[Federal Register Volume 67, Number 137 (Wednesday, July 17, 2002)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47154-47210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 02-17716]



[[Page 47153]]

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

Part III





Department of the Interior





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



Fish and Wildlife Service



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



50 CFR Part 17



Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of Critical 
Habitat for the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius 
preblei); Proposed Rule

  Federal Register / Vol. 67, No. 137 / Wednesday, July 17, 2002 / 
Proposed Rules  

[[Page 47154]]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

50 CFR Part 17

RIN 1018-AI46


Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Designation of 
Critical Habitat for the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius 
preblei)

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose to 
designate critical habitat for the Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Zapus 
hudsonius preblei) pursuant to the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act). The proposed designation includes 19 habitat units 
totaling approximately 23,248 hectares (ha) (57,446 acres (ac)) found 
along 1,058.1 kilometers (km) (657.5 miles (mi)) of rivers and streams 
in the States of Colorado and Wyoming.
    Critical habitat identifies specific areas, both occupied and 
unoccupied, that are essential to the conservation of a listed species 
and that may require special management considerations or protection. 
If this proposed rule is made final, section 7 of the Act will prohibit 
destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat by any activity 
funded, authorized, or carried out by any Federal agency; and Federal 
agencies proposing actions affecting areas designated as critical 
habitat must consult with us on the effects of their proposed actions, 
pursuant to section 7(a)(2) of the Act.
    Section 4 of the Act requires that we consider economic and other 
relevant impacts prior to making a final decision on what areas to 
designate as critical habitat. We solicit data and comments from the 
public on all aspects of this proposal, including data on the economic 
and other impacts of the designation. We may revise this proposal to 
incorporate or address new information received during the comment 
period.

DATES: We will consider all comments on the proposed rule received from 
interested parties by September 16, 2002. Public hearing requests must 
be received by September 3, 2002.

ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments and information to Preble's 
Mouse Comments, Colorado Ecological Services Field Office, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, 755 Parfet Street, Suite 361, Lakewood, CO 80215 
or by facsimile to 303-275-2371. You may hand-deliver written comments 
to our Colorado Ecological Services Field Office at the address given 
above. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) to <[email protected]. See the ``Public Comments Solicited'' section 
below for file format and other information on electronic filing. You 
may view comments and materials received, as well as supporting 
documentation used in the preparation of this proposed rule, by 
appointment, during normal business hours, at the Colorado Ecological 
Services Field Office.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: LeRoy Carlson, Field Supervisor, 
Colorado Ecological Services Field Office, (see ADDRESSES section), 
(telephone 303-275-2370; facsimile 303-275-2371).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    Much of what is now known about the Preble's meadow jumping mouse 
(Preble's) is a result of information gained from the early 1990s to 
the present. Following the Preble's listing as a threatened species in 
1998, knowledge about its distribution, habitat requirements, 
abundance, and population dynamics has grown substantially. However, 
much of the biology and ecology of the Preble's is still not well 
understood. Where gaps in knowledge exist, scientists have relied on 
information from closely related subspecies of the meadow jumping mouse 
(Zapus hudsonius), whose biology and ecology appear similar to the 
Preble's. Information presented below that is specific to the Preble's 
is described as being relevant to this subspecies, the Preble's, but 
when information pertains to what is known about other subspecies of 
meadow jumping mouse, it will be described as relevant to the species, 
the meadow jumping mouse. Portions of the following have been adapted 
from the general biology section of the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse 
Recovery Team's February 27, 2002, Draft Discussion Document on a 
recovery plan for the Preble's.

Taxonomy and Description

    The Preble's is a member of the family Dipodidae (jumping mice) 
with four living genera, two of which, Zapus and Napaeozapus, are found 
in North America (Hall 1981). The three living species within the genus 
Zapus are Z. hudsonius (the meadow jumping mouse), Z. princeps (the 
western jumping mouse), and Z. trinotatus (the Pacific jumping mouse).
    Edward A. Preble (1899) first documented the meadow jumping mouse 
from Colorado. Krutzch (1954) described the Preble's as a separate 
subspecies of meadow jumping mouse limited to Colorado and Wyoming. The 
Preble's is now recognized as 1 of 12 subspecies of meadow jumping 
mouse (Hafner et al. 1981).
    The Preble's is a small rodent with an extremely long tail, large 
hind feet, and long hind legs. The tail is bicolored, lightly-furred, 
and typically twice as long as the body. The large hind feet can be 
one-third again as large as those of other mice of similar size. The 
Preble's has a distinct, dark, broad stripe on its back that runs from 
head to tail and is bordered on either side by gray to orange-brown 
fur. The hair on the back of all jumping mice appears coarse compared 
to other mice. The underside hair is white and much finer in texture. 
Total length of adult Preble's mice is approximately 180 to 250 
millimeters (mm) (7 to 10 inches (in)), and tail length is 108 to 155 
mm (4 to 6 in) (Krutzsch 1954, Fitzgerald et al. 1994).
    The average weight of 120 adult Preble's mice captured early in 
their active season (prior to June 18) was 18 grams (g) (0.6 ounce 
(oz)); included were10 pregnant females weighing more than 22 g (0.8 
oz) (Meaney et al., in prep.). Upon emergence from hibernation, adult 
Preble's mice can weigh as little as 14 g (0.5 oz). Through late August 
and into mid-September, Preble's adults ready for hibernation weighed 
25 to 34 g (0.9 to 1.2 oz) (Meaney et al., in prep.), comparable to 
pre-hibernation weights for the meadow jumping mouse cited by 
Muchlinski (1988).
    While the western jumping mouse is a distinctly separate species 
from the Preble's, it is similar in appearance and can easily be 
confused with Preble's. The range of the western jumping mouse in 
Wyoming and Colorado is generally west of, and at higher elevations 
than, the range of the Preble's. However, they appear to coexist over 
portions of their range in southeastern Wyoming and Colorado (Long 
1965, Clark and Stromberg 1987, Schorr 1999, Meaney et al. 2001). 
Compared to the western jumping mouse, the Preble's is generally 
smaller, has a more distinctly bicolored tail, and a less obvious 
dorsal (back) stripe. Krutzsch (1954) described skull characteristics 
useful for differentiating the two species. Previously, studies found 
that the meadow jumping mouse could be distinguished from the western 
jumping mouse by a fold in the first

[[Page 47155]]

lower molar (Klingener 1963, Hafner 1993). However, this molar 
characteristic is not always reliable due to tooth wear as animals age; 
specimens showing the tooth fold are presumed to be Preble's, while 
specimens lacking the fold may be either species (Klingener 1963; 
Conner and Shenk, in prep.). A recent reevaluation of Preble's and 
western jumping mouse morphology showed that, by using a combination of 
six skull measurements and this molar characteristic, the Preble's 
could be distinguished from the western jumping mouse (Conner and 
Shenk, in prep.).
    A genetic study that analyzed tissue samples of meadow jumping mice 
and western jumping mice from throughout North America concluded that 
the Preble's is distinct from other subspecies of the meadow jumping 
mouse and from the western jumping mouse (Riggs et al. 1997, Hafner 
1997). While results from the genetic study supported the taxonomic 
status of Preble's, analysis of samples from jumping mice in a few 
Wyoming and Colorado locations produced unexpected results. In these 
cases, samples of assumed Preble's mice at lower elevations were later 
determined to be the western jumping mouse and samples of assumed 
western jumping mice at higher elevations were later determined to be 
the Preble's. Hafner (1997) suggested that limited hybridization could 
have affected the results of the study and Beauvais (2001) stated that 
zones of co-occurrence of the Preble's and the western jumping mouse in 
Wyoming provide the opportunity for hybridization. However, Krutzsch 
(1954) cited significant range overlap between the meadow jumping mouse 
and the western jumping mouse in North America and indicated that there 
was no evidence of interbreeding. While the question of possible 
hybridization between the Preble's and the western jumping mouse has 
yet to be fully explored, information currently available suggests that 
any hybridization between the two species is limited in scope.

Geographic Range

    The Preble's is found along the foothills in southeastern Wyoming, 
southward along the eastern edge of the Front Range of Colorado to 
Colorado Springs, El Paso County (Hall 1981, Clark and Stromberg 1987, 
Fitzgerald et al. 1994). Knowledge about the current distribution of 
the Preble's comes from collected specimens, and live-trapping 
locations from both range-wide survey efforts and numerous site-
specific survey efforts conducted in Wyoming and Colorado since the 
mid-1990s. Recently collected specimens are housed at the Denver Museum 
of Nature and Science and survey reports are filed with the Service's 
Field Offices in Colorado and Wyoming.
    In Wyoming, capture locations of mice confirmed as the Preble's, 
and locations of mice identified in the field as Preble's and released, 
extend in a band from the town of Douglas southward along the Laramie 
Range to the Colorado border, with captures east to eastern Platte 
County and Cheyenne, Laramie County. In Colorado, the distribution of 
the Preble's forms a band along the Front Range from Wyoming southward 
to Colorado Springs, El Paso County, with eastern marginal captures in 
western Weld County, western Elbert County, and north-central El Paso 
County.
    The Preble's is likely an Ice Age relict (Hafner et al. 1981, 
Fitzgerald et al. 1994). Once the glaciers receded from the Front Range 
of Colorado and the foothills of Wyoming and the climate became drier, 
the Preble's was confined to the riparian (river) systems where 
moisture was more plentiful. The semi-arid climate in southeastern 
Wyoming and eastern Colorado limits the extent of riparian corridors 
and restricts the range of the Preble's in this region. The Preble's 
has not been found east of Cheyenne in Wyoming or on the extreme 
eastern plains in Colorado. The eastern boundary for the subspecies is 
likely defined by the dry shortgrass prairie, which may present a 
barrier to eastward expansion (Beauvais 2001).
    The western boundary of Preble's range in both States appears 
related to elevation along the Laramie Range and Front Range. The 
Service has used 2,300 meters (m) (7,600 feet (ft)) in elevation as the 
general upward limit of Preble's habitat in Colorado (Service 1998). 
Recent morphological examination of specimens has confirmed the 
Preble's to an elevation of approximately 2,300 m (7,600 ft) in 
Colorado (Meaney et al. 2001) and to 2,360 m (7,750 ft) in southeastern 
Wyoming (Cheri Jones, Denver Museum of Natural Science, in litt., 
2001). In a modeling study of habitat associations in Wyoming, Keinath 
(2001) found suitable habitat predicted in the Laramie Basin and Snowy 
Range Mountains (west of known Preble's occurrence) but very little 
suitable habitat predicted on the plains of Goshen, Niobrara, and 
eastern Laramie Counties (east of known Preble's occurrence).
    Although there is little information on past distribution or 
abundance of the Preble's, surveys have identified various locations 
where the subspecies was historically present but is now absent (Ryon 
1996). Since at least 1991, the Preble's has not been found in Denver, 
Adams, or Arapahoe Counties in Colorado. Its absence in these counties 
is likely due to urban development, which has altered, reduced, or 
eliminated riparian habitat (Compton and Hugie 1993, Ryon 1996).

Ecology and Life History

    Typical habitat for the Preble's comprises well-developed plains 
riparian vegetation with adjacent, undisturbed grassland communities 
and a nearby water source. Well-developed plains riparian vegetation 
typically includes a dense combination of grasses, forbs, and shrubs; a 
taller shrub and tree canopy may be present (Bakeman 1997). When 
present, the shrub canopy is often Salix spp. (willow), although shrub 
species including Symphoricarpus spp. (snowberry), Prunus virginiana 
(chokecherry), Crataegus spp. (hawthorn), Quercus gambelli (Gambel's 
oak), Alnus incana (alder), Betula fontinalis (river birch), Rhus 
trilobata (skunkbrush), Prunus americana (wild plum), Amorpha fruticosa 
(lead plant), Cornus sericea (dogwood), and others also may occur 
(Bakeman 1997, Shenk and Eussen 1998).
    Preble's have rarely been trapped in uplands adjacent to riparian 
areas (Dharman 2001). However, in detailed studies of Preble's movement 
patterns using radio telemetry, Preble's has been found feeding and 
resting in adjacent uplands (Shenk and Sivert 1999b, Ryon 1999, Schorr 
2001). These studies reveal that the Preble's regularly uses uplands at 
least as far out as 100 m (330 ft) beyond the 100-year floodplain (Ryon 
1999; Tanya Shenk, Colorado Division of Wildlife, in litt., 2002). 
Preble's also can move considerable distances along streams, as far as 
1.6 km (1.0 mi) in one evening (Ryon 1999, Shenk and Sivert 1999a).
    In a study comparing habitats at Preble's capture locations on the 
Department of Energy's Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site (Rocky 
Flats), Jefferson County, CO, and the U.S. Air Force Academy (Academy), 
El Paso County, CO, the Academy sites had lower plant species richness 
at capture locations but considerably greater numbers of the Preble's 
(Schorr 2001). However, the Academy sites had higher densities of both 
grasses and shrubs. It is likely that Preble's abundance is not driven 
by the diversity of plant species, but by the density of riparian 
vegetation.
    The tolerance of the Preble's for exotic plant species is not well 
understood. Whether or not exotic plant species reduce Preble's 
persistence at a site may be due in large part to whether plants

[[Page 47156]]

create a monoculture and replace native species. There is particular 
concern about nonnative species such as Euphorbia esula (leafy spurge) 
that may form a monoculture, displacing native vegetation and thus 
reducing available habitat.
    Fifteen apparent Preble's hibernacula (hibernation nests) have been 
located through radio telemetry, all within 78 m (260 ft) of a 
perennial stream bed or intermittent tributary (Bakeman and Deans 1997, 
Shenk and Sivert 1999a, Schorr 2001). Of these, one was confirmed 
through excavation (Bakeman and Deans 1997); others were left intact to 
prevent harm to the mice. Hibernacula have been located under willow, 
chokecherry, snowberry, skunkbrush, Rhus spp. (sumac), Clematis spp. 
(clematis), Populus spp. (cottonwoods), Gambel's oak, Cirsium spp. 
(thistle), and Alyssum spp. (alyssum) (Shenk and Sivert 1999a). At the 
Academy, four of six hibernacula found by radio-telemetry were located 
in close proximity to coyote willow (Salix exigua) (Schorr 2001). The 
one excavated hibernaculum, at Rocky Flats, was found 9 m (30 ft) above 
the stream bed, in a dense patch of chokecherry and snowberry (Bakeman 
and Deans 1997). The nest was constructed of leaf litter 30 centimeters 
(cm) (12 in) below the surface in coarse textured soil.
    The Preble's constructs day nests composed of grasses, forbs, 
sedges, rushes, and other available plant material. They may be 
globular in shape or simply raised mats of litter, and are most 
commonly above ground but also can be below ground. They are typically 
found under debris at the base of shrubs and trees, or in open 
grasslands (Ryon 2001). An individual mouse can have multiple day nests 
in both riparian and grassland communities (Shenk and Sivert 1999a), 
and may abandon a nest after approximately a week of use (Ryon 2001).
    Hydrologic regimes that support Preble's habitat range from large 
perennial rivers such as the South Platte River to small temporary 
drainages only 1 to 3 m (3 to 10 ft) in width, as at Rocky Flats and in 
montane habitats. Flooding is a common and natural event in the 
riparian systems along the Front Range of Colorado. This periodic 
flooding helps create a dense vegetative community by stimulating 
resprouting from willow shrubs and allows herbs and grasses to take 
advantage of newly-deposited soil.
    Fire is also a natural component of the Colorado Front Range and 
Wyoming foothills, and Preble's habitat naturally waxes and wanes with 
fire events. Within shrubland and forest, intensive fire may result in 
adverse impacts to Preble's populations. However, in a review of the 
effects of grassland fires on small mammals, Kaufman et al. (1990) 
found a positive effect of fire on the meadow jumping mouse in one 
study and no effect of fire on the species in another study.
    Meadow jumping mice usually have two litters per year, but there 
are records of three litters per year. An average of five young are 
born per litter, but the size of a litter can range from two to eight 
young (Quimby 1951, Whitaker 1963).
    The Preble's is long-lived for a small mammal, in comparison with 
many species of mice and voles that seldom live a full year. Along 
South Boulder Creek, Boulder County, CO, seven individuals originally 
captured as adults were still alive 2 years later, having attained at 
least 3 years of age (Meaney et al., in prep.). However, like many 
small mammals, the Preble's annual survival rate is low. Preble's 
survival rates appear to be lower over the summer than over the winter. 
Over-summer survival rates ranged from 22 to 78 percent and over-winter 
survival rates ranged from 56 to 97 percent (Shenk and Sivert 1999b; 
Ensight Technical Services 2000, 2001; Schorr 2001; Meaney et al., in 
prep.).
    The Preble's has a host of known predators including garter snakes 
(Thamnophis spp.), prairie rattlesnakes (Crotalus viridus), bullfrogs 
(Rana catesbiana), foxes (Vulpes vulpes and Urocyon cinereoargenteus), 
house cats (Felis catus), long-tailed weasels (Mustela frenata), and 
red-tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis) (Shenk and Sivert 1999a, Schorr 
2001). Other potential predators include coyotes (Canis latrans), barn 
owls (Tyto alba), great horned owls (Bubo virginianus), screech owls 
(Otus spp.), long-eared owls (Asio otus), northern harriers (Circus 
cyaneus), and large predatory fish.
    Other mortality factors of the Preble's include drowning and 
vehicle collision (Schorr 2001, Shenk and Sivert 1999a). Mortality 
factors known for the meadow jumping mouse, such as starvation, 
exposure, disease, and insufficient fat stores for hibernation 
(Whitaker 1963) also are likely causes of death for the Preble's.
    White and Shenk (2000) determined that riparian shrub cover, tree 
cover, and the amount of open water nearby are good predictors of 
Preble's densities, and summarized abundance estimates from nine sites 
in Colorado for field work conducted during 1998 and 1999. Estimates of 
abundance ranged from 4 to 67 mice per km (6 to 110 mice per mi) of 
stream and averaged 33 mice per km (53 mice per mi) of stream.
    While fecal analyses have provided the best data on the Preble's 
diet to date, they overestimate the components of the diet that are 
less digestible. Based on fecal analyses the Preble's eats insects; 
fungus; moss; pollen; willow; Chenopodium sp. (lamb's quarters); 
Salsola sp. (Russian thistle); Helianthus spp. (sunflowers); Carex spp. 
(sedge); Verbascum sp. (mullein); Bromus, Festuca, Poa, Sporobolus and 
Agropyron spp. (grasses); Lesquerella sp. (bladderpod); Equisetum sp. 
(rushes); and assorted seeds (Shenk and Eussen 1998, Shenk and Sivert 
1999a). The diet shifts seasonally; it consists primarily of insects 
and fungus after emerging from hibernation, shifts to fungus, moss, and 
pollen during mid-summer (July-August), with insects again added in 
September (Shenk and Sivert 1999a). The shift in diet along with shifts 
in mouse movements suggests that the Preble's may require specific 
seasonal diets, perhaps related to the physiological constraints 
imposed by hibernation (Shenk and Sivert 1999a).
    The Preble's is a true hibernator, usually entering hibernation in 
September or October and emerging the following May, after a potential 
hibernation period of 7 or 8 months. Adults are the first age group to 
enter hibernation because they accumulate the necessary fat stores 
earlier than young of the year. Similar to other subspecies of meadow 
jumping mouse, Preble's do not store food, but survive on fat stores 
accumulated prior to hibernation (Whitaker 1963). Apparent hibernacula 
of the Preble's have been located both within and outside of the 100-
year floodplain of streams (Shenk and Sivert 1999a, Ryon 2001, Schorr 
2001). Those hibernating outside of the 100-year floodplain would 
likely be less vulnerable to flood-related mortality.
    Meadow jumping mice are docile to handle and not antagonistic 
toward one another (Whitaker 1972). However, meadow jumping mice 
compete with meadow voles and may be kept at low densities by voles 
(Boonstra and Hoyle 1986). Introduced species that occupy riparian 
habitats may displace or compete with the Preble's. House mice (Mus 
musculus) were common in and adjacent to historic capture sites where 
the Preble's was no longer found (Ryon 1996).
    The Preble's is primarily nocturnal or crepuscular but also may be 
active during the day, when they have been seen moving around or 
sitting still under a shrub (Shenk 1998). Little is known about social 
interactions and their significance in the Preble's. Jones

[[Page 47157]]

and Jones (1985) described lively social interactions in which several 
Preble's mice were observed jumping into the air and squeaking and 
suggested that they formed a gregarious unit. In a recent study, for 
the month their radio-collars were active, several Preble's mice came 
repeatedly from different day-nest locations to meet at one spot at 
night (Shenk, pers. comm., 2002).

