BULL TROUT Proposed Critical Habitat

1. BULL TROUTProposed Critical Habitat Pacific Region U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service January 13, 2010

2. Photo by Bart Gamett

3. Photo by Wade Fredenberg

4. Bull Trout ESA History 1999: Listed as threatened 2002/04: Draft recovery plan 2005: Critical habitat designated; challenged in U.S. District Court (Oregon) 2008: 5-year status review completed;bull trout remain listed rangewide July, 2009: Court directs new proposed rule by Dec 09 January, 2010: Critical habitat re-proposed

5. 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.

6. Four Biological Indicators Distribution Abundance Trend Connectivity

7. “Seven Guiding Principles” Conserve diverse life-history Conserve genetic diversity Ensure species distribution across habitats Ensure connectivity among populations Ensure sufficient habitat for viable populations Consider threats (e.g., climate change) Ensure multiple, redundant populations

8. Nine Habitat Needs (Primary Constituent Elements) Springs, seeps, groundwater sources, subsurface water connectivity Migratory corridors with minimal impediments Abundant food base (insects, fish) Complex stream channels Cold water (2 to 15 °C) Varied stream substrates (quantity, size, composition) Natural stream flow patterns Sufficient water quantity Few or no nonnative species

9. Proposed Bull Trout Critical Habitat(32 units)

10. Proposed Designation • Proposed 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

11. 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%)

12. 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)

13. Proposed Designation: Habitat Percentages Spawning/Rearing: 48% Foraging/Migration/Overwinter: 52% Occupied: 96% Unoccupied: 4%

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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

19. 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

20. Comments: Due by INSERT DATE • Electronic mail - Federal eRulemaking Portal http://www.regulations.gov Docket # 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