[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 93 (Friday, May 13, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 29907-29909]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-10948]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R2-ES-2016-N020; FXES11120200000F2-167-FF02ENEH00]


Final Environmental Impact Statement and Draft Record of Decision 
for the Final Pima County Multi-Species Habitat Conservation Plan, Pima 
County, Arizona

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of the final environmental impact statement (EIS) and 
related draft record of decision (ROD) for the Pima County Multi-
Species Conservation Plan (MSCP). The final EIS was updated to address 
the comments received on the 2012 draft EIS and considers the 
environmental effects of issuing an incidental take permit (ITP) for 
covered activities on the covered species. The ITP will be in effect 
for a period of 30 years. Pima County has prepared the final Pima 
County MSCP to describe and implement a conservation plan that will 
minimize and mitigate environmental effects associated with the 
incidental take of seven animal species and impacts to two plant 
species currently listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 
amended (Act), as well as impacts to 35 species that may become listed 
under the Act. The incidental take and other impacts would occur in 
Pima County and the adjacent counties of Cochise, Santa Cruz, and 
Pinal, Arizona, as a result of specific actions conducted under the 
authority of Pima County (covered activities).

DATES: The Record of Decision will become effective no sooner than 30 
days after the publication date of this notice of availability for the 
final EIS.

ADDRESSES: Obtaining Documents: You may download copies of the final 
EIS, draft ROD, and final MSCP from the Arizona Ecological Services 
Office Web site at http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona. 
Alternatively, you may use one of the methods below to request a CD-ROM 
of the documents. Please send your requests or comments by any one of 
the following methods.
     U.S. Mail: Field Supervisor, Arizona Ecological Services 
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 2321 West Royal Palm Road, 
Suite 103, Phoenix, AZ 85021.
     In-Person Drop Off, Viewing, or Pickup: Telephone 520-670-
6150 x 242 (Scott Richardson) to make an appointment during regular 
business hours (8 a.m. to 4 p.m.) to drop off comments or view 
documents at the Arizona Ecological Services, Tucson Sub-Office, 201 
North Bonita Avenue, Suite 141, Tucson, AZ 85745.
     Fax: Arizona Ecological Services, Tucson Sub-Office; Fax 
Number 520-670-6155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Richardson, by U.S. mail at the 
Arizona Ecological Services Office, Tucson Sub-Office, 201 North Bonita 
Avenue, Suite 141, Tucson, AZ 85745; by telephone at 520-670-6150 
extension 242; or by email at [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under NEPA, we advise the public of the 
following:
    1. We have gathered the information necessary to determine the 
impacts and to formulate the alternatives for the final EIS related to 
the issuance of an ITP to Pima County; and
    2. Pima County has developed a final habitat conservation plan--the 
Pima County MSCP--which describes the measures Pima County has agreed 
to implement to minimize and mitigate the effects of the proposed 
incidental take of federally listed species and unlisted covered 
species, to the maximum extent practicable, pursuant to Section 
10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 
Act).
    The 30-year ITP authorizes the incidental take of 40 animal 
species. Among the 40 animal species are 7 species currently listed 
under the Act:
     Lesser long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris curasoae yerbabuenae)
     Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii 
extimus)
     Yellow-billed cuckoo (Coccyzus americanus; western 
distinct population segment)
     Northern Mexican gartersnake (Thamnophis eques megalops)
     Chiricahua leopard frog (Lithobates chiricahuensis)
     Gila topminnow (Poeciliopsis occidentalis occidentalis)
     Gila chub (Gila intermedia)
    The 40 animal species also include 33 species not currently listed 
under the Act:
     Mexican long-tongued bat (Choeronycteris mexicana)
     Western red bat (Lasiurus blossevillii)
     Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus)
     California leaf-nosed bat (Macrotus californicus)
     Pale Townsend's big-eared bat (Corynorhinus townsendii 
pallescens)
     Merriam's mouse (Peromyscus merriami)
     Western Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia hypugaea)
     Cactus ferruginous pygmy-owl (Glaucidium brasilianum 
cactorum)
     Rufous-winged sparrow (Aimophila carpalis)
     Swainson's hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
     Abert's towhee (Melozone aberti)
     Arizona Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii arizonae)
     Sonoran desert tortoise (Gopherus morafkai)
     Desert box turtle (Terrapene ornata luteola)
     Tucson shovel-nosed snake (Chionactis occipitalis 
klauberi)
     Groundsnake (valley form) (Sonora semiannulata)
     Giant spotted whiptail (Aspidoscelis stictogramma)
     Lowland leopard frog (Lithobates yavapaiensis)
     Longfin dace (Agosia chrysogaster)
     Desert sucker (Catostomus clarki)
     Sonora sucker (Catostomus insignis)

