Designated Critical Habitat: Re-proposed Critical Habitat for Johnson's Seagrass

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

50 CFR Part 226

[Docket No. 991116305-9305-01; I.D. No. 110599D]

RIN 0648-AL82

Designated Critical Habitat: Re-proposed Critical Habitat for

Johnson's Seagrass

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Proposed rule; notice of hearing; request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS re-proposes to designate critical habitat for Johnson's

seagrass (Halophila johnsonii) pursuant to section 4 of the Endangered

Species Act (ESA). Johnson's seagrass is found on the east coast of

Florida from Sebastian Inlet to central Biscayne Bay. Within this

range, 10 areas are proposed for critical habitat: a portion of the

Indian River Lagoon, north of the Sebastian Inlet Channel; a portion of

the Indian River Lagoon, south of the Sebastian Inlet Channel; a

portion of the Indian River Lagoon near the Fort Pierce Inlet; a

portion of the Indian River Lagoon, north of the St. Lucie Inlet; a

portion of Hobe Sound; a site on the south side of Jupiter Inlet; a

site in central Lake Worth Lagoon; a site in Lake Worth Lagoon, Boynton

Beach; a site in Lake Wyman, Boca Raton; and a portion of the Biscayne

Bay Aquatic Preserve.

The designation of critical habitat provides explicit notice to

Federal agencies and the public that these areas and features are vital

to the conservation of the species.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received by January 3,

2000. A public hearing on this proposed action is scheduled for

Thursday, December 16, 1999, from 7:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m.

the Biscayne

Bay Aquatic Preserve.

The designation of critical habitat provides explicit notice to

Federal agencies and the public that these areas and features are vital

to the conservation of the species.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received by January 3,

2000. A public hearing on this proposed action is scheduled for

Thursday, December 16, 1999, from 7:00 p.m.-9:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Written comments on this proposed designation of critical

habitat should be addressed to Mr. Charles Oravetz, Assistant Regional

Administrator, Protected Resources Division, NMFS, Southeast Regional

Office, 9721 Executive Center Drive North, St. Petersburg, Florida

33702-2432. Comments may be sent via facsimile (fax) to 727-570-5517.

Comments will not be accepted if submitted via e-mail or Internet. A

public hearing on this proposal will be held at the South Florida Water

Management District auditorium, 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach,

Florida, 33416-4680 (see DATES).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Layne Bolen, Southeast Region,

Protected Resources Division, NMFS, 727-570-5312, [email protected]

or Marta Nammack, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 301-713-1401,

[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

NMFS published a proposed rule to list Johnson's seagrass as a

threatened species on September 15, 1993 (58 FR 48326) and a proposed

rule to designate critical habitat on August 4, 1994 (59 FR 39716). A

public hearing on both the proposed listing and critical habitat

designation was held in Vero Beach, Florida, on September 20, 1994. As

a result of public input during the comment period, NMFS postponed

further action on listing. NMFS reopened the comment period for the

proposed listing on April 20, 1998 (63 FR 19468)

osed

rule to designate critical habitat on August 4, 1994 (59 FR 39716). A

public hearing on both the proposed listing and critical habitat

designation was held in Vero Beach, Florida, on September 20, 1994. As

a result of public input during the comment period, NMFS postponed

further action on listing. NMFS reopened the comment period for the

proposed listing on April 20, 1998 (63 FR 19468). In order to update

the original status report (Kenworthy, 1993) and to include information

from new field and laboratory research on species distribution,

ecology, genetics and phylogeny, NMFS convened a workshop on the

biology, distribution, and abundance of H. johnsonii. The results of

this workshop were summarized in the proceedings (Kenworthy, 1997)

submitted to NMFS on October 15, 1997. The final rule to list Johnson's

seagrass as a threatened species was published by NMFS on September 14,

1998 (63 FR 49035).

On February 23, 1999, NMFS established and convened a recovery team

to prepare a recovery plan and develop recommendations for critical

habitat for Johnson's seagrass. Based on these recommendations and the

best available scientific data on the distribution, ecology and

genetics of this species, NMFS has developed a new proposal to

designate critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass. A draft recovery

plan for Johnson's seagrass is anticipated by January 2000.

The proposed designation identifies those physical and biological

features of the habitat that are essential to the conservation of the

species and that may require special management consideration or

protection. The economic and other impacts resulting from designating

critical habitat, over and above those that result from listing the

species, are expected to be minimal.

NMFS has completed a conference opinion with the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (COE) on maintenance dredging which will be used to fulfill

the ESA section 7 consultation requirement

re special management consideration or

protection. The economic and other impacts resulting from designating

critical habitat, over and above those that result from listing the

species, are expected to be minimal.

NMFS has completed a conference opinion with the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers (COE) on maintenance dredging which will be used to fulfill

the ESA section 7 consultation requirement. NMFS expects that normal

maintenance dredging activities and routine operations on ports will

not be negatively impacted by this proposed critical habitat

designation.

Critical Habitat

Section 4(a)(3)(A) of the ESA requires that, to the maximum extent

prudent and determinable, NMFS designate critical habitat concurrently

with a determination that a species is endangered or threatened. NMFS

has determined that sufficient information exists to propose

designating critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass currently listed as

threatened under the ESA. NMFS will consider all available information

and data in finalizing this proposal.