Conservation Issues

    The Preble's is closely associated with riparian ecosystems that 
are relatively narrow and represent a small percentage of the 
landscape. If habitat for the Preble's is destroyed or modified, 
populations in those areas will decline or be extirpated. The decline 
in the extent and quality of Preble's habitat is considered the main 
factor threatening the subspecies (Service 1998, Hafner et al. 1998, 
Shenk 1998). Habitat alteration, degradation, loss, and fragmentation 
resulting from urban development, flood control, water development, 
agriculture, and other human land uses have adversely impacted Preble's 
populations. Habitat destruction may impact individual Preble's 
directly or by destroying nest sites, food resources, and hibernation 
sites, by disrupting behavior, or by forming a barrier to movement.
    Despite numerous surveys, the Preble's has not recently been found 
in the Denver and Colorado Springs metropolitan areas, and is believed 
to be extirpated from these areas as a result of extensive urban 
development. Given the overlap of the Preble's range with an area of 
extensive and rapid urban development along the Colorado Front Range, 
it is likely that significant losses of Preble's populations and 
habitats have occurred and may continue to occur.
    Conversion of native riparian ecosystems to commercial croplands 
and grazed rangelands was identified as the major threat to Preble's 
persistence in Wyoming (Clark and Stromberg 1987, Compton and Hugie 
1993). Intensive grazing and haying operations may negatively impact 
the Preble's by removing food and shelter. While some Preble's 
populations coexist with livestock operations, overgrazing can decimate 
riparian communities on which the Preble's depends. Similarly, haying 
operations that allow significant riparian vegetation to remain in 
place may be compatible with persistent Preble's populations.
    Trail systems frequently parallel or intersect riparian communities 
and thus are common throughout Preble's range. Trail development can 
alter natural communities and may impact the Preble's by modifying nest 
sites, food resources, and hibernation sites, and by fragmenting its 
habitat. Humans and pets using these trails may alter behavior patterns 
of the Preble's and cause a decrease in survival and reproductive 
success.
    Habitat fragmentation limits the extent and abundance of the 
Preble's. In general, as animal populations become fragmented and 
isolated, it becomes more difficult for them to persist. Small, 
isolated patches of habitat are unable to support as many Preble's mice 
as larger patches of habitat. When threats to persistence are similar, 
larger populations are more secure from extirpation than smaller ones.
    The structure and function of riparian ecosystems are determined by 
the hydrology of the waterway. Changes in timing and abundance of water 
can alter the channel structure, riparian vegetation, and the adjacent 
floodplain, and may result in changes that are detrimental to the 
persistence of the Preble's. Similarly, depletion of groundwater also 
affects the habitat components needed by the Preble's. As groundwater 
supplies are depleted, more xeric (low moisture) plant communities 
replace the riparian vegetation. The conversion of habitats from mesic 
(moderate moisture), shrub-dominated systems to drier grass-dominated 
systems may preclude the Preble's from these areas.
    Alluvial aggregate extraction may produce long-term changes to 
Preble's habitat by altering hydrology and removing riparian 
vegetation. In particular, such extraction removes and often precludes 
reestablishment of habitat components required by the Preble's. Such 
mining impacts the deposits of alluvial sands and gravels that may be 
important hibernation locations for the Preble's.
    Within the Preble's range, bank stabilization, channelization, and 
other measures to address flooding and stormwater runoff have increased 
the rate of stream flow, straightened riparian channels, and narrowed 
riparian areas (Pague and Grunau 2000). Using riprap and other 
structural stabilization options to reduce erosion can destroy riparian 
vegetation, and prevent or delay its re-establishment. These measures 
can alter the hydrologic processes and plant communities present to the 
point where Preble's populations can no longer persist.
    Transportation and utility corridors frequently cross Preble's 
habitat and may negatively affect populations. As new roads are built 
and old roads are maintained, habitat is destroyed or fragmented. Roads 
and bridges also may act as barriers to dispersal. Train and truck 
accidents within riparian areas may release spills of chemicals, fuels 
and other substances that may impact the mouse or its habitat. Sewer, 
water, communications, gas, and electric lines cross Preble's habitat. 
Their rights-of-way can contribute to habitat disturbance and 
fragmentation through new construction and periodic maintenance.
    Invasive, noxious plants can encroach upon a landscape and displace 
native plant species. This change reduces the abundance and diversity 
of native plants, and may negatively impact cover and food sources for 
the Preble's. The control of noxious weeds also may impact the Preble's 
where large-scale removal of vegetation occurs through chemical 
treatments and mechanical mowing operations.
    Pesticides and herbicides are used within the range of the 
Preble's. Inappropriate use of these chemicals may harm the Preble's 
directly or when ingested by the Preble's with food or water. Overall, 
an integrated pest management approach (use of biological, chemical, 
and mechanical control) may help reduce the threat of chemicals, but 
allow for the control of target species.
    The increasing presence of humans near Preble's habitats may result 
in increased level of predation that may pose a threat to the Preble's. 
The striped skunk (Mephitis mephitis), raccoon (Procyon lotor), red fox 
(Vulpes vulpes), and the domestic and feral cat are found in greater 
densities in and around areas of human activity; all four of these 
species feed opportunistically on small mammals. Introduction of non-
native sport fish and the bullfrog into waters within Preble's range 
may result in additional predation. The fact that summer mortality is 
higher than overwinter mortality underscores the impact that predators 
can have on the Preble's.
    While normal flooding events help maintain the riparian and 
floodplain communities that provide suitable habitat for the Preble's, 
increased development and surfaces impervious to water absorption 
within a drainage can result in more frequent and severe flood events 
and prevent the re-establishment of riparian communities.
    Catastrophic fires can alter habitat dramatically and change the 
structure and composition of the vegetation communities so that the 
Preble's may no longer persist. In addition, precipitation falling in a 
burned area may degrade Preble's habitat by causing greater levels of 
erosion and sedimentation along creeks. Controlled use of fire may be 
one

[[Page 47158]]

method to maintain appropriate riparian, floodplain, and upland 
vegetation within Preble's habitat. However, over the past several 
decades, as human presence has increased through Preble's range, 
significant effort has been made to suppress fires. Long periods of 
fire suppression may result in a build-up of fuel and result in a 
catastrophic fire.

Previous Federal Action

    The Service included the Preble's as a category 2 candidate species 
in the 1985 Animal Notice of Review (50 FR 37958) and retained that 
status in subsequent notices published in the Federal Register on 
January 6, 1989 (54 FR 554), November 21, 1991 (56 FR 58810), and 
November 15, 1994 (59 FR 58982). In 1996 the Service discontinued the 
practice of maintaining a list of category 2 species and the Preble's 
did not appear in the February 28, 1996, notice of review (61 FR 7596). 
Category 2 species were those species for which information in the 
Service's possession indicated that listing was possibly appropriate, 
but for which substantive data on biological vulnerability and threats 
were not available to support a proposed rule.
    On August 16, 1994, we received a petition from the Biodiversity 
Legal Foundation to list the Preble's as endangered or threatened 
throughout its range and to designate critical habitat within a 
reasonable amount of time following the listing. On March 15,1995, we 
published notice of the 90-day finding that the petition presented 
substantial information indicating that listing the Preble's may be 
warranted (60 FR 13950), and requested comments and biological data on 
the status of the Preble's. On March 25, 1997, we issued a proposed 
rule to list the Preble's as an endangered species (62 FR 14093) and 
announced a 90-day public comment period. After a review of the best 
scientific data available and all comments received in response to the 
proposed rule, we published a final rule on May 13, 1998, designating 
the Preble's as threatened throughout its range (62 FR 26517). The 
Service did not designate critical habitat for the species at that 
time.
    On December 3, 1998, we proposed special regulations under section 
4(d) of the Act (63 FR 66777) to define conditions under which certain 
activities that could result in incidental take of the Preble's would 
be exempt from the section 9 take prohibitions of the Act. On May 22, 
2001, we published a final rule (66 FR 28125) adopting certain portions 
of the proposal that provided exemptions for specified activities 
related to rodent control, ongoing agricultural activities, landscape 
maintenance, and ongoing use of perfected water rights, for a period of 
36 months (through May 21, 2004). On August 30, 2001, we proposed to 
amend the special regulations to provide additional exemptions from 
section 9 take prohibitions for certain noxious weed control and ditch 
maintenance activities (66 FR 45829).
    The final listing rule for the Preble's indicated that designation 
of critical habitat was not prudent because publication of specific 
locations would increase the threat of vandalism or intentional 
destruction of habitat. On June 9, 2000, the Biodiversity Legal 
Foundation, Biodiversity Associates, Center for Biological Diversity, 
South Dakota Resources Coalition, David C. Jones, and Dennis Williams 
filed a suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado 
(Civil Action Number 00-D-1180) against the Department of the Interior 
and the Service over our failure to designate critical habitat for both 
the Preble's and the Topeka shiner, and for failure to prepare and 
implement a recovery plan for the Preble's. A court-mediated settlement 
was reached with the litigants that included a June 4, 2002, date for 
submission of proposed critical habitat for the Preble's to the Federal 
Register for publication and a June 4, 2003, date for submission of 
final critical habitat for the Preble's to the Federal Register. They 
agreed to dismiss their claim that the Service failed to prepare a 
recovery plan for the Preble's and subsequently agreed to extend the 
date for submission of the proposed critical habitat for the Preble's 
to July 8, 2001. In early 2000, we formed the Preble's Meadow Jumping 
Mouse Recovery Team. A recovery plan for the Preble's is currently 
being drafted. The team's working draft is available to the public as a 
discussion document.

Critical Habitat

    Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the Act as (i) 
the specific areas within the geographic area occupied by a species, at 
the time it is listed in accordance with the Act, on which are found 
those physical or biological features (I) essential to conserve the 
species and (II) that may require special management considerations or 
protection; and (ii) specific areas outside the geographic area 
occupied by a species at the time it is listed, upon determination that 
such areas are essential to conserve the species. ``Conservation'' 
means the use of all methods and procedures that are necessary to bring 
an endangered or threatened species to the point at which listing under 
the Act is no longer necessary.
    Critical habitat receives protection under section 7 of the Act 
through the prohibition against destruction or adverse modification of 
critical habitat with regard to actions carried out, funded, or 
authorized by a Federal agency. Section 7 also requires conferences 
with the Service on Federal actions that are likely to result in the 
destruction or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. In 
our regulations at 50 CFR 402.02, we define destruction or adverse 
modification as ``a direct or indirect alteration that appreciably 
diminishes the value of critical habitat for both the survival and 
recovery of a listed species. Such alterations include, but are not 
limited to, alterations adversely modifying any of those physical or 
biological features that were the basis for determining the habitat to 
be critical.'' Aside from the added protection that may be provided 
under section 7, the Act does not provide other forms of protection to 
lands designated as critical habitat. Because consultation under 
section 7 of the Act does not apply to activities on private or other 
non-Federal lands that do not involve a Federal nexus, critical habitat 
designation would not result in any regulatory requirement for these 
actions.
    To be included in a critical habitat designation, the habitat must 
first be ``essential to the conservation of the species.'' Critical 
habitat designations identify, to the extent known using the best 
scientific and commercial data available, habitat areas that provide 
essential life cycle needs of the species (i.e., areas on which are 
found the primary constituent elements, as defined at 50 CFR 
424.12(b)).
    Section 4 requires that we designate critical habitat at the time 
of listing and based on what we know at the time of designation. When 
we designate critical habitat at the time of listing or under short 
court-ordered deadlines, we will often not have sufficient information 
to identify all areas of critical habitat. We are required, 
nevertheless, to make a decision and thus must base our designations on 
what, at the time of designation, we know to be critical habitat.
    In accordance with sections 3(5)(C) of the Act, not all areas that 
can be occupied by a species will be designated critical habitat. 
Within the geographic area occupied by the species we designate only 
areas currently known to be essential. Essential areas should already 
have the features and habitat characteristics that are necessary to 
conserve the species. We will not

[[Page 47159]]

speculate about what areas might be found to be essential if better 
information becomes available, or what areas may become essential over 
time. If the information available at the time of designation does not 
show that an area provides essential life cycle needs of the species, 
then the area should not be included in the critical habitat 
designation. We will not designate areas within the geographic area 
occupied by the species unless at least one of the primary constituent 
elements are present, as defined at 50 CFR 424.12(b), that provide 
essential life cycle needs of the species. Moreover, areas occupied by 
certain known populations of the Preble's have not been proposed as 
critical habitat. For example, we did not propose critical habitat for 
some small scattered populations or habitats in areas highly fragmented 
by human development.
    Our regulations state, ``The Secretary shall designate as critical 
habitat areas outside the geographical area presently occupied by a 
species only when a designation limited to its present range would be 
inadequate to ensure the conservation of the species'' (50 CFR 
424.12(e)). Based on the best available science and commercial data, 
there appears to be no foundation upon which to make a determination 
that the conservation needs of the Preble's require designation of 
critical habitat outside of the geographic area occupied by the 
species, so we have not proposed to designate critical habitat outside 
of the geographic area believed to be occupied.
    Our Policy on Information Standards Under the Endangered Species 
Act, published in the Federal Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34271), 
provides criteria, procedures, and guidance to ensure decisions made by 
the Service represent the best scientific and commercial data 
available. It requires Service biologists, to the extent consistent 
with the Act and with the use of the best scientific and commercial 
data available, to use primary and original sources of information as 
the basis for recommendations to designate critical habitat. When 
determining which areas are critical habitat, a primary source of 
information should be the listing package for the species. Additional 
information may be obtained from a recovery plan, articles in peer-
reviewed journals, conservation plans developed by States, Tribes, and 
counties, scientific status surveys and studies, and biological 
assessments or other unpublished materials, and expert opinion or 
personal knowledge.
    Habitat is often dynamic, and species may move from one area to 
another over time. Furthermore, we recognize designation of critical 
habitat may not include all habitat eventually determined as necessary 
to recover the species. For these reasons, all should understand that 
critical habitat designations do not signal that habitat outside the 
designation is unimportant or may not be required for recovery. Areas 
outside the critical habitat designation will continue to be subject to 
conservation actions that may be implemented under section 7(a)(1) of 
the Act, and the regulatory protections afforded by the section 7(a)(2) 
jeopardy standard and the section 9 take prohibition, as determined on 
the basis of the best available information at the time of the action. 
Federally funded or assisted projects affecting listed species outside 
their designated critical habitat areas may still result in likely-to-
jeopardize findings in some cases. Similarly, critical habitat 
designations made on the basis of the best available information at the 
time of designation will not control the direction and substance of 
future recovery plans, habitat conservation plans, or other species 
conservation planning efforts, if new information available to these 
planning efforts calls for a different outcome.

Methods

    In determining areas essential to conserve the Preble's, we used 
the best scientific and commercial data available. We have reviewed 
approaches to the conservation of the Preble's undertaken by the 
Federal, State, and local agencies operating within the species' range 
since its listing in 1998, and the identified steps necessary for 
recovery outlined in the working draft of the recovery plan for the 
Preble's. We also reviewed available information that pertains to the 
habitat requirements of this species, including material received since 
the listing of the Preble's. The material included research published 
in peer-reviewed articles, academic theses and agency reports; reports 
from biologists conducting research under section 10(a)(1)(A) recovery 
permits; the working draft of the recovery plan for the Preble's; 
information from consulting biologists conducting site assessments, 
surveys, formal and informal consultations; as well as information 
obtained in personal communications with Federal, State, and other 
knowledgeable biologists in Colorado and Wyoming.

Primary Constituent Elements

    In accordance with section 3(5)(A)(i) of the Act and regulations at 
50 CFR 424.12, in determining which areas to propose as critical 
habitat we are required to base critical habitat determinations on the 
best scientific and commercial data available and to consider physical 
and biological features (primary constituent elements) that are 
essential to conservation of the species, and that may require special 
management considerations and protection. These physical and biological 
features include, but are not limited to--(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, rearing (or 
development) of offspring; and (5) habitats protected from disturbance 
or that are representative of the historic geographical and ecological 
distributions of a species.
    The primary constituent elements for the Preble's include those 
habitat components essential for the biological needs of reproducing, 
rearing of young, foraging, sheltering, hibernation, dispersal, and 
genetic exchange. The Preble's is able to live and reproduce in and 
near riparian areas located within grassland, shrubland, forest, and 
mixed vegetation types where dense herbaceous or woody vegetation 
occurs near the ground level, where available open water exists during 
their active season, and where there are ample upland habitats of 
sufficient width and quality for foraging, hibernation, and refugia 
from catastrophic flooding events. While willows of shrub form are a 
dominant component in many riparian habitats occupied by the Preble's, 
the structure of the vegetation appears more important to the Preble's 
than species composition.
    Primary constituent elements associated with the biological needs 
of dispersal and genetic exchange also are found in areas that provide 
connectivity or linkage between or within Preble's populations. These 
areas may not include the habitat components listed above and may have 
experienced substantial human alteration or disturbance.
    The dynamic ecological processes that create and maintain Preble's 
habitat also are important primary constituent elements. Habitat 
components essential to the Preble's are found in and near those areas 
where past and present geomorphological and hydrological processes have 
shaped streams, rivers, and floodplains, and have created conditions 
that support appropriate vegetative communities. Preble's habitat is 
maintained over time along rivers and streams by a natural flooding 
regime (or

[[Page 47160]]

one sufficiently corresponding to a natural regime) that periodically 
scours riparian vegetation, reworks stream channels, floodplains, and 
benches, and redistributes sediments such that a pattern of appropriate 
vegetation is present along river and stream edges, and throughout 
their floodplains. Periodic disturbance of riparian areas sets back 
succession and promotes dense, low-growing shrubs and lush herbaceous 
vegetation favorable to the Preble's. Where flows are controlled to 
preclude a natural pattern and other disturbance is limited, a less 
favorable mature successional stage of vegetation dominated by 
cottonwoods or other trees may develop. The long-term availability of 
habitat components favored by the Preble's also depends on plant 
succession and impacts of drought, fires, windstorms, herbivory, and 
other natural events. In some cases these naturally-occurring 
ecological processes are modified or are supplanted by human land uses 
that include manipulation of water flow and of vegetation.
    Primary constituent elements for the Preble's include:
    (1) A pattern of dense riparian vegetation consisting of grasses, 
forbs, and shrubs in areas along rivers and streams that provide open 
water through the Preble's active season.
    (2) Adjacent floodplains and vegetated uplands with limited human 
disturbance (including hayed fields, grazed pasture, other agricultural 
lands that are not plowed or disced regularly, areas that have been 
restored after past aggregate extraction, areas supporting recreational 
trails, and urban/wildland interfaces).
    (3) Areas that provide connectivity between and within populations. 
These may include river and stream reaches with minimal vegetative 
cover or that are armored for erosion control, travel ways beneath 
bridges, through culverts, along canals and ditches, and other areas 
that have experienced substantial human alteration or disturbance.
    (4) Dynamic geomorphological and hydrological processes typical of 
systems within the range of the Preble's, i.e., those processes that 
create and maintain river and stream channels, floodplains, and 
floodplain benches, and promote patterns of vegetation favorable to the 
Preble's.
    Existing features and structures within the boundaries of the 
mapped units, such as buildings, roads, parking lots, other paved 
areas, lawns, other urban and suburban landscaped areas, regularly 
plowed or disced agricultural areas, and other features not containing 
any of the primary constituent elements are not considered critical 
habitat.

Criteria Used To Identify Critical Habitat

    The Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse Recovery Team's February 27, 
2002, Draft Discussion Document on a recovery plan for the Preble's 
(Draft Document) identifies specific criteria for reaching recovery and 
the delisting of the Preble's. While elements of this Draft Document 
may change prior to plan finalization, the concepts described within it 
apply the best available science on the Preble's and serve as a logical 
starting point for identifying areas that are essential for the 
conservation of the Preble's. We anticipate that a draft recovery plan 
for the Preble's will be published prior to our final designation of 
critical habitat. To assure that designation of critical habitat for 
the Preble's and the recovery plan for the Preble's are compatible, the 
content of the draft recovery plan and comments received on the plan 
will be reviewed and incorporated, as appropriate, into the final 
designation of critical habitat.
    To recover the Preble's to the point where it can be delisted, the 
Draft Document identifies the need for a specified number, size, and 
distribution of wild, self-sustaining Preble's populations across the 
known range of the Preble's. The distribution of these recovery 
populations is intended both to reduce the risk of multiple Preble's 
populations being negatively affected by natural or man-made events at 
any one time and to preserve the existing genetic variation within the 
Preble's.
    The Draft Document identifies recovery criteria for each of the 
three major river drainages where the Preble's occurs (the North Platte 
River drainage in Wyoming, the South Platte River drainage in Wyoming 
and Colorado, and the Arkansas River drainage in Colorado) and for each 
subdrainage judged likely to support Preble's. In some cases the Draft 
Document identifies recovery criteria for subdrainages where trapping 
for the Preble's has not yet occurred or where limited trapping has not 
confirmed the presence of the Preble's. Boundaries of drainages and 
subdrainages have been mapped by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). For 
the Draft Document, 8-digit Hydrological Unit Code (HUC) boundaries 
were selected to define subdrainages. Hereafter, we refer to these 
specific subdrainages as ``HUCs.'' A total of 19 HUCs are identified in 
the Draft Document as occupied or potentially occupied by the Preble's. 
Of these, 5 are located in the North Platte River drainage, 11 in the 
South Platte River drainage, and 3 in the Arkansas River drainage.
    Three large and three medium Preble's populations in Colorado that 
are designated in the Draft Document as recovery populations are 
reflected in this critical habitat proposal. The Draft Document defines 
large populations as maintaining 2,500 mice and usually including at 
least 80 km (50 mi) of rivers and streams. It defines medium 
populations as maintaining 500 mice over at least 16 km (10 mi) of 
rivers and streams. However, the Draft Document does not delineate 
specific boundaries of these six recovery populations. In addition, in 
the remaining 13 HUCs within the Preble's range the Draft Document 
calls for recovery populations but does not designate their locations. 
In these cases, the Draft Document only prescribes the need to 
establish one or more recovery populations of specified minimum size 
within a HUC. The Draft Document anticipates that, in the future, the 
locations of these recovery populations will be designated and their 
boundaries delineated by State and local governments, and other 
interested parties, working in coordination with the Service. However, 
to meet the deadline for this critical habitat proposal, we have 
proposed specific critical habitat units in these areas. In addition, 
we have proposed specific critical habitat units, as appropriate, in 
HUCs where recovery populations are called for by the Draft Document, 
but where their locations have not been specifically designated in the 
Draft Document.
    Beyond proposing critical habitat for sites of likely recovery 
populations based on the Draft Document, we reviewed other sites of 
Preble's occurrence, especially on Federal lands, for possible 
designation as critical habitat. The Draft Document emphasizes the 
importance of protecting additional Preble's populations, to provide 
insurance for the Preble's in the event that designated recovery 
populations cannot be effectively managed or protected as envisioned by 
the recovery plan, or are decimated by uncontrollable catastrophic 
events such as fires or flooding. The Draft Document also recommends 
directing recovery efforts toward public lands rather than private 
lands where possible and calls upon all Federal agencies to protect and 
manage for the Preble's wherever it occurs on Federal lands. Given 
these recommendations from the Draft Plan, the designation of 
additional areas of critical habitat on Federal land is essential for 
the conservation of the Preble's. Should unforseen events cause

[[Page 47161]]

the continued decline of Preble's populations throughout its range, 
Preble's populations and the primary constituent elements on which they 
depend are more likely to persist and remain viable on Federal lands 
than on non-Federal lands. The likelihood of maintaining stable 
populations is greatest on these Federal lands, where consistent and 
effective land management strategies can be more easily employed. 
Preble's populations on Federal lands could serve as substitute 
recovery populations should designated recovery populations decline or 
fail to meet recovery goals. In addition, some Preble's populations on 
Federal lands have been the subject of ongoing research that could 
prove vital to the conservation of the Preble's.
    For the reasons stated above we have proposed selected stream 
reaches on Federal lands supporting the Preble's that we believe to be 
essential to the conservation of the Preble's, even if these areas 
appear unlikely to be selected for initially designated recovery 
populations based on the Draft Document. These areas of proposed 
critical habitat may include short reaches of intervening non-Federal 
lands that in some cases support all primary constituent elements 
needed by the Preble's or, if substantially developed, are likely to 
provide only connectivity between areas of Preble's habitat on nearby 
Federal lands.
    Proposed critical habitat units include only river and stream 
reaches, and adjacent floodplains and uplands, that are within the 
known geographic and elevational range of the Preble's, have the 
primary constituent elements present, and, based on the best available 
scientific information, are believed to currently support the Preble's.
    In Wyoming and at higher elevations along the Front Range in 
Colorado the geographical distribution of the Preble's has been subject 
to scrutiny due to the close resemblance, and apparent range overlap, 
between the Preble's and the western jumping mouse. However, new 
information obtained since the time of the Preble's listing has not 
appreciably changed the known range of the Preble's. Based on the most 
recent information on elevational range of the Preble's we have, with 
one exception, limited proposed critical habitat to 2,300 m (7,600 ft) 
in elevation and below.
    Presence of primary constituent elements was determined through a 
variety of sources including, but not limited to--Colorado Division of 
Wildlife mapping of Preble's Habitat Similarity Models derived from 
interpretation of aerial photographs; the Services' 1998 mapping of 
sites occupied or potentially occupied by the Preble's produced in 
conjunction with the Colorado Department of Natural Resources as part 
of proposed special regulations under section 4(d) of the Act (63 FR 
66777); working maps produced by the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse 
Recovery Team during development of the Draft Document; National 
Wetland Inventory maps produced by the Service; results of research 
conducted on a variety of Federal properties by the Forest Service, the 
Department of Energy, the Air Force, and the Army Corps of Engineers; 
results of research conducted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife, 
Colorado Department of Transportation, and the City of Boulder; field 
assessments of habitat by Service staff; information amassed to support 
regional Habitat Conservation Plans (HCPs) including those in Boulder, 
Douglas, and El Paso Counties in Colorado, and for Denver Water 
properties; coordination with Forest Service personnel from the 
Medicine Bow-Routt, Arapaho-Roosevelt, and Pike-San Isabel National 
Forests; and, numerous evaluations of potential Preble's habitat by 
consulting biologists in support of developers, landowners, and other 
clients.
    Presence of the Preble's was determined based largely on the 
results of trapping surveys, the majority of which were conducted in 
the past 6 years. Sites judged to be occupied by the Preble's include 
those that--(1) have recently been documented to support jumping mice 
identified by genetic or morphological examination as Preble's; (2) 
have recently been documented to support jumping mice and for which 
historical verification of the Preble's exists; or (3) are at 
appropriate elevation levels for the Preble's, have recently been 
documented to support jumping mice identified in the field as the 
Preble's, but where the mice were released alive and not subject to 
definitive morphological or genetic studies. While, in some cases, 
proposed critical habitat units extend well beyond these Preble's 
capture locations, boundaries of these critical habitat units include 
only those reaches that we believe to be occupied by the Preble's based 
on the best available information regarding capture sites, the known 
mobility of the Preble's, and the quality and continuity of habitat 
components along stream reaches. Where appropriate, we have included 
details on the known status of the Preble's within specific 
subdrainages in the in the Proposed Critical Habitat Designation 
section of this document.
    Survey efforts to document the Preble's in Wyoming have been more 
limited than in Colorado and have been focused on--(1) Federal lands 
(the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest, some Bureau of Land Management 
lands, and the F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Laramie County); (2) lands 
owned by True Ranches; and (3) areas to be impacted by proposed 
projects, most notably the Medicine Bow Lateral Pipeline.
    We considered several qualitative criteria to judge the current 
status and probable persistence of Preble's populations in the 
selection and proposal of specific areas as critical habitat. These 
included--(1) the quality, continuity, and extent of habitat components 
present; (2) the state of natural hydrological processes that maintain 
and rejuvenate suitable habitat components; (3) the presence of lands 
devoted to conservation, either public lands such as parks, wildlife 
management areas, and dedicated open space, or private lands under 
conservation easements; and (4) the landscape context of the site, 
including the overall degree of current human disturbance and presence, 
and likelihood of future development based on local planning and 
zoning.
    In those units where we propose critical habitat on Federal lands 
judged not likely to be initially designated as recovery populations 
under the Draft Document, we looked for contiguous Federal property 
along stream reaches occupied by the Preble's of at least 3 miles in 
length. This corresponds to the minimum size of small populations 
consistent with recovery criteria in the Draft Document. In some cases 
shorter reaches on Federal lands were proposed as critical habitat when 
they were separated from more substantial reaches on Federal lands by 
only small segments of intervening non-Federal lands.
    We also determined whether areas or portions of areas designated as 
recovery populations in the Draft Document, or otherwise likely to be 
proposed as critical habitat based on factors described above, do not 
represent critical habitat due to adequate protection and management 
under an existing Integrated Natural Resource Management Plan, HCP, or 
other special management plan. Where regional HCPs are being developed, 
we evaluated the potential completion schedule of these planning 
efforts in relation to the likely completion of the final rule 
designating Preble's critical habitat.

North Platte River Drainage

    In order to meet recovery criteria, the Draft Document calls for 
one large and

[[Page 47162]]

two medium recovery populations spread over three of the five HUCs in 
the North Platte River drainage likely to support the Preble's. The 
Draft Document calls for three small populations (defined as 5 km (3 
mi) or more of occupied habitat) or one medium population in each of 
the other two HUCs. Two of the five HUCs currently lack confirmed 
occurrence of the Preble's. Therefore, we have proposed critical 
habitat areas representing large and medium recovery populations on the 
remaining three HUCs, all of which have extensive areas supporting 
primary constituent elements required by the Preble's.
    Suitable habitat appears to be present throughout the Middle North 
Platte-Casper HUC. However, survey efforts targeted at the Preble's 
have occurred on only a limited basis in this subdrainage, with the 
only known captures of jumping mice at elevations above 2,800 m (7,800 
ft) and likely to be western jumping mice. Therefore, while primary 
constituent elements for the Preble's appear present in this 
subdrainage and the Preble's probably occurs within this system, we 
have not proposed critical habitat based on lack of known occurrence.
    Suitable habitat components occur throughout the Glendo HUC. We 
have proposed critical habitat on the Cottonwood Creek watershed 
consistent with one of the medium recovery populations required to meet 
recovery criteria for the North Platte River drainage in the Draft 
Document. In addition, we have proposed critical habitat in the 
Horseshoe Creek watershed on Forest Service land.
    Primary constituent elements required by the Preble's appear 
widespread within the Lower Laramie HUC. Of two major watersheds we 
investigated, the complex formed by Chugwater Creek and its tributaries 
appears to be of better habitat quality and includes more stream miles 
than the complex formed by Sybille Creek and its tributaries. We have 
proposed critical habitat on the Chugwater Creek watershed consistent 
with the one large recovery population required to meet recovery 
criteria for the North Platte River drainage in the Draft Document. 
Richeau Creek and Hunton Creek were not included as proposed critical 
habitat since they are segregated from the main portion of the 
Chugwater Creek complex by long stretches of less suitable habitat.
    In the Lower Laramie HUC, habitat components typically used by the 
Preble's exist on Federal property on the Medicine Bow-Routt National 
Forest. While many of these locations are at higher elevations than 
those that the Preble's has been shown to inhabit, surveys have 
captured jumping mice identified in the field as the Preble's from the 
appropriate elevational range. Therefore, we have proposed critical 
habitat on Forest Service lands and small parcels of intervening non-
Federal lands within the Friend Creek watershed and within the Murphy 
Canyon watershed.
    Suitable habitat in the Horse Creek HUC is generally limited to the 
western half of the subdrainage. Two areas of suitable habitat include 
the complex formed by Horse Creek and its tributaries and the various 
tributaries to Bear Creek. The Bear Creek tributaries are generally 
isolated from each other and from Horse Creek by large sections of 
unsuitable habitat. The Horse Creek complex is the larger complex and 
has better quality habitat. Therefore, we have proposed critical 
habitat on the Horse Creek watershed consistent with one of the two 
medium recovery populations required to meet recovery criteria for the 
North Platte River drainage in the Draft Document.
    Habitat components suitable for the Preble's appear to be quite 
limited in the Middle North Platte-Scottsbluff HUC and are largely 
confined to the westernmost portions of the subdrainage. Some small 
pockets of suitable habitat are scattered throughout the rest of the 
subdrainage, but they are quite isolated. Additionally, trapping 
efforts targeted at the Preble's have occurred on a limited basis in 
this subdrainage with no surveys providing captures of the jumping 
mice. Therefore, while there is a high probability that the Preble's 
occurs within this subdrainage, we have not proposed critical habitat 
based on lack of known occurrence.

South Platte River Drainage

    Recovery criteria in the Draft Document require three small 
recovery populations or one medium population in the Upper Lodgepole 
HUC. Suitable habitat for Preble's is generally limited to the western 
half of the subdrainage. Most trapping efforts in this HUC have been on 
the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest at elevations above 2,300 m 
(7,700 ft). Additionally, one trapping effort at a lower elevation 
produced a jumping mouse presumed to be a Preble's. We have proposed 
two critical habitat units in this subdrainage, Lodgepole Creek and 
Upper Middle Lodgepole Creek, consistent with two of the three small 
recovery populations identified for the HUC in the Draft Document.
    In Crow Creek HUC we have proposed critical habitat consistent with 
one of the three small recovery populations required to meet recovery 
criteria in the Draft Document. This area is limited to the F.E. Warren 
Air Force Base in Cheyenne.
    The Lone Tree-Owl HUC supports primary constituent elements for 
Preble's both in Wyoming and in Colorado. Based on the recovery 
criteria of three small or one medium recovery population assigned to 
this HUC in the Draft Document, we have proposed two small areas of 
critical habitat along Lone Tree Creek, one in Wyoming and one in 
Colorado.
    We have elected not to propose additional critical habitat on 
Federal property in the Upper Lodgepole, Crow Creek, and Lone Tree-Owl 
HUCs in southern Wyoming beyond those populations likely to be 
designated recovery populations under the proposed plan. Within these 
HUCs, Bureau of Land Management properties are largely upland areas 
with only small segments of streams. Forest Service lands in the 
Medicine Bow--Routt National Forest include many suitable-looking 
streams, but most occur at elevations ranging from 2,200 m (7,300 ft) 
to 2,400 m (8,000 ft). Although surveys from these riparian areas have 
produced jumping mice that are potentially the Preble's, it is likely, 
based on elevation, that many of these are western jumping mice. We 
will continue to work with the Forest Service regarding potential 
Preble's populations on their lands and will encourage further survey 
effort and collection of jumping mouse specimens for species 
verification.
    In the Cache La Poudre HUC, we have proposed critical habitat along 
the lower portions of the North Fork of the Cache Le Poudre River and 
its tributaries, consistent with the large recovery population 
designated in the Draft Document. In addition, further south in this 
subdrainage we have proposed a second area limited largely to Forest 
Service lands along the main stem of the Cache Le Poudre River and on 
selected tributaries. While additional stream reaches that support 
Preble's populations are present on Forest Service lands in the upper 
reaches of the North Fork of the Cache Le Poudre and its tributaries, 
including Bull Creek, Willow Creek, Mill Creek, and Trail Creek, the 
extent of contiguous stream reaches in Forest Service ownership is very 
limited. A checkerboard pattern of land ownership convinced us that 
proposing additional critical habitat centered on Federal lands is not 
warranted; therefore, we proposed no critical habitat in this area.
    In the Big Thompson HUC we proposed critical habitat on Buckhorn

[[Page 47163]]

Creek and its tributaries consistent with the medium recovery 
population designated to meet recovery criteria for this area under the 
Draft Document. We also assessed Forest Service lands along the Big 
Thompson River and Little Thompson River for possible inclusion as 
proposed critical habitat. Potential areas along the Big Thompson River 
and the North Fork of the Big Thompson River were largely in private 
ownership, with substantial human development occurring in many places. 
For these reasons we proposed only one additional area as critical 
habitat, centered on Forest Service lands on portions of Dry Creek and 
its tributaries. Similarly, Forest Service holdings along the Little 
Thompson River and its tributaries are highly fragmented by non-Federal 
lands or represent only short stream reaches near the 7,600-foot 
elevation. No critical habitat has been proposed on the Little Thompson 
River.
    Within the St. Vrain HUC, the Draft Document designated a medium 
recovery population on South Boulder Creek as necessary to meet 
recovery criteria. We included the South Boulder Creek as proposed 
critical habitat. At the request of representatives from the City of 
Boulder we considered proposing critical habitat along the St. Vrain 
River between Hygiene and Lyons. We have little evidence to support 
designation of critical habitat for the Preble's population on the St. 
Vrain River as a preferable alternative to that on South Boulder Creek, 
nor did we find reason to propose critical habitat for a second 
population on non-Federal lands within this subdrainage. We considered 
proposing critical habitat for the Preble's on Forest Service lands at 
higher elevations along the North St. Vrain Creek and the Middle St. 
Vrain Creek. However, since no trapping efforts targeted at the 
Preble's have been conducted in these areas and we are aware of no 
records of the Preble's occurrence in these watersheds, neither has 
been proposed as critical habitat.
    The Department of Energy's Rocky Flats site spans portions of the 
St. Vrain HUC and the Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek HUC. Rocky Flats 
has been a focus of research on the Preble's. We have proposed a 
critical habitat unit consisting of three streams in close proximity to 
one another on Department of Energy lands within these two 
subdrainages.
    While the Draft Document calls for three small recovery populations 
or one medium recovery population within the Clear Creek HUC, the 
Preble's has been captured only along a segment of Ralston Creek above 
Ralston Reservoir. Based on limited occurrence of habitat components 
needed by the Preble's and the absence of other captures, we limited 
proposed critical habitat within the Clear Creek HUC to this single 
population.
    The Draft Document calls for a medium recovery population along 
Cherry Creek in the Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek HUC. Preble's 
habitat in the upper reaches of the Cherry Creek basin appears 
extensive. We propose critical habitat in an area that includes a 
segment of Cherry Creek, Lake Gulch, and its tributaries. This area was 
chosen partly because it includes substantial public lands.
    Within the Upper South Platte HUC we have proposed critical habitat 
along West Plum Creek and its tributaries consistent with the large 
recovery population designated in the Draft Document. An approved HCP 
exists for The Harding Property on West Plum Creek just upstream from 
its confluence with Garber Creek. Since the duration of the permit for 
this HCP is only 3 years, we have included this property in the 
proposed critical habitat.
    We examined other areas of Preble's habitat on Federal lands within 
the Upper South Platte HUC, and have proposed critical habitat on Corps 
of Engineers lands upstream of Chatfield Reservoir along the South 
Platte River and on four areas centered on Forest Service land in the 
Pike-San Isabel National Forest within the South Platte River 
watershed. Though Forest Service lands in the Upper South Platte HUC 
are extensive, much of the South Platte itself is not federally owned. 
On Forest Service lands on some of the major tributaries of the South 
Platte River, habitat components required by the Preble's have been 
degraded by fire, flooding, or both. The Buffalo Creek watershed in 
particular has been highly degraded by fire, followed by flooding and 
accompanying erosion and sedimentation. Critical habitat has not been 
proposed in these areas. Combined, these five areas of proposed 
critical habitat should help assure that a viable population of the 
Preble's is maintained in the portion of this HUC upstream of Chatfield 
Reservoir on the South Platte River.
    While the Draft Document calls for either three small populations 
or one medium population in both the Kiowa and Bijou HUCs, no 
confirmation of the Preble's currently exists for either of these 
subdrainages. To our knowledge, no trapping efforts targeted at the 
Preble's have taken place within likely Preble's habitat in either HUC. 
While primary constituent elements appear present and it is likely that 
the Preble's occurs within these systems, based on lack of known 
Preble's occurrence we have not proposed critical habitat within these 
HUCs.

Arkansas River Drainage

    Within the Fountain Creek HUC the Draft Document calls for a large 
recovery population along Monument Creek and its tributaries including 
lands within the Air Force Academy. While the Academy would be an 
essential part of this recovery population, we have determined that the 
Academy does not meet the definition of critical habitat since it does 
not require special management considerations or protection. In 
determining boundaries of proposed critical habitat we considered 
whether documented Preble's populations on some reaches remained 
connected to the larger population present along Monument Creek or, due 
to fragmentation caused by past development, they have become 
permanently isolated.
    Massive erosion and habitat modification along Pine Creek has 
likely isolated the Preble's population east of Interstate Highway 25 
from that downstream on Monument Creek. Therefore, we have proposed no 
critical habitat on Pine Creek. A significant barrier to Preble's 
movement is present on Kettle Creek in the form of a large detention 
basin just east of Interstate Highway 25 and accompanying outflow 
structure that channels creek flow under the highway. Recent 
discussions have addressed possible means of improving connectivity 
between upstream and downstream Preble's populations along this reach. 
Since improved connectivity may be pursued and could prove important in 
meeting the recovery criteria in this HUC, we have proposed critical 
habitat through this reach of Kettle Creek.
    Along the upper reaches of Monument Creek, Monument Lake and the 
dam that forms it create at least a partial barrier to Preble's 
movement upstream and downstream. While a current project will likely 
enhance connectivity for the Preble's population along this reach of 
Monument Creek, some reaches upstream from Monument Lake have been 
significantly altered by human activity. Based on our examination of 
the extent and quality of Preble's habitat upstream from Monument Lake, 
we have chosen to limit proposed critical habitat to areas downstream 
of the dam.
    The Draft Document calls for either three small recovery 
populations or one medium recovery population to meet recovery criteria 
in both the Chico and the Big Sandy HUCs. The Preble's has been 
documented at a single location

[[Page 47164]]

within the Chico HUC, in apparently marginal habitat along an unnamed 
tributary of Black Squirrel Creek. Subsequent trapping could not 
relocate the Preble's at the site. Limited trapping of other sites has 
produced no captures of the Preble's and the extent of appropriate 
habitat components within the subdrainage appears limited. We have not 
proposed critical habitat in the Chico HUC based on our uncertainty 
that the Preble's exists within any given reach in this area. In the 
Big Sandy HUC limited trapping efforts targeted at the Preble's have 
not confirmed Preble's presence. Sites supporting primary constituent 
elements required by the Preble's appear few. For these reasons we have 
not proposed critical habitat in the Big Sandy HUC.
    Proposed critical habitat for the Preble's was delineated based on 
the interpretation of multiple sources used during the preparation of 
this proposed rule. We used GIS-based mapping using ARCInfo that 
incorporated streams, steam order (Stahler method), roads, and cities 
from USGS maps, floodplains from Federal Emergency Management Agency 
maps, and surface management maps depicting property ownership from the 
Bureau of Land Management (primarily from the early 1990s). Lands 
proposed as critical habitat were divided into specific mapping units, 
i.e., critical habitat units, often corresponding to individual HUCs. 
For the purposes of this proposed rule these units have been described 
primarily by latitude and longitude, and by section, township, and 
range, to mark the upstream and the downstream extent of proposed 
critical habitat along rivers and streams.
    We were presented with a decision in designating outward extent of 
critical habitat into uplands. The Service has typically described 
Preble's habitat as extending outward 300 ft (90 m) from the 100-year 
floodplain of rivers and streams (Service 1998). The Draft Document 
defines Preble's habitat as the 100-year floodplain plus 100 m (330 ft) 
outward on both sides, but allows for alternative delineations that 
provide for all the needs of the Preble's and include the alluvial 
floodplain, transition slopes, and pertinent uplands.
    In order to allow normal behavior and to assure that the Preble's 
and the primary constituent elements on which it depends are protected 
from disturbance, the outward extent of critical habitat should at 
least approximate the outward distances described above in relation to 
the 100-year floodplain. Unfortunately, floodplains have not been 
mapped for many streams within Preble's range and electronic layers 
depicting 100-year floodplains needed to facilitate GIS mapping are not 
available for several counties within Preble's range. Where floodplain 
mapping is available, we have found that it may include local 
inaccuracies.
    While alternative delineation of critical habitat based on 
geomorphology and existing vegetation could accurately portray the 
presence and extent of required habitat components, we lacked an 
explicit data layer that could support such a delineation. Creation of 
such a layer through interpretation of aerial photographs and site 
visits was not possible given the time and resources available for this 
proposal.
    We also considered determining the outward extent of critical 
habitat based on a distance outward from features such as the stream 
edge, associated wetlands, or riparian areas. We judged wetlands an 
inconsistent indicator of habitat extent and found no consistent source 
of riparian mapping available across the range of the Preble's. We also 
considered using an outward extent of critical habitat established by a 
vertical distance above the elevation of the river or stream to 
approximate the floodplain and adjacent uplands likely to be used by 
the Preble's.
    For this proposal we ultimately settled on delineating the upland 
extent of critical habitat boundaries as a set distance outward from 
the river or stream edge (as defined by the ordinary high water mark) 
varying with the size (order) of a river or stream. We compared known 
floodplain widths to stream order over a series of sites and 
approximated average floodplain width for various orders of streams. To 
that average we added an additional 100 m (330 ft) outward on each 
side. Based on this calculation, for streams of order 1 and 2 (the 
smallest streams) we have delineated critical habitat as 110 m (360 ft) 
outward from the stream edge, for streams of order 3 and 4 we have 
delineated critical habitat as 120 m (400 ft) outward from the stream 
edge, and for stream orders 5 and above (the largest streams and 
rivers) we have delineated critical habitat as 140 m (460 ft) outward 
from the stream edge. While proposed critical habitat will not include 
all areas used by individual Preble's over time, we believe that these 
corridors of critical habitat ranging from 220 m (720 ft) to 280 m (920 
ft) in width (plus the river or stream width) will support the full 
range of primary constituent elements essential for persistence of 
Preble's populations, and should help protect the Preble's and their 
habitats from secondary impacts of nearby disturbance. We welcome 
comments regarding the appropriate outward limits of critical habitat 
and means of establishing them.
    In selecting areas of proposed critical habitat, we made an effort 
to avoid developed areas that are not likely to contribute to Preble's 
conservation. However, the scale of mapping that we used to approximate 
our delineation of critical habitat did not allow us to exclude all 
developed areas such as roads and rural development. In addition, some 
developed stream reaches serve as important connectors within Preble's 
populations. Existing structures and features within the boundaries of 
the mapped units, such as buildings, roads, parking lots, other paved 
areas, lawns, other urban and suburban landscaped areas, regularly 
plowed or disced agricultural areas, and certain other areas are not 
likely to contain primary constituent elements for the Preble's and, 
therefore, are not critical habitat. Federal actions limited to these 
areas would not trigger a section 7 consultation unless they affect the 
Preble's or primary constituent elements within proposed critical 
habitat.
    Consistent with the Draft Document, we could not depend solely on 
federally-owned lands to propose critical habitat designation, as these 
lands are limited in geographic location, size, and habitat quality 
within the range of the Preble's. In addition to the federally-owned 
lands, we are proposing critical habitat on non-Federal public lands 
and privately owned lands, including lands owned by the State of 
Colorado and State of Wyoming, and by local governments. All non-
Federal lands designated as critical habitat meet the definition of 
critical habitat under section 3 of the Act in that they are within the 
geographical area occupied by the species, are essential to the 
conservation of the species, and may require special management 
considerations or protection.
    Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to consider the economic and 
other relevant impacts of designating areas as critical habitat. We may 
exclude areas from critical habitat upon a determination that the 
benefits of such exclusions outweigh the benefits of designating these 
areas as critical habitat. We cannot exclude areas from critical 
habitat when the exclusion will result in the extinction of the 
species. We will make available for public review an economic analysis 
of this proposal; this economic analysis will serve as the basis of our 
4(b)(2) analysis and any exclusions. However, this economic analysis is 
not yet completed;

[[Page 47165]]

as a result, we are not able to identify proposed exclusions under 
section 4(b)(2) in this proposed rule. We will complete our economic 
analysis, re-open the public comment period, and review public comments 
before making a final determination of critical habitat. This review, 
combined with our assessment of the benefits of designating areas as 
critical habitat, may identify certain proposed areas that should be 
excluded from the final critical habitat designation, provided these 
exclusions will not result in the extinction of the species. As a 
result, the final critical habitat determination may differ from this 
proposal.

Proposed Critical Habitat Designation

    The proposed critical habitat contained within units discussed 
below constitutes our best evaluation of areas necessary to conserve 
the Preble's. Proposed critical habitat may be revised should new 
information become available prior to the final rule, or may be revised 
through rule-making (including notice and public comment) if new 
information becomes available after the final rule.
    Table 1 provides a summary of land ownership by river or stream 
length and area of proposed critical habitat in each county for which 
critical habitat has been proposed. Critical habitat for the Preble's 
includes approximately 381.7 km (237.2 mi) of rivers and streams and 
8,116 ha (20,054 ac) of lands in Wyoming and approximately 676.4 km 
(420.3 mi) of rivers and streams and 15,132 ha (37,392 ac) of lands in 
Colorado. Lands proposed as critical habitat are under Federal, State, 
local government, and private ownership. No lands proposed as critical 
habitat are under Tribal ownership. Estimates reflect the total river 
or stream length, or area of lands within critical habitat unit 
boundaries, without regard to the presence of primary constituent 
elements. Therefore, given exclusions for developed areas and other 
areas not supporting the primary constituent elements, the area 
proposed for designation is actually less than indicated in Table 1.

  Table 1.--Proposed Critical Habitat for the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse by County in Wyoming and Colorado,
                                Summarized by Federal, State, and Other Ownership
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                    Ownership
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                            Linear River Kilometers and Hectares by State and County
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Federal              State               Other               Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wyoming.........................  51.4 km (32.0 mi);  12.8 km (7.9 mi);   317.5 km (197.3     381.7 km (237.2
                                   1,552 ha (3,836     265 ha (655 ac).    mi) 6,297 ha        mi); 8,116 ha
                                   ac).                                    (15,561 ac).        (20,253 ac)
    Albany......................  42.8 km (26.6 mi);  5.6 km (3.5 mi);    63.3 km (39.3 mi);  111.7 km (69.4
                                   940 ha (2,323 ac).  107 ha (265 ac).    1,348 ha (3,334     mi); 2,396 ha
                                                                           ac).                (5,921 ac)
    Converse....................  3.8 km (2.1 mi);    0; 0..............  1.4 km (0.9 mi); 0  4.8 km (3.0 mi);
                                   143 ha (279 ac).                                            113 ha (279 ac)
    Laramie.....................  5.0 km (3.1 mi);    4.4 km (2.7 mi);    188.6 km (117.2     198.0 km (123.0
                                   496 ha (1,225 ac).  98 ha (242 ac).     mi); 3,617 ha       mi); 4,210 ha
                                                                           (8,937 ac).         (10,403 ac)
    Platte......................  0.1 km (0.1 mi); 4  2.8 km (1.8 mi);    64.2 km (39.9 mi);  67.2 km (41.7 mi);
                                   ha (11 ac).         60 ha (148 ac).     1,332 ha (3,292     1,397 ha (3,451
                                                                           ac).                ac)
Colorado........................  215.2 km (133.6     65.2 km (40.5 mi);  396.1 km (246.1     676.4 km (420.3
                                   mi); 4,942 ha       1,405 ha (3,473     mi); 8,784 ha       mi); 15,132 ha
                                   (12,214 ac).        ac).                (21,706 ac).        (37, 392 ac)
    Boulder.....................  0.................  0.................  12.3 km (7.7 mi);   12.3 km (7.7 mi);
                                                                           299 ha (740 ac).    299 ha (740 ac)
    Douglas.....................  57.5 km (35.7 mi)   13,5 km (8.4 mi);   157.7 km (98.0      228.7 km (142.1
                                   1,351 ha (3,479     276 ha (683 ac).    mi); 3,450 ha       mi); 5,076 ha
                                   ac).                                    (8,524 ac).         (12,545 ac)
    El Paso.....................  0.2 km (0.1 mi);    0.4 km (0.3 mi); 8  55.6 km (34.5 mi);  56.3 km (35.0 mi);
                                   16 ha (41 ac).      ha (21 ac).         1,232 ha (3.048     1,259 ha (3,110
                                                                           ac).                ac)
    Jefferson...................  31.8 km (19.7 mi)   5.1 km (3.2 mi);    26.7 km (16.6 mi);  63.8 km (39.6 mi);
                                   611 ha (1,509 ac).  82 ha (203 ac).     551 ha (1,361 ac).  1,244 ga (3,073
                                                                                               ac)
    Larimer.....................  124.2 km (77.2      46.0 km (28.6 mi);  134.8 km (83.3      305.1 km (189.6
                                   mi); 2,939 ha       1,038 ha (2,564     ac); 3,054 ha       mi); 7,022 ha
                                   (6,745 ac).         ac).                (7,547 ac).         (17,352 ac)
    Teller......................  1.3 km (0.8 mi);    0.................  0.................  1.3 km (0.8 mi);
                                   34 ha (85 ac).                                              34 ha (85 ac)
    Weld........................  0.................  0.0; 1 ha (2 ac)..  8.9 km (5.6 mi);    8.9 km (5.6 mi);
                                                                           196 ha (484 ac).    197 ha (486 ac)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Lands proposed as critical habitat are divided into 19 critical 
habitat units containing all of those primary constituent elements 
necessary to meet the primary biological needs of the Preble's. We did 
not include all areas currently occupied by the Preble's. A brief 
description of each Preble's critical habitat unit and the reasons why 
they are essential for the conservation of the Preble's are provided 
below. The units are generally based on geographically distinct river 
drainages and subdrainages described in the Draft Document. These units 
have been subject to, or are threatened by, varying degrees of 
degradation from human use and development. For these reasons, all of 
the areas we are proposing for critical habitat designation may require 
special management considerations or protection.
    In areas within the range of the Preble's where there has been 
concern over possible confusion between the Preble's and the western 
jumping mouse, we have provided comments regarding known occurrence of 
the Preble's. Unless otherwise noted, references to ``morphological 
examination'' refer to Connor and Shenk (in prep.), references to 
``genetic examination'' refer to Riggs et al. (1997), and references to 
``captures presumed to be the Preble's'' refer to field surveys where 
jumping mice presumed to be Preble's were released alive and not 
subject to morphological or genetic examination.
    The following five critical habitat units are located in the North 
Platte River drainage:

[[Page 47166]]

    Unit NP1: Cottonwood Creek, Albany, Platte, and Converse Counties, 
Wyoming.
    Unit NP1 encompasses approximately 924 ha (2,284 ac) on 43.3 km 
(26.9 mi) of streams within the Cottonwood Creek watershed. It includes 
Cottonwood Creek from Harris Park Road upstream to the 2,100-m (7,000-
ft) elevation. Tributaries include North Cottonwood Creek and Preacher 
Creek. The unit includes both public and private lands, including a 
small portion on the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest.
    This unit is located in the Glendo HUC and is proposed to address 
the one of two medium recovery populations required to meet recovery 
criteria for the North Platte River drainage in the Draft Document. The 
Preble's habitat on this unit appears generally excellent, particularly 
on the Forest Service lands. This population is essential not only to 
maintain distribution near the northernmost extreme of known Preble's 
range, but because the large size of the population (as predicted by 
amount and quality of habitat) should help ensure viability into the 
future. Private lands within the unit are used extensively for grazing, 
which could pose a threat to the Preble's and its habitat if not 
managed appropriately.
    A specimen examined by Krutzch (1954) in describing the subspecies 
is from Springhill in this HUC. Five recent specimens from this 
subdrainage have been identified as the Preble's through morphological 
examination (tooth fold presence) (Jones, in litt., 2002). Captures of 
jumping mice presumed to be Preble's have occurred at several other 
locations in this subdrainage.
    NP2: Horseshoe Creek, Albany County, Wyoming.
    Unit NP2 encompasses approximately 153 ha (377 ac) on 6.5 km (4.1 
mi) of streams within the Horseshoe Creek watershed. It includes 
Horseshoe Creek upstream from Harris Park Road. The unit is entirely on 
Federal lands within the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest.
    This unit is located in the Glendo HUC and, while unlikely to serve 
as an initial recovery population under the Draft Document, it 
encompasses a significant area of habitat entirely on Federal lands. 
Proposal of critical habitat on this area is based upon captures of 
jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's on Trail Creek (an upstream 
tributary to Horshoe Creek) and on primary constituent elements present 
in this area.
    Unit NP3: Chugwater Creek, Albany, Laramie, and Platte Counties, 
Wyoming.
    Unit NP3 encompasses approximately 3,811 ha (9,416 ac) on 179.4 km 
(111.5 mi) of streams within the Chugwater Creek watershed. It extends 
from several miles downstream of the town of Chugwater, upstream on 
Chugwater Creek and its tributaries to approximately the 2,100-m 
(7,000-ft) elevation. Major tributaries within the unit include Middle 
Chugwater Creek, South Chugwater Creek, Three Mile Creek, Sand Creek, 
Ricker Creek, Strong Creek, and Shanton Creek. The unit consists of 
both public and private lands.
    This unit is located in the Lower Laramie HUC and is proposed to 
address the large recovery population in the North Platte River 
drainage required to meet the recovery criteria described in the Draft 
Document. The unit supports excellent Preble's habitat with a complex 
tributary system and is likely to support a high density of the 
Preble's. While some isolated portions of this unit may be less 
suitable, we do not believe those areas are permanently affected by 
current land use practices or pose such barriers as to segregate 
portions of this Preble's population. Based on the amount and apparent 
quality of Preble's habitat contained in this unit, it may support one 
of the largest populations of the Preble's within its entire range and 
has a high probability of remaining viable well into the future. 
Threats are presented by future development, road construction, and 
road improvements. In addition, the unit is repeatedly crossed by gas 
pipelines and utility corridors. Haying and grazing may be threats to 
the Preble's in portions of the unit.
    Specimens of Preble's from this HUC include a specimen from 
Chugwater examined by Krutzch (1954) in describing the subspecies, and 
specimens from Sybille Creek, Chugwater Creek, and Hunton Creek 
verified as the Preble's through morphological examination (tooth fold 
presence) (Jones, in litt., 2002). Capture of jumping mice presumed to 
be the Preble's has occurred at several other locations in this 
subdrainage.
    Unit NP4: Friend Creek and Murphy Canyon, Albany County, Wyoming.
    Unit NP4 encompasses approximately 683 ha (1,689 ac) on 32.0 km 
(19.9 mi) of streams within two subunits, the Friend Creek and Murphy 
Canyon watersheds. It consists largely of Federal lands within the 
Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest but includes small parcels of 
intervening non-Federal lands.
    This unit is located in the Lower Laramie HUC and, while unlikely 
to serve as an initial recovery population under the Draft Document, it 
encompasses a significant area of Preble's habitat largely on Federal 
lands within the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest. We have proposed 
this unit as critical habitat based on the primary constituent elements 
present and captures of jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's.
    Unit NP5: Horse Creek, Laramie County, Wyoming.
    Unit NP5 encompasses approximately 1,770 ha (4,373 ac) on 84.1 km 
(52.3 mi) of streams within the Horse Creek watershed. It includes 
Horse Creek from the Interstate Highway 25 bridge upstream to the 
2,100-m (7,000-ft) elevation with major tributaries including Dry 
Creek, the South Fork of Horse Creek, Mill Creek, and the North Fork of 
Horse Creek. The unit consists of both public and private lands. It 
includes lands owned by the University of Wyoming.
    The unit is located in the Horse Creek HUC and is proposed to 
address one of the two medium recovery populations required in the 
Draft Document to meet recovery criteria in the North Platte River 
drainage. In general, the habitat appears extremely good with a broad 
floodplain, patches of dense shrubs, and extensive hay meadows. This 
population appears to be relatively large, as predicted by the quality 
and extent of habitat present, and should retain viability into the 
future. Current and future threats include development, road 
construction, and utility corridors. Additionally, haying and grazing 
may be threats to the Preble's in portions of the unit.
    This designation is based upon a capture of a mouse verified to be 
the Preble's through morphological examination (tooth fold presence) 
(Jones, in litt., 2002) on Horse Creek and other captures presumed to 
be Preble's on Horse Creek and the South Fork of Horse Creek. We 
elected to propose critical habitat both upstream and downstream of 
successful survey locations based on the extensive complex of suitable 
habitat that is present.
    The following 13 critical habitat units are located in the South 
Platte River drainage:
    Unit SP1: Lodgepole Creek and Upper Middle Lodgepole Creek, Laramie 
County, Wyoming.
    Unit SP1 encompasses approximately 265 ha (654 ac) on 20.8 km (13.0 
mi) of streams within two subunits in the Lodgepole Creek watershed, 
Lodgepole Creek and the Upper Middle Lodgepole Creek. The Lodgepole 
Creek subunit includes Lodgepole Creek from Horse Creek Road (County 
Road 211) upstream beyond the confluence of North Lodgepole Creek and 
Middle Lodgepole

[[Page 47167]]

Creek up to 2,300-m (7,000-ft) elevation on both creeks. The subunit 
consists of almost entirely private lands. The Upper Middle Lodgepole 
Creek subunit includes Middle Lodgepole Creek from the eastern boundary 
of the Pole Mountain Unit of the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest 
upstream to about 2,400-m (7,750-ft) elevation and including the North 
Branch of Middle Lodgepole Creek. The unit consists of public lands 
including portions of the Medicine Bow-Routt National Forest.
    This unit is located in the Upper Lodgepole HUC and is proposed to 
address two of three small recovery populations included in the 
recovery criteria for this HUC in the Draft Document. The Lodgepole 
Creek subunit will likely be threatened in the future by development 
including road construction. The Upper Middle Lodgepole Creek subunit 
may be threatened by grazing pressure (particularly during drought 
conditions) and off-road vehicle use.
    Critical habitat on this unit is proposed based on captures of 
jumping mice on Middle Lodgepole Creek and North Branch of Middle 
Lodgepole Creek. Although these two trap sites are fairly high in 
elevation, a specimen was confirmed as the Preble's on the North Branch 
of Middle Lodgepole Creek through genetic examination and a second 
specimen was verified to be the Preble's through morphological 
examination (tooth fold presence) (Jones, in litt., 2001).
    Unit SP2: F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Laramie County, Wyoming.
    Unit SP2 encompasses approximately 134 ha (331 ac) on 5.7 km (3.6 
mi) of streams within the Crow Creek watershed. It includes Crow Creek 
on the F.E. Warren Air Force Base from the southeastern boundary of the 
Air Force Base in Cheyenne upstream to the western boundary of the Air 
Force Base. The unit consists entirely of Federal lands of the Air 
Force Base.
    This unit is located in the Crow Creek HUC and is proposed to 
address one of three small recovery populations required in the 
recovery criteria for this HUC in the Draft Document. This unit 
includes portions of the Air Force Base threatened by water management 
for flood control, reclamation of landfills, and other Air Force Base 
operations.
    Crow Creek on the Air Force Base has been the subject of repeated 
past trapping. Trapping efforts by the University of Wyoming, Colorado 
Natural Heritage Program, and the Wyoming Natural Diversity Database 
identified mice from the Air Force Base as the Preble's, though without 
morphological examination of specimens. A specimen from Cheyenne, 
within this HUC, was examined by Krutzch (1954) and used in describing 
the Preble's subspecies. However, genetic examination identified 
specimens from the Air Force Base as western jumping mice. One 1996 
specimen taken from the Air Force Base was identified through 
morphological examination as a western jumping mouse. Given that the 
Air Force Base is within the normal elevational range of the Preble's, 
it is likely the Air Force Base is occupied by both the Preble's and 
the western jumping mouse.
    Unit SP3: Lone Tree Creek, Laramie County, Wyoming, Weld County, 
Colorado.
    Unit SP3 encompasses approximately 394 ha (974 ac) on 18.7 km (11.7 
mi) of streams within the Lone Tree Creek watershed. It includes two 
subunits, Lone Tree Creek, Wyoming and Lone Tree Creek, Colorado. The 
Lone Tree Creek, Wyoming, subunit includes a reach of Lone Tree Creek 
and a portion of Goose Creek. The subunit consists of both public and 
private lands. The Lone Tree Creek, Colorado, subunit includes Lone 
Tree Creek both upstream and downstream of a successful trapping site 
near Interstate Highway 25. This subunit also consists of both public 
and private lands.
    This unit is located in the Lone Tree-Owl HUC and is proposed to 
address two of three small recovery populations required in the 
recovery criteria for this HUC in the Draft Document. Suitable habitat 
occurs throughout the HUC, although some areas are of lower quality due 
to heavy grazing. This unit may be threatened by development in the 
future.
    Proposal of critical habitat within this unit is based on captured 
jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's in Wyoming and Colorado. In 
the Colorado subunit, a mouse identified in the field as a Preble's was 
determined by genetic examination to be more similar to a western 
jumping mouse. Given the low elevation of the capture site 1,900 m 
(6,200 ft), it is likely that both the Preble's and the western jumping 
mouse are present within this unit.
    Unit SP4: North Fork Cache La Poudre River, Larimer, Colorado.
    Unit SP4 encompasses approximately 3,321 ha (8,206 ac) on 141.8 km 
(88.1 mi) of streams within the North Fork of the Cache La Poudre River 
watershed. It includes the North Fork of the Cache La Poudre River from 
Seaman Reservoir upstream to Halligan Reservoir. Major tributaries 
within the unit include Stonewall Creek, Rabbit Creek (including its 
North Fork, Middle Fork and South Fork), and Lone Pine Creek. The unit 
includes both public and private lands. It includes portions of the 
Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest, as well as Lone Pine State Wildlife 
Area.
    The unit is located in the Cache La Poudre HUC and is proposed to 
address the large recovery population designated for this area in the 
Draft Document. The area remains rural and agricultural with habitat 
components likely to support relatively high densities of Preble's. 
Pressure for expanded development is increasing within the area. 
Portions of the unit are the subject of the Livermore Valley Landowners 
HCP currently under development.
    Specimens from Rabbit Creek and Lone Pine Creek were verified 
through genetic examination as the Preble's. Jumping mice presumed to 
be the Preble's have been captured at several locations within the 
unit.
    Unit SP5: Cache La Poudre River, Larimer County, Colorado.
    Unit SP5 encompasses approximately 1,912 ha (4,725 ac) on 82.4 km 
(51.2 mi) of streams within the Cache La Poudre River watershed. It 
includes the Cache La Poudre River from Poudre Park upstream to the 
2,300-m (7,600-ft) elevation (below Rustic). Major tributaries within 
the unit include Hewlett Gulch, Young Gulch, Skin Gulch, Poverty Gulch, 
Elkhorn Creek, Pendergrass Creek, and Bennett Creek. The unit is 
primarily composed of Federal lands of the Arapaho-Roosevelt National 
Forest, including portions of the Cache La Poudre Wilderness, but 
includes limited non-Federal lands.
    The unit is located in the Cache La Poudre HUC and, while unlikely 
to serve as a recovery population under the Draft Document, it 
encompasses a significant area of habitat likely to support a sizeable 
population of Preble's. Due to Federal ownership, development pressure 
is minimal; however, the area is subject to substantial recreational 
use (rafting, kayaking, fishing) in the Cache La Poudre River corridor. 
Non-Federal lands include existing development that may limit habitat 
components present. Some such reaches may serve the Preble's mostly as 
connectors between areas containing all necessary primary constituent 
elements.
    A number of jumping mice, presumed to be the Preble's, have been 
captured from this unit, with one specimen from Young Gulch was 
verified through morphological examination as a Preble's.
    Unit SP6: Buckhorn Creek, Larimer County, Colorado.
    Unit SP6 encompasses approximately 1,537 ha (3,798 ac) on 69.2 km 
(43.0 mi)

[[Page 47168]]

of streams within the Buckhorn Creek watershed. It includes Buckhorn 
Creek from just west of Masonville, upstream to the 7,600-foot 
elevation. Major tributaries within the unit include Little Bear Gulch, 
Bear Gulch, Stringtown Gulch, Fish Creek, and Stove Prairie Creek. The 
unit includes both public and private lands, and includes portions of 
the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest.
    The unit is located in the Big Thompson HUC and is proposed to 
address the medium recovery population designated for this area in the 
Draft Document. Pressure for expanded rural development exists on non-
Federal lands within the unit.
    Jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's have been captured from 
various portions of this unit with one specimen from Little Bear Gulch 
verified through morphological examination as the Preble's.
    Unit SP7: Cedar Creek, Larimer County, Colorado.
    Unit SP7 encompasses approximately 252 ha (624 ac) on 11.7 km (7.3 
mi) of streams within the Cedar Creek watershed, including Dry Creek 
and Jug Gulch. Cedar Creek is a tributary of the Big Thompson River and 
enters the Big Thompson River at Cedar Cove. The unit is centered on 
Federal lands of the Arapaho-Roosevelt National Forest, but includes 
some stream reaches on non-Federal lands.
    This unit is located in the Big Thompson HUC and, while unlikely to 
serve as an initial recovery population under the Draft Document, it 
supports a population on mostly Federal lands of the upper Big Thompson 
River, isolated, at least in terms of riparian connection, from the 
Preble's population on nearby Buckhorn Creek. This site is upstream of 
The Narrows of the Big Thompson Canyon, a barrier to Preble's movement, 
while the confluence of the Big Thompson River and Buckhorn Creek is 
downstream from The Narrows. However, the close proximity of the 
headwaters of Jug Gulch within this unit to the headwaters of Bear 
Gulch within the Buckhorn Creek unit suggests that some individual 
Preble's mice may pass between the two populations and thus between the 
two significant watersheds within this HUC.
    Jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's have been captured from 
within this unit. The Little Bear Gulch capture of Preble's, cited 
above, is from just north of this unit and within the same HUC.
    Unit SP8: South Boulder Creek, Boulder County, Colorado.
    Unit SP8 encompasses approximately 283 ha (699 ac) on 11.8 km (7.3 
mi) of streams within the South Boulder Creek watershed. It includes 
South Boulder Creek from Baseline Road upstream to Eldorado Springs, 
and includes the Spring Brook tributary. The unit includes both public 
and private lands. It includes substantial lands owned by the City of 
Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks.
    This unit is located in the St. Vrain HUC and is proposed to 
address the medium recovery population designated for this area in the 
Draft Document. Portions of the area have been the subject of Preble's 
research funded by the City of Boulder and, in places, high densities 
of the Preble's have been documented. A wide floodplain, complex ditch 
system, and the irrigation of pastures makes habitat within the lower 
portions of this unit unique. In places, the outward extent of primary 
constituent elements surpasses the standard distance outward from the 
stream used to define critical habitat in this proposal. Boundaries of 
critical habitat on this unit should be refined in cooperation with the 
City of Boulder prior to the final rule. Pressure for expanded 
development is occurring on private lands within the unit. Recreational 
use of the City of Boulder lands is considerable and may adversely 
impact the Preble's. The entire unit is within the Boulder County HCP 
currently under development.
    The Preble's has been verified through genetic and morphological 
examination of specimens from several sites within the unit.
    Unit SP9: Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, Jefferson 
County, Colorado.
    Unit SP9 encompasses approximately 429 ha (1,059 ac) on 19.5 km 
(12.1 mi) of streams within the Rock Creek, Woman Creek, and Walnut 
Creek watersheds. The unit includes only Federal lands on the 
Department of Energy's Rocky Flats.
    Portions of this unit are located in the St. Vrain HUC (Rock Creek) 
and portions are in the Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek HUC (Woman 
Creek and Walnut Creek). While unlikely to serve as an initial recovery 
population under the Draft Document, this unit is unique in that it is 
limited entirely to Federal lands and has been the subject of 
substantial past research on the Preble's. After cleanup and closure of 
the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, the property will be 
transferred to the Service to become part of the National Wildlife 
Refuge system. Population studies have taken place on the site over a 
period of years. Streams within the unit are small and habitat 
components present do not support a high density of the Preble's. The 
site presents an opportunity to study small populations and their 
viability over time.
    The Preble's has been verified to be present through genetic and 
morphological examination of specimens from within the unit.
    Unit SP10: Ralston Creek, Jefferson County, Colorado.
    Unit SP10 encompasses approximately 282 ha (698 ac) on 13.1 km (8.1 
mi) of streams within the Ralston Creek watershed. It includes Ralston 
Creek from Ralston Reservoir upstream to the 7,600-foot elevation. The 
unit includes both public and private lands including lands in Golden 
Gate Canyon State Park, White Ranch County Park, and lands owned by 
Denver Water.
    This unit is located in the Clear Creek HUC and is proposed to 
partially address the criteria of three small recovery populations or 
one medium recovery population required for this area in the Draft 
Document. The segment of Ralston Creek that passes through the Cotter 
Corporation's existing Schwartzwalder Mine serves as a connector 
between areas supporting primary constituent elements required by the 
Preble's located in areas upstream and downstream.
    The Preble's has been verified through morphological examination of 
a specimen from the lower portion of this unit.
    Unit SP11: Cherry Creek, Douglas County, Colorado.
    Unit SP11 encompasses approximately 703 ha (1,738 ac) on 32.1 km 
(19.9 mi) of streams within the Cherry Creek watershed. It includes 
Cherry Creek from the downstream boundary of the Castlewood Canyon 
State Recreation Area, upstream to its confluence with Lake Gulch. 
Major tributaries within the unit include Lake Gulch and Upper Lake 
Gulch. The unit includes both public and private lands. It includes 
portions of the Castlewood Canyon State Recreation Area, as well as 
Douglas County's recently acquired Green Mountain Ranch property.
    This unit is located in the Middle South Platte-Cherry Creek HUC 
and is proposed to address the medium recovery population designated 
for this area in the Draft Document. Some development pressure is 
occurring from expanding rural development within the area. The entire 
unit is within the Douglas County HCP currently being developed.
    Unit SP12: West Plum Creek, Douglas County, Colorado.
    Unit SP12 encompasses approximately 3,270 ha (8,080 ac) on 146.6 km 
(91.1 mi) of streams within the

[[Page 47169]]

Plum Creek watershed. It includes Plum Creek from Chatfield Reservoir 
upstream to the confluence with West Plum Creek then continues upstream 
on West Plum Creek to its headwaters. Major tributaries within the unit 
include Indian Creek, Jarre Creek, Garber Creek (including North, 
Middle, and South Garber Creek), Jackson Creek, Spring Creek, Dry 
Gulch, Bear Creek, Starr Canyon, Gove Creek, and Metz Canyon. The unit 
is a combination of public and private lands. It includes portions of 
the Pike-San Isabel National Forest, as well as Chatfield State 
Recreation Area (Corps of Engineers property), and Colorado Division of 
Wildlife's Woodhouse Ranch property.
    This unit is located in the Upper South Platte HUC and is proposed 
to address the large recovery population designated for this area in 
the Draft Document. Aside from a portion of Plum Creek, the area 
remains rather rural and includes habitat components likely to support 
relatively high densities of the Preble's. Pressure for expanded rural 
development is occurring within the area. With the exception of Federal 
lands, the entire unit is within the Douglas County HCP currently being 
developed.
    Specimens from West Plum Creek, Garber Creek, and Indian Creek have 
been verified through morphological examination as the Preble's. The 
unit has been widely surveyed and jumping mice presumed to be the 
Preble's have been found in several other locations.
    Unit SP13: Upper South Platte River, Jefferson and Douglas 
Counties, Colorado.
    Unit SP13 encompasses approximately 1,687 ha (4,168 ac) on 83.1 km 
(51.6 mi) of streams within the Platte River watershed. It includes 
five subunits. The Chatfield subunit includes a section of the South 
Platte River upstream of Chatfield Reservoir within Chatfield State 
Recreation Area (Corps of Engineers' property). The Bear Creek subunit 
includes Bear Creek and West Bear Creek, tributaries to the South 
Platte River on Forest Service lands. The South Platte sub-unit 
includes a segment of the South Platte River upstream from Nighthawk, 
including the tributaries Gunbarrel Creek and Sugar Creek. This subunit 
is centered on Federal lands of the Pike-San Isabel National Forest but 
includes some intervening non-Federal lands. The Trout Creek subunit 
includes portions of Trout Creek, a tributary to Horse Creek, and also 
portions of Eagle Creek, Long Hollow, Fern Creek, Illinois Gulch, and 
Missouri Gulch. This subunit is centered on Federal lands of the Pike-
San Isabel National Forest but includes some intervening non-Federal 
lands along Trout Creek. The Wigwam Creek subunit includes Wigwam Creek 
and its tributaries, Pine Creek and Cabin Creek on Forest Service 
lands.
    This unit is located in the Upper South Platte HUC and, while 
unlikely to serve as an initial recovery population under the Draft 
Document, encompasses five areas of primarily Federal land spread 
through the drainage, four within the Pike-San Isabel National Forest 
boundary. Habitat components present and the likely density of Preble's 
populations vary. The Trout Creek subunit appears to have high quality 
Preble's habitat and may provide an opportunity to research 
relationships between the Preble's and the western jumping mouse, both 
of which have been verified from a single location in the subunit. 
Small segments of non-Federal lands in the unit are within the Douglas 
County HCP currently being developed.
    Preble's has been confirmed through morphological examination of a 
specimen from Trout Creek near the Douglas County-Teller County 
boundary at 2,310 m (7,590 ft). Other captures of jumping mice from 
various locations within this unit are presumed to be the Preble's.
    The following critical habitat unit is located in the Arkansas 
River drainage:
    Unit A1: Monument Creek, El Paso County, Colorado.
    Unit A1 encompasses approximately 1,259 ha (3,110 ac) 56.3 km (35.0 
mi) of streams within the Monument Creek watershed. It includes 
Monument Creek from the confluence of Cottonwood Creek upstream to the 
southern boundary of the Academy and from the northern boundary of the 
Academy upstream to the dam at Monument Lake. Major tributaries within 
the unit include Kettle Creek, Black Squirrel Creek, Monument Branch, 
Smith Creek, Jackson Creek, Beaver Creek, Teachout Creek, and Dirty 
Woman Creek. The unit is primarily on private lands. It includes a 
small portion of the Pike-San Isabel National Forest.
    This unit is located in the Fountain Creek HUC and is proposed to 
address the large recovery population designated for this area in the 
Draft Document. The area is unique in that it represents the only known 
Preble's population of significant size within the Arkansas River 
drainage and the southernmost known occurrence of the Preble's. 
Development pressure is extremely high on some private lands within the 
unit. There is concern that development will result in changes in flows 
from increased stormwater runoff and will affect riparian systems. Non-
Federal lands within the unit are addressed in the El Paso County HCP 
currently being developed.
    Jumping mice presumed to be the Preble's have been captured 
throughout this unit and specimens from the Academy and within the unit 
have been verified as the Preble's through genetic and morphological 
examination.

Effects of Critical Habitat Designation

    Designating critical habitat does not, in itself, lead to the 
recovery of a listed species. The designation does not establish a 
reserve, create a management plan, establish numerical population 
goals, prescribe specific management practices (inside or outside of 
critical habitat), or directly affect areas not designated as critical 
habitat. Specific management recommendations for areas designated as 
critical habitat are most appropriately addressed in recovery and 
conservation plans, and through section 7 consultation and section 10 
permits.
    However, designation of critical habitat can help focus 
conservation activities for listed species by identifying areas 
essential to conserve the species. Designation of critical habitat also 
alerts the public, as well as land-managing agencies, to the importance 
of these areas. As a result of critical habitat designation, Federal 
agencies may be able to prioritize landowner incentive programs such as 
Conservation Reserve Program enrollment and other private landowner 
agreements that benefit the Preble's. Critical habitat designation also 
may assist States and local governments in prioritizing their 
conservation and land management programs.

ESA Section 7  Consultation

    The regulatory effects of a critical habitat designation under the 
Act are triggered through the provisions of section 7, which applies 
only to activities conducted, authorized, or funded by a Federal agency 
(Federal actions). Regulations implementing this interagency 
cooperation provision of the Act are codified at 50 CFR 402. 
Individuals, organizations, States, local governments, and other non-
Federal entities are not affected by the designation of critical 
habitat unless their actions occur on Federal lands, require Federal 
authorization, or involve Federal funding.
    Section 7(a)(2) of the Act requires Federal agencies, including us, 
to insure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued 
existence of a listed species or result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of designated critical habitat. This requirement is met 
through section 7

[[Page 47170]]

consultation under the Act. Adverse modification might result from 
alterations that include, but are not limited to, adverse changes to 
the physical or biological features, i.e., the primary constituent 
elements, that were the basis for determining the habitat to be 
critical.

Conference for Proposed Critical Habitat

    Section 7(a)(4) of the Act requires Federal agencies to confer with 
us on any action that is likely to result in the destruction or adverse 
modification of proposed critical habitat. The regulations for 
interagency cooperation regarding proposed critical habitat are 
codified at 50 CFR 402.10. During a conference on the effects of a 
Federal action on proposed critical habitat, we make non-binding 
recommendations on ways to minimize or avoid adverse effects of the 
action. We document these recommendations and any conclusions reached 
in a conference report provided to the Federal agency and to any 
applicant involved.
    If requested by the Federal agency and deemed appropriate by us, 
the conference may be conducted in accordance with the procedures for 
formal consultation under 50 CFR 402.14. We may adopt an opinion issued 
at the conclusion of the conference as our biological opinion when the 
critical habitat is designated by final rule, but only if new 
information or changes to the proposed Federal action would not 
significantly alter the content of the opinion.

Consultation for Designated Critical Habitat

    If a Federal action may affect a listed species or its designated 
critical habitat, the action agency must initiate consultation with us 
(50 CFR 402.14). Through this consultation, we would advise the agency 
whether the action would likely jeopardize the continued existence of 
the species or adversely modify its critical habitat.
    When we issue a biological opinion that concludes that an action is 
likely to result in the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat, we must provide reasonable and prudent alternatives to the 
action, if any are identifiable. Reasonable and prudent alternatives 
are actions identified during consultation that can be implemented in a 
manner consistent with the intended purpose of the proposed action, are 
consistent with the scope of the action agency's authority and 
jurisdiction, are economically and technologically feasible, and would 
likely avoid the destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat (50 CFR 402.02).

Reinitiation of Prior Consultations

    A Federal agency may request a conference with us for any 
previously reviewed action that is likely to destroy or adversely 
modify proposed critical habitat and over which the agency retains 
discretionary involvement or control, as described above under 
``Conference for Proposed Critical Habitat.'' Following designation of 
critical habitat, regulations at 50 CFR 402.16 require a Federal agency 
to reinitiate consultation for previously reviewed actions that may 
affect critical habitat and over which the agency has retained 
discretionary involvement or control.

Federal Actions That May Destroy or Adversely Modify Preble's Meadow 
Jumping Mouse Critical Habitat

    Section 4(b)(8) of the Act requires us, in any proposed or final 
rule designating critical habitat, to briefly describe and evaluate 
those activities that may adversely modify such habitat, or that may be 
affected by such designation.
    Federal actions that, when carried out, funded or authorized by a 
federal agency, may destroy or adversely modify critical habitat for 
the Preble's include, but are not limited to:
    (1) Any activity that results in development or alteration of the 
landscape within a unit, including land clearing; activities associated 
with construction for urban and industrial development, roads, bridges, 
pipelines, or bank stabilization; agricultural activities such as 
plowing, discing, haying, or intensive grazing; off-road vehicle 
activity; and mining or drilling of wells;
    (2) Any activity that results in changes in the hydrology of the 
unit, including construction, operation, and maintenance of levees, 
dams, berms, and channels; activities associated with flow control 
(e.g., releases, diversions, and related operations); irrigation; 
sediment, sand, or gravel removal; and other activities resulting in 
the draining or inundation of a unit;
    (3) Any sale, exchange, or lease of Federal land that is likely to 
result in the habitat in a unit being destroyed or appreciably 
degraded;
    (4) Any activity that detrimentally alters natural processes in a 
unit including the changes to inputs of water, sediment and nutrients, 
or that significantly and detrimentally alters water quantity in the 
unit; and
    (5) Any activity that could lead to the introduction, expansion, or 
increased density of exotic plant or animal species that are 
detrimental to the Preble's and to its habitat.
    Federal actions not affecting listed species or critical habitat 
and actions on non-Federal lands that are not federally funded or 
permitted do not require section 7 consultation.

Previous Section 7  Consultations

    Many section 7 consultations for Federal actions affecting the 
Preble's and its habitat have preceded this critical habitat proposal, 
including, but not limited to:
    (1) Activities on Federal lands including those of the Department 
of Defense, Forest Service, Department of Energy, and Bureau of Land 
Management;
    (2) Activities affecting waters of the United States by the Corps 
of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act;
    (3) Licensing or relicensing of dams by the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission;
    (4) Development, operation, and maintenance of dams, canals, and 
other means of directing flows by the Corps of Engineers and the Bureau 
of Reclamation;
    (5) Funding and regulation of highway and bridge construction, and 
improvements by the Federal Highway Administration;
    (6) Licensing or construction of communication sites by the Federal 
Communications Commission;
    (7) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the 
Federal Emergence Management Agency; and
    (8) Issuance of Endangered Species Act section 10(a)(1)(B) permits 
by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
    If you have any questions regarding whether specific activities 
will likely constitute destruction or adverse modification of critical 
habitat, contact LeRoy Carlson, Field Supervisor, Colorado Ecological 
Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). Requests 
for copies of regulations on listed wildlife and inquiries about 
prohibitions and permits may be addressed to U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Ecological Services, P.O. Box 25486, DFC, Denver, CO 80225-
0486 (telephone 303-236-7400; facsimile 303-236-0027).

Relationship of Critical Habitat to Military Lands

    The Sikes Act Improvements Act of 1997 (Sikes Act) requires each 
military installation that includes land and water suitable for the 
conservation and management of natural resources to complete, by 
November 17, 2001, an Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan 
(INRMP). An INRMP integrates implementation of the

[[Page 47171]]

military mission of the installation with stewardship of the natural 
resources found there. Each INRMP includes an assessment of the 
ecological needs on the installation, including needs to provide for 
the conservation of listed species; a statement of goals and 
priorities; a detailed description of management actions to be 
implemented to provide for these ecological needs; and a monitoring and 
adaptive management plan. We consult with the military on the 
development and implementation of INRMPs for installations with listed 
species. Bases that have completed and approved INRMPs that address the 
needs of the species generally do not meet the definition of critical 
habitat discussed above, as they require no additional special 
management or protection. Therefore, we do not include these areas in 
critical habitat designations if they meet the following three 
criteria: (1) A current INRMP must be complete and provide a 
conservation benefit to the species; (2) the plan must provide 
assurances that the conservation management strategies will be 
implemented; and (3) the plan must provide assurances that the 
conservation management strategies will be effective, by providing for 
periodic monitoring and revisions as necessary. If all of these 
criteria are met, then the lands covered under the plan would not meet 
the definition of critical habitat.
    In place at the Air Force Academy in El Paso County, CO are an 
INRMP, a 1999 Conservation and Management Plan for Preble's Meadow 
Jumping Mouse on the U.S. Air Force Academy, and a 2000 programmatic 
section 7 consultation addressing certain activities on the Academy 
that may affect the Preble's. The conservation and management plan 
provides guidance for U.S. Air Force management decisions regarding the 
Preble's and its habitat over five years (2000--2005). While it was 
based upon the most current scientific knowledge available at the time 
that it was developed, research regarding Preble's is ongoing at the 
Academy and the conservation and management plan will be updated as new 
information is collected.
    We have reviewed these measures and have determined that they 
address the three criteria identified above. Therefore, Academy lands 
do not meet the definition of critical habitat and are not included in 
this proposed designation of critical habitat for the Preble's. To 
date, the Academy is the only Department of Defense installation that 
has completed a final INRMP that provides for sufficient conservation, 
management and protection for the Preble's.

Relationship to Habitat Conservation Plans and Other Planning Efforts

    Section 10(a) of the Act authorizes us to issue permits for private 
actions which result in the taking of listed species incidental to 
otherwise lawful activities. Incidental take permit applications must 
be supported by an HCP that identifies conservation measures that the 
permittee agrees to implement for the species to minimize and mitigate 
the impacts of the requested incidental take. Currently a limited 
number of small HCPs covering the Preble's or its habitat have been 
approved and regional or county-wide HCPs are being developed in a few 
instances. We have not proposed to exclude any lands from this critical 
habitat designation on the basis of existing HCPs. However, HCPs that 
will likely include proposed critical habitat are currently under 
development. Should any of these HCPs be approved by the Service prior 
to finalization of a rule designating critical habitat, we will 
consider whether the area covered by the HCP does not represent 
critical habitat due to adequate existing protection and management 
under the HCP.
    In the event that future HCPs covering the Preble's are developed 
within the boundaries of designated critical habitat after finalization 
of the critical habitat designation, we will provide technical 
assistance and work closely with the applicants to identify lands 
essential for the long-term conservation of the Preble's, ensure that 
the HCPs provide for protection and management of habitat areas 
essential to the Preble's by either directing development and habitat 
modification to nonessential areas, or appropriately modifying 
activities within essential habitat areas so that such activities will 
not adversely modify the primary constituent elements. The HCP 
development process provides an opportunity for more intensive analysis 
and data collection regarding the use of particular habitat areas by 
the Preble's and a more detailed analysis of the importance of such 
lands.

Economic Analysis

    Section 4(b)(2) of the Act requires us to designate critical 
habitat on the basis of the best scientific and commercial information 
available, and to consider the economic and other relevant impacts of 
designating these areas as critical habitat. We may exclude areas from 
critical habitat upon a determination that the benefits of such 
exclusions outweigh the benefits of designating these areas as critical 
habitat. We cannot exclude areas from critical habitat when the 
exclusion will result in the extinction of the species. We will conduct 
an analysis of the economic impacts of designating these areas as 
critical habitat prior to a final determination. When completed, we 
will announce the availability of the draft economic analysis with a 
notice in the Federal Register and reopen the comment period at the 
time to accept comments on the economic analysis or, if necessary, 
further comments on the proposed rule. The economic analysis will be 
available at http://www.R6.FWS.GOV/preble. This economic analysis will 
serve as the basis of our analysis under section 4(b)(2), and of any 
exclusions. As this economic analysis is not yet completed, we are not 
yet able to identify proposed exclusions under section 4(b)(2) in this 
proposed rule. We will review this analysis, public comments on the 
analysis and this proposed rule, and the benefits of designating areas 
as critical habitat; we may identify certain proposed areas that should 
be excluded from the final critical habitat designation, provided these 
exclusions will not result in the extinction of the species. As a 
result, the final critical habitat determination may differ from this 
proposal.

Public Comments Solicited

    We intend any final action resulting from this proposal to be as 
accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we solicit comments 
or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, 
the scientific community, industry, or any other interested party 
concerning this proposed rule. We particularly seek comments 
concerning:
    (1) Reasons why any habitat should or should not be determined to 
be critical habitat as provided by section 4 of the Act, including 
whether the benefits of designation will outweigh any threats to the 
species due to designation;
    (2) Specific information on the amount and distribution of the 
Preble's habitat, and what habitat is essential to the conservation of 
the species and why;
    (3) Land use practices, and current or planned activities in the 
subject areas and their possible impacts on proposed critical habitat;
    (4) Any foreseeable economic or other impacts resulting from the 
proposed designation of critical habitat, in particular, any impacts on 
small entities or families;
    (5) Economic and other values associated with designating critical

[[Page 47172]]

habitat for the Preble's, such as those derived from non-consumptive 
uses (e.g., hiking, camping, birdwatching, enhanced watershed 
protection, improved air quality, increased soil retention, ``existence 
values,'' and reductions in administrative costs); and
    (6) Whether our approach to critical habitat designation could be 
improved or modified in any way to provide for greater public 
participation and understanding, or to assist us in accommodating 
public concern and comments.
    If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments and materials 
concerning this proposal by any one of several methods (see ADDRESSES). 
If you would like to submit comments by electronic format, please 
submit them in ASCII file format and avoid the use of special 
characters and encryption. Please include your name and return e-mail 
address in your e-mail message. Please note that the e-mail address 
will be closed out at the termination of the public comment period. If 
you do not receive confirmation from the system that we have received 
your message, contact us directly by calling our Colorado Ecological 
Services Field Office at 303-275-2370.
    Our practice is to make comments, including names and home 
addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular 
business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold 
their home address, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. 
If you wish us to withhold your name or address, you must state this 
request prominently at the beginning of your comments. However, we will 
not consider anonymous comments. To the extent consistent with 
applicable law, we will make all submissions from organizations or 
businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as 
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available 
for public inspection in their entirety. Comments and materials 
received will be available for public inspection, by appointment, 
during normal business hours at the above address.

Peer Review

    In accordance with our policy published on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 
34270), we will seek the expert opinions of at least three appropriate 
and independent specialists regarding this proposed rule. The purpose 
of such review is to ensure decisions are based on scientifically sound 
data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send these peer reviewers 
copies of this proposed rule immediately following publication in the 
Federal Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to comment, 
during the public comment period, on the specific assumptions and 
conclusions regarding the proposed designation of critical habitat.
    We will consider all comments and data received during the 60-day 
comment period on this proposed rule during preparation of a final 
rule. Accordingly, the final rule may differ from this proposal.

Public Hearings

    The Act provides for one or more public hearings on this proposal, 
if requested. Requests for public hearings must be made at least 15 
days prior to the close of the public comment period. We will schedule 
public hearings on this proposal, if requested, and announce the dates, 
times, and places of those hearings in the Federal Register and local 
newspapers at least 15 days prior to the first hearing.
    We plan to schedule at least three informal public meetings in 
Wyoming and Colorado to provide information on and an opportunity for 
discussion of this proposed rule. The dates, times, and places of these 
meetings will be publicized by the Service, including announcements in 
local newspapers.

Clarity of the Rule

    Executive Order 12866 requires each agency to write regulations and 
notices that are easy to understand. We invite your comments on how to 
make this proposed rule easier to understand including answers to 
questions such as the following--(1) Are the requirements in the 
proposed rule clearly stated? (2) Does the proposed rule contain 
technical language or jargon that interferes with the clarity? (3) Does 
the format of the proposed rule (grouping and order of sections, use of 
headings, paragraphing, etc.) aid or reduce its clarity? (4) Is the 
description of the proposed rule in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
section of the preamble helpful in understanding the proposal? (5) What 
else could we do to make the proposed rule easier to understand?
    Send a copy of any comments that concern how we could make this 
proposed rule easier to understand to: Office of Regulatory Affairs, 
Department of the Interior, Room 7229, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, 
DC 20240. You may also e-mail comments to: [email protected].

Required Determinations

Regulatory Planning and Review

    In accordance with Executive Order 12866, this document is a 
significant rule and was reviewed by the Office of Management and 
Budget (OMB). We are preparing a draft economic analysis of this 
proposed action. We will use this analysis to meet the requirement of 
section 4(b)(2) of the Act to determine the economic consequences of 
designating the specific areas as critical habitat and excluding any 
area from critical habitat if it is determined that the benefits of 
such exclusion outweigh the benefits of specifying such areas as part 
of the critical habitat, unless failure to designate such area as 
critical habitat will lead to the extinction of the Preble's. This 
analysis will be available for public comment before finalizing this 
designation. The availability of the draft economic analysis will be 
announced in the Federal Register and in local newspapers.

Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)

    In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of 
critical habitat will have a significant effect on a substantial number 
of small entities. As indicated on Table 1 (see ``Critical Habitat 
Designation''), we have proposed designating property owned by Federal, 
State, and local governments, and private entities.
    Within these areas, the types of Federal actions or authorized 
activities that we have identified as potential concerns are:
    (1) Activities on Federal lands including the Department of 
Defense, Forest Service, Department of Energy, and Bureau of Land 
Management;
    (2) Regulations of activities affecting waters of the United States 
by the Corps of Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act;
    (3) Licensing or relicensing of dams by the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission;
    (4) Development, operations, and maintenance of dams, canals, and 
other means of directing flows by the Corps of Engineers and Bureau of 
Reclamation;
    (5) Funding and regulation of highway and bridge construction and 
improvements by the Federal Highway Administration;
    (6) Licensing or construction of communication sites by the Federal 
Communications Commission;
    (7) Hazard mitigation and post-disaster repairs funded by the 
Federal Emergency Management Agency; and
    (8) Issuance of Endangered Species Act section 10(a)(1)(B) permits 
by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
    Many of these activities sponsored by Federal agencies within the 
proposed critical habitat areas are carried out by small entities (as 
defined by the Regulatory Flexibility Act) through

[[Page 47173]]

contract, grant, permit, or other Federal authorization. These actions 
are currently required to comply with the listing protections of the 
Act, and the designation of critical habitat is not anticipated to have 
significant additional effects on these activities in areas of critical 
habitat occupied by the species.
    For actions on non-Federal property that do not have a Federal 
connection (such as funding or authorization), the current restrictions 
concerning take of the species remain in effect, and this rule will 
have no additional restrictions.

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2))

    In the economic analysis, we will determine whether designation of 
critical habitat will cause--(a) any effect on the economy of $100 
million or more; (b) any increases in costs or prices for consumers, 
individual industries, Federal, State, Tribal, or local government 
agencies, or geographic regions; or (c) any significant adverse effects 
on competition, employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or 
the ability of United States-based enterprises to compete with foreign-
based enterprises.

Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (Executive Order 13211)

    On May 18, 2001, the President issued an Executive Order (E.O. 
13211) on regulations that significantly affect energy supply, 
distribution, and use. Executive Order 13211 requires agencies to 
prepare Statements of Energy Effects when undertaking certain actions. 
Though this proposed rule is a significant regulatory action under 
Executive Order 12866, it is not expected to significantly affect 
energy supplies, distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is not a 
significant energy action and no Statement of Energy Effects is 
required.

Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 et seq.)

    In accordance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501 
et seq.), the Service will use the economic analysis to further 
evaluate this situation.

Takings

    In accordance with Executive Order 12630, this rule does not have 
significant takings implications, and a takings implication assessment 
is not required. As discussed above, the designation of critical 
habitat affects only Federal agency actions. The rule will not increase 
or decrease the current restrictions on private property concerning 
take of the Preble's as defined in section 9 of the Act and its 
implementing regulations (50 FR 17.31). Due to current public knowledge 
of the species' protection, the prohibition against take of the 
Preble's both within and outside of the proposed areas, and the fact 
that critical habitat provides no incremental restrictions, we do not 
anticipate that property values will be affected by the critical 
habitat designation. Additionally, critical habitat designation does 
not preclude development of HCPs and issuance of incidental take 
permits. Landowners in areas that are included in the designated 
critical habitat will continue to have the opportunity to utilize their 
property in ways consistent with the conservation of the Preble's.

Federalism

    In accordance with Executive Order 13132, the rule does not have 
significant Federalism effects. A Federalism assessment is not 
required. In keeping with Department of the Interior policy, the 
Service requested information from and coordinated development of this 
critical habitat proposal with appropriate State resource agencies in 
Wyoming and Colorado. We will continue to coordinate any future 
designation of critical habitat for the Preble's with the appropriate 
State agencies. The designation of critical habitat for the Preble's 
imposes few additional restrictions to those currently in place and, 
therefore, has little incremental impact on State and local governments 
and their activities. The designation may have some benefit to these 
governments in that the areas essential to the conservation of the 
species are more clearly defined and the primary constituent elements 
of the habitat necessary to the conservation of the species are 
specifically identified. While making this definition and 
identification does not alter where and what federally-sponsored 
activities may occur, doing so may assist these local governments in 
long-range planning (rather than waiting for case-by-case section 7 
consultations to occur).

Civil Justice Reform

    In accordance with Executive Order 12988, the Office of the 
Solicitor has determined that the rule does not unduly burden the 
judicial system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) 
of the Order. We are proposing to designate critical habitat in 
accordance with the provisions of the Act and plan public meetings on 
the proposed designation during the comment period. The rule uses 
standard property descriptions and identifies the primary constituent 
elements within the designated areas to assist the public in 
understanding the habitat needs of the Preble's.

Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.)

    This rule does not contain any information collection requirements 
for which Office of Management and Budget approval under the Paperwork 
Reduction Act is required. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 
person is not required to respond to, a collection of information 
unless it displays a valid OMB control number.

National Environmental Policy Act

    Our position is that, outside the Tenth Circuit, we do not need to 
prepare environmental analyses as defined by the National Environmental 
Policy Act (NEPA) in connection with designating critical habitat under 
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. We published a notice 
outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal Register on 
October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244). This assertion was upheld in the courts 
of the Ninth Circuit (Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48 F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 
Ore. 1995), cert. denied 116 S. Ct. 698 (1996)). However, when the 
range of the species includes States within the Tenth Circuit, pursuant 
to the Tenth Circuit ruling in Catron County Board of Commissioners v. 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 75 F.3d 1429 (10th Cir. 1996), we will 
complete a NEPA analysis with an Environmental Assessment. The range of 
the Preble's includes States within the Tenth Circuit; therefore, we 
are completing an Environmental Assessment and will announce its 
availability in the Federal Register.

Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes

    In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994, 
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal 
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and 512 DM 2, we 
readily acknowledge our responsibility to communicate meaningfully with 
recognized Federal Tribes on a government-to-government basis. We are 
required to assess the effects of critical habitat designation on 
tribal lands and tribal trust resources. We believe that no tribal 
lands or tribal trust resources are essential for the conservation of 
the Preble's.

References Cited

    A complete list of all references cited in this final rule is 
available upon request from the Colorado Fish and

[[Page 47174]]

Wildlife Service Field Office (see ADDRESSES).

Author

    The primary author of this proposed rule is Peter Plage, Biologist, 
of the Colorado Ecological Services Field Office (see ADDRESSES).

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17

    Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Transportation.

Proposed Regulation Promulgation

    Accordingly, we propose to amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter 
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations as set forth below:

PART 17--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C. 
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.

    2. In Sec. 17.11(h), revise the entry for ``Mouse, Preble's meadow 
jumping'' under ``MAMMALS'' to read as follows:


Sec. 17.11  Endangered and threatened wildlife.

* * * * *
    (h) * * *

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                        Species                                                    Vertebrate
--------------------------------------------------------                        population where                                  Critical     Special
                                                            Historic range       endangered or         Status      When listed    habitat       rules
           Common name                Scientific name                              threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Mammals
 
                 *                  *                   *                   *                  *                   *                   *
Mouse, Preble's meadow jumping...  Zapus hudsonius       U.S.A. (CO, WY)....  Entire.............  T                       636     17.95(a)           NA
                                    preblei.
 
                 *                  *                   *                   *                  *                   *                   *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. Amend Sec. 17.95(a) by adding critical habitat for the Preble's 
meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei) in the same alphabetical 
order as the species occurs in Sec. 17.11(h) to read as follows:


Sec. 17.95  Critical habitat--fish and wildlife.

    (a) Mammals. * * *
    Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei)
    (1) Critical habitat units are depicted for Wyoming and Colorado. 
Maps and description follow.
    (2) Within these areas, the primary constituent elements for the 
Preble's include those habitat components essential for the biological 
needs of reproducing, rearing of young, foraging, sheltering, 
hibernation, dispersal, and genetic exchange. The primary constituent 
elements are found in and near riparian areas located within grassland, 
shrubland, forest, and mixed vegetation types where dense herbaceous or 
woody vegetation occurs near the ground level, where available open 
water exists during their active season, and where there are ample 
upland habitats of sufficient width and quality for foraging, 
hibernation, and refugia from catastrophic flooding events. Primary 
constituent elements associated with the biological needs of dispersal 
and genetic exchange also are found in areas that provide connectivity 
or linkage between or within Preble's populations. The dynamic 
ecological processes that create and maintain Preble's habitat also are 
important primary constituent elements. Primary constituent elements 
include:
    (i) A pattern of dense riparian vegetation consisting of grasses, 
forbs, and shrubs in areas along rivers and streams that provide open 
water through the Preble's active season;
    (ii) Adjacent floodplains and vegetated uplands with limited human 
disturbance (including hayed fields, grazed pasture, other agricultural 
lands that are not plowed or disced regularly, areas that have been 
restored after past aggregate extraction, areas supporting recreational 
trails, and urban/wildland interfaces);
    (iii) Areas that provide connectivity between and within 
populations. These may include river and stream reaches with minimal 
vegetative cover or that are armored for erosion control, travel ways 
beneath bridges, through culverts, along canals and ditches, and other 
areas that have experienced substantial human alteration or 
disturbance; and
    (iv) Dynamic geomorphological and hydrological processes typical of 
systems within the range of the Preble's, i.e., those processes that 
create and maintain river and stream channels, floodplains, and 
floodplain benches, and promote patterns of vegetation favorable to the 
Preble's.
    (3) Existing features and structures within the boundaries of the 
mapped units, such as buildings, roads, parking lots, other paved 
areas, lawns, other urban and suburban landscaped areas, regularly 
plowed or disced agricultural areas, and other features not containing 
any of the primary constituent elements are not considered critical 
habitat.
    (4) Critical Habitat Units--Wyoming Index Map Follows:

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 47175]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.004


[[Page 47176]]


    (5) Map Unit NP1: Cottonwood Creek, Albany, Platte, and Converse 
Counties, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    43.3 km (26.9 mi) of streams. Cottonwood Creek from the confluence 
with Held Creek at (42 18 44N 105 14 50W, T.27N., R.70W., Sec. 16) 
upstream to (42 14 34N 105 26 04W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 12). Includes 
Preacher Creek from its confluence with Cottonwood Creek at (42 18 43N 
105 16 51W, T.27N., R.70W., Sec. 17) upstream to (42 16 39N 105 18 22W, 
T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 25). Also includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Cottonwood Creek at (42 17 24N 105 21 12W, T.27N., 
R.71W., south boundary Sec. 22) upstream to (42 17 39N 105 23 13W, 
T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 20). Also includes another unnamed tributary from 
its confluence with Cottonwood Creek at (42 16 51N 105 21 23W, T.27N., 
R.71W., Sec. 28) upstream to (42 16 46N 105 21 59W, T.27N., R.71W., 
Sec. 28). Also includes North Cottonwood Creek from its confluence with 
Cottonwood Creek at (42 16 39N 105 21 21W, T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 28) 
upstream to (42 16 51N 105 23 59W, T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 30). Which 
includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence North Cottonwood 
Creek at (42 16 15N 105 21 57W, T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 33) upstream to 
(42 15 48N 105 22 30W, T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 32). Cottonwood Creek 
includes another unnamed tributary from its confluence with Cottonwood 
Creek at (42 16 08N 105 21 38W, T.27N., R.71W., Sec. 33) upstream to 
(42 15 17N 105 20 39W, T.26N., R.71W., Sec. 3). Also includes a final 
tributary, Kloer Creek from its confluence with Cottonwood Creek at (42 
14 30N 105 25 49W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 12) upstream to (42 14 20N 105 
26 00W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 12).
    (ii) Map Unit NP1 follows:

[[Page 47177]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.005


[[Page 47178]]


    (6) Map Unit NP2: Horseshoe Creek, Albany County, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    6.5 km (4.1 mi) of streams. Horseshoe Creek from the confluence 
with Soldier Creek at (42 23 07N 105 19 30W, T.28N., R.71W., Sec. 23) 
upstream to the confluence with Mary Cooper Creek at (42 22 20N 105 23 
30W, T.28N., R.71W., Sec. 29).
    (ii) Map Unit NP2 follows:

[[Page 47179]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.006


[[Page 47180]]


    (7) Map Unit NP3: Chugwater Creek, Albany, Laramie, and Platte 
Counties, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    179.4 km (111.5 mi) of streams. Chugwater Creek from (41 49 41N 104 
48 03W, T.21N., R.66W., north boundary Sec. 5) upstream to Farthing 
Reservoir (41 32 36N 105 14 31W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 9). Includes 
Spring Creek from its confluence with Chugwater Creek (41 38 10N 105 05 
56W, T.19N., R.69W., Sec. 10) upstream to (41 39 00N 105 13 58W, 
T.19N., R.70W., Sec. 4). Includes Threemile Creek from its confluence 
with Chugwater Creek (41 36 22N 105 08 23W, T.19N., R.69W., Sec. 20) 
upstream to (41 37 51N 105 14 59W, T.19N., R.70W., west boundary Sec. 
9). Also includes Sand Creek from its confluence with Chugwater Creek 
(41 34 09N 105 12 37W, T.18N., R.70W., north boundary Sec. 3) upstream 
to (41 31 12N 105 12 54W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 22). Also includes 
Middle Chugwater Creek from its confluence with Chugwater Creek (41 33 
55N 105 14 20W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 4) upstream to (41 34 23N 105 21 
32W, T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 33). Which includes Shanton Creek from its 
confluence with Middle Chugwater Creek at (41 34 36N 105 19 05W, 
T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 35) upstream to (41 34 12N 105 20 41W, T.19N., 
R.71W., southwest corner Sec. 34). Also includes Strong Creek from its 
confluence with Middle Chugwater Creek at (41 35 04N 105 19 36W, 
T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 34) upstream to (41 36 16N 105 20 25W, T.19N., 
R.71W., Sec. 22). Middle Chugwater Creek also includes an unnamed 
tributary from its confluence with Middle Chugwater Creek at (41 34 56N 
105 20 54W, T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 33) upstream to (41 35 14N 105 22 17W, 
T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 29). Finally, another unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Middle Chugwater Creek at (41 34 43N 105 21 28W, 
T.19N., R.71W., Sec. 33) upstream to (41 34 47N 105 21 56W, T.19N., 
R.71W., Sec. 32). Another included tributary of Chugwater Creek is 
Spring Creek from its confluence with Chugwater Creek at (41 32 57N 105 
14 27W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 9) upstream to (42 32 03N 105 19 17W, 
T.18N., R.71W., Sec. 15). South Chugwater Creek is included in the unit 
from the ending point of Chugwater Creek at Farthing Reservoir (41 32 
36N 105 14 31W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 9) upstream to (41 30 42N 105 20 
03W, T.18N., R.71W., north boundary Sec. 27). Includes Ricker Creek 
from its confluence with South Chugwater Creek at (41 31 04N 105 16 
07W, T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 19) upstream to (41 29 24N 105 16 39W, 
T.18N., R.70W., Sec. 31).
    (ii) Map Unit NP3 follows:

[[Page 47181]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.007


[[Page 47182]]


    (8) Map Unit NP4: Friend Creek and Murphy Canyon, Albany County, 
Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    32 km (19.9 mi) of streams. Includes 2 subunits. Subunit Murphy 
Canyon from its confluence with Sturgeon Creek at (42 11 27N 105 23 
58W, T.26N., R.71W., Sec. 30) upstream to (42 13 07N 105 21 48W, 
T.26N., R.71W., north boundary Sec. 21). Includes Clark Draw from its 
confluence with Murphy Canyon at (42 12 03N 105 22 56W, T.26N., R.71W., 
Sec. 29) upstream to (42 13 05N 105 22 31W, T.26N., R.71W., north 
boundary Sec. 20).
    Subunit Friend Creek includes Bear Creek from (42 12 02N 105 28 
00W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 27) upstream to (42 12 46N 105 31 05W, 
T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 19). Includes Arapaho Creek from its confluence 
with Bear Creek at (42 12 30N 105 28 35W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 22) 
upstream to (42 13 32N 105 27 37W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 15). Includes 
an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Arapaho Creek at (42 13 
11N 105 27 38W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec.15) upstream to (42 13 18N 105 27 
53W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec.15). Bear Creek also includes an unnamed 
tributary from its confluence with Bear Creek at (42 12 22N 105 29 18W, 
T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 21) upstream to (42 12 11N 105 29 59W, T.26N., 
R.72W., Sec. 20). Also includes Friend Creek from its confluence with 
Bear Creek at (42 12 48N 105 30 03W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec.20) upstream 
to (42 15 48N 105 28 18W, T.27N., R.72W., Sec. 34). Which includes an 
unnamed tributary from its confluence with Friend Creek at (42 15 03N 
105 29 34W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 4) upstream to (42 15 48N 105 29 18W, 
T.27N., R.72W., Sec. 33). Which includes another unnamed tributary from 
its confluence with the aforementioned unnamed tributary at (42 15 23N 
105 29 28W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 4) upstream to (42 15 44N 105 29 43W, 
T.27N., R.72W., Sec. 33). Bear Creek finally includes an unnamed 
tributary from its confluence with Bear Creek at (42 12 54N 105 30 26W, 
T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 20) upstream to (42 14 36N 105 31 17W, T.26N., 
R.72W., Sec. 7). Which includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with the aforementioned unnamed tributary at (42 13 32N 105 
30 55W, T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 17) upstream to (42 13 37N 105 31 24W, 
T.26N., R.72W., Sec. 18).
    (ii) Map Unit NP4 follows:

[[Page 47183]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.008


[[Page 47184]]


    (9)Map Unit NP5: Horse Creek, Laramie County, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    84.1 km (52.3 mi) of streams. Horse Creek from (41 27 46N 104 52 
40W, T.17N., R.67W., Sec. 10) upstream to (41 24 59N 105 15 40W, 
T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 29). Includes Dry Creek from its confluence with 
Horse Creek (41 25 12N 105 08 54W, T.17N., R.69W., Sec. 29) upstream to 
Highway 211 (41 23 29N 105 10 11W, T.16N., R.69W., Sec. 6). Also 
includes South Fork Horse Creek from its confluence with Horse Creek 
(41 25 07N 105 10 22W, T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 25) upstream to (41 23 52N 
105 14 32W, T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 33). Also includes North Fork Horse 
Creek from its confluence with Horse Creek (41 25 27N 105 11 33W, 
T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 23) upstream to (41 27 05N 105 16 32W, T.17N., 
R.70W., Sec. 18). Which includes Mill Creek from its confluence with 
North Fork Horse Creek (41 25 40N 105 11 38W, T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 23) 
upstream to (41 26 06N 105 15 24W, T.17N., R.70W., Sec. 20).
    (ii) Map Unit NP5 follows:

[[Page 47185]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.009


[[Page 47186]]


    (10) Map Unit SP1: Lodgepole Creek and Upper Middle Lodgepole 
Creek, Laramie County, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    20.8 km (13 mi) of streams. Consists of 2 subunits. Subunit 
Lodgepole Creek, Laramie County, from Highway 211 (41 19 53N 105 08 
35W, T.16N., R.69W., Sec. 29) upstream to the confluence of North 
Lodgepole Creek and Middle Lodgepole Creek (41 19 17N 105 11 52W, 
T16N., R.70W., Sec. 26). Includes North Lodgepole Creek from the 
aforementioned confluence (41 19 17N 105 11 52W, T16N., R.70W., Sec. 
26) upstream to (41 19 27N 105 13 54W, T.16N., R.70W., west boundary 
Sec. 27). Also includes Middle Lodgepole Creek from (41 19 17N 105 11 
52W, T16N., R.70W., Sec. 26) upstream to (41 18 40N 105 13 19W, T.16N., 
R.70W., Sec. 34).
    Subunit Middle Lodgepole Creek, Albany County, includes Middle 
Lodgepole Creek from the boundary of Medicine Bow National Forest (41 
17 06N 105 17 27W, T15N., R.71W., east boundary Sec. 12) upstream to 
the confluence of North Branch Middle Lodgepole Creek and Middle Branch 
Middle Lodgepole Creek (41 16 48N 105 18 10W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 12). 
Includes Middle Branch Middle Lodgepole Creek from the aforementioned 
confluence (41 16 48N 105 18 10W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 12) upstream to 
(41 16 29N 105 19 31W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 14). Also includes North 
Branch Middle Lodgepole Creek from the aforementioned confluence (41 16 
48N 105 18 10W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 12) upstream to (41 16 58N 105 20 
43W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 10). Which includes an unnamed tributary from 
its confluence with North Branch Middle Lodgepole Creek (41 16 56N 105 
19 11W, T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 11) upstream to (41 17 12N 105 19 36W, 
T.15N., R.71W., Sec. 11).
    (ii) Map Unit SP1 follows:

[[Page 47187]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.010


[[Page 47188]]


    (11) Map Unit SP2: F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Laramie County, 
Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    5.7 km (3.6 mi) of stream. Crow Creek within the boundary of Warren 
Air Force Base from (41 08 01N 104 50 21W, T.14N., R.67W., Sec. 36) 
upstream to (41 09 30N 104 52 48W, T.14N., R.67W., Sec. 27).
    (ii) Map Unit SP2 follows:

[[Page 47189]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.011


[[Page 47190]]


    (12) Map Unit SP3: Lone Tree Creek, Laramie County, Wyoming.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    18.7 km (11.7 mi) of streams. Includes 2 subunits. Subunit Wyoming 
includes Lone Tree Creek from (41 02 06N 104 54 40W, T.12N., R.67W., 
Sec. 5) upstream to (41 03 46N 104 56 48W, T.13N., R.68W., Sec. 25). 
Includes Goose Creek from its confluence with Lone Tree Creek (41 02 
55N 104 56 01W, T.13N., R.67W., Sec. 31) upstream to (41 03 01N 104 58 
04W, T.13N., R.68W., Sec. 35). Which includes an unnamed tributary from 
its confluence with Goose Creek (41 02 54N 104 57 41W, T.13N., R.68W., 
Sec. 36) upstream to (41 02 52N 104 57 59W, T.13N., R.68W., Sec. 35).
    Subunit Colorado includes Lone Tree Creek from 40 54 49N 104 54 
36W, T.11N., R.67W., south boundary Sec. 17) upstream to (40 58 18N 104 
55 11W, T.12N., R.67W., north boundary Sec. 32).
    (ii) Map Unit SP3 (Wyoming) follows:

[[Page 47191]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.012


[[Page 47192]]


    (13) Critical Habitat Units--Colorado Index Map Follows:
    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.013
    

[[Page 47193]]


    (14) Map Unit SP3: Lone Tree Creek, Weld County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    141.8 km (88.1 mi) of streams and rivers. North Fork Cache La 
Poudre River from Seaman Reservoir (40 43 03N 105 14 27W, T.9N., 
R.70W., Sec. 28) upstream to Halligan Reservoir spillway (40 52 49N 105 
20 12W, T.11N., R.71W., Sec. 34). Includes Lone Pine Creek from its 
confluence North Fork Cache La Poudre River (40 47 53N 105 15 28W, 
T.10N., R.70W., Sec. 32) upstream and continuing upstream into North 
Lone Pine Creek to 7,600 feet elevation (40 49 58N 105 34 09W, T.01N., 
R.73W., Sec. 15). Which includes Columbine Canyon from its confluence 
with North Lone Pine Creek (40 49 48N 105 33 28W, T.10N., R.73W., Sec. 
15) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 49 33N 105 33 54W, T.10N., 
R.73W., Sec. 15). Also includes Stonewall Creek from its confluence 
with North Fork Cache La Poudre River (40 48 19N 105 15 21W, T.10N., 
R.70W., Sec. 29) upstream to (40 53 26N 105 15 38W, T.11N., R.70W., 
Sec. 29). Which includes Tenmile Creek from its confluence with 
Stonewall Creek (40 51 48N 105 15 30W, T.10N., R.70W., Sec. 5) upstream 
to Red Mountain Road (40 53 00N 105 16 09W, T.11N., R.70W., Sec. 31). 
Also includes Rabbit Creek from its confluence with North Fork Cache La 
Poudre River (40 48 30N 105 16 04W, T.10N., R.70W., Sec. 30) upstream 
to the confluence with North and Middle Forks of Rabbit Creek (40 49 
34N 105 20 47W, T.10N., R 71W., Sec. 21). Also includes South Fork 
Rabbit Creek from its confluence with Rabbit Creek (40 48 40N 105 19 
43W, T.10N., R.71W., Sec. 27) upstream to (40 49 39N 105 24 40W, 
T.10N., R.72W., north boundary Sec. 24). Which includes an unnamed 
tributary from its confluence with South Fork Rabbit Creek (40 47 28N 
105 20 45W, T.10N., R.71W., Sec. 33) upstream to (40 47 28N 105 23 10W, 
T.10N., R.71W., Sec. 31). Which in turn has an unnamed tributary from 
their confluence at (40 47 16N 105 21 45W, T.10N., R.71W., east 
boundary Sec. 32) upstream to (40 46 54N 105 22 14W, T.9N., R.71W., 
Sec. 5). Also includes Middle Fork Rabbit Creek from its confluence 
with Rabbit Creek (40 49 34N 105 20 47W, T.10N., R 71W., Sec. 21) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 49 46N 105 26 55W, T.10N., R.72W., 
Sec. 15). This includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with 
Middle Fork Rabbit Creek (40 49 56N 105 25 49W, T.10N., R.72W., Sec. 
14) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 48 48N 105 26 26W, T.10N., 
R.72W., Sec. 23). This unit includes North Fork Rabbit Creek from its 
confluence with Rabbit Creek (40 49 34N 105 20 47W, T.10N., R.71W., 
Sec. 21) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 49 38N 105 29 17W, 
T.10N., R.72W., Sec. 17). Which includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with North Fork Rabbit Creek (40 50 45N 105 27 23W, T.10N., 
R.72W., Sec. 9) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 50 57N 105 28 42W, 
T.10N., R.72W., Sec. 9).
    (ii) Map Unit SP3 (Colorado) follows:

BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

[[Page 47194]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.014

BILLING CODE 4310-55-C

[[Page 47195]]

    (15) Map Unit SP4: North Fork Cache La Poudre River, Larimer 
County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    82.4 km (51.2 mi) of streams and rivers. Cache La Poudre River from 
Poudre Park (40 41 16N 105 18 25W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 2) upstream to 
(40 42 02N 105 34 01W, T.9N., R.73W., west boundary Sec. 34). Includes 
Hewlett Gulch from its confluence with Cache La Poudre River (40 41 16N 
105 18 25W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 2) upstream to the boundary of 
Arapahoe--Roosevelt National Forest (40 43 45N 105 19 06W, T.9N., 
R.71W., Sec. 23). Also includes Young Gulch from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 41 25N 105 20 56W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 4) 
upstream to (40 39 13N 105 20 12W, T.8N., R.71W., south boundary Sec. 
15). Also includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Cache 
La Poudre River at Stove Prairie Landing (40 40 58N 105 23 21W, T.8N., 
R.71W., Sec. 6) upstream to (40 39 32N 105 22 34W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 
17). Which includes Skin Gulch from its confluence with the 
aforementioned unnamed tributary at (40 40 33N 105 23 15W, T.8N., 
R.71W., Sec. 7) upstream to (40 39 41N 105 24 13W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 
13). Unit SP5 also includes Poverty Gulch from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 40 28N 105 25 42W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 11) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 39 02N 105 26 38W, T.8N., R.72W., 
Sec. 22). Also includes Elkhorn Creek from its confluence with Cache La 
Poudre River (40 41 50N 105 26 24W, T.9N., R.72W., Sec. 34) upstream to 
(40 44 04N 105 27 32W, T.9N., R.72W., Sec. 21). Also includes South 
Fork Cache La Poudre River from its confluence with Cache La Poudre 
River (40 41 10N 105 26 46W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 3) upstream to 7,600 
feet elevation (40 38 49N 105 29 20W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 20). Which 
includes Pendergrass Creek from its confluence with South Fork Cache La 
Poudre River (40 39 54N 105 27 27W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 15) upstream to 
7,600 feet elevation (40 38 34N 105 27 26W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 22). 
Also included in the unit is Bennett Creek from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 40 26N 105 28 37W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 9) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 39 18N 105 31 31W, T.8N., R.73W., 
Sec. 13).
    (ii) Map Unit SP4 follows:

[[Page 47196]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.015


[[Page 47197]]


    (16) Map Unit SP5: Cache La Poudre River, Larimer County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    82.4 km (51.2 mi) of streams and rivers. Cache La Poudre River from 
Poudre Park (40 41 16N 105 18 25W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 2) upstream to 
(40 42 02N 105 34 01W, T.9N., R.73W., west boundary Sec. 34). Includes 
Hewlett Gulch from its confluence with Cache La Poudre River (40 41 16N 
105 18 25W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 2) upstream to the boundary of 
Arapahoe--Roosevelt National Forest (40 43 45N 105 19 06W, T.9N., 
R.71W., Sec. 23). Also includes Young Gulch from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 41 25N 105 20 56W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 4) 
upstream to (40 39 13N 105 20 12W, T.8N., R.71W., south boundary Sec. 
15). Also includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Cache 
La Poudre River at Stove Prairie Landing (40 40 58N 105 23 21W, T.8N., 
R.71W., Sec. 6) upstream to (40 39 32N 105 22 34W, T.8N., R.71W., Sec. 
17). Which includes Skin Gulch from its confluence with the 
aforementioned unnamed tributary at (40 40 33N 105 23 15W, T.8N., 
R.71W., Sec. 7) upstream to (40 39 41N 105 24 13W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 
13). Unit SP5 also includes Poverty Gulch from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 40 28N 105 25 42W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 11) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 39 02N 105 26 38W, T.8N., R.72W., 
Sec. 22). Also includes Elkhorn Creek from its confluence with Cache La 
Poudre River (40 41 50N 105 26 24W, T.9N., R.72W., Sec. 34) upstream to 
(40 44 04N 105 27 32W, T.9N., R.72W., Sec. 21). Also includes South 
Fork Cache La Poudre River from its confluence with Cache La Poudre 
River (40 41 10N 105 26 46W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 3) upstream to 7,600 
feet elevation (40 38 49N 105 29 20W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 20). Which 
includes Pendergrass Creek from its confluence with South Fork Cache La 
Poudre River (40 39 54N 105 27 27W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 15) upstream to 
7,600 feet elevation (40 38 34N 105 27 26W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 22). 
Also included in the unit is Bennett Creek from its confluence with 
Cache La Poudre River (40 40 26N 105 28 37W, T.8N., R.72W., Sec. 9) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 39 18N 105 31 31W, T.8N., R.73W., 
Sec. 13).
    (ii) Map Unit SP5 follows:

[[Page 47198]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.016


[[Page 47199]]


    (17) Map Units SP6 and SP7: Buckhorn Creek and Cedar Creek, Larimer 
County, Colorado.
    (i) These units consist of the following:
    For SP6, Buckhorn Creek, 69.1 km (43 mi) of streams. Buckhorn Creek 
from (40 30 20N 105 13 39W, T.6N., R.70W., east boundary Sec. 9) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 34 17N 105 25 28W, T.7N., R.72W., 
Sec. 14). Includes Little Bear Gulch from its confluence with Buckhorn 
Creek (40 31 16N 105 15 32W, T.6N., R.70W., Sec. 5) upstream to (40 30 
43N 105 16 33W, T.6N., R.70W., Sec. 6). Also includes Bear Gulch from 
its confluence with Buckhorn Creek (40 31 15N 105 15 51W, T.6N., 
R.70W., Sec. 5) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 29 47N 105 19 59W, 
T.6N., R.71W., Sec. 10). Also includes Stringtown Gulch from its 
confluence with Buckhorn Creek (40 32 19N 105 16 40W, T.7N., R.70W., 
Sec. 30) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 30 30N 105 20 48W, T.6N., 
R.71W., Sec. 4). Also includes Fish Creek from its confluence with 
Buckhorn Creek (40 32 50N 105 17 05W, T.7N., R.70W., Sec. 30) upstream 
to 7,600 feet elevation (40 30 56N 105 21 19W, T.6N., R.71W., Sec. 4). 
Which includes North Fork Fish Creek from its confluence with Fish 
Creek (40 32 47N 105 18 18W, T.7N., R.71W., west boundary Sec. 25) 
upstream and following the first unnamed tributary northwest to (40 33 
35N 105 19 42W, T.7N., R.71W., Sec. 22). Also includes Stove Prairie 
Creek from its confluence with Buckhorn Creek (40 34 15N 105 19 45W, 
T.7N., R.71W., Sec. 15) upstream to the dirt road crossing at (40 35 
22N 105 20 16W, T.7N., R.71W., Sec. 10). Also includes Sheep Creek from 
its confluence with Buckhorn Creek (40 34 15N 105 20 51W, T.7N., 
R.71W., Sec. 16) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 33 09N 105 21 
46W, T.7N., R.71W., Sec. 20). Also includes Twin Cabin Gulch from its 
confluence with Buckhorn Creek (40 34 38N 105 23 11W, T.7N., R.71W., 
Sec. 18) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (40 35 44N 105 23 33W, T.7N., 
R.71W., Sec. 6).
    For SP7, Cedar Creek, 11.7 km (7.3 mi) of streams. Cedar Creek from 
the boundary of Federal land (40 26 46N 105 16 17W, T.6N., R.70W., Sec. 
31) upstream to the boundary of Federal land (40 28 15N 105 18 11W, 
T.6N., R.71W., Sec. 24). Includes Dry Creek from its confluence with 
Cedar Creek (40 27 07N 105 16 16W, T.6N., R.70W., Sec. 30) upstream to 
the boundary of Federal land (40 28 52N 105 16 21W, T.6N., R.70W., Sec. 
18). Also includes Jug Gulch from its confluence with Cedar Creek (40 
28 15N 105 17 41W, T.6N., R.71W., Sec. 24) upstream to the boundary of 
Federal land (40 29 07N 105 18 28W, T.6N., R.71W., Sec. 14).
    (ii) Map Units SP6 and SP7 follow:

[[Page 47200]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.017


[[Page 47201]]


    (18) Map Units SP8, SP9, and SP10: South Boulder Creek, Boulder 
County, Colorado, Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site and Ralston 
Creek, Jefferson County, Colorado.
    (i) These units consists of the following:
    For SP8, South Boulder Creek, 11.8 km (7.3 mi) of streams. 
Including South Boulder Creek from Baseline Road (39 59 59N 105 12 53W, 
T.1S., R.70W. Sec. 3) upstream to near Eldorado Springs, Colorado (39 
56 7N 105 16 14W, T.1S., R.70W. Sec. 30) Also Spring Brook from the 
Community Ditch near Eldorado Springs (39 55 59N 105 16 8W, T.1S., 
R.70W. Sec. 30) upstream to South Boulder Diversion Canal (39 55 11N 
105 16 11W, T.1S., R.70W. Sec. 31).
    For SP9, the Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site, 19.5 km 
(12.1 mi) of streams. Consists of 3 subunits. Subunit Woman Creek from 
Indiana Street (39 52 40N 105 9 53W, T.2S., R.70W., east boundary Sec. 
13) upstream to (39 53 3N 105 13 17W, T.2S., R.70W., west boundary Sec. 
15). Includes unnamed tributary from confluence with Woman Creek (39 52 
43N 105 10 8W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 13) upstream to (39 52 39N 105 12 
9W, T.2S., R.70W., west boundary Sec. 14).
    Subunit Walnut Creek from Indiana Street (39 54 5N 105 9 54W, 
T.2S., R.70W., east boundary Sec. 1) upstream to (39 53 48N 105 11 54W, 
T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 11). Includes unnamed tributary from its confluence 
with Walnut Creek (39 54 6N 105 10 40W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 1) upstream 
to (39 53 34N 105 11 29W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 11).
    Subunit Rock Creek from State Highway 128 (39 54 53N 105 11 37W, 
T.1S., R.70W., Sec. 35) upstream to (39 54 8N 105 13 18W, T.2S., 
R.70W., west boundary Sec. 3). Includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Rock Creek (39 54 40N 105 12 8W, T.2S., R.70W., east 
boundary Sec. 3) upstream to (39 54 41 N 105 13 00W, T.2S., R.70W., 
Sec. 3). Also includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with 
Rock Creek at (39 54 27N 105 12 32W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 3) upstream to 
(39 54 6N 105 12 51W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 3). Another unnamed tributary 
from its confluence with Rock Creek at (39 54 23N 105 12 54W, T.2S., 
R.70W., Sec. 3) upstream to (39 54 18N 105 13 18W, T.2S., R.70W., west 
boundary Sec. 3. Another unnamed tributary from its confluence with 
Rock Creek at (39 54 00N 105 13 12W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 3) upstream to 
(39 54 07N 105 13 08W, T.2S., R.70W., Sec. 3).
    For SP10, Ralston Creek, 13.1 km (8.1 mi) of streams. Ralston Creek 
from Ralston Reservoir (39 49 12N 105 15 32W, T.3S., R.70W. Sec. 6) 
upstream into Golden Gate Canyon State Park to 7,600 feet elevation (39 
50 54N 105 21 12W, T.2S., R.71W. Sec. 29).
    (ii) Map Units SP8, SP9, and SP10 follow:

[[Page 47202]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.018


[[Page 47203]]


    (19) Map Unit SP11: Cherry Creek, Douglas County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    32 km (19.9 mi) of streams. Cherry Creek from the northern boundary 
of Castlewood Canyon State Recreation Area (39 21 56N 104 45 31W, 
T.8S., R.66W., south boundary Sec. 10) upstream to the confluence with 
Lake Gulch (39 20 24N 104 45 36W, T.8S., R.66W., Sec. 23). Lake Gulch 
from the aforementioned confluence upstream to (39 15 38N 104 46 03W, 
T.9S., R.66W., south boundary Sec. 15). Includes Upper Lake Gulch from 
its confluence with Lake Gulch (39 17 26N 104 46 07W, T.9S., R.66W., 
Sec. 3) upstream to (39 13 25N 104 50 18W, T.9S., R.67W., mid-point 
Sec. 36). Also includes a unnamed tributary from its confluence with 
Upper Lake Gulch (39 16 06N 104 47 55W, T.9S., R.66W., Sec. 17) 
upstream to Upper Lake Gulch Road (39 14 45N 104 48 02W, T.9S., R.66W., 
south boundary Sec. 20). Also includes unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Upper Lake Gulch (39 16 01N 104 48 02W, T.9S., R.66W., 
Sec. 17) upstream to (39 15 37N 104 49 51W, T.9S., R.67W., Sec. 13). 
Includes another unnamed tributary from its confluence with Upper Lake 
Gulch (39 14 30N 104 49 12W, T.9S., R.66W., Sec. 30) upstream to (39 14 
39N 104 50 19W, T.9S., R.67W., Sec. 25).
    (ii) Map Unit SP11 follows:

[[Page 47204]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.019


[[Page 47205]]


    (20) Map Unit SP12: West Plum Creek, Douglas County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    146.6 km (91.1 mi) of streams. Plum Creek from Chatfield Lake (39 
32 35N 105 03 02W, T.6S., R.68W., Sec. 7) upstream to its confluence 
with West Plum Creek and East Plum Creek (39 25 48N 104 58 12W, T.7S., 
R.68W., Sec. 23). West Plum Creek from the aforementioned confluence 
(39 25 48N 104 58 12W, T.7S., R.68W., Sec. 23) upstream to the boundary 
of Pike--San Isabel National Forest and 7,600 feet elevation (39 13 07N 
104 59 18W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 34). Includes Indian Creek from its 
confluence with Plum Creek (39 28 26N 105 00 00W, T.7S., R.68W., Sec. 
4) upstream to Silver State Youth Camp (39 22 34N 105 05 10W, T.8S., 
R.69W., Sec. 2). Indian Creek includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Indian Creek at Pine Nook (39 23 00N 105 04 23W, T.8S., 
R.69W., Sec. 2) upstream to (39 22 10N 105 04 05W, T.8S., R.69W., Sec. 
12). Also includes Jarre Creek from its confluence with Plum Creek (39 
25 50N 104 58 13W, T.7S., R.68W., Sec. 23) upstream to 7,600 feet 
elevation (39 21 52N 105 03 15W, T.8S., R.69W., Sec. 12). Jarre Creek 
includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Jarre Creek (39 
22 58N 105 01 51W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 5) upstream to (39 22 44N 105 02 
12W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 8). Also includes an unnamed tributary from 
its confluence with West Plum Creek (39 22 20N 104 57 39W, T.8S., 
R.68W., Sec. 11) upstream to 6320 feet elevation (39 21 27N 104 55 00W, 
T.8S., R.67W., Sec. 17). Which includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with this aforementioned unnamed tributary (39 22 06N 104 57 
07W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 12) upstream to (39 21 43N 104 56 56W, T.8S., 
R.68W., south boundary Sec. 12).Unit SP12 also includes Garber Creek 
from its confluence with West Plum Creek (39 22 16N 104 57 43W, T.8S., 
R.68W., Sec. 11) upstream to its confluence with South Garber Creek and 
Middle Garber Creek (39 21 02N 105 02 10W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 18). 
Including South Garber Creek from its confluence with Garber Creek (39 
21 02N 105 02 10W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 18) upstream to 7,600 feet 
elevation (39 19 15N 105 03 28W, T.8S., R.69W., Sec. 25). Including 
Middle Garber Creek from its confluence with Garber Creek (39 21 02N 
105 02 10W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 18) upstream to (39 19 48N 105 04 07W, 
T.8S., R.69W., west boundary Sec. 25). Including North Garber Creek 
from its confluence with Middle Garber Creek (39 20 55N 105 02 32W, 
T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 18) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 20 45N 105 
04 35W, T.8S., R.69W., Sec. 23). Includes Jackson Creek from its 
confluence with West Plum Creek (39 21 02N 104 58 28W, T.8S., R.68W., 
Sec. 14) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 17 58N 105 03 56W, T.9S., 
R.69W., Sec. 1). Includes Spring Creek from its confluence with West 
Plum Creek at (39 18 59N 104 58 24W, T.8S., R.68W., Sec. 35) upstream 
to (39 15 21N 105 01 38W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 20). Including Dry Gulch 
from its confluence with Spring Creek (39 17 54N 104 59 57W, T.9S., 
R.68W., Sec. 4) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 16 08N 105 02 27W, 
T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 18). Including Bear Creek from its confluence with 
West Plum Creek (39 17 26N 104 58 20W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 2) upstream 
to 7,600 feet elevation (39 13 58N 105 01 06W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 29). 
Including Gove Creek from its confluence with West Plum Creek (39 14 
07N 104 57 40W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 26) upstream to 7,600 feet 
elevation (39 11 50N 104 58 30W, T.10S., R.68W., Sec. 11). Includes 
Merz Canyon stream from its confluence with Gove Creek (39 13 06N 104 
57 30W, T.9S., R.68W., Sec. 36) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 11 
21N 104 57 18W, T.10S., R.68W., Sec. 12). Includes Starr Canyon stream 
from its confluence with West Plum Creek (39 13 07N 104 58 39W, T.9S., 
R.68W., Sec. 35) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 12 34N 104 58 
58W, T.10S., R.68W., Sec. 3).
    (ii) Map Unit SP12 follows:

[[Page 47206]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.020


[[Page 47207]]


    (21) Map Unit SP13: Upper South Platte River, Jefferson and Douglas 
Counties, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    83.1 km (51.6 mi) of rivers and streams. Consists of 5 subunits. 
Subunit South Platte River north segment, on the border of Jefferson 
County and Douglas County from Chatfield Lake (39 31 35N 105 04 49W, 
T.6S., R.69W., Sec. 14) upstream to the boundary of U.S. Army Corps of 
Engineers property (39 29 33N 105 05 15W, T.6S., R.69W., south boundary 
Sec. 26).
    Subunit Bear Creek, Douglas County from Pike--San Isabel National 
Forest boundary (39 25 27N 105 07 40W, T.7S., R.69W., west boundary 
Sec. 21) upstream to (39 22 32N 105 06 40W, T.8S., R.69W., south 
boundary Sec. 4). Includes West Bear Creek from its confluence with 
Bear Creek (39 25 15N 105 07 30W, T.7S., R.69W., Sec. 21) upstream to a 
confluence with an unnamed tributary (39 24 17N 105 07 38W, T.7S., 
R.69W., Sec. 33).
    Subunit South Platte River south segment, on the border of 
Jefferson County and Douglas County from Nighthawk (39 21 05N 105 10 
23W, T.8S., R.70W., Sec. 13) upstream to (39 17 27N 105 12 24W, T.9S., 
R.70W., Sec. 3). Includes Sugar Creek, Douglas County from its 
confluence with South Platte River at Oxyoke (39 18 22N 105 11 47W, 
T.8S., R.70W., Sec. 35) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 18 28N 105 
08 07W, T.8S., R.69W., Sec. 32). Includes Gunbarrel Creek, Jefferson 
County from its confluence with South Platte River at Oxyoke (39 18 22N 
105 11 47W, T.8S., R.70W., Sec. 35) upstream to (39 18 41N 105 14 34W, 
T.8S., R.70W., Sec. 32).
    Subunit Wigwam Creek, Jefferson County from its confluence with 
South Platte River (39 14 26N 105 15 15W, T.9S., R.70W., Sec. 29) 
upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 13 50N 105 19 51W, T.9S., R.71W., 
Sec. 27). Includes Pine Creek from its confluence with Wigwam Creek (39 
14 25N 105 16 52W, T.9S., R.71W., Sec. 25) upstream to 7,600 feet 
elevation (39 15 48N 105 17 51W, T.9S., R.71W., Sec. 14). Also includes 
Cabin Creek from its confluence with Wigwam Creek (39 13 55N 105 18 
06W, T.9S., R.71W., Sec. 26) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 14 
41N 105 18 17W, T.9S., R.71W., Sec. 23).
    Subunit Trout Creek, Douglas County upstream into Teller County 
from (39 13 02N 105 09 31W, T.9S., R.69W., Sec. 31) upstream to 7,600 
feet elevation which is 1.3 km (0.8 mi) into Teller County (39 07 13N 
105 05 49W, T.11S., R.69W., Sec. 3). Includes Eagle Creek from its 
confluence with Trout Creek (39 11 52N 105 08 27W, T.10S., R.69W., Sec. 
8) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 12 06N 105 07 12W, T.10S., 
R.69W., Sec. 9). Also including an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Trout Creek (39 11 07N 105 08 05W, T.10S., R.69W., Sec. 
17) upstream to (39 10 18N 105 08 23W, T.10S., R.69W., Sec. 20). Also 
including Long Hollow from its confluence with Trout Creek (39 10 56N 
105 08 01W, T.10S., R.69W., Sec. 17) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation 
(39 11 30N 105 06 19W, T.10S., R.69W., Sec. 10).
    (ii) Map Unit SP13 follows:

[[Page 47208]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.021


[[Page 47209]]


    (22) Map Unit A1: Monument Creek, El Paso County, Colorado.
    (i) This unit consists of the following:
    56.3 km (35 mi) of streams. Monument Creek from its confluence with 
Cottonwood Creek (38 55 36N 104 48 51W, T.13S., R66W., Sec. 7) upstream 
to the southern property boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (38 57 
06N 104 49 46W, T.13S., R.66W., Sec. 6). Then Monument Creek from the 
northern property boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (39 02 31N 104 
51 06W, T.12S., R.67W., north boundary Sec. 2) upstream to Monument 
Lake (39 05 19N 104 52 41W, T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 15). Includes Kettle 
Creek from its confluence with Monument Creek (38 57 01N 104 49 42W, 
T.13S., R.66W., Sec 6) upstream to the property boundary of the U.S. 
Air Force Academy (38 57 04N 104 49 41W, T.13S., R.66W., Sec 6). Then 
continues from the property boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (38 
58 33N 104 47 55W, T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 29) upstream to its 
intersection with a road at (39 00 06N 104 45 21W, T.12S., R.66W., east 
boundary Sec. 15). Which includes an unnamed tributary from its 
confluence with Kettle Creek (38 59 06N 104 46 51W, T.12S., R.66W., 
Sec. 21) upstream to (38 59 14N 104 46 19W, T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 22). 
Also includes Black Squirrel Creek from the property boundary of the 
U.S. Air Force Academy (39 00 06N 104 49 00W, T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 18) 
upstream to (39 02 30N 104 44 34W, T.12S., R.66W., north boundary Sec. 
2). Including an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Black 
Squirrel Creek (39 01 20N 104 46 17W, T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 10) upstream 
to (39 02 30N 104 45 39W, T.12S., R.66W., north boundary Sec. 3). Which 
includes another unnamed tributary from (39 01 49N 104 46 17W, T.12S., 
R.66W., Sec. 3) upstream to (39 02 30N 104 46 01W, T.12S., R.66W., 
north boundary Sec. 3). Unit A1 also includes Monument Branch from the 
property boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (39 00 49N 104 49 23W, 
T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 7) upstream to (39 01 11N 104 48 42W, T.12S., 
R.66W., east boundary Sec. 7). Also includes Smith Creek from the 
property boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (39 01 30N 104 49 46W, 
T.12S., R.66W., Sec. 7) upstream to (39 02 23N 104 47 57W, T.12S., 
R.66W., Sec. 5). Also includes an unnamed tributary from the property 
boundary of the U.S. Air Force Academy (39 02 30N 104 50 23W, T.12S., 
R.67W., Sec. 1) upstream to 6,800 feet elevation (39 02 45N 104 49 54W, 
T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 36). Also includes Jackson Creek from its 
confluence with Monument Creek (39 02 33N 104 51 13W, T.11S., R.67W., 
Sec. 35) upstream to (39 04 30N 104 49 06W, T.11S., R.66W., Sec. 19). 
Includes an unnamed tributary from its confluence with Jackson Creek 
(39 04 11N 104 50 02W, T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 25) upstream to Higby Road 
(39 04 41N 104 49 38W, T.11S., R.66W., Sec. 19). Also includes Beaver 
Creek from its confluence with Monument Creek (39 02 53N 104 52 00W, 
T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 35) upstream to 7,600 feet elevation (39 03 08N 
104 55 29W, T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 31). Also includes Teachout Creek from 
its confluence with Monument Creek (39 03 45N 104 51 50W, T.11S., 
R.67W., Sec. 26) upstream to Interstate 25 (39 04 19N 104 51 27W, 
T.11S., R.67W., Sec. 23). Also includes Dirty Woman Creek from its 
confluence with Monument Creek (39 04 48N 104 52 48W, T.11S., R.67W., 
Sec 22) upstream to Highway 105 (39 05 35N 104 51 28W, T.11S., R.67W., 
Sec 14).
    (ii) Map Unit A1 follows:

[[Page 47210]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP17JY02.022

* * * * *

    Dated: July 9, 2002.
Paul Hoffman,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 02-17716 Filed 7-16-02; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C