[[Page 29908]]

     San Xavier talussnail (Sonorella eremita)
     Black Mountain/Papago talussnail (Sonorella ambigua)
     Total Wreck talussnail (Sonorella imperatrix)
     Empire Mountain talussnail (Sonorella imperialis)
     Sonoran talussnail (Sonorella magdalenensis syn. 
tumamocensis)
     Pungent talussnail (Sonorella odorata)
     Santa Rita talussnail (Sonorella walkeri)
     Posta Quemada talussnail (Sonorella rinconensis)
     Santa Catalina talussnail subspecies (Sonorella 
sabinoensis buehmanensis)
     Santa Catalina talussnail subspecies (Sonorella 
sabinoensis tucsonica)
     Las Guijas talussnail (Sonorella sitiens)
     Tortolita talussnail (Sonorella tortillita)
    Although take of listed plant species is not prohibited under the 
Act, plant species may be included in a habitat conservation plan to 
formally document the conservation benefits provided to them through 
that process. Pima County proposes four plant species for coverage 
under their MSCP, including two listed species:
     Huachuca water umbel (Lilaeopsis schaffneriana ssp. 
recurva)
     Pima pineapple cactus (Coryphantha scheeri var. 
robustispina)
    And the two following unlisted species:
     Needle-spined pineapple cactus (Echinomastus erectocentrus 
var. erectocentrus)
     Tumamoc globeberry (Tumamoca macdougalii)
    The proposed incidental take would primarily occur within Pima 
County, Arizona, although some Pima County actions may also occur in 
adjacent counties as a result of impacts from actions occurring under 
the authority of the applicants. The applicants have completed a final 
habitat conservation plan as part of the application package, as 
required by the Act.
    The final EIS considers the direct, indirect, and cumulative 
effects of the proposed action of permit issuance, including the 
measures that will be implemented to minimize and mitigate such 
impacts.

Background

    Over the past 50 years, Pima County, Arizona, has had one of the 
fastest growing human populations of any county in the United States 
(an increase of just under 500 percent), as a result of a sunny 
climate, natural beauty, and economic opportunities. Urban growth has 
resulted in significant development, which is expected to continue in 
the foreseeable future. A significant proportion of the predicted 
future development in unincorporated Pima County is anticipated to 
occur in the undeveloped or underdeveloped areas, particularly in the 
eastern portion of the county.
    The presence of threatened and endangered species in the areas of 
potential land development creates regulatory concerns in Pima County. 
Interest in conservation and its potential related costs is found 
across many segments of the community, ranging from environmental 
advocates promoting strengthened protections to members of the business 
community, the development industry, and real estate profession, all of 
whom may be concerned about potential economic impacts. Landowners and 
private property interests are concerned about how their land-use 
decisions potentially can be affected by the presence of federally 
listed threatened and endangered species.
    A long-term solution to ensure compliance with the Act, 
particularly in areas such as Pima County where there is a large number 
of listed and unlisted species, is to develop a habitat conservation 
plan, such as the MSCP, under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The Pima 
County MSCP proposes a combination of long-term and short-term actions 
and long-range planning to protect and enhance some areas of the 
natural environment within Pima County. The Pima County MSCP would help 
guide public investments in both infrastructure and conservation, as 
well as establish Pima County's preferences for the expenditure of 
funds to preserve and reduce the threats posed by urbanization to 
species and their habitats, using tools such as ranch conservation and 
open space programs. Through the MSCP and the ITP, Pima County commits 
to a series of measures that will avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts 
of covered activities on the covered species.
    The objective of the Pima County MSCP is to achieve a balance 
between:
     Long-term conservation of the diversity of natural 
vegetation communities and native species of plants and animals that 
make up an important part of the natural heritage and allure of Pima 
County; and
     The orderly use of land to promote a sustainable economy, 
health, well-being, customs, and culture of the growing population of 
Pima County.
    In addition, the Pima County MSCP has been designed to:
     Avoid, minimize, and mitigate for the impacts of 
activities that would result in take of threatened and endangered 
species and provide long-term management and monitoring programs to 
help ensure program effectiveness;
     Meet the requirements for the applicants to receive an 
ITP-- pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act-- that would allow for 
the incidental take of threatened and endangered species while engaging 
in otherwise lawful activities;
     Provide conservation benefits to species and ecosystems in 
Pima County that would not otherwise occur without the MSCP;
     Maximize flexibility and available options in developing 
mitigation and conservation programs;
     Minimize uncoordinated decision making, which can result 
in incremental habitat loss and inefficient project review;
     Provide a decision-making framework that minimizes habitat 
loss and maximizes the efficiency of public-sector projects;
     Provide the applicants and their community stakeholders 
(participants) with long-term planning assurances;
     Cover an appropriate range of activities under the permit;
     Reduce the regulatory burden of compliance with the Act 
for the applicants and all affected participants; and
     Designate the funding that would be available to implement 
the Pima County MSCP over the entirety of its proposed term.
    The Service prepared the final EIS to respond to Pima County's 
request for an ITP for the proposed covered species related to 
activities that have the potential to result in incidental take. The 
need for this action is based on the potential for activities proposed 
by the applicants on lands under their jurisdiction to result in 
incidental take of covered species, thus requiring an ITP because 
section 9 of the Act prohibits the ``taking'' of threatened and 
endangered species. We are authorized, however, under limited 
circumstances, to issue permits to take federally listed species, when 
such a taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, otherwise 
lawful activities. Regulations governing permits for endangered and 
threatened species are in the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 
17.22 and 17.32, respectively.
    To identify the scope and content of the draft EIS for the MSCP, 
the Service formally initiated the scoping process on September 7, 
2000, with the publication in the Federal Register (65

