California, South-Central California coast, Central California 
coast, California Central Valley, Upper Columbia River, Snake River 
Basin, Lower Columbia River, Upper Willamette River, and Middle 
Columbia River steelhead ESUs (64 FR 5740, February 5, 1999).
    Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA requires that, to the maximum extent 
prudent and determinable, NMFS designate critical habitat concurrently 
with a determination that a species is endangered or threatened. At the 
time of final listing for each of these 19 ESUs, critical habitat was 
not determinable because the information to perform the required 
analyses was insufficient. However, NMFS has published proposed rules 
designating critical habitat for these ESUs, solicited public comments, 
and held public hearings on the proposals. This final rule considers 
the new information and comments received in response to the proposed 
rules for all 19 ESUs.

[[Page 7765]]

    Use of the term ``essential habitat'' within this document refers 
to critical habitat as defined by the ESA and should not be confused 
with the requirement to describe and identify Essential Fish Habitat 
(EFH) pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and 
Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

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.'' 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 chapter are no longer 
necessary'' (see U.S.C. 1532(3)).
    In designating critical habitat, NMFS considers the following 
requirements of the species: (1) Space for individual and population 
growth, and for normal behavior; (2) food, water, air, light, minerals, 
or other nutritional or physiological requirements; (3) cover or 
shelter; (4) sites for breeding, reproduction, or rearing of offspring; 
and, generally, (5) habitats that are protected from disturbance or are 
representative of the historical geographical and ecological 
distributions of the species (see 50 CFR 424.12(b)). In addition to 
these factors, NMFS also focuses on the known physical and biological 
features (primary constituent elements) within the designated area that 
are essential to the conservation of the species and that may require 
special management considerations or protection. These essential 
features may include, but are not limited to, spawning sites, food 
resources, water quality and quantity, and riparian vegetation.

Benefits of Critical Habitat Designation

    A designation of critical habitat provides Federal agencies with a 
clear indication as to when consultation under section 7 of the ESA is 
required, particularly in cases where the proposed action would not 
result in immediate mortality, injury, or harm to individuals of a 
listed species (e.g., an action occurring within the critical habitat 
area when a migratory species is not present). The critical habitat 
designation, in describing the essential features of the habitat, also 
helps determine which activities conducted outside the designated area 
are subject to section 7 (i.e., activities outside critical habitat 
that may affect essential features of the designated area).
    A critical habitat designation will also assist Federal agencies in 
planning future actions because the designation establishes, in 
advance, those habitats that will be given special consideration in 
section 7 consultations. With a designation of critical habitat, 
potential conflicts between Federal actions and endangered or 
threatened species can be identified and possibly avoided early in an 
agency's planning process.

Summary of Comments

    Between April 1998 and June 1999, NMFS held 40 public hearings on 
the critical habitat proposals: 9 in Washington, 15 in Oregon, 4 in 
Idaho, and 12 in California (63 FR 16955, April 7, 1998; 63 FR 30455, 
June 4, 1998; 64 FR 20248, April 26, 1999; 64 FR 24998, May 10, 1999). 
Approximately 800 written comments were submitted in response to the 
proposed rules and numerous individuals provided oral testimony at the 
public hearings. New information and comments received are summarized 
as follows.

Public Notification Process

    Comment 1 : Some commenters felt that the process for proposing 
critical habitat was not handled well (e.g., difficulties with public 
notice and time to respond) and that the proposal itself was too ill-
defined to be fully evaluated.
    Response: NMFS made every attempt to communicate the critical 
habitat proposal to the affected communities. As noted above, 40 public 
hearings were held in California, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho and 
various local newspapers were notified of the proposed action, comment 
deadlines, and public meetings. In response to numerous requests, NMFS 
twice extended the comment periods (63 FR 30455, June 4, 1998; 64 FR 
20248, April 26, 1999) to allow additional time for the public to 
submit comments. Finally, NMFS responded to several requests for 
supplemental meetings with affected county and local groups to promote 
better understanding of the proposal and attempt to allay unwarranted 
fears resulting from misleading information. Any and all parties are 
encouraged to contact NMFS if they have questions or need additional 
information regarding this final rule (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION 
CONTACT).

Economic Considerations

    Comment 2: Numerous commenters believed that NMFS improperly 
minimized the proposal's economic impacts by separating the designation 
of critical habitat from the listing process (i.e., by considering only 
the incremental economic effects of designating critical habitat, 
beyond the effects associated with listing the species). These 
commenters are concerned that by separating the costs associated with 
the various administrative actions (e.g., listing, critical habitat 
designation, section 7 consultations), NMFS underestimated the real 
economic consequences of protecting listed salmon and steelhead. Some 
commenters countered that any economic costs would be offset once the 
salmon and steelhead fisheries were restored. Many commenters objected 
to NMFS' interpretation that the impact of critical habitat designation 
is subsumed by the costs associated with protections under section 7 of 
the ESA. Several commenters contended that NMFS failed to conduct an 
analysis pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    Response: NMFS disagrees with the assertion that it has improperly 
minimized the economic impacts by separating the designation of 
critical habitat from the listing process, or that this incremental 
approach for critical habitat designation renders sections of the ESA 
meaningless. Rather, the ESA is unambiguous in how it addresses 
economic impacts; it prohibits the consideration of economic impacts in 
the listing process, but requires analysis of economic impacts when 
designating critical habitat. These separate requirements for each 
determination necessarily engender an incremental analysis in which 
only the economic impacts resulting from the designation of critical 
habitat are considered.
    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 beyond those which already accrue from 
section 7 of the ESA, which is triggered by the species' listing. 
Section 7 requires Federal agencies to ensure that any action they 
carry out, authorize, or fund is not likely to jeopardize the continued 
existence of any listed species or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of habitat determined to be critical. The consultation 
requirements of section 7 are nondiscretionary and are effective at the 
time of species' listing. Therefore, Federal agencies must consult with

[[Page 7766]]

NMFS and ensure their actions do not jeopardize a listed species 
regardless of whether critical habitat is designated.
    Most of the effect on non-Federal interests will result from the 
protective regulations of 4(d) and the no-jeopardy requirement of 
section 7, both of which are a function of listing a species, not 
designating its critical habitat. Whether or not critical habitat is 
designated, non-Federal interests must conduct their actions in a 
manner consistent with the requirements of the ESA. When a species is 
listed, non-Federal interests must comply with the prohibitions on 
takings found in section 9 of the ESA and associated regulations under 
section 4(d). If the activity is funded, permitted, or authorized by a 
Federal agency, that agency must comply with the non-jeopardy mandate 
of section 7 of the ESA, which results from listing a species, not from 
designating its critical habitat. Once critical habitat is designated, 
the agency must avoid actions that destroy or adversely modify that 
critical habitat. However, pursuant to NMFS' ESA implementing 
regulations, any action that destroys or adversely modifies critical 
habitat is also likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the 
species (See the definitions in 50 CFR 402.02). Therefore, NMFS does 
not anticipate that the designation will result in significant 
additional requirements for non-Federal interests.
    Notwithstanding its lack of economic impact, the designation of 
critical habitat remains important because it identifies habitat that 
is essential for the continued existence of a species and, therefore, 
indicates habitat that may require special management attention. This 
facilitates and enhances Federal agencies' ability to comply with 
section 7 by ensuring that agencies are aware of it when their 
activities may affect listed species and habitats essential to support 
them. In addition to aiding Federal agencies in determining when 
consultations are required pursuant to section 7(a)(2), critical 
habitat can aid an agency in fulfilling its broader obligation under 
section 7(a)(1) to use its authority to carry out programs for the 
conservation of listed species.
    The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has 
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business 
Administration that this rule would not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities, as provided in the 
Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    Comment 3: A number of commenters were under the impression that 
critical habitat is equivalent to a ``set-aside'' or an easement and 
that by its nature is tantamount to an illegal and unconstitutional 
``taking'' of private property. Some commenters felt that designating 
critical habitat abrogated Executive Order 12630 and the June 30, 1988, 
Attorney General's ``Guidelines for Evaluation and Risk Avoidance of 
Unanticipated Takings.'' Some of these commenters provided estimates 
and analyses describing specific costs they believed they would incur 
as a result of the proposed critical habitat designation. These 
commenters suggested that they should be monetarily reimbursed for any 
financial hardship resulting from a designation of critical habitat.
    Response: A critical habitat designation does not impose any 
additional burdens on private land than those imposed by the species' 
listing. A private landowner continues to be free to manage his 
property as he sees fit, using care that his land management does not 
result in the take of a listed species. The critical habitat 
designation simply clarifies the geographic areas within which one's 
activities may impact listed salmon and steelhead. A critical habitat 
designation affects private land only when a Federal action (e.g., 
obtaining a Federal permit) triggers a section 7 consultation.
    Land use activities may be affected by statutory and regulatory 
protections afforded species once they are listed under the ESA. 
Section 9(a) of the ESA specifically prohibits the take of endangered 
species, and NMFS has proposed to adopt similar regulations for 
threatened steelhead (64 FR 73479, December 30, 1999) and chinook, 
chum, coho, and sockeye salmon (65 FR 170, January 3, 2000). These 
prohibitions, which include actions that significantly modify or 
degrade habitat, may have some impact on land uses that can be shown to 
have harmed anadromous salmonids (e.g., placing barriers to migration 
in a stream), but these regulations should not be confused with the 
designation of critical habitat. In the course of deciding to make this 
final designation, the Department of Commerce has complied with 
Executive Order 12630, Government Actions and Interference with 
Constitutionally Protected Property Rights.

Compliance with National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)

    Comment 4: Some commenters believed that NMFS should prepare an 
environmental impact statement pursuant to NEPA on the critical habitat 
designations because the designations are a major Federal action and 
will have a significant impact on the environment.
    Response: Under section 4(b)(2) of the ESA, the Secretary is 
required to designate critical habitat on the basis of the best 
scientific data available after taking into account the economic and 
other relevant impacts of specifying any particular area as critical 
habitat. In past critical habitat designations, NMFS has performed 
analyses of the kind requested here: environmental analysis under the 
NEPA. In all such cases NMFS has determined that mere designation of 
critical habitat has no adverse environmental impacts. In the time 
since these analyses were performed, it has become NMFS' policy, as 
well as that of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, that designating 
critical habitat has in fact no impact that requires a NEPA analysis. 
The Services determined that any appreciable environmental impact 
resulting from ESA activities accrued not from designating critical 
habitat, but from listing the species in the first place. Thus, 
designating critical habitat is simply an adjunct to listing species as 
threatened or endangered; it is, in itself, merely another effect 
generated by the listing process and has little or no environmental 
impact.
    The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld the Services' 
determination. In Douglas County v. Babbitt (see 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 
1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 698 (1996)), the Court found that 
Congress, in enacting the ESA, intended that critical habitat 
procedures displace NEPA requirements. Further, the Court found that 
NEPA ``does not apply to actions that do not change the physical 
environment'' and that ``to apply NEPA to the * * * ESA would further 
the purposes of neither statute.'' In other words, the court found that 
NEPA does not apply to designation of critical habitat under the ESA.

Scope and Extent of Critical Habitat

    The majority of commenters raised issues regarding the geographic 
scope and extent of proposed critical habitat, in particular the 
designation of adjacent riparian zones and the exclusion of historical 
habitats above dams and marine areas in the Pacific Ocean. Critical 
habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as the specific areas 
within the geographic area occupied by the species on which are found 
those physical or biological features that are essential to the 
conservation of the species and that may require special management 
considerations or protection. Based on commenters' concerns and on new 
information received during the public comment period, NMFS has refined 
its designation of critical habitat for all 19

[[Page 7767]]

ESUs of salmon and steelhead. The following sections, partitioned by 
habitat type, address commenters' concerns and clarify NMFS' 
designation of critical habitat for these ESUs.

Freshwater and Estuarine Habitats

    Comment 5 : Numerous commenters felt that a more complete 
scientific analysis was required before critical habitat could be 
designated and, as a result, requested that the agency withdraw the 
proposed rules. Some commenters questioned NMFS' delineation of 
critical habitat as including all areas currently accessible to the 
species, and requested more specificity as to which stream reaches are 
critical habitat. Some commenters sought designation of unoccupied 
streams as critical habitat, while others noted that some local creeks 
and streams never had salmon or steelhead (e.g., Calleguas Creek) and 
requested designation of only those areas where species restoration is 
feasible. Several commenters believed that adverse hydrologic 
conditions and degraded habitat in certain streams (e.g., Stone Corral 
Creek and Upper Elder Creek in California's Central Valley, and Pony 
Creek in coastal Oregon) would preclude certain basins or river reaches 
from playing a critical role in the species' recovery. Several 
commenters noted errors in the tables used to identify river basins 
containing critical habitat in the proposed rules (e.g., in the 
California coastal chinook salmon ESU). Several commenters identified 
streams and estuarine areas that they believed should be included or 
highlighted due to their significance for salmon and steelhead 
production. Finally, a large number of commenters requested that NMFS 
extend the southern extent of the critical habitat designation from 
Malibu Creek to at least San Mateo Creek in San Diego County in 
conjunction with a range extension of the Southern California steelhead 
ESU.
    Response: While the proposed rules described the lack of consistent 
and robust data sets with which to discern the species' distribution at 
a fine scale, NMFS believes that the best available distribution 
information is sufficient to characterize basin-level designations of 
critical habitat for the listed species. A variety of mapping efforts 
are underway throughout the Pacific Northwest and California (e.g., the 
``core area'' mapping component of the Oregon Coastal Salmon 
Restoration Initiative (OCSRI 1997), since renamed ``The Oregon Plan 
for Salmon and Watersheds''). However, most have yet to be completed or 
fail to depict salmonid habitats in a consistent manner or at a fine 
geographic scale. Hence, they must be viewed as good but tentative 
descriptions of areas occupied by or critical for salmon and steelhead. 
NMFS believes that these mapping efforts hold great promise for 
focusing habitat protection and restoration efforts and will continue 
to use the expertise of state and tribal comanagers to discern salmonid 
distribution when specific actions warrant (e.g., during section 7 
consultations). However, the limited data across the range of these 19 
ESUs, as well as dissimilarities in data types within them, continue to 
make it difficult to define this species' distribution at a finer scale 
than the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) hydrologic units (i.e., basins) 
identified Tables 7-24. Similarly, this limitation precludes the agency 
from restricting critical habitat to streams where restoration may or 
may not be feasible.
    The agency's preferred approach to identifying critical habitat is 
to designate all areas accessible to the species within the range of 
hydrologic units in each ESU. While this may not provide the level of 
resolution to define the species' presence or absence in specific local 
creeks and streams, NMFS believes that adopting a more inclusive, 
watershed-based description of critical habitat is appropriate because 
it: (1) Recognizes the species' use of diverse habitats and underscores 
the need to account for all of the habitat types supporting the 
species' freshwater and estuarine life stages, from small headwater 
streams to migration corridors and estuarine rearing areas; (2) takes 
into account the natural variability in habitat use that makes precise 
mapping problematic (e.g., some streams may have fish present only in 
years with abundant rainfall); and (3) reinforces the important linkage 
between aquatic areas and adjacent riparian/upland areas. While 
unoccupied streams are excluded from critical habitat, habitat quality 
in the species' current range is intrinsically related to the quality 
of upland areas and of inaccessible headwater or intermittent streams 
which provide key habitat elements (e.g., large woody debris, gravel, 
water quality) crucial for fish in downstream reaches.
    NMFS clarifies that reaches or basins historically and currently 
unoccupied (e.g., Calleguas Creek, Ventura County, California) would 
not be considered critical habitat. Also, the agency acknowledges that 
some streams currently have little suitable habitat for salmon and 
steelhead or are rarely inhabited by the species. As noted previously, 
the paucity of detailed information regarding salmonid distribution 
precludes NMFS from identifying specific drainages or river reaches 
occupied by the species. In addition, the current low abundance of the 
species makes it difficult to rule out any stream for recovery since 
the remnant populations may need whatever habitat is available in order 
to persist. In the case of some streams cited by commenters it is 
unclear whether the basin has been monitored sufficiently such that 
firm conclusions about the species' presence/absence can be made. 
Instead, NMFS believes that the most prudent approach to characterizing 
critical habitat is to include all areas accessible to listed salmon 
and steelhead. In streams where there is limited species distribution 
information, NMFS biologists would make their best professional 
judgment about the access to and suitability of available habitat and 
what if any impacts would occur to the listed fish as a result of a 
specific activity. Few if any effects would result from an activity 
where it is well documented that the listed species makes little use of 
a river reach or basin and the existing habitat conditions are poor.
    To address the request by several commenters, NMFS has provided a 
more complete list of rivers, bays, and estuaries known to support 
salmon and steelhead in each ESU (see section Critical Habitat of 
Salmon and Steelhead; Changes to the Proposed Rules). NMFS has also 
corrected several errors contained in the tables used to identify river 
basins and estuarine areas containing critical habitat and errors in 
the regulatory definitions. Changes included correcting misidentified 
basins and dams, deleting reference to several dams that are beyond the 
upstream extent of salmonid access, and including habitats currently 
occupied but erroneously omitted in the proposed rule (e.g., the 
inadvertent exclusion of south San Francisco Bay as critical habitat 
for Central California Coast steelhead ESU). See also comments and 
corrections noted under Dams and Barriers.
    It is important to note that recent listing determinations have 
changed the geographic boundaries of several chinook salmon, chum 
salmon, and steelhead ESUs. These changes have resulted in 
modifications to the critical habitat to correspond with the new ESU 
configurations. As a result, the Upper Willamette River chinook salmon 
ESU (and its critical habitat) now extends downstream of Willamette 
Falls to include the areas occupied by Clackamas River spring-run 
populations (64 FR 14308, March 24, 1999) and the Hood Canal summer-run 
chum salmon ESU/critical habitat now includes

[[Page 7768]]

Dungeness Bay and tributaries (64 FR 14508, March 25, 1999). In 
contrast, the California coastal and Snake River fall-run chinook 
salmon ESUs (64 FR 50394, September 16, 1999) and Upper Willamette 
River steelhead ESU (64 FR 14517, March 25, 1999) were listed within a 
smaller range of watersheds; hence several basins and dams/reservoirs 
are now being excluded from the critical habitat designation. In the 
case of the Snake River fall-run chinook salmon ESU, critical habitat 
will remain in the range of watersheds originally designated on 
December 28, 1993 (58 FR 68543). Specific changes to the critical 
habitat designations for all ESUs are summarized in Critical Habitat of 
Salmon and Steelhead; Changes to the Proposed Rules.
    Finally, with respect to the southern extent of critical habitat 
for the Southern California steelhead ESU, NMFS finds that the comments 
may have merit. In 1999, juvenile O. mykiss suspected of being 
steelhead were found in several locations within the San Mateo Creek 
watershed. NMFS is evaluating the available biological information for 
these fish, including a limited amount of genetic and otolith 
microchemistry data, to determine whether a range extension of this ESU 
is warranted. If warranted by the available data, NMFS will propose a 
range extension of this ESU in a separate rule making. NMFS would 
consider the extension of the critical habitat designation south of 
Malibu Creek in conjunction with that rulemaking.

Adjacent Riparian Zones

    Comment 6: While many commenters supported NMFS' proposal to 
include the adjacent riparian zone as critical habitat, others were 
strongly against this approach. Some noted the lack of justification 
for including adjacent riparian zones of 300 feet from each side of a 
stream in the critical habitat proposals for chinook, chum and sockeye 
salmon. Moreover, many felt that proposing to designate these zones was 
arbitrary and excessive. Several commenters offered possible lesser 
solutions to defining adjacent riparian zones, including: only the 
actual inhabited stream reaches themselves, a smaller width to the 
riparian boundary (e.g., equivalent to a site-potential tree height), 
or the extent of the flood plain.
    Response: NMFS agrees that the proposed rules for chinook, chum, 
and sockeye salmon did not adequately describe the rationale for 
identifying adjacent riparian zones as part of critical habitat. The 
subsequent proposed rules for steelhead and Oregon coast coho salmon 
included greater detail on this topic and moreover proposed a new, 
refined approach to designating the adjacent riparian zone (summarized 
below). NMFS believes it is important to include these zones in the 
designation of critical habitat for several reasons. The ESA defines 
critical habitat to include areas ``on which are found those physical 
or biological features * * * essential to the conservation of the 
species and * * * which may require special management considerations 
or protection.'' These essential features for salmon include, but are 
not limited to, spawning sites, food resources, water quality and 
quantity, and riparian vegetation (see 50 CFR 424.12(b)). Riparian 
areas form the basis of healthy watersheds and affect these primary 
constituent elements; therefore, they are essential to the conservation 
of the species and need to be included as critical habitat.
    NMFS' past critical habitat designations for listed salmonids have 
included the adjacent riparian zone as part of the designation. For 
example, in the final designations for Snake River spring/summer 
chinook, fall chinook, and sockeye salmon (58 FR 68543, December 28, 
1993), NMFS included the adjacent riparian zone as part of critical 
habitat and defined it in the regulation as those areas within a 
horizontal distance of 300 feet (91.4 meters) from the normal high 
water line. In the critical habitat designation for Sacramento River 
winter-run chinook (58 FR 33212, June 16, 1993), NMFS included 
``adjacent riparian zones'' as part of the critical habitat but did not 
define the extent of that zone in the regulation. The preamble to that 
rule stated that the adjacent riparian zone was limited to ``those 
areas that provide cover and shade.''
    Streams and stream functioning are inextricably linked to adjacent 
riparian and upland (or upslope) areas. Streams regularly submerge 
portions of the riparian zone via floods and channel migration, and 
portions of the riparian zone may contain off-channel rearing habitats 
used by juvenile salmonids, especially during periods of high flow. The 
riparian zone also provides an array of important watershed functions 
that directly benefit salmonids. Vegetation in the zone shades the 
stream, stabilizes banks, and provides organic litter and large woody 
debris. The riparian zone stores sediment, recycles nutrients and 
chemicals, mediates stream hydraulics, and controls microclimate. 
Healthy riparian zones help ensure water quality essential to salmonids 
as well as the forage species they depend on (Reiser and Bjornn, 1979; 
Meehan, 1991; FEMAT, 1993; and Spence et al., 1996). Human activities 
in the adjacent riparian zone, or in upslope areas, can harm stream 
function and can harm salmonids, both directly and indirectly, by 
interfering with the watershed functions described here. For example, 
timber harvest, road-building, grazing, cultivation, and other 
activities can increase sediment, destabilize banks, reduce organic 
litter and woody debris, increase water temperatures, simplify stream 
channels, and increase peak flows leading to scouring. These adverse 
modifications reduce the value of habitat for salmonids and, in many 
instances, may result in injury to or mortality of fish. Because human 
activity may adversely affect these watershed functions and habitat 
features, NMFS concluded the adjacent riparian zone could require 
special management consideration, and, therefore, was appropriate for 
inclusion in critical habitat.
    The Snake River salmon critical habitat designation relied on 
analyses and conclusions reached by the Forest Ecosystem Management 
Assessment Team (FEMAT, 1993) regarding interim riparian reserves for 
fish-bearing streams on Federal lands within the range of the northern 
spotted owl. The interim riparian reserve recommendations in the FEMAT 
report were based on a systematic review of the available literature, 
primarily for forested habitats, concerning riparian processes as a 
function of distance from stream channels. The interim riparian 
reserves identified in the FEMAT report for fish-bearing streams on 
Federal forest lands are intended to (1) provide protection to 
salmonids, as well as riparian-dependent and associated species, 
through the protection of riparian processes that influence stream 
function, and (2) provide a high level of fish habitat and riparian 
protection until site-specific watershed and project analyses can be 
completed. The FEMAT report identified several alternative ways that 
interim riparian reserves providing a high level of protection could be 
defined, including the 300-foot (91.4 meter) slope distance, a distance 
equivalent to two site-potential tree heights, the outer edges of 
riparian vegetation, the 100-year flood plain, or the area between the 
edge of the active stream channel to the top of the inner gorge, 
whichever is greatest. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and U.S. Bureau 
of Land Management (BLM) ultimately adopted these riparian reserve 
criteria as part of an Aquatic Conservation Strategy aimed at 
conserving fish, amphibians, and other aquatic- and riparian-

[[Page 7769]]

dependent species in the Record of Decision for the Northwest Forest 
Plan (FEMAT ROD, 1994).
    While NMFS has used the findings of the FEMAT report to guide its 
analyses in ESA section 7 consultations with the USFS and BLM regarding 
management of Federal lands, NMFS recognizes that the interim riparian 
reserves may be conservative in some instances, with regard to the 
protection of adjacent riparian habitat for salmonids since they are 
designed to protect terrestrial species that are riparian dependent or 
associated, as well as salmonids. Moreover, NMFS' analyses have focused 
more on the stream functions important to salmonids and on how proposed 
activities will affect the riparian area's contribution to properly 
functioning conditions for salmonid habitat.
    Since the adoption of the Northwest Forest Plan, NMFS has gained 
experience working with Federal and non-Federal landowners to determine 
the likely effects of proposed land management actions on stream 
functions. In freshwater and estuarine areas, these activities include, 
but are not limited to agriculture; forestry; grazing; diking and bank 
stabilization; construction/urbanization; dam construction/operation; 
dredging and dredged spoil disposal; habitat restoration projects; 
irrigation withdrawal, storage, and management; mineral mining; road 
building and maintenance; sand and gravel mining; wastewater/pollutant 
discharge; wetland and floodplain alteration; and woody debris/
structure removal from rivers and estuaries. NMFS has developed 
numerous tools to assist Federal agencies in analyzing the likely 
impacts of their activities on anadromous fish habitat. With these 
tools, Federal agencies are better able to judge the impacts of their 
actions on salmonid habitat, taking into account the location and 
nature of their actions. NMFS' primary tool guiding Federal agencies is 
a document titled ``Making Endangered Species Act Determinations of 
Effect for Individual or Grouped Actions at the Watershed Scale'' 
(NMFS, 1996a). This document presents guidelines to facilitate and 
standardize determinations of ``effect'' under the ESA and includes a 
matrix for determining the condition of various habitat parameters. 
This matrix is being implemented throughout northern California and 
Oregon coastal watersheds and is expected to help guide efforts to 
define salmonid risk factors and conservation strategies throughout the 
West Coast.
    Several recent literature reviews have addressed the effectiveness 
of various riparian zone widths for maintaining specific riparian 
functions (e.g., sediment control, large woody debris recruitment) and 
overall watershed processes. These reviews provide additional useful 
information about riparian processes as a function of distance from 
stream channels. For example, Castelle et al. (1994) conducted a 
literature review of riparian zone functions and concluded that 
riparian widths in the range of 30 meters (98 feet) appear to be the 
minimum needed to maintain biological elements of streams. They also 
noted that site-specific conditions may warrant substantially larger or 
smaller riparian management zones. Similarly, Johnson and Reba (1992) 
summarized the technical literature and found that available 
information supported a minimum 30-meter riparian management zone for 
salmonid protection.
    A recent assessment funded by NMFS and several other Federal 
agencies reviewed the technical basis for various riparian functions as 
they pertain to salmonid conservation (Spence et al., 1996). These 
authors suggest that a functional approach to riparian protection 
requires a consistent definition of riparian ecosystems based on 
``zones of influence'' for specific riparian processes. They noted that 
in constrained reaches where the active channel remains relatively 
stable through time, riparian zones of influences may be defined based 
on site-potential tree heights and distance from the active channel. In 
contrast, they note that, in unconstrained reaches (e.g., streams in 
broad valley floors) with braided or shifting channels, the riparian 
zone of influence is more difficult to define, but recommend that it is 
more appropriate to define the riparian zone based on some measure of 
the extent of the flood plain.
    Spence et al. (1996) reviewed the functions of riparian zones that 
are essential to the development and maintenance of aquatic habitats 
favorable to salmonids and the available literature concerning the 
riparian distances that would protect these functional processes. Many 
of the studies reviewed indicate that riparian management widths 
designed to protect one function in particular, recruitment of large 
woody debris, are likely to be adequate to protect other key riparian 
functions. The reviewed studies concluded that the vast majority of 
large woody debris is obtained within one site-potential tree height 
from the stream channel (Murphy and Koski, 1989; McDade et al., 1990; 
Robison and Beschta, 1990; Van Sickle and Gregory, 1990; FEMAT, 1993; 
and Cederholm, 1994). Based on the available literature, Spence et al. 
(1996) concluded that fully protected riparian management zones of one 
site-potential tree would adequately maintain 90 to 100 percent of most 
key riparian functions of Pacific Northwest forests if the goal was to 
maintain instream processes over a time frame of years to decades.
    Based on experience gained since earlier critical habitat 
designations and after considering public comments and reviewing 
additional scientific information regarding riparian habitats, NMFS is 
re-defining adjacent riparian zones for the 9 chinook, chum and sockeye 
salmon ESUs to match the riparian function description used for 
steelhead and Oregon Coast coho salmon ESUs. Specifically, the adjacent 
riparian area for all 19 salmon and steelhead ESUs is defined as the 
area adjacent to a stream that provides the following functions: shade, 
sediment transport, nutrient or chemical regulation, streambank 
stability, and input of large woody debris or organic matter. Specific 
guidance on assessing the potential impacts of land use activities on 
riparian functions can be obtained by consulting with NMFS (see 
ADDRESSES), local foresters, conservation officers, fisheries 
biologists, or county extension agents.
    The physical and biological features that create properly 
functioning salmonid habitat vary throughout the species' range and the 
extent of the adjacent riparian zone may change accordingly depending 
on the landscape under consideration. While a site-potential tree 
height can serve as a reasonable benchmark in some cases, site-specific 
analyses provide the best means to characterize the adjacent riparian 
zone because such analyses are more likely to accurately capture the 
unique attributes of a particular landscape. Knowing what may be a 
limiting factor to the properly functioning condition of a stream 
channel on a land use or land type basis and how that may or may not 
affect the function of the riparian zone will significantly assist 
Federal agencies in assessing the potential for impacts to listed 
salmon and steelhead. On Federal lands within the range of the northern 
spotted owl, Federal agencies should continue to rely on the Aquatic 
Conservation Strategy of the Northwest Forest Plan to guide their 
consultations with NMFS. Where there is a Federal action on non-Federal 
lands, Federal agencies should consider the potential effects of the 
activities they fund, permit, or authorize on the riparian zone 
adjacent to a stream that may

[[Page 7770]]

influence the following functions: shade, sediment delivery to the 
stream, nutrient or chemical regulation, streambank stability, and the 
input of large woody debris or organic matter. In areas where the 
existing riparian zone is seriously diminished (e.g., in many urban 
settings and agricultural settings where flood control structures are 
prevalent), Federal agencies should focus on maintaining any existing 
riparian functions and restoring others where appropriate, for example, 
by cooperating with local watershed groups and landowners. NMFS 
acknowledges in its description of riparian habitat function that 
different land use types (e.g., timber, urban, and agricultural) will 
have varying degrees of impact and that activities requiring a Federal 
permit will be evaluated on the basis of disturbance to the riparian 
zone. In many cases the evaluation of an activity may focus on a 
particular limiting factor for a watercourse (e.g., temperature, stream 
bank erosion, sediment transport) and whether that activity may or may 
not contribute to improving or degrading the riparian habitat.
    Finally, NMFS emphasizes that a designation of critical habitat 
does not prohibit landowners from conducting actions that modify 
streams or the adjacent terrestrial habitat. Critical habitat 
designation serves to identify important areas and essential features 
within those areas, thus alerting both Federal and non-Federal entities 
to the importance of the area for listed salmonids. Federal agencies 
are required by the ESA to consult with NMFS to ensure that any action 
they authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to destroy or 
adversely modify critical habitat in a way that appreciably diminishes 
the value of critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of the 
listed species. The designation of critical habitat will assist Federal 
agencies in evaluating how their actions on Federal or non-Federal 
lands may affect listed salmon and steelhead and determining when they 
should consult with NMFS on the impacts of their actions. When a 
private landowner requires a Federal permit that may result in the 
modification of salmonid habitat, Federal permitting agencies will be 
required to ensure that the permitted action, regardless of whether it 
occurs in the stream channel, adjacent riparian zone, upstream of an 
impassible dam, or upland areas, does not appreciably diminish the 
value of critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of the 
listed species or jeopardize the species' (i.e., ESUs) continued 
existence. For other actions, landowners and agencies should consider 
the needs of the listed fish and NMFS will assist them in assessing the 
impacts of actions.

Dams and Barriers

    Comment 7: Numerous commenters, including the Elwha Klallam Tribe 
requested that NMFS conduct a more detailed analysis of areas above 
existing dams before concluding that these areas do not constitute 
critical habitat. Of particular concern were two Elwha River dams in 
Washington and numerous dams in California's Central Valley and south 
coast. Many felt that designating areas above dams would assist in 
recovery planning and dam-relicensing negotiations. Others requested 
that NMFS identify additional dams as the upstream extent of accessible 
habitat for salmon and steelhead. Some commenters requested 
clarification about whether NMFS considers critical habitat above dams 
that currently have listed fish transported above them (i.e., via trap 
and haul programs). The Shoshone-Bannock Tribes requested that NMFS 
include areas above Napias Creek Falls in the designation for Snake 
River Basin steelhead.
    Response: NMFS' ESA implementing regulations specify that 
unoccupied areas are not to be included in critical habitat unless the 
present range would be inadequate to ensure the conservation of the 
species (50 CFR 424.12(e)). While the blocked areas are significant in 
certain ESUs or river basins (e.g., California's Central Valley and 
southern coast and in Washington's Elwha River Basin), NMFS has not 
conducted an assessment to determine if all or some of these blocked 
habitats are currently essential for the recovery of any ESU. In 
addition, the agency has not performed the requisite economic analyses 
needed to designate blocked areas (50 CFR 424.12(a)).
    The agency's intent in identifying specific dams in each ESU was to 
clarify the upstream extent of known occupied reaches and to contrast 
these barriers with smaller, ephemeral barriers (e.g., culverts, push-
up dams, etc.) that the agency does not view as impassable structures. 
NMFS does not intend to ``write off'' potential habitats above these 
dams, but instead will fully consider the role of these blocked 
habitats in the recovery planning process and in ESA habitat 
conservation plans and section 7 consultations. If future analyses 
reveal that these areas are essential for the species' conservation or 
could contribute to an expedited recovery of any listed ESU, NMFS will 
revise the critical habitat designation and make efforts to gain access 
to blocked habitats. NMFS will continue to encourage Federal, state and 
local agencies to consider the needs of listed salmon and steelhead 
even in areas currently unoccupied but potentially important for future 
population access, restoration, and recovery.
    NMFS has also reviewed information submitted by commenters 
requesting that a number of dams be added or removed from the list of 
dams/reservoirs representing the upstream extent of critical habitat 
(Tables 7-24). In doing so, the agency re-examined the hydrologic unit 
maps and found a number of errors that have been corrected in the 
tables. In many cases a particular dam was found to be misidentified, 
located in the wrong hydrologic unit, or upstream of an impassable 
barrier. Although several commenters believed that Black Butte Dam was 
misidentified in the proposed rule, NMFS has verified that this dam 
does in fact mark the upstream extent of Stony Creek in the Sacramento-
Lower Thomes hydrologic unit. In other cases, NMFS found additional 
dams that block salmon and steelhead passage and has identified them as 
the upstream extent of critical habitat in the appropriate tables.
    The agency also found several cases where dams identified as 
blockages in the original proposed designation were discovered to have 
``trap and haul'' programs that move listed salmon and steelhead above 
them. This has resulted in an increase in the occupied range of several 
listed ESUs, and NMFS has expanded critical habitat to include 
accessible reaches above such dams. These and other edits are 
summarized in the section Critical Habitat of Salmon and Steelhead; 
Changes to the Proposed Rules.
    In the case of Napias Creek Falls, NMFS noted in the proposed 
designation that steelhead do not presently occur in upper Napias Creek 
and that conclusions regarding the nature of this barrier are 
difficult. While NMFS believes it is likely steelhead could migrate 
above the falls at certain streamflows (NMFS, 1998), it is difficult to 
determine the frequency that steelhead would migrate above the falls or 
whether steelhead would recolonize habitat areas above the falls. The 
presence of relict indicator species above the falls (e.g., rainbow 
trout) tends to indicate steelhead may have occurred above the falls 
over evolutionary time periods; however, historical information 
indicates steelhead have not occurred in this area in recent times. The 
agency specifically requested comments regarding this and

[[Page 7771]]

other falls, but has not received information that would bear 
conclusively on this issue. Therefore, the agency will continue to 
consider the areas upstream of Napias Creek Falls as outside the range 
of critical habitat for listed Snake River Basin steelhead. If new 
information becomes available to indicate otherwise, the agency will 
make the appropriate modifications to this ESU's critical habitat 
designation.

Marine Habitats

    Comment 8: Numerous commenters questioned why NMFS had not 
designated critical habitat in marine areas. Some commenters provided 
data supporting the inclusion of estuarine/marine areas for the Hood 
Canal summer-run chum salmon ESU. Some recommended that NMFS revise its 
designation based on the recent EFH recommendations which include 
marine areas over portions of the continental shelf.
    Response: In the case of the Hood Canal summer-run chum salmon ESU, 
NMFS agrees that the evidence supports including marine/estuarine areas 
in the unique, fjord-like setting of Puget Sound (i.e., in a manner 
similar to the designation for the Puget Sound chinook salmon ESU). The 
agency is currently re-evaluating its previous determination to exclude 
ocean areas as critical habitat for listed salmon and steelhead ESUs, 
in particular the issue of whether marine areas require special 
management consideration or protection. NMFS agrees that the rationale 
supporting the current EFH designation for Pacific salmon should be a 
key part of this re-evaluation. Regardless of the specific areas 
designated, it is important to note that Federal agencies are required 
to ensure that their actions, regardless of whether they occur in 
freshwater, estuarine, or marine habitats, do not jeopardize the 
continued existence of a listed species.

Factors for the Species' Decline

    Comment 9: Many commenters challenged the merits of the original 
listings and felt that the true cause of salmon and steelhead declines 
lay in various spheres aside from freshwater habitat. Among the various 
causes cited were: tribal fishing, commercial fishing, sport fishing, 
foreign fishing, marine mammals, other protected predators, non-native 
species, birds, hatchery practices, dams, ocean conditions, and recent 
droughts and floods. Others provided evidence that mismanagement and 
pollution of freshwater habitats have been principal factors in the 
species' decline. Still others felt that extinction is a natural 
process and that little can (or should) be done about it.
    Response: NMFS believes that the threatened extinction of numerous 
salmon and steelhead populations is primarily the result of human, not 
natural, factors and will continue to encourage all efforts to protect 
and restore imperiled salmon and their habitat. The agency acknowledges 
that a multitude of factors have contributed to the decline of west 
coast salmon and steelhead and has described these factors in more 
detail in the proposed listing determinations (60 FR 38011, July 25, 
1995; 61 FR 41541, August 9, 1996; 63 FR 11482, March 9, 1998; 63 FR 
11750, March 10, 1998; 63 FR 11774, March 10, 1998; 63 FR11798, March 
10, 1998), in technical status reviews for the coho salmon (Weitkamp et 
al., 1995), steelhead (Busby et al., 1996), sockeye salmon (Gustafson 
et al., 1997), chum salmon (Johnson et al., 1997), and chinook salmon 
(Myers et al., 1998), and in documents detailing factors for decline 
for related species (NMFS 1996b and 1998). Many of the causes cited by 
commenters are human-controlled and NMFS believes that these can and 
must be addressed in the near term to improve the salmon's chances for 
surviving uncontrollable natural events such as droughts, floods, and 
poor ocean conditions.

ESA Definitions and Standards

    Comment 10: Some commenters requested that NMFS clarify the meaning 
of ``harm'' under the ESA.
    Response: NMFS interprets the term ``harm'' in the context of 
habitat destruction as an act that actually kills or injures fish or 
wildlife. Such an act may include significant habitat modification or 
degradation where it actually kills or injures fish or wildlife by 
significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including 
breeding, spawning, rearing, migrating, feeding, and sheltering (64 FR 
60727, November 8, 1999). The habitat modification or degradation 
contained in the definition of ``harm'' is limited to those actions 
that actually kill or injure listed fish or wildlife. NMFS believes 
that this definition is reasonable for the conservation of the habitats 
of listed species and moreover is in keeping with Congress' intent 
under the ESA.
    Section 9 of the ESA makes it illegal to take an endangered species 
of fish or wildlife. The definition of ``take'' is to ``harass, harm, 
pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to 
attempt to engage in any such conduct.'' (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)). On 
November 8, 1999, NMFS published a final rule defining the term 
``harm'' (64 FR 60727). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has also 
promulgated a regulation further defining the term ``harm'' to 
eliminate confusion concerning its meaning (50 CFR 17.3). The U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service's definition of ``harm'' with respect to habitat 
destruction has been upheld by the Supreme Court as a reasonable 
interpretation of the term and supported by the broad purpose of the 
ESA to conserve endangered and threatened species (See Babbitt v. Sweet 
Home Chapter of Communities for a Greater Oregon, 115 S. Ct. 2407, 2418 
(1995)). With the listings of salmon and steelhead, potentially 
affected parties questioned whether NMFS also interpreted harm to 
include habitat destruction. The November 8, 1999, final rule clarifies 
that NMFS' interpretation of harm is consistent with that of the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service.
    Comment 11: Several commenters took exception to NMFS' assertion 
that adverse modification of critical habitat is equivalent to 
jeopardizing the listed species.
    Response: NMFS disagrees that the terms ``adverse modification'' 
and ``jeopardy'' are necessarily different. Section 7 of the ESA 
requires that Federal agencies ensure that their actions are not likely 
to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat. This requirement is in addition to the prohibition against 
jeopardizing the continued existence of a listed species, and it is the 
only mandatory legal consequence of a critical habitat designation. An 
understanding of the interplay of the ``jeopardy'' and ``adverse 
modification'' standards is necessary to the proper evaluation of the 
prudence of designation as well as the conduct of consultation under 
section 7. Implementing regulations (50 CFR 402.02) define ``jeopardize 
the continued existence of'' and ``destruction or adverse modification 
of'' in virtually identical terms. ``Jeopardize the continued existence 
of'' means ``to engage in an action that reasonably would be 
expected...to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival 
and recovery of a listed species...'' ``Destruction or adverse 
modification'' means ``an alteration that appreciably diminishes the 
value of critical habitat for both the survival and recovery of a 
listed species.'' Common to both definitions is an appreciable 
detrimental effect on both survival and recovery of a listed species. 
Thus, actions satisfying the standard for adverse modification are 
nearly always found to also jeopardize the species

[[Page 7772]]

concerned, and the existence of a critical habitat designation does not 
materially affect the outcome of section 7 consultation. This is in 
contrast to the public perception that the adverse modification 
standard sets a lower threshold for violation of section 7 than that 
for jeopardy. In fact, biological opinions which conclude that a 
Federal agency action is likely to adversely modify critical habitat 
but not to jeopardize the species for which it is designated are very 
rare.

