PACIFIC REGIONU.S. FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE

JANUARY 13 , 2010

BULL TROUTProposed Critical Habitat

Photo by Bart Gamett

Photo by Wade Fredenberg

Bull Trout ESA History

1999: Listed as threatened2002/04: Draft recovery plan2005: Critical habitat designated;

challenged in U.S. District Court (Oregon)2008: 5-year status review completed;

bull trout remain listed rangewideJuly, 2009: Court directs new proposed

rule by Dec 09January, 2010: Critical habitat re-proposed

Critical Habitat

Specific areas within the range of the species with physical and biological features essential to the conservation of the species that may require special management consideration.

Four Biological Indicators

Distribution

Abundance

Trend

Connectivity

“Seven Guiding Principles”

Conserve diverse life-historyConserve genetic diversityEnsure species distribution across habitatsEnsure connectivity among populationsEnsure sufficient habitat for viable populationsConsider threats (e.g., climate change)Ensure multiple, redundant populations

Nine Habitat Needs (Primary Constituent Elements)

Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, subsurface water connectivity

Migratory corridors with minimal impedimentsAbundant food base (insects, fish) Complex stream channelsCold water (2 to 15 °C)Varied stream substrates (quantity, size, composition)Natural stream flow patternsSufficient water quantityFew or no nonnative species

Proposed Bull Trout Critical Habitat(32 units)

Proposed DesignationProposed Rule (2010)

Stream Miles: 22,679 miles (36,498 kilometers) Lakes/Reservoirs: 533,426 acres (215,870 hectares)

• Idaho: 9,671 stream miles; 197,915 acres of lakes or reservoirs • Oregon: 3,100 stream miles; 29,139 acres of lakes or reservoirs • Washington: 5,233 stream miles; 82,610 acres of lakes or reservoirs; 985 miles of marine shoreline • Montana: 3,094 stream miles; 223,762 acres of lakes or reservoirs • Nevada: 85 stream miles   In some areas, the critical habitat proposal spans shared border designations

along the Columbia or Snake Rivers. • Oregon/Idaho (Snake River): 170 stream miles • Washington/Idaho (Snake River): 37 stream miles • Washington/Oregon (Columbia): 304 stream miles

State-by-State Percentages

Idaho: 9,671 mi (43%) and 197,915 ac (37%)

Oregon: 3,100 mi (14%) and 29,140 ac (6%)

Washington: 6,218 mi (27%, incl. 985 of marine) and 82,610 ac (16%)

Montana: 3,094 mi (14%) and 223,762 ac (43%)

Nevada: 85 mi (0.4%) and 0 ac (0%)

Columbia and Snake River Shared Border Designations: Oregon/Idaho (Snake River): 170 mi (0.8%) Washington/Idaho (Snake River): 37 mi (<0.1%) Washington/Oregon (Columbia): 304 mi (1%)

Previous Rules

2005 Rule 4,813 mi (79% less than 2010) 136,407 ac (74% less than 2010)

2002-04 Proposed Rules 21,935 mi (3% less than 2010) 591,577 ac (10% more than 2010)

Proposed Designation: Habitat Percentages

Spawning/Rearing: 48%

Foraging/Migration/Overwinter: 52%

Occupied: 96%

Unoccupied: 4%

Rationale:Why Proposed Critical Habitat is Essential

“Justification Document”

Identifies Methods used to propose critical habitat/rationale Critical Habitat Units and Subunits Biological indicators Seven Guiding Principles 104 maps Occupancy data for each individual water body

Available at www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout

Exemptions and Exclusions

Military 5 facilities (25 miles/16 acres habitat - based

onINRMPs)

HCPs, Conservation Agreements, andpossibly some Native American Tribal lands USFWS requests comment on excluding these

identified lands from designation

Economic Analysis

Approximately $5 million cost per year for additional critical habitat from increased administrative costs

Small business impacts less than 1% across all sectors

Public comment requested on the economic analysis (effects of proposed rule) at: www.fws.gov/pacific/bulltrout

Public Forums, February 2010

• Bend, Oregon, 5:30-7:30 p.m. on the 2nd

• Chiloquin, Oregon, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on the 3rd

• LaGrande, Oregon, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. on the 4th

• Post Falls, Idaho, 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. on the 11th

• Missoula, Montana, 3 p.m. to 8 p.m. on the 16th

• Elko, Nevada, 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. on the 17th

• Wenatchee, Washington, 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. on the 23rd

• Boise, Idaho, 2010, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m. on the 25th

PUBLIC HEARING/ORAL TESTIMONY

     • Boise, Idaho, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. on the 25th

Next Steps

Public Comment Period (insert dates)

Revise proposed rule after comment period closes

Final rule: September 30, 2010

Revise and complete bull trout recovery plan

Continue implementing recovery actions

Conservation Actions

Many partners in conservation have worked successfully to conserve bull trout rangewide. Connectivity: thousands of miles restored Water Flows: thousands of cubic feet per second

restored Habitat Quality: hundreds of stream miles

improved Water Quality: significant improvements Direct “Take:” significant protection

Comments: Due by INSERT DATE

Electronic mail - Federal eRulemaking Portalhttp://www.regulations.govDocket # FWS–R1–ES–2009–0085

U.S. Mail Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R1-ES-2009-0085;

Division of Policy & Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 222; Arlington, VA 22203.

Hand-write comments at Public Meeting

Deliver oral testimony at Public Hearing