[[Page 29909]]

FR 54295) of the notice of intent to prepare an EIS. Public involvement 
meetings were held in the form of open house/informational meetings in 
October, November, and December of 2000. In addition, a public scoping 
meeting was held in October 2003 prior to the release of an early draft 
MSCP. This meeting was preceded by the publication in the Federal 
Register (68 FR 53748) of a second notice of intent to prepare an EIS. 
Subsequent drafts of the MSCP were published in 2005, 2006 (two 
versions), 2008, and 2009 as part of the extensive process of 
developing scientific information and inviting public review and 
comment.
    A notice of availability and notice of public meetings for the 
draft MSCP and EIS were posted in the Federal Register on December 7, 
2012 (77 FR 73045). We also posted the notice of availability, draft 
MSCP, and draft EIS on the Arizona Ecological Services Web site (http://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/arizona/HCPs.htm). The formal comment period 
for the Pima County Draft MSCP/Draft EIS was from December 7, 2012, 
through March 15, 2013. Pima County hosted five public meetings for the 
draft MSCP in January 2013. The Service held one public comment meeting 
for the EIS on February 21, 2013, in Tucson, Arizona.
    During the public comment period, including the six public meetings 
as described above, 20 letters and written comments were received. Of 
the comments received during the draft MSCP/draft EIS public comment 
review period, the topics of primary concern were the planning and 
decision making process, natural resources management, social and 
economic concerns, cumulative effects, and MSCP-specific issues. 
Detailed information concerning public involvement and a record of 
comments received during scoping and public comment periods, and 
Service responses, are provided in Chapter 6 of the final EIS.
    Revisions were made to the draft MSCP and draft EIS based on public 
comments. The Service has afforded government agencies, tribes, and the 
public extensive opportunity to participate in the preparation of the 
EIS. We have requested data, comments, new information, and suggestions 
from the public, other concerned governmental agencies, the scientific 
community, Tribes, industry, or any other interested party regarding 
the draft EIS and draft MSCP. We have considered these comments in 
completing the final EIS, working with Pima County to finalize the 
MSCP, and developing the ITP.

Authority

    We provide this notice under Section 10(c) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 
1531 et seq.) and its implementing regulations (50 CFR 17.22 and 
17.32), and NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4371 et seq.) and its implementing 
regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

Joy E. Nicholopoulos,
Acting Regional Director, Southwest Region, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
[FR Doc. 2016-10948 Filed 5-12-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4333-15-P