Adequacy of Existing Conservation Plans and Efforts

    Comment 12: Several commenters stated that existing management 
plans and conservation initiatives were sufficient to protect salmon 
and steelhead and their habitat, and, therefore, the proposed critical 
habitat designation is not warranted. Some commenters admonished NMFS 
to engage in local salmon conservation programs and warned that 
designating critical habitat could dampen these efforts.
    Response: The designation of critical habitat relies on evaluating 
which areas are occupied and essential for the species' conservation 
(see ``Definition of Critical Habitat''). However, NMFS did consider 
existing regulatory mechanisms and conservation plans applicable to 
salmon and steelhead and their habitats in the final listing 
determinations for each species (62 FR 43937, August 18, 1997; 63 FR 
13347, March 19, 1998; 63 FR 42587, August 10, 1998; 64 FR 14308, March 
24, 1999; 64 FR 14508, March 25, 1999; 64 FR 14517, March 25, 1999; 64 
FR 14528, March 25, 1999; 64 FR 50394, September 16, 1999). In those 
Federal Register documents, a variety of Federal and state laws and 
programs were found to have affected the abundance and survival of 
anadromous fish populations in all 19 ESUs. NMFS concluded that 
available regulatory mechanisms were inadequate and that regulated 
activities continued to represent a potential threat to the species' 
existence.
    NMFS agrees with commenters that state and local watershed efforts 
are key to the recovery and long-term survival of these 19 salmon and 
steelhead ESUs. Species listings and critical habitat designations 
under the ESA should in no way hamper efforts to help salmonids and 
other imperiled species in the Pacific Northwest and California. NMFS 
encourages such efforts, as evidenced by the agency's involvement with 
an array of programs in the Pacific Northwest and California, 
including: helping to fund watershed coordinators through the Oregon 
Governor's Watershed Enhancement Board and assisting with 
implementation of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds; working 
with numerous Resource Conservation Districts and watershed restoration 
efforts in the four states; providing technical support for a variety 
of recovery planning efforts in Puget Sound and the Columbia River 
Basin; participating in the development of California's recovery and 
strategic management plans for coastal salmonids and working with the 
California Governor's Biodiversity Councils; and working with tribal, 
state, and city/local jurisdictions to develop protective regulations 
for threatened salmonids. NMFS recognizes the significant benefits that 
will accrue to salmon and steelhead as a result of these efforts. In 
fact, NMFS has promulgated interim and proposed protection regulations 
(i.e., ESA 4(d) rules) that provide specific limits to the ESA take 
prohibitions for certain harvest, hatchery, habitat restoration, 
monitoring, and other state and tribal efforts currently underway in 
the range of these 19 salmon and steelhead ESUs (62 FR 38479, July 18, 
1997; 64 FR 73479, December 30, 1999; 65 FR 170, January 3, 2000). All 
parties interested in obtaining technical assistance in support of 
salmon and steelhead conservation (or other information related to 
NMFS' ESA activities) are encouraged to contact NMFS field office 
personnel in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and California (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

Indian Lands

    Comment 13: Beginning in 1998, NMFS received comments from various 
Northwest and California tribes requesting that the agency not 
designate critical habitat on Indian lands. Many of these tribes noted 
that this exclusion was warranted due to specific provisions contained 
in a June 1997 Secretarial Order entitled ``American Indian Tribal 
Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered 
Species Act'' (Secretarial Order). Many of these comments focused on 
the critical habitat proposals for chinook, chum and sockeye salmon (63 
FR 11482, March 9, 1998; 63 FR 11750, March 10, 1998; 63 FR 11774, 
March 10, 1998) which did not address Indian lands (i.e., proposed to 
designate Indian lands). However, other comments addressed specific 
language used to define the exclusion of Indian lands in proposals for 
steelhead (64 FR 5740, February 5, 1999) and Oregon Coast coho salmon 
(64 FR 24998, May 10, 1999).
    Response: The unique and distinctive relationship between the 
United States and Indian tribes is defined by treaties, statutes, 
executive orders, judicial decisions, and agreements, which 
differentiate tribes from the other entities that deal with, or are 
affected by, the Federal Government. This relationship has given rise 
to a special Federal trust responsibility involving the legal 
responsibilities and obligations of the United States toward Indian 
tribes and the application of fiduciary standards of due care with 
respect to Indian lands, tribal trust resources, and the exercise of 
tribal rights. Pursuant to the treaties, statutes, judicial decisions, 
executive orders and other agreements that define the relationship 
between the United States and tribes, lands have been retained by 
Indian tribes or have been set aside for tribal use. These lands are 
managed by Indian tribes in accordance with tribal goals and 
objectives, within the framework of applicable laws.
    As a means of recognizing the responsibilities and relationship 
between the United States and Indian tribes, the Secretaries of 
Commerce and Interior issued the June 5, 1997 Secretarial Order. The 
Secretarial Order clarifies the responsibilities of NMFS and the U.S. 
Fish and Wildlife Service when carrying out authorities under the ESA 
and requires that they consult with, and seek participation of, the 
affected Indian tribes to the maximum extent practicable. The 
Secretarial Order further provides that the Services...shall 
consult with the affected Indian tribe(s) when considering the 
designation of critical habitat in an area that may impact tribal trust 
resources, tribally owned fee lands, or the exercise of tribal rights. 
Critical habitat shall not be designated in such areas unless it is 
determined essential to conserve a listed species.''
    Pursuant to the Secretarial Order and in response to written and 
verbal comments provided by various tribes in Washington, Oregon, 
Idaho, and California, as well as the Northwest Indian Fisheries 
Commission, NMFS met and corresponded with many of the affected tribes 
concerning the inclusion of Indian lands in final critical habitat 
designations. These discussions resulted in significant clarifications 
regarding the tribes' general position to exclude their lands, as well 
as specific issues regarding NMFS' interpretation of Indian lands under 
the Secretarial Order.
    The Secretarial Order defines Indian lands as ``any lands title to 
which is either: (1) Held in trust by the United States for the benefit 
of any Indian tribe

[[Page 7773]]

or individual; or (2) held by any Indian tribe or individual subject to 
restrictions by the United States against alienation.'' In clarifying 
this definition with the tribes, NMFS has asserted that (1) fee lands 
within the reservation boundaries and owned by non-Indians, and (2) fee 
lands outside the reservation boundaries and owned by individual 
Indians, would be designated as critical habitat. The basis for this 
distinction regarding fee lands is that the tribal governments exercise 
management authority over fee lands they own (whether on or off the 
reservation) and over fee lands on the reservation owned by individual 
Indians. However, it is presently unclear to NMFS what management 
authority the tribal governments have over non-Indian-owned lands on 
the reservation or member-owned fee lands off the reservation. Such 
authority over land management is a crucial factor in the determination 
to designate them as critical habitat or not.
    Based on a consideration of the Federal Government's trust 
responsibilities to Indian tribes, particularly as addressed in the 
Secretarial Order (including NMFS' determination that designating such 
areas are not essential to the conservation of listed steelhead), and 
out of respect for tribal sovereignty over the management of Indian 
lands, NMFS has determined that Indian lands should be excluded from 
the final critical habitat designation for these 19 ESUs of salmon and 
steelhead. The Indian lands specifically excluded from critical habitat 
are those defined in the Secretarial Order, including: (1) Fee lands, 
either within or outside the reservation boundaries, owned by the 
tribal government; and (2) fee lands, within the reservation 
boundaries, owned by individual Indians.
    Although NMFS continues to believe that habitat on Indian lands 
which is currently accessible to listed salmon and steelhead is 
important for the long-term survival and recovery of these species, the 
agency believes that section 7 consultations through the Bureau of 
Indian Affairs and other Federal agencies in combination with the 
continued development and implementation of tribal resource management 
programs that support salmonid conservation represent an alternative to 
designating critical habitat that will result in a proportionate and 
essential contribution to salmon and steelhead conservation that is 
also consistent with the goals of the Secretarial Order. Also, all of 
these Tribal lands combined comprised only a minor portion (less than 
3%) of the total watershed area for these 19 ESUs. Therefore, NMFS has 
determined that the critical habitat that is designated in this final 
rule is sufficient to provide for the conservation of these 5 species.
    NMFS will continue to discuss this issue with interested tribes, in 
particular some tribes' concerns over the status of fee lands, and will 
modify critical habitat as needed in the future. Such modifications 
could include: (1) Recognizing that additional lands have been 
converted into trust status and are thereby excluded from critical 
habitat; or (2) designating Indian lands as critical habitat if the 
agency, in consultation with an affected tribe, determines that 
recovery cannot be achieved for an ESU unless the particular lands are 
designated.
    The original proposals for steelhead and Oregon Coast coho 
identified specific tribes that should be excluded from critical 
habitat designation. However, given the complete exclusion of all 
Indian lands within the range of these 19 salmon and steelhead ESUs, 
NMFS believes there is no longer a need to identify all affected 
tribes. If, in future rulemaking, NMFS proposes to designate Indian 
lands, then the agency would specifically identify the affected 
landholdings.

Critical Habitat of Salmon and Steelhead; Changes to the Proposed 
Rules

    As noted in the proposed rules for these 5 species of salmon and 
steelhead, critical habitat encompasses dozens of major river basins 
and an array of essential habitat features. Essential habitat types for 
these species can be generally described to include the following: (1) 
Juvenile rearing areas; (2) juvenile migration corridors; (3) areas for 
growth and development to adulthood; (4) adult migration corridors; and 
(5) spawning areas. Within these areas, essential features of critical 
habitat include adequate: (1) Substrate, (2) water quality, (3) water 
quantity, (4) water temperature, (5) water velocity, (6) cover/shelter, 
(7) food, (8) riparian vegetation, (9) space, and (10) safe passage 
conditions. Given the vast geographic range occupied by each of these 
salmon and steelhead ESUs and the diverse habitat types used by the 
various life stages, it is not practical to describe specific values or 
conditions for each of these essential habitat features. However, good 
summaries of these environmental parameters and freshwater factors that 
have contributed to the decline of salmon and steelhead can be found in 
reviews by CDFG, 1965; California Advisory Committee on Salmon and 
Steelhead Trout (CACSST), 1988; Brown and Moyle, 1991; Bjornn and 
Reiser, 1991; Nehlsen et al., 1991; Higgins et al., 1992; California 
State Lands Commission (CSLC), 1993; Botkin et al., 1995; NMFS, 1996b; 
and Spence et al., 1996.
    For reasons described earlier in this document, NMFS has revised 
its designation of freshwater and estuarine critical habitat for 
chinook, chum, and sockeye salmon to include riparian areas that 
provide the following functions: shade, sediment transport, nutrient or 
chemical regulation, streambank stability, and input of large woody 
debris or organic matter. Habitat quality in this range is 
intrinsically related to the quality of riparian and upland areas and 
of inaccessible headwater or intermittent streams which provide key 
habitat elements (e.g., large woody debris, gravel, water quality) 
crucial for salmon and steelhead in downstream reaches. Marine habitats 
(i.e., oceanic or nearshore areas seaward of the mouth of coastal 
rivers) are also vital to salmon and steelhead, and ocean conditions 
are believed to have a major influence on the species' survival. 
Although NMFS has not included the Pacific Ocean as critical habitat in 
these final rules, the agency will be re-evaluating this issue and may 
propose including specific marine zones for salmon and steelhead ESUs 
in a separate notice.
    NMFS is modifying the final critical habitat designations for these 
19 ESUs based on comments and new information received on the proposed 
rules. The following section gives a general description of each ESU's 
range, identifies some of the larger salmon and steelhead basins within 
each ESU, and summarizes the major changes to critical habitat 
designations. The river basins identified do not constitute a 
comprehensive inventory; many small or unidentified streams and 
tributaries in each ESU also provide essential spawning, rearing and 
estuarine habitat for salmon and steelhead. Instead, these summaries 
are meant to supplement the USGS hydrologic units listed in Tables 7-24 
with commonly-used river names within each ESU. The actual regulatory 
descriptions of critical habitat for each ESU can be found in the 
regulatory text at the end of this Federal Register document.

General Description of ESU Range and Major Changes from Proposed 
Critical Habitat Designations

Chinook Salmon

    (1) Puget Sound ESU - Major river basins known to support this ESU 
include the Nooksack, Skagit, Stillaguamish, Snohomish, Green/

[[Page 7774]]

Duwamish, Puyallup, Nisqually, Skokomish, Dungeness, Cedar, and Elwha 
Rivers. Major bays and estuarine/marine areas include the South Sound, 
Hood Canal, Elliott Bay, Possession Sound, Admiralty Inlet, Saratoga 
Passage, Rosario Strait, Strait of Georgia, Haro Strait, and the Strait 
of Juan De Fuca. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified the 
description of the adjacent riparian zone to be based on a functional 
(rather than quantitative) description; (2) excluded all Indian lands 
(as previously defined) from the designation; (3) removed the Fraser 
and Crescent-Hoko hydrologic units from Table 7 because they are 
outside the range of the ESU; (4) included areas above Howard Hanson 
Dam due to the fact that trap and haul operations move listed chinook 
salmon into habitats above this dam; (5) included areas above Cushman 
Dam due to the presence of listed chinook salmon above the dam; (6) 
removed Cedar Falls Dam (Masonary Dam) since it does not delimit the 
upstream extent of river reaches inhabited by this ESU; and (7) added 
Landsburg Diversion and Alder Dam to Table 7 because they currently 
block upstream passage.
    (2) Lower Columbia River ESU - Major river basins known to support 
this ESU include the Grays, Elochoman, Kalama, Lewis, Washougal, White 
Salmon, Cowlitz, Coweeman, Klaskanine, Clackamas, Sandy, and Hood 
Rivers, as well as Youngs Bay and the Columbia River and estuary. In 
this final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified the description of the adjacent 
riparian zone to be based on a functional (rather than quantitative) 
description; (2) excluded all Indian lands (as previously defined) from 
the designation; (3) added the Upper Cowlitz hydrologic unit to Table 8 
because it contains critical habitat for this ESU; (4) removed Cougar, 
Oak Grove, and Yale Dams from Table 8 since they do not delimit the 
upstream extent of river reaches inhabited by this ESU; (5) clarified 
that the dam in the Lower Columbia-Sandy hydrologic unit is ``Bull Run 
Dam 2'' and that The Dalles Dam is in the Middle Columbia-Hood 
hydrologic unit; and (6) included areas above Mayfield Dam due to the 
fact that trap and haul operations move listed chinook salmon into 
habitats above the dam.
    (3) Upper Willamette River ESU - Major river basins known to 
support this ESU include the Willamette, Molalla, North Santiam, and 
McKenzie Rivers, as well as the Columbia River and estuary. In this 
final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified the description of the adjacent 
riparian zone to be based on a functional (rather than quantitative) 
description; (2) excluded all Indian lands (as previously defined) from 
the designation; (3) corrected the range of the designation to include 
the Clackamas River Basin (which contains populations that are part of 
the ESU); (4) added Big Cliff, Blue River, Cottage Grove, Dorena, and 
Fern Ridge Dams to Table 9 because they currently block upstream 
passage; (5) included areas above Foster, Cougar, and Dexter Dams due 
to the fact that trap and haul operations move listed chinook salmon 
into habitats above these dams.
    (4) Upper Columbia River Spring-run ESU - Major river basins known 
to support this ESU include the Wenatchee, Entiat, and Methow Rivers, 
as well as the Columbia River and estuary. In this final rule, NMFS 
has: (1) Modified the description of the adjacent riparian zone to be 
based on a functional (rather than quantitative) description; (2) 
excluded all Indian lands (as previously defined) from the designation; 
(3) added the Lower Willamette hydrologic unit to Table 10 because it 
contains critical habitat for this ESU; (4) removed the Okanogan 
hydrologic unit from Table 10 since it does not contain river reaches 
inhabited by the ESU; and (5) removed Bull Run and Condit Dams from 
Table 10 since they do not delimit the upstream extent of river reaches 
inhabited by this ESU.
    (5) California Central Valley Spring-run ESU - Major river basins 
known to support this ESU include the Sacramento River, Feather River, 
Yuba River, and Big Chico, Beegum, Deer, Mill, Butte, Clear, Battle, 
and Antelope Creeks, as well as the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta and 
Honker, Grizzly, Suisun, and San Francisco Bays. In this final rule, 
NMFS has: (1) Modified the description of the adjacent riparian zone to 
be based on a functional (rather than quantitative) description; (2) 
excluded all Indian lands (as previously defined) from the designation; 
(3) removed the Lower American, Cottonwood Headwaters, Upper Coon-Upper 
Auburn and Coyote hydrologic units from Table 11 since they do not 
contain river reaches inhabited by the ESU; (4) removed Nimbus, San 
Pablo, Shasta, and Calaveras Dams from Table 11 since they do not 
delimit the upstream extent of river reaches inhabited by this ESU; (5) 
added Centerville Dam to Table 11 because it currently blocks upstream 
passage; and (6) corrected the location of Englebright Dam to be in the 
Upper Yuba hydrologic unit.
    (6) California Coastal ESU - Rivers, estuaries, and bays known to 
support this ESU include Humboldt Bay, Redwood Creek, and the Mad, Eel, 
Mattole, and Russian Rivers. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified 
the description of the adjacent riparian zone to be based on a 
functional (rather than quantitative) description; (2) excluded all 
Indian lands (as previously defined) from the designation; (3) removed 
several hydrologic units and dams/reservoirs that are no longer within 
the range of this re-configured ESU; (4) added Warm Springs Dam to 
Table 12 because it currently blocks upstream passage; and (5) 
specified the dams for two reservoirs - Scott Dam (Lake Pillsbury) and 
Coyote Dam (Lake Mendocino).

Chum Salmon

    (1) Hood Canal Summer-run ESU - Rivers, estuaries, and bays known 
to support this ESU include the Quilcene, Dosewallips, Duckabush, Hamma 
Hamma, Lilliwaup, Dewatto, Tahuya, and Union Rivers, Dungeness Bay/
River, and Snow and Salmon Creeks (Discovery Bay tributaries) and 
Jimmycomelately Creek in Sequim Bay. Some populations on the east side 
of Hood Canal (Big Beef Creek, Anderson Creek, and the Dewatto and 
Tahuya Rivers) are severely depressed and have recently had no 
returning adults. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified the 
description of the adjacent riparian zone to be based on a functional 
(rather than quantitative) description; (2) excluded all Indian lands 
(as previously defined) from the designation; (3) included estuarine/
marine areas adjacent to the basins within the range of the ESU as well 
as areas of Admiralty Inlet and the Straits of Juan De Fuca; (4) 
corrected the range of the designation to extend as far west as 
Dungeness Bay/Basin (which contains populations that are part of the 
ESU); and (5) excluded areas above Cushman Dam or above longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers.
    (2) Columbia River ESU - Besides the Columbia River and estuary, 
presently only a few Washington streams are recognized as containing 
chum salmon: Hamilton and Hardy Creeks (near Bonneville Dam), and the 
Cowlitz and Grays Rivers. Oregon currently recognizes 23 
``provisional'' populations in the Columbia River Basin, ranging from 
the Lewis and Clark River to Milton Creek near St. Helens, Oregon 
(Kostow, 1995). In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) Modified the 
description of the adjacent riparian zone to be based on a functional 
(rather than quantitative) description; (2) excluded all Indian lands 
(as previously defined) from the designation; and (3) excluded areas 
above specific dams (Bonneville and Merwin Dams) or above longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers.

[[Page 7775]]

Sockeye Salmon

    (1) Ozette Lake ESU - Sockeye salmon in this ESU inhabit Ozette 
Lake and the Ozette River and currently spawn primarily in lakeshore 
upwelling areas in Ozette Lake (particularly at Allen's Bay and Olsen's 
Beach). Additional spawning areas may include the Ozette River (below 
Ozette Lake) and Coal Creek, a tributary of the Ozette River. Sockeye 
salmon do not presently spawn in tributary streams to Ozette Lake 
(although they may have spawned there historically), but currently 
there are efforts to propagate the species in Umbrella Creek. In this 
final rule, NMFS has: (1) modified the description of the adjacent 
riparian zone to be based on a functional (rather than quantitative) 
description; (2) excluded all Indian lands (as previously defined) from 
the designation; and (3) clarified that areas above longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers are excluded.

Coho Salmon

    (1) Oregon Coast ESU - Major river basins known to support this ESU 
include the Necanicum, Nehalem, Nestucca, Salmon, Siletz, Yaquina, 
Alsea, Yachats, Siuslaw, Umpqua, Coos, Coquille Rivers, and Siltcoos, 
Tahkenitch, and Tenmile Lakes Basins. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) 
added Win Walker Reservoir to Table 15 because it currently blocks 
upstream passage; and (2) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded 
from the designation.

Steelhead

    (1) Southern California ESU - Major river basins known to support 
this ESU include Malibu Creek and the Santa Clara, Santa Ynez, and 
Ventura Rivers. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) removed Vern Freeman 
Dam (which was misidentified in the Ventura hydrologic unit) and 
Matilija Dam since they do not delimit the upstream extent of river 
reaches inhabited by this ESU; (2) corrected the location of Vaquero 
and Rindge Dams to be in the Santa Maria and Santa Monica Bay 
hydrologic units, respectively; (3) removed the Calluegas hydrologic 
unit from Table 16 since it does not contain river reaches inhabited by 
the ESU; and (4) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from the 
designation.
    (2) South-Central California Coast ESU - Major river basins known 
to support this ESU include the Big Sur, Carmel, Little Sur, Pajaro, 
and Salinas Rivers. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) removed Los 
Padres Dam since it does not delimit the upstream extent of river 
reaches inhabited by this ESU; (2) added Lopez Dam, and Whale Rock, 
North Fork Pacheco, Chesbro, Nacimiento, and San Antonio Reservoirs to 
Table 17 because they currently block upstream passage; and (3) 
clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from the designation.
    (3) Central California Coast ESU - Major river basins known to 
support this ESU include the Russian and San Lorenzo Rivers on the 
coast, and several other smaller tributaries within San Pablo and San 
Francisco Bays. In this final rule, NMFS has: (1) corrected the range 
of the designation to include Aptos Creek (which contains populations 
that are part of the ESU); (2) added Phoenix Dam, Almaden Reservoir, 
Anderson Reservoir, Calero Reservoir, Guadalupe Reservoir, Searsville 
Lake, Stevens Creek Reservoir, Vasona Reservoir, Chabot Dam, Crystal 
Springs Reservoir, Del Valle Reservoir, San Antonio Reservoir, 
Soulejule Dam, and Pilarcitos Dam to Table 18 because they currently 
block upstream passage; (3) corrected the location of Calaveras 
Reservoir to be in the San Francisco Bay hydrologic unit; (4) renamed 
Nicasio Dam to Peters Dam; (5) included the entire San Francisco Bay 
(west to the Golden Gate Bridge) as critical habitat; and (6) clarified 
that all Indian lands are excluded from the designation.
    (4) California Central Valley ESU - Major river basins known to 
support this ESU include the Sacramento, San Joaquin, Stanislaus, 
American, Feather, Merced, Mokelumne, Tuolumne, and Yuba Rivers, 
Battle, Butte, Big Chico, Beegum, Cache, Deer, Mill, Antelope, Putah, 
Stony, and Cottonwood Creeks, as well as the Sacramento-San Joaquin 
Delta and Honker, Grizzly, Suisun, and San Francisco Bays. In this 
final rule, NMFS has: (1) added Centerville and Monticello Dams to 
Table 19 because they currently block upstream passage; (2) corrected 
the location of Whiskeytown Dam to be in the Sacramento-Upper Clear 
hydrologic unit; (3) added the Lower Cache and San Francisco Bay 
hydrologic units to Table 19 because they contain critical habitat for 
this ESU; and (4) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from the 
designation.
    (5) Upper Columbia River ESU - Major Columbia River tributaries 
known to support this ESU include the Entiat, Methow, Okanogan, and 
Wenatchee Rivers, as well as the Columbia River and estuary. In this 
final rule, NMFS has clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from 
the designation.
    (6) Snake River Basin ESU - Major Snake River tributaries known to 
support this ESU include the Clearwater, Grande Ronde, Salmon, Selway, 
and Tucannon Rivers, as well as the Columbia River and estuary. In this 
final rule, NMFS has: (1) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded 
from the designation; and (2) clarified that areas upstream of Napias 
Creek Falls are excluded from the designation.
    (7) Lower Columbia River ESU - Major Columbia River tributaries 
known to support this ESU include the Clackamas, Cowlitz, Hood, Kalama, 
Lewis, Sandy, Washougal, and Wind Rivers. In this final rule, NMFS has: 
(1) included areas above Mayfield Dam due to the fact that trap and 
haul operations move listed steelhead into habitats above these dams; 
and (2) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from the 
designation.
    (8) Upper Willamette River ESU - Major river basins known to 
support this ESU include the Willamette, Mollala, and Santiam Rivers, 
as well as the Columbia River and estuary. In this final rule, NMFS 
has: (1) corrected the range of the designation to exclude areas 
upstream of the Calapooia River Basin; (2) removed Bull Run, Cougar, 
Dexter, and Dorena Dams from Table 23 since they do not delimit the 
upstream extent of river reaches inhabited by this ESU; (3) corrected 
the location of Big Cliff Dam to be in the North Santiam hydrologic 
unit; and (4) clarified that all Indian lands are excluded from the 
designation.
    (9) Middle Columbia River ESU - Major Columbia River tributaries 
known to support this ESU include the Deschutes, John Day, Klickitat, 
Umatilla, Walla Walla, and Yakima Rivers, as well as the Columbia River 
and estuary. In this final rule, NMFS has clarified that all Indian 
lands are excluded from the designation.
    As a result of recent listing determinations affecting the 
geographic boundaries and ESA listing status of several chinook salmon 
ESUs (64 FR 50394, September 16, 1999), NMFS is not promulgating a 
final critical habitat designation for the Central Valley fall- and 
late-fall run chinook salmon ESU. Also, NMFS is excluding from 
designation areas north of Redwood Creek and south of the Russian 
River, including San Francisco and San Pablo Bay tributaries, that were 
originally proposed as critical habitat for the former southern Oregon 
and California coastal chinook salmon ESU (63 FR 11482, March 9, 1998). 
Finally, critical habitat for the Snake River fall-run chinook salmon 
ESU will remain in the range of watersheds originally designated on 
December 28, 1993 (58 FR 68543).

[[Page 7776]]

Need for Special Management Considerations or Protection

    NMFS believes that special management considerations may be needed 
to ensure that essential habitats and features are maintained or 
restored. Activities that may require special management considerations 
for freshwater and estuarine life stages of listed salmon and steelhead 
include, but are not limited to: (1) land management; (2) timber 
harvest; (3) point and non-point water pollution; (4) livestock 
grazing; (5) habitat restoration; (6) beaver removal; (7) irrigation 
and domestic water withdrawals and returns; (8) mining; (9) road 
construction; (10) dam operation and maintenance; (11) diking and 
streambank stabilization; and (12) dredge and fill activities. Not all 
of these activities are necessarily of current concern within every 
watershed; however, they indicate the potential types of activities 
that will require consultation in the future. At this time, no special 
habitat management considerations have been identified for listed 
salmon and steelhead while they are residing in the ocean environment.

Activities that May Affect Critical Habitat

    A wide range of activities may affect the essential habitat 
requirements of listed salmon and steelhead in freshwater and estuarine 
habitats. More in-depth discussions are contained in the response to 
comments under Scope and Extent of Critical Habitat and in Federal 
Register documents announcing the proposed critical habitat for each 
ESU (63 FR 11482, March 9, 1998; 63 FR 11750, March 10, 1998; 63 FR 
11774, March 10, 1998; 64 FR 5740, February 5, 1999; 64 FR 24998, May 
10, 1999). These activities include water and land management actions 
of Federal agencies (e.g., U.S. Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land 
Management, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, 
the Federal Highway Administration, Natural Resource Conservation 
Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission) and related or similar actions of 
other federally regulated projects and lands, including livestock 
grazing allocations by the U.S. Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land 
Management; hydropower sites licensed by the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission; dams built or operated by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 
or U.S. Bureau of Reclamation; timber sales conducted by the U.S. 
Forest Service and U.S. Bureau of Land Management; road building 
activities authorized by the Federal Highway Administration, U.S. 
Forest Service, U.S. Bureau of Land Management, and National Park 
Service; and mining and road building activities authorized by the 
states of California and Oregon. Other actions of concern include 
dredge and fill, mining, diking, and bank stabilization activities 
authorized or conducted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, habitat 
modifications authorized by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, 
and approval of water quality standards and pesticide labeling and use 
restrictions administered by the Environmental Protection Agency.
    The Federal agencies that will most likely be affected by this 
critical habitat designation include the U.S. Forest Service, U.S. 
Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps 
of Engineers, Federal Highway Administration, Natural Resource 
Conservation Service, National Park Service, Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Environmental Protection Agency, 
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. This designation will 
provide these agencies, private entities, and the public with clear 
notification of critical habitat designated for listed salmonids and 
the boundaries of the habitat and protection provided for that habitat 
by the section 7 consultation process. This designation will also 
assist these agencies and others in evaluating the potential effects of 
their activities on listed salmon and steelhead and their critical 
habitat and in determining if consultation with NMFS is needed.
    NMFS anticipates that numerous private entities will be affected by 
the ESA listings and the resultant need to carry out conservation 
measures throughout the species' current range. As noted above, many of 
these effects result from direct and indirect linkages to an array of 
Federal actions, including Federal projects, permits, and funding. For 
example, the fishing industry (both the commercial and recreational 
sectors) is already hard hit by declining salmon runs and will continue 
to suffer until the species recover and provide sustainable fisheries. 
Agriculture and forestry sectors typically require Federal permits or 
authorizations to harvest timber, graze livestock, apply herbicides/
pesticides, irrigate crops, or build associated access roads in salmon 
watersheds. These permits will need to be modified so that they are 
adequately protective of salmon and their habitats. In some cases, such 
modifications could result in decreases in timber harvest, and 
livestock and crop production. The transportation and utilities sectors 
may need to modify the placement of culverts, bridges and utility 
conveyances (e.g., water, sewer and power lines) to avoid barriers to 
fish migration. Developments occurring in or near salmon streams (e.g., 
marinas, residential, or industrial facilities) may need to be altered 
or built in a manner that ensures that listed fish will not be harmed 
by the construction, or subsequent operation, of the facility. 
Recreational and commercial mining operations will need to ensure that 
their actions do not jeopardize listed species. Recreational and 
tourism industries may have ESA-related restrictions imposed so that 
activities such as fishing enterprises are conducted in a manner that 
safeguard spawning fish and their habitats.
    In addition, the widespread ESA listings underscore that both urban 
and rural communities could face significant changes in how they 
approach such diverse activities as: planning, zoning, and 
construction/development; erosion and sediment control; floodplain 
management; water withdrawals and supply reservoirs; and stormwater and 
wastewater discharges. These are just a few examples of potential 
impacts, but it is clear that the effects will encompass numerous 
sectors of private and public activities.

Expected Economic Impacts of Designating Critical Habitat

    The economic impacts to be considered in a critical habitat 
designation are the incremental effects of critical habitat designation 
above the economic impacts attributable to listing or attributable to 
authorities other than the ESA (see response to comments under Economic 
Considerations). 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 to the 
conservation of the species. For these 19 salmon and steelhead ESUs 
NMFS has determined that the present geographic extent of their 
freshwater and estuarine range is likely sufficient to provide for 
conservation of the species, although the quality of that habitat needs 
improvement on many fronts. Because NMFS is not designating any areas 
beyond the current range of these ESUs as critical habitat, the 
designation will result in few, if any, additional economic effects 
beyond those that may have been caused by listing and by other 
statutes.

[[Page 7777]]

Compliance With Existing Statutes

    NMFS has determined that Environmental Assessments and 
Environmental Impact Statements, as defined under the National 
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared for critical 
habitat designations made pursuant to the ESA. See Douglas County v. 
Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 698 
(1996).

References

    The complete citations for the references used in this document can 
be obtained by contacting Garth Griffin, NMFS (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT) or via the Internet (see ADDRESSES).

Classification

    This rule has been determined to be significant for purposes of 
Executive Order (E.O.) 12866.
    NMFS is designating only the current range of these salmon and 
steelhead ESUs as critical habitat. Given the affinity of these species 
to spawn in small watersheds, this current range encompasses a wide 
range of habitat, including lakes, small tributary reaches, as well as 
mainstem, off-channel and estuarine areas. Areas excluded from this 
designation include historically-occupied areas above impassable dams 
and headwater areas above impassable natural barriers (e.g., long-
standing, natural waterfalls). 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 result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of critical habitat (ESA Sec. 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 local businesses, organizations, and 
governments.
    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 this rule would not have a significant 
economic impact of a substantial number of small entities, as described 
in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Executive Order 13132 - Federalism

    In keeping with the intent of the Administration and Congress to 
provide continuing and meaningful dialogue on issues of mutual State 
and Federal interest, NMFS has conferred with appropriate State and 
local officials following its proposal to designate the critical 
habitat described in this final rule. While these officials, and other 
interested parties, expressed support for protection of the listed 
species, they also expressed support for activities that may be 
affected by the designation. The SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of 
this rule discusses these comments and NMFS' responses. Among other 
things, the responses address concerns regarding the scope and extent 
of critical habitat, and concerns regarding possible impacts of a 
critical habitat designation. The areas described in this final rule 
represent the current freshwater and estuarine range of the listed 
species. For all ESUs, critical habitat includes all waterways, 
substrate, and adjacent riparian zones below longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers. The economic (and other) impacts resulting from 
this critical habitat designation are expected to be minimal.
    This rule does not contain a collection-of-information requirement 
for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 226

    Endangered and threatened species, Incorporation by reference.

    Dated: February 7, 2000.
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 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. Section 226.212 is added to read as follows:


Sec. 226.212  Critical habitat designation for 19 evolutionary 
significant units of salmon and steelhead in Washington, Oregon, Idaho, 
and California.

    Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed salmon or steelhead within the range of the ESUs 
listed, except for reaches on Indian lands. Critical habitat consists 
of the water, substrate, and adjacent riparian zone of estuarine and 
riverine reaches in hydrologic units and counties identified in Tables 
7 through 24 to this part for all of the salmon and steelhead ESUs 
listed in this section. Accessible reaches are those within the 
historical range of the ESUs that can still be occupied by any life 
stage of salmon or steelhead. Inaccessible reaches are those above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years) and specific dams 
within the historical range of each ESU identified in Tables 7 through 
24 to this part. Hydrologic units are those defined by the Department 
of the Interior (DOI), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) publication, 
``Hydrologic Unit Maps,'' Water Supply Paper 2294, 1987, and the 
following DOI, USGS, 1:500,000 Scale Hydrologic Unit Maps: State of 
Oregon (1974), State of Washington (1974), State of California (1978), 
and State of Idaho (1981), which are incorporated by reference. This 
incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the Federal 
Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. Copies 
of the USGS publicaion and maps may be obtained from the USGS, Map 
Sales, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225. Copies may be inspected at NMFS, 
Protected Resources Division, 525 NE Oregon Street-Suite 500, Portland, 
OR 97232-2737, or NMFS, Office of Protected Resources, 1315 East-West 
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910, or at the Office of the Federal 
Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., Suite 700, Washington, DC.
    (a) Puget Sound Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
marine, estuarine and river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon 
in Puget Sound. Puget Sound marine areas include South Sound, Hood 
Canal, and North Sound to the international boundary at the outer 
extent of the Strait of Georgia, Haro Strait, and the Strait of Juan De 
Fuca to a straight line extending north from the west end of Freshwater 
Bay, inclusive. Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in 
Table 7 to this part or above longstanding, naturally impassable 
barriers (i.e.,

[[Page 7778]]

natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (b) Lower Columbia River Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon in Columbia River 
tributaries between the Grays and White Salmon Rivers in Washington and 
the Willamette and Hood Rivers in Oregon, inclusive. Also included are 
river reaches and estuarine areas in 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) upstream to the Dalles Dam. Excluded are areas above specific 
dams identified in Table 8 to this part or above longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence 
for at least several hundred years).
    (c) Upper Willamette River chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 
tshawytscha) geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to 
include all river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon in the 
Clackamas River and the Willamette River and its tributaries above 
Willamette Falls. Also included are river reaches and estuarine areas 
in 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) upstream to, and 
including, the Willamette River in Oregon. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 9 to this part or above longstanding, 
naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence 
for at least several hundred years).
    (d) Upper Columbia River Spring-run Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 
tshawytscha) geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to 
include all river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon in 
Columbia River tributaries upstream of the Rock Island Dam and 
downstream of Chief Joseph Dam in Washington, excluding the Okanogan 
River. Also included are river reaches and estuarine areas in 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) upstream to Chief Joseph 
Dam in Washington. Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in 
Table 10 to this part or above longstanding, naturally impassable 
barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least several 
hundred years).
    (e) Central Valley Spring-run chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus 
tshawytscha) geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to 
include all river reaches accessible to listed chinook salmon in the 
Sacramento River and its tributaries in California. Also included are 
river reaches and estuarine areas of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, 
all waters from Chipps Island westward to Carquinez Bridge, including 
Honker Bay, Grizzly Bay, Suisun Bay, and Carquinez Strait, all waters 
of San Pablo Bay westward of the Carquinez Bridge, and all waters of 
San Francisco Bay (north of the San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge) from 
San Pablo Bay to the Golden Gate Bridge. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 11 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (f) California Coastal Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches and estuarine areas accessible to listed chinook salmon 
from Redwood Creek (Humboldt County, California) to the Russian River 
(Sonoma County, California), inclusive. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 12 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (g) Hood Canal Summer-run Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches accessible to listed chum salmon (including estuarine 
areas and tributaries) draining into Hood Canal as well as Olympic 
Peninsula rivers between and including Hood Canal and Dungeness Bay, 
Washington. Also included are estuarine/marine areas of Hood Canal, 
Admiralty Inlet, and the Straits of Juan De Fuca to the international 
boundary and as far west as a straight line extending north from 
Dungeness Bay. Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in 
Table 13 to this part or above longstanding, naturally impassable 
barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least several 
hundred years).
    (h) Columbia River Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed chum salmon (including estuarine areas and 
tributaries) in the Columbia River downstream from Bonneville Dam, 
excluding Oregon tributaries upstream of Milton Creek at river km 144 
near the town of St. Helens. Excluded are areas above specific dams 
identified in Table 14 to this part or above longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least 
several hundred years).
    (i) Ozette Lake Sockeye Salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all lake areas 
and river reaches accessible to listed sockeye salmon in Ozette Lake, 
located in Clallam County, Washington. Excluded are areas above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (j) Oregon Coast coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
and estuarine areas accessible to listed coho salmon from coastal 
streams south of the Columbia River and north of Cape Blanco, Oregon. 
Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in Table 15 to this 
part or above longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., 
natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (k) Southern California steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
and estuarine areas accessible to listed steelhead in coastal river 
basins from the Santa Maria River to Malibu Creek, California 
(inclusive). Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in Table 
16 to this part or above longstanding, naturally impassable barriers 
(i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred 
years).
    (l) South-Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches and estuarine areas accessible to listed steelhead in 
coastal river basins from the Pajaro River (inclusive) to, but not 
including, the Santa Maria River, California. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 17 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (m) Central California Coast steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches and estuarine areas accessible to listed steelhead in 
coastal river basins from the Russian River to Aptos Creek, California 
(inclusive), and the drainages of San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. 
Also included are all waters of San Pablo Bay westward of the Carquinez

[[Page 7779]]

Bridge and all waters of San Francisco Bay from San Pablo Bay to the 
Golden Gate Bridge. Excluded is the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Basin 
of the California Central Valley as well as areas above specific dams 
identified in Table 18 to this part or above longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least 
several hundred years).
    (n) Central Valley steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed steelhead in the Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers 
and their tributaries in California. Also included are river reaches 
and estuarine areas of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, all waters 
from Chipps Island westward to Carquinez Bridge, including Honker Bay, 
Grizzly Bay, Suisun Bay, and Carquinez Strait, all waters of San Pablo 
Bay westward of the Carquinez Bridge, and all waters of San Francisco 
Bay (north of the San Francisco/Oakland Bay Bridge) from San Pablo Bay 
to the Golden Gate Bridge. Excluded are areas of the San Joaquin River 
upstream of the Merced River confluence and areas above specific dams 
identified in Table 19 to this part or above longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least 
several hundred years).
    (o) Upper Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed steelhead in Columbia River tributaries upstream 
of the Yakima River, Washington, and downstream of Chief Joseph Dam. 
Also included are river reaches and estuarine areas in 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) upstream to Chief Joseph Dam in Washington. 
Excluded are areas above specific dams identified in Table 20 to this 
part or above longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., 
natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (p) Snake River Basin steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed steelhead in the Snake River and its tributaries 
in Idaho, Oregon, and Washington. Also included are river reaches and 
estuarine areas in 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) upstream 
to the confluence with the Snake River. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 21 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., Napias Creek Falls 
and other natural waterfalls in existence for at least several hundred 
years).
    (q) Lower Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) geographic 
boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all river reaches 
accessible to listed steelhead in Columbia River tributaries between 
the Cowlitz and Wind Rivers in Washington and the Willamette and Hood 
Rivers in Oregon, inclusive. Also included are river reaches and 
estuarine areas in 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) upstream 
to the Hood River in Oregon. Excluded are areas above specific dams 
identified in Table 22 to this part or above longstanding, naturally 
impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls in existence for at least 
several hundred years).
    (r) Upper Willamette River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches accessible to listed steelhead in the Willamette River 
and its tributaries above Willamette Falls upstream to, and including, 
the Calapooia River. Also included are river reaches and estuarine 
areas in 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) upstream to, and 
including, the Willamette River in Oregon. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 23 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    (s) Middle Columbia River steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) 
geographic boundaries. Critical habitat is designated to include all 
river reaches accessible to listed steelhead in Columbia River 
tributaries (except the Snake River) between Mosier Creek in Oregon and 
the Yakima River in Washington (inclusive). Also included are river 
reaches and estuarine areas in 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) 
upstream to the Yakima River in Washington. Excluded are areas above 
specific dams identified in Table 24 to this part or above 
longstanding, naturally impassable barriers (i.e., natural waterfalls 
in existence for at least several hundred years).
    3. Tables 7 through 24 are added to part 226 to read as follows:

 Table 7 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Puget Sound Chinook Salmon,
                    and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strait of Georgia........................     17110002  Skagit (WA), Whatcom (WA)..
Sand Juan Islands........................     17110003  San Juan (WA)..............
Nooksack.................................     17110004  Skagit (WA), Whatcom (WA)..
Upper Skagit.............................     17110005  Skagit (WA), Whatcom (WA)..
Sauk.....................................     17110006  Snohomish (WA), Skagit (WA)
Lower Skagit.............................     17110007  Skagit (WA), Snohomish (WA)
Stillaguamish............................     17110008  Snohomish (WA), Skagit (WA)
Skykomish................................     17110009  King (WA), Snohomish (WA)..
Snoqualmie...............................     17110010  King (WA), Snohomish (WA)..  Tolt Dam
Snohomish................................     17110011  Snohomish (WA).............
Lake Washington..........................     17110012  King (WA), Snohomish (WA)..  Landsburg Diversion
Duwamish.................................     17110013  King (WA)..................
Puyallup.................................     17110014  King (WA), Pierce (WA).....
Nisqually................................     17110015  Pierce (WA), Thurston (WA).  Alder Dam

[[Page 7780]]

 
Deschutes................................     17110016  Lewis (WA), Thurston (WA)..
Skokomish................................     17110017  Grays Harbor (WA),
                                                         Jefferson (WA), Mason (WA).
Hood Canal...............................     17110018  Clallam (WA), Jefferson
                                                         (WA), Kitsap (WA), Mason
                                                         (WA).
Puget Sound..............................     17110019  Island (WA), Jefferson
                                                         (WA), King (WA), Kitsap
                                                         (WA), Mason (WA), Pierce
                                                         (WA), Skagit (WA),
                                                         Snohomish (WA), Thurston
                                                         (WA).
Dungeness-Elwha..........................     17110020  Clallam (WA), Jefferson      Elwha Dam
                                                         (WA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


Table 8 to Part 226 --Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River Chinook
                Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Klickitat   Condit Dam, The Dalles Dam
                                                         (WA), Skamania (WA), Wasco
                                                         (OR).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clackamas (OR), Clark (WA),  Bull Run Dam 2
                                                         Multnomah (OR), Skamania
                                                         (WA).
Lewis....................................     17080002  Clark (WA), Cowlitz (WA),    Merwin Dam
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Cowlitz (WA), Lewis
                                                         (WA), Skamania (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Upper Cowlitz............................     17080004  Lewis (WA), Pierce (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA), Yakima (WA).
Lower Cowlitz............................     17080005  Cowlitz (WA), Lewis (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Clackamas................................     17090011  Clackamas (OR), Marion (OR)
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Washington (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


   Table 9 to Part 226 --Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Upper Willamette River
            Chinook Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clark (WA).................
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Middle Fork Willamette...................     17090001  Douglas (OR), Lane (OR)....
Coast Fork Willamette....................     17090002  Douglas (OR), Lane (OR)....  Cottage Grove Dam, Dorena
                                                                                      Dam
Upper Willamette.........................     17090003  Benton (OR), Lane (OR),      Fern Ridge Dam
                                                         Lincoln (OR), Linn (OR),
                                                         Polk (OR).
McKenzie.................................     17090004  Lane (OR), Linn (OR).......  Blue River Dam
North Santiam............................     17090005  Clackamas (OR), Linn (OR)    Big Cliff Dam
                                                         Marion (OR).
South Santiam............................     17090006  Linn (OR)..................  Green Peter Dam
Middle Willamette........................     17090007  Clackamas (OR), Marion
                                                         (OR), Polk (OR),
                                                         Washington (OR), Yamhill
                                                         (OR).
Yamhill..................................     17090008  Lincoln (OR), Polk (OR),
                                                         Tillamook (OR), Yamhill
                                                         (OR).
Molalla-Pudding..........................     17090009  Clackamas (OR), Marion (OR)
Tualatin.................................     17090010  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Tillamook (OR), Washington
                                                         (OR), Yamhill (OR).
Clackamas................................     17090011  Clackamas (OR), Marion (OR)

[[Page 7781]]

 
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


Table 10 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Upper Columbia River Spring-
          run Chinook Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Joseph.............................     17020005  Chelan (WA), Douglas (WA),   Chief Joseph
                                                         Okanogan (WA).
Similkameen..............................     17020007  Okanogan (WA)..............
Methow...................................     17020008  Okanogan (WA)..............
Upper Columbia-Entiat....................     17020010  Chelan (WA), Douglas (WA),
                                                         Grant (WA), Kittitas (WA).
Wenatchee................................     17020011  Chelan (WA)................
Upper Columbia-Priest Rapids.............     17020016  Benton (WA), Grant (WA),
                                                         Franklin (WA), Kittitas
                                                         (WA), Yakima (WA).
Middle Columbia-Lake Wallula.............     17070101  Benton (WA), Gilliam (OR),
                                                         Klickitat (WA), Morrow
                                                         (OR), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Umatilla (OR), Walla Walla
                                                         (WA).
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Klickitat
                                                         (WA), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA), Wasco (OR).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clark (WA), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Columbia (OR), Multnomah
                                                         (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


  Table 11 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Central Valley California
      Spring-run Chinook Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento-Lower Cow-Lower Clear.........     18020101  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Lower Cottonwood.........................     18020102  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Sacramento-Lower Thomes..................     18020103  Butte (CA), Glenn (CA),      Black Butte Dam
                                                         Tehama (CA).
Sacramento-Stone Corral..................     18020104  Butte (CA), Colusa (CA),
                                                         Glenn (CA), Sutter (CA),
                                                         Yolo (CA).
Lower Butte..............................     18020105  Butte (CA), Colusa (CA),     Centerville Dam
                                                         Glenn (CA), Sutter (CA).
Lower Feather............................     18020106  Butte (CA), Sutter (CA),     Oroville Dam
                                                         Yuba (CA).
Lower Yuba...............................     18020107  Yuba (CA)..................
Lower Bear...............................     18020108  Placer (CA), Sutter (CA),    Camp Far West Dam
                                                         Yuba (CA).
Lower Sacramento.........................     18020109  Sacramento (CA), Solano
                                                         (CA), Sutter (CA), Placer
                                                         (CA), Yolo (CA).
Sacramento-Upper Clear...................     18020112  Shasta (CA)................  Keswick Dam, Whiskeytown
                                                                                      Dam
Upper Elder-Upper Thomes.................     18020114  Tehama (CA)................
Upper Cow-Battle.........................     18020118  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Mill-Big Chico...........................     18020119  Butte (CA), Shasta (CA),
                                                         Tehama (CA).
Upper Butte..............................     18020120  Butte (CA), Tehama (CA)....
Upper Yuba...............................     18020125  Nevada (CA), Yuba (CA).....  Englebright Dam
Suisun Bay...............................     18050001  Contra Costa (CA), Napa
                                                         (CA), Solano (CA).
San Pablo Bay............................     18050002  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa
                                                         (CA), Marin (CA), Napa
                                                         (CA), San Mateo (CA),
                                                         Solano (CA), Sonoma (CA).
San Francisco Bay........................     18050004  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa
                                                         (CA), Marin (CA), San
                                                         Francisco (CA), San Mateo
                                                         (CA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


[[Page 7782]]


 Table 12 to Part 226 --Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for California Coastal Chinook
                Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mad-Redwood..............................     18010102  Humboldt (CA), Trinity (CA)
Upper Eel................................     18010103  Glenn (CA), Lake (CA),       Scott Dam
                                                         Mendocino (CA), Trinity
                                                         (CA).
Middle Fork Eel..........................     18010104  Humboldt (CA), Mendocino
                                                         (CA), Trinity (CA).
Lower Eel................................     18010105  Humboldt (CA), Mendocino
                                                         (CA).
South Fork Eel...........................     18010106  Humboldt (CA), Mendocino
                                                         (CA).
Mattole..................................     18010107  Humboldt (CA), Mendocino
                                                         (CA).
Big-Navarro-Garcia.......................     18010108  Mendocino (CA).............
Gualala-Salmon...........................     18010109  Mendocino (CA), Sonoma (CA)
Russian..................................     18010110  Mendocino (CA), Sonoma (CA)  Coyote Dam, Warm Springs
                                                                                      Dam
Bodega Bay...............................     18010111  Marin (CA), Sonoma (CA)....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, and riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


 Table 13 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Hood Canal Summer-run Chum
                Salmon, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Skokomish................................     17110017  Mason (WA).................  Cushman Dam
Hood Canal...............................     17110018  Clallam (WA), Jefferson
                                                         (WA), Kitsap (WA), Mason
                                                         (WA).
Puget Sound..............................     17110019  Island (WA), Jefferson
                                                         (WA), Kitsap (WA).
Dungeness-Elwha..........................     17110020  Clallam (WA), Jefferson
                                                         (WA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


 Table 14 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Columbia River Chum Salmon,
                    and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower Columbia - Sandy...................     17080001  Clark (WA), Skamania (WA),   Bonneville Dam
                                                         Multnomah (OR).
Lewis....................................     17080002  Cowlitz (WA), Clark (WA),    Merwin Dam
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia - Clatskanie..............     17080003  Wahkiakum (WA), Lewis (WA),
                                                         Cowlitz (WA), Skamania
                                                         (WA), Clatsop (OR),
                                                         Columbia (OR).
Lower Cowlitz............................     17080005  Cowlitz (WA), Lewis (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Pacific (WA), Wahkiakum
                                                         (WA), Lewis (WA), Clatsop
                                                         (OR).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Columbia (OR), Multnomah
                                                         (OR), Washington (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


  Table 15 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Oregon Coast Coho Salmon,
                    and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic   Unit and within the range         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number            of ESUX
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Necanicum................................     17100201  Clatsop (OR), Tillamook
                                                         (OR).
Nehalem..................................     17100202  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Tillamook (OR),
                                                         Washington (OR).
Wilson-Trask-Nestucca....................     17100203  Lincoln (OR), Polk (OR),     McGuire Dam
                                                         Tillamook (OR), Washington
                                                         (OR), Yamhill (OR).
Siletz-Yaquina...........................     17100204  Benton (OR), Lincoln (OR),
                                                         Polk (OR), Tillamook (OR).
Alsea....................................     17100205  Benton (OR), Lane (OR),
                                                         Lincoln (OR).
Siuslaw..................................     17100206  Benton (OR), Douglas (OR),
                                                         Lane (OR).
Siltcoos.................................     17100207  Douglas (OR), Lane (OR)....

[[Page 7783]]

 
North Umpqua.............................     17100301  Douglas (OR), Lane (OR)....  Cooper Creek Dam, Soda
                                                                                      Springs Dam
South Umpqua.............................     17100302  Coos (OR), Douglas (OR),     Ben Irving Dam, Galesville
                                                         Josephine (OR).              Dam, Win Walker Reservoir
Umpqua...................................     17100303  Coos (OR), Douglas (OR),
                                                         Lane (OR).
Coos.....................................     17100304  Coos (OR), Douglas (OR)....  Lower Pony Creek Dam
Coquille.................................     17100305  Coos (OR), Curry (OR),
                                                         Douglas (OR).
Sixes....................................     17100306  Coos (OR), Curry (OR)......
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


     Table 16 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Southern California
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cuyama...................................     18060007  San Luis Obispo (CA), Santa
                                                         Barbara (CA).
Santa Maria..............................     18060008  San Luis Obispo (CA), Santa  Vaquero Dam
                                                         Barbara (CA).
San Antonio..............................     18060009  Santa Barbara (CA).........
Santa Ynez...............................     18060010  Santa Barbara (CA).........  Bradbury Dam
Santa Barbara Coastal....................     18060013  Santa Barbara (CA), Ventura
                                                         (CA).
Ventura..................................     18070101  Santa Barbara (CA), Ventura  Casitas Dam, Robles Dam
                                                         (CA).
Santa Clara..............................     18070102  Los Angeles (CA), Santa      Santa Felicia Dam
                                                         Barbara (CA), Ventura (CA).
Santa Monica Bay.........................     18070104  Los Angeles (CA), Ventura    Rindge Dam
                                                         (CA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


  Table 17 to Part 226.--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for South-Central California
           Coast Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pajaro...................................     18060002  Monterey (CA), San Benito    Chesbro Reservoir, North
                                                         (CA), Santa Clara (CA),      Fork Pacheco Reservoir
                                                         Santa Cruz (CA).
Estrella.................................     18060004  Monterey (CA), San Luis
                                                         Obispo (CA).
Salinas..................................     18060005  Monterey (CA), San Benito    Nacimiento Reservoir,
                                                         (CA), San Luis Obispo (CA).  Salinas Dam, San Antonio
                                                                                      Reservoir
Central Coastal..........................     18060006  Monterey (CA), San Luis      Lopez Dam, Whale Rock
                                                         Obispo (CA).                 Reservoir
Alisal-Elkhorn Sloughs...................     18060011  Monterey (CA), San Benito
                                                         (CA).
Carmel...................................     18060012  Monterey (CA)..............
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