The use of the term ``essential habitat'' within this document

refers to critical habitat as defined by the ESA and should not be

confused with the requirement to describe and identify Essential Fish

Habitat pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and

Management Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Definition of Critical Habitat

Critical habitat is defined in section 3(5)(A) of the ESA as ``(i)

the specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species

* * * on which are found those physical or biological features (I)

essential to the conservation of the species and (II) which may require

special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific

areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species * * * upon

a determination by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) that such

areas are essential for the conservation of the species.'' The term

``conservation'', as defined in section 3(3) of the ESA, means ``* * *

to use and the use of al

nd (II) which may require

special management considerations or protection; and (ii) specific

areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species * * * upon

a determination by the Secretary of Commerce (Secretary) that such

areas are essential for the conservation of the species.'' The term

``conservation'', as defined in section 3(3) of the ESA, means ``* * *

to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to

bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at

which the measures provided pursuant to this Act are no longer

necessary.''

In designating critical habitat, NMFS must consider the

requirements of the species, including: (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, or rearing

of offspring; and, generally, (5) habitats that are protected from

disturbance or are representative of the historic geographical and

ecological distributions of the species (50 CFR 424.12(b)).

In addition, NMFS must focus on and list the known physical and

biological features (primary constituent elements) within the

designated area(s) that are essential to the conservation of the

species and that may require special management considerations or

protection. These essential features may include, but are not limited

to, food resources, water quality or quantity, and vegetation and

sediment types and stability (50 CFR 424.12(b)).

Consideration of Economic and Other Factors

y constituent elements) within the

designated area(s) that are essential to the conservation of the

species and that may require special management considerations or

protection. These essential features may include, but are not limited

to, food resources, water quality or quantity, and vegetation and

sediment types and stability (50 CFR 424.12(b)).

Consideration of Economic and Other Factors

The economic, environmental and other impacts of a designation must

also be evaluated and considered. NMFS must identify present and future

activities that may adversely modify the proposed critical habitat or

be affected by a designation. An area may be excluded from a critical

habitat designation if NMFS determines that the overall benefits of

exclusion outweigh the benefits of designation, unless the exclusion

will result in the extinction of the species (16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(2)).

The impacts considered in this analysis are only those incremental

impacts that specifically result from designating critical habitat

above the economic and other impacts attributable to listing the

species or resulting from other authorities. These incremental impacts

are expected to be minimal (see Significance of Designating Critical

Habitat section). In general, the designation of critical habitat

highlights geographical areas of concern and reinforces the substantive

protection resulting from the listing itself.

Impacts attributable to listing include those resulting from the

``take'' prohibitions under section 9 of the ESA and associated

regulations. The term ``take'', as defined in the ESA, means ``to

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or

collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.'' (16 U.S.C.

1532(19)). Harm can occur through destruction or modification of

habitat (whether or not designated as critical) that significantly

impairs essential behaviors, including breeding, feeding, rearing or

migration (64 FR 60727; November 8, 1999)

he ESA, means ``to

harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or

collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.'' (16 U.S.C.

1532(19)). Harm can occur through destruction or modification of

habitat (whether or not designated as critical) that significantly

impairs essential behaviors, including breeding, feeding, rearing or

migration (64 FR 60727; November 8, 1999).

Section 9 of the ESA prohibits certain activities that directly or

indirectly affect endangered species. These prohibitions apply to all

individuals, organizations, and agencies subject to U.S. jurisdiction.

Section 9 prohibitions apply automatically to endangered species; as

described here, this is not the case for threatened species. Section

4(d) of the ESA directs the Secretary to implement regulations ``to

provide for the conservation of [threatened] species'' that may include

extending any or all of the prohibitions of section 9 to threatened

species.

Section 9(a)(2)(E) of the ESA also prohibits violations of

protective regulations for threatened species of plants implemented

under section 4(d). NMFS may issue protective regulations pursuant to

section 4(d) for Johnson's seagrass in a future rulemaking.

Impacts attributable to listing also include those resulting from

the responsibility of all Federal agencies under section 7 of the ESA

to ensure that their actions are not likely to jeopardize endangered or

threatened species. An action could be likely to jeopardize the

continued existence of a listed species through the destruction or

adverse modification of its habitat, whether or not that habitat has

been designated as critical.

As indicated above, NMFS has completed a conference opinion with

the COE on maintenance dredging. This conference opinion included an

analysis of the effects of maintenance dredging on proposed critical

habitat

to jeopardize the

continued existence of a listed species through the destruction or

adverse modification of its habitat, whether or not that habitat has

been designated as critical.

As indicated above, NMFS has completed a conference opinion with

the COE on maintenance dredging. This conference opinion included an

analysis of the effects of maintenance dredging on proposed critical

habitat. NMFS concluded that normal maintenance dredging activities and

routine operations on ports are not likely to destroy or adversely

modify proposed critical habitat.

Significance of Designating Critical Habitat

The designation of critical habitat does not, in itself, restrict

state or private activities within the area or mandate any specific

management or recovery actions. A critical habitat designation

contributes to species conservation primarily by identifying important

areas and describing the features within those areas that are essential

to the species, thus alerting public and private entities to the

importance of the area. Under the ESA, the only regulatory impact of a

critical habitat designation is through the provisions of section 7.

Section 7 applies only to actions with Federal involvement (e.g.,

authorized, funded, or conducted by a Federal agency) and does not

affect exclusively state or private activities.

Under the ESA section 7 provisions, a designation of critical

habitat would require Federal agencies to ensure that any action they

authorize, fund, or carry out is not likely to destroy or adversely

modify the designated critical habitat. Activities that destroy or

adversely modify critical habitat are defined as those actions that

``appreciably diminish the value of critical habitat for both the

survival and recovery'' of the species (50 CFR 402.02). Regardless of a

critical habitat designation, Federal agencies must ensure that their

actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the

listed species

habitat. Activities that destroