HomeMy WebLinkAboutF&G Commission - Clear Lake Hitch (2) Commissioners STATE DE CALIFORNIA Sonke Mastrup,Executive Director
Jack Baylis,President Edmund G.Brown Jr.,Governor 1416 Ninth Street,Room 1320
Los Angeles Sacramento,CA 95814
Jim Kellogg,Vice President (916)653.4899
Discovery Bay Fish and Game Commission
Jacque Hostler-Carmesin,Member www.tgc.ca,gov
McKinleyville
Eric Sklar,Member >;
Saint Helena
Anthony C.Williams,MemberLJW22t
Huntington Beach
DEC 2 3 26/aj
Wildlife Heritage and Conservation QVYVIL s3WAisU'OiCNIA
Since 1870
December 18, 2015
TO ALL INTERESTED ANCA AFFECTED PARTIES.
This its to provide you with a copy of the notice of proposed regulatory action resulting
from the Commission's August 6, 2014 meeting, when it made a finding pursuant to
Section 2675.5, Fish andGame Code, that listing Clear Lake Ditch as threatened under
the California Endangered Species Act is warranted. The notice of proposed regulatory
action will be published in the California Regulatory Notice Register on December 24,
2015.
Please note the date of the public hearing related to this matter and associated
deadlines for receipt of written comments.
Ms. Karen Mitchell, 'Fisheries Branchi, Department of Fish and Wildlife, phone
(916) 5-445-0826, has been designated to respond to questions on the
substance of the proposed regulations.
Sincerely,
f
_/ fieri Tiemann
Associate Governmental Program Analyst
Attachment
l
TITLE 14. Fish and Game Commission
Notice of Proposed Changes in Regulations
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Fish and Game Commission (Commission), pursuant to
the authority vested by sections 240, 2070, 2075.5 and 2076.5, of the Fish and Game Code,
and to implement, interpret or make specific sections 1755, 2055, 2062, 2067, 2070, 2072.7,
2074.6, 2075.5, 2077, 2080, 2081 and 2835, of said Code, proposes to amend Section 670.5,
Title 14, California Code of Regulations, relating to Animals of California Declared to Be
Endangered or Threatened.
Informative Di-gestiPolicy Statement Overview
Section 670.5 of Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR), provides a list, established by
the California Fish and Game Commission (Commission), of animals designated as endangered
or threatened in California. The Commission has the authority to add or remove species from
this list if it finds that the action is warranted.
As required by Fish and Game Code Section 2075.5, subsection (e)(2), the Commission must
initiate proceedings in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act to amend subsection
(b)(2) of Section 670.5, to add Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi) to the list of threatened
animals.
In making the recommendation to list Clear Lake hitch pursuant to the California Endangered
Species Act, the Department identified the following primary threats: 1) present or threatened
modification or destruction of habitat; 2) predation; 3) competition; and 4) climate change. More
detail about the current status of Clear Lake hitch can be found in the Report to the Fish and
Game Commission, "A status review of Clear Lake hitch (Lavinia exilicauda chi)" (Department of
Fish and Wildlife, May 28, 2014).
The proposed regulation will benefit the environment by protecting Clear Lake hitch as a
threatened species.
Commission staff has searched the CCR and has found that the proposed regulation is neither
inconsistent nor incompatible with existing state regulations. No other state entity has the
authority to list threatened and endangered species.
NOTICE IS GIVEN that any person interested may present statements, orally or in writing,
relevant to this action at a hearing to be held in the Resources Building Auditorium, 1416 Ninth
Street, Sacramento, California, on February 11, 2016, at 8 a.m., or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard. It is requested, but not required, that written comments be submitted on
or before January 13, 2016, at the address given below, or by e-mail to FGC@fgc.ca.go�_.
Written comments mailed or e-malled to the Commission office, must be received before
5:00 p.m. on February 8, 2016. All comments must be received no later than February 11,
2016, at the hearing in Sacramento, California. If you would like copies of any modifications to
this proposal, please include your name and mailing address.
The regulations as proposed in strikeout-underline format, as well as an initial statement of
reasons, including environmental considerations and all information upon which the proposal is
based (rulemaking file), are on file and available for public review from the agency
representative, Sonke Mastrup, Executive Director, Fish and Game Commission, 1416 Ninth
Street, Box 944209, Sacramento, California 94244-2090, phone (916) 653-4899. Please direct
requests for the above mentioned documents and inquiries concerning the regulatory process to
Sonke Mastrup or Sheri Tiemann (back-up contact) at the preceding address or phone number.