  Table 18 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Central California Coast
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Russian..................................     18010110  Mendocino (CA), Sonoma (CA)  Coyote Dam, Warm Springs
                                                                                      Dam
Bodega Bay...............................     18010111  Marin (CA), Sonoma (CA)....
Suisun Bay...............................     18050001  Contra Costa (CA), Napa
                                                         (CA), Solano (CA).
San Pablo Bay............................     18050002  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa   Phoenix Dam, San Pablo Dam
                                                         (CA), Marin (CA), Napa
                                                         (CA), San Francisco (CA),
                                                         Solano (CA), Sonoma (CA).
Coyote...................................     18050003  Alameda (CA), San Mateo      Almaden Reservoir, Anderson
                                                         (CA), Santa Clara (CA).      Reservoir, Calero
                                                                                      Reservoir, Guadalupe
                                                                                      Reservoir, Searsville
                                                                                      Lake, Stevens Creek
                                                                                      Reservoir, Vasona
                                                                                      Reservoir
San Francisco Bay........................     18050004  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa   Calaveras Reservoir, Chabot
                                                         (CA), San Francisco (CA),    Dam, Crystal Springs
                                                         San Mateo (CA), Santa        Reservoir, Del Valle
                                                         Clara (CA).                  Reservoir, San Antonio
                                                                                      Reservoir

[[Page 7784]]

 
Tomales-Drake Bays.......................     18050005  Marin (CA), Sonoma (CA)....  Peters Dam, Seeger Dam,
                                                                                      Soulejule Dam
San Francisco Coastal South..............     18050006  San Mateo (CA).............  Pilarcitos Dam
San Lorenzo-Soquel.......................     18060001  San Mateo (CA), Santa Cruz   Newell Dam
                                                         (CA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


  Table 19 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Central Valley Steelhead,
                    and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sacramento-Lower Cow-Lower Clear.........     18020101  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Lower Cottonwood.........................     18020102  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Sacramento-Lower Thomes..................     18020103  Butte (CA), Glenn (CA),      Black Butte Dam
                                                         Tehama (CA).
Sacramento-Stone Corral..................     18020104  Butte (CA), Colusa (CA),
                                                         Glenn (CA), Sutter (CA),
                                                         Yolo (CA).
Lower Butte..............................     18020105  Butte (CA), Colusa (CA),     Centerville Dam
                                                         Glenn (CA), Sutter (CA).
Lower Feather............................     18020106  Butte (CA), Sutter (CA),     Oroville Dam
                                                         Yuba (CA).
Lower Yuba...............................     18020107  Yuba (CA)..................
Lower Bear...............................     18020108  Placer (CA), Sutter (CA),    Camp Far West Dam
                                                         Yuba (CA).
Lower Sacramento.........................     18020109  Placer (CA), Sacramento      Monticello Dam
                                                         (CA), Solano (CA), Sutter
                                                         (CA), Yolo (CA).
Lower Cache..............................     18020110  Yolo (CA)..................
Lower American...........................     18020111  Placer (CA), Sacramento      Nimbus Dam
                                                         (CA), Sutter (CA).
Sacramento-Upper Clear...................     18020112  Shasta (CA)................  Keswick Dam, Whiskeytown
                                                                                      Dam
Cottonwood Headwaters....................     18020113  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Upper Elder-Upper Thomes.................     18020114  Tehama (CA)................
Upper Cow-Battle.........................     18020118  Shasta (CA), Tehama (CA)...
Mill-Big Chico...........................     18020119  Butte (CA), Shasta (CA),
                                                         Tehama (CA).
Upper Butte..............................     18020120  Butte (CA), Tehama (CA)....
Honcut Headwaters........................     18020124  Butte (CA), Yuba (CA)......
Upper Yuba...............................     18020125  Yuba (CA), Nevada (CA).....  Englebright Dam
Upper Coon-Upper Auburn..................     18020127  Placer (CA)................
Middle San Joaquin-Lower Merced-Lower         18040002  Calaveras (CA), Merced       Crocker Diversion Dam, La
 Stanislaus.                                             (CA), San Joaquin (CA),      Grange Dam
                                                         Stanislaus (CA).
San Joaquin Delta........................     18040003  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa
                                                         (CA), Sacramento (CA), San
                                                         Joaquin (CA).
Lower Calaveras-Mormon Slough............     18040004  Calaveras (CA), San Joaquin
                                                         (CA), Stanislaus (CA).
Lower Consumnes-Lower Mokelumne..........     18040005  Amador (CA), Sacramento      Comanche Dam
                                                         (CA), San Joaquin (CA).
Upper Stanislaus.........................     18040010  Calaveras (CA), San Joaquin  Goodwin Dam
                                                         (CA), Tuolumne (CA).
Upper Calaveras..........................     18040011  Calaveras (CA).............  New Hogan Dam
Panoche-San Luis Reservoir...............     18040014  San Joaquin (CA),
                                                         Stanislaus (CA).
Suisun Bay...............................     18050001  Contra Costa (CA), Solano
                                                         (CA).
San Pablo Bay............................     18050002  Contra Costa (CA), Marin
                                                         (CA), San Francisco (CA),
                                                         Solano (CA), Sonoma (CA).
San Francisco Bay........................     18050004  Alameda (CA), Contra Costa
                                                         (CA), San Francisco (CA),
                                                         San Mateo (CA).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


    Table 20 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Upper Columbia River
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chief Joseph.............................     17020005  Chelan (WA), Douglas (WA),   Chief Joseph Dam
                                                         Okanogan (WA).
Okanogan.................................     17020006  Okanogan (WA)..............
Similkameen..............................     17020007  Okanogan (WA)..............
Methow...................................     17020008  Okanogan (WA)..............

[[Page 7785]]

 
Upper Columbia-Entiat....................     17020010  Chelan (WA), Douglas (WA),
                                                         Grant (WA), Kittitas (WA).
Wenatchee................................     17020011  Chelan (WA)................
Moses Coulee.............................     17020012  Douglas (WA), Grant (WA)...
Upper Columbia-Priest Rapids.............     17020016  Benton (WA), Franklin (WA),
                                                         Grant (WA), Kittitas (WA),
                                                         Yakima (WA).
Middle Columbia-Lake Wallula.............     17070101  Benton (WA), Gilliam (OR),
                                                         Klickitat (WA), Morrow
                                                         (OR), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Umatilla (OR), Walla Walla
                                                         (WA).
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Klickitat
                                                         (WA), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA), Wasco (OR).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clark (WA), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (WA), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Columbia (OR), Multnomah
                                                         (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


Table 21 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Snake River Basin Steelhead,
                    and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hells Canyon.............................     17060101  Adams (ID), Idaho (ID),      Hells Canyon Dam
                                                         Wallowa (OR).
Imnaha...................................     17060102  Baker (OR), Union (OR),
                                                         Wallowa (OR).
Lower Snake-Asotin.......................     17060103  Asotin (WA), Garfield (WA),
                                                         Nez Perce (ID), Wallowa
                                                         (OR).
Upper Grande Ronde.......................     17060104  Umatilla (OR), Union (OR),
                                                         Wallowa (OR).
Wallowa..................................     17060105  Union (OR), Wallowa (OR)...
Lower Grande Ronde.......................     17060106  Asotin (WA), Columbia (WA),
                                                         Garfield (WA), Union (OR),
                                                         Wallowa (OR).
Lower Snake-Tucannon.....................     17060107  Asotin (WA), Columbia (WA),
                                                         Garfield (WA), Whitman
                                                         (WA).
Palouse..................................     17060108  Franklin (WA), Whitman (WA)
Lower Snake..............................     17060110  Columbia (WA), Franklin
                                                         (WA), Walla Walla (WA).
Upper Salmon.............................     17060201  Blaine (ID), Custer (ID),
                                                         Lemhi (ID).
Pahsimeroi...............................     17060202  Custer (ID), Lemhi (ID)....
Middle Salmon-Panther....................     17060203  Custer (ID), Lemhi (ID)....
Lemhi....................................     17060204  Lemhi (ID).................
Upper Middle Fork Salmon.................     17060205  Boise (ID), Custer (ID),
                                                         Lemhi (ID), Valley (ID).
Lower Middle Fork Salmon.................     17060206  Idaho (ID), Lemhi (ID),
                                                         Valley (ID).
Middle Salmon-Chamberlain................     17060207  Idaho (ID), Lemhi (ID),
                                                         Valley (ID).
South Fork Salmon........................     17060208  Idaho (ID), Valley (ID)....
Lower Salmon.............................     17060209  Idaho (ID), Lewis (ID), Nez
                                                         Perce (ID).
Little Salmon............................     17060210  Adams (ID), Idaho (ID).....
Upper Selway.............................     17060301  Idaho (ID).................
Lower Selway.............................     17060302  Idaho (ID).................
Lochsa...................................     17060303  Clearwater (ID), Idaho (ID)
Middle Fork Clearwater...................     17060304  Idaho (ID).................
South Fork Clearwater....................     17060305  Idaho (ID).................
Clearwater...............................     17060306  Clearwater (ID), Idaho
                                                         (ID), Latah (ID), Lewis
                                                         (ID), Nez Perce (ID),
                                                         Whitman (WA).
Lower North Fork Clearwater..............     17060308  Clearwater (ID)............  Dworshak Dam
Middle Columbia-Lake Wallula.............     17070101  Benton (WA), Gilliam (OR),
                                                         Klickitat (WA), Morrow
                                                         (OR), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Umatilla (OR), Walla Walla
                                                         (WA).
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Klickitat
                                                         (WA), Sherman (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA), Wasco (OR).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clark (WA), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Skamania (WA).

[[Page 7786]]

 
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (WA), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Columbia (OR), Multnomah
                                                         (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


    Table 22 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Lower Columbia River
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Skamania
                                                         (WA).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clackamas (OR), Clark (WA),  Bull Run Dam 2
                                                         Multnomah (OR), Skamania
                                                         (WA).
Lewis....................................     17080002  Clark (WA), Cowlitz (WA),    Merwin Dam
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA), Wahkiakum
                                                         (WA).
Lower Cowlitz............................     17080005  Cowlitz (WA), Lewis (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Clackamas................................     17090011  Clackamas (OR), Marion (OR)
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Washington (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


   Table 23 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Upper Willamette River
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Clark (WA).................
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (WA), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Upper Willamette.........................     17090003  Benton (OR), Linn (OR),
                                                         Polk (OR).
North Santiam............................     17090005  Clackamas (OR), Linn (OR),   Big Cliff Dam
                                                         Marion (OR).
South Santiam............................     17090006  Linn (OR)..................  Green Peter Dam
Middle Willamette........................     17090007  Clackamas (OR), Marion
                                                         (OR), Polk (OR),
                                                         Washington (OR), Yamhill
                                                         (OR).
Yamhill..................................     17090008  Lincoln (OR), Polk (OR),
                                                         Tillamook (OR), Yamhill
                                                         (OR).
Molalla-Pudding..........................     17090009  Clackamas (OR), Marion (OR)
Tualatin.................................     17090010  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR),
                                                         Tillamook (OR), Washington
                                                         (OR), Yamhill (OR).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Clackamas (OR), Columbia
                                                         (OR), Multnomah (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.


    Table 24 to Part 226--Hydrologic Units and Counties Containing Critical Habitat for Middle Columbia River
              Steelhead, and Dams/Reservoirs Representing the Upstream Extent of Critical Habitat.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        Counties1 within Hydrologic
           Hydrologic Unit name             Hydrologic    Unit and within range of         Dams/Reservoirs
                                           Unit number              ESU
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Upper Columbia-Priest Rapids.............     17020016  Benton (WA), Franklin (WA).
Upper Yakima.............................     17030001  Kittitas (WA), Yakima (WA).

[[Page 7787]]

 
Naches...................................     17030002  Kittitas (WA), Yakima (WA).
Lower Yakima.............................     17030003  Benton (WA), Klickitat
                                                         (WA), Yakima (WA).
Middle Columbia-Lake Wallula.............     17070101  Gilliam (OR), Morrow (OR),
                                                         Umatilla (OR), Benton
                                                         (WA), Klickitat (WA),
                                                         Sherman (OR), Walla Walla
                                                         (WA), Yakima (WA).
Walla Walla..............................     17070102  Umatilla (OR), Wallowa
                                                         (OR), Columbia (WA), Walla
                                                         Walla (WA).
Umatilla.................................     17070103  Morrow (OR), Umatilla (OR),
                                                         Union (OR).
Willow...................................     17070104  Morrow (OR), Gilliam (OR)..
Middle Columbia-Hood.....................     17070105  Hood River (OR), Sherman     Condit Dam
                                                         (OR), Wasco (OR),
                                                         Klickitat (WA), Skamania
                                                         (WA).
Klickitat................................     17070106  Klickitat (WA), Yakima (WA)
Upper John Day...........................     17070201  Crook (OR), Grant (OR),
                                                         Harney (OR), Wheeler (OR),.
North Fork John Day......................     17070202  Grant (OR), Morrow (OR),
                                                         Umatilla (OR), Union (OR),
                                                         Wheeler (OR).
Middle Fork John Day.....................     17070203  Grant (OR).................
Lower John Day...........................     17070204  Crook (OR), Gilliam (OR),
                                                         Grant (OR), Jefferson
                                                         (OR), Morrow (OR), Sherman
                                                         (OR), Wasco (OR), Wheeler
                                                         (OR).
Lower Deschutes..........................     17070306  Hood River (OR), Jefferson   Pelton Dam
                                                         (OR), Sherman (OR), Wasco
                                                         (OR).
Trout....................................     17070307  Crook (OR), Jefferson (OR),
                                                         Wasco (OR).
Lower Columbia-Sandy.....................     17080001  Multnomah (OR), Clark (WA),
                                                         Skamania (WA).
Lower Columbia-Clatskanie................     17080003  Clatsop (OR), Columbia
                                                         (WA), Cowlitz (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Columbia...........................     17080006  Clatsop (OR), Pacific (WA),
                                                         Wahkiakum (WA).
Lower Willamette.........................     17090012  Columbia (OR), Multnomah
                                                         (OR).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Some counties have very limited overlap with estuarine, riverine, or riparian habitats identified as
  critical habitat for this ESU. Consult USGS hydrologic unit maps (available from USGS) to determine specific
  county and basin boundaries.

[FR Doc. 00-3553 Filed 2-15-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F