Karen Mitchell, Fisheries Branch, Department of Fish and Wildlife, phone (916) 445-0826,
has been designated to respond to questions on the substance of the proposed
regulations. Copies of the Initial Statement of Reasons, including the regulatory language,
may be obtained from the address above. Notice of the proposed action shall be posted on the
Fish and Game Commission website at http://www.fgc.ca.gov.
Availabilitv of Modified Text
If the regulations adopted by the Commission differ from but are sufficiently related to the action
proposed, they will be available to the public for at least 15 days prior to the date of adoption.
Circumstances beyond the control of the Commission (e.g., timing of Federal regulation
adoption, timing of resource data collection, timelines do not allow, etc.) or changes made to be
responsive to public recommendation and comments during the regulatory process may
preclude full-compliance-with the 15--day comment period, and the Commission-will exercise its
powers under Section 202 of the Fish and Game Code. Regulations adopted pursuant to this
section are not subject to the time periods for adoption, amendment or repeal of regulations
prescribed in Sections 11343.4, 11346:4 and 11346.8 of the Government Code. Any person
interested may obtain a copy of said regulations prior to the date of adoption by contacting the
agency representative named herein.
If the regulatory proposal is adopted, the final statement of reasons may be obtained from the
address above when it has been received from the agency program staff.
Impact of Re ulato Action/Results of the Economic Im act Analysis
The potential for significant statewide adverse economic impacts that might result from the
proposed regulatory action has been assessed, and the following initial determinations relative
to the required statutory categories have been made:
(a) Significant Statewide Adverse Economic Impact Directly Affecting Businesses, Including
the Ability of California Businesses to Compete with Businesses in Other States:
Although localized economic impacts could result from adding Clear Lake hitch to the list
.of threatened species, the Commission does not anticipate that there will be significant,
statewide adverse economic impact on California businesses or significant costs to
private or public entities due to the limited area affected by the listing.
(b) Impact on the Creation or Elimination of Jobs Within the State, the Creation of New
Businesses or the Elimination of Existing Businesses, or the Expansion of Businesses in
California; Benefits of the Regulation to the Health and Welfare of California Residents,
Worker Safety, and the State's Environment:
The Commission does not anticipate any impacts on the creation or elimination of jobs,
the creation of new business, the elimination of existing businesses or the expansion of
businesses in California. The entire distribution of Clear Lake hitch is limited to the Clear
Lake watershed. Because of this localized distribution, adding the Clear Lake hitch to
the list of threatened species under CESA is unlikely to affect the creation or elimination
of jobs or businesses within the state as a whole.
2
The Commission does not anticipate benefits to the health and welfare of California
residents or to worker safety.
The Commission anticipates benefits to the environment by the protection of the Clear
Lake hitch.
(c) Cost Impacts on a Representative Private Person or Business:
Designation of threatened or endangered status, per se, would not necessarily result in
any significant cost to private persons or entities undertaking projects subject to public
agency review and approval under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
since impacts to Clear Lake hitch would have been evaluated as part of the CEQA lead
agency's mandatory consideration of a project's impacts to biological resources and
species of special concern.
Some costs to individuals associated with avoiding take or-obtaining take authorization.
arose with the candidacy designation, which took place more than two years ago.
Because the take prohibition for both candidate and listed species is the same, such
costs would not be increased by the act of adding Clear Lake hitch to the threatened
species list. However, individuals may have delayed actions in anticipation of a final
listing decision by the Commission; therefore listing could increase such costs.
(d) Costs or Savings to State Agencies or Costs/Savings in Federal Funding to the State:
None.
(e) Nondiscretionary Costs/Savings to Local Agencies:
None.
(f) Programs mandated on Local Agencies or School Districts:
None.
(g) Costs Imposed on Any Local Agency or School District that is Required to be
Reimbursed Under Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division 4, Government
Code:
None.
(h) Effect on Housing Costs:
None.
Effect on Small Business
It has been determined that the adoption of these regulations may affect small business. The
Commission has drafted the regulations in Plain English pursuant to Government Code sections
11342.580 and 11346.2(a)(1).
3
Consideration of Alternatives
The Commission must determine that no reasonable alternative considered by the Commission,
or that has otherwise been identified and brought to the attention of the Commission, would be
more effective in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, would be as
effective and less burdensome to affected private persons than the proposed action, or would
be more cost effective to affected private persons and equally effective in implementing the
statutory policy or other provision of law.
FISH AND GAME COMMISSION
Sonke Mastrup
Dated: December 15, 2015 Executive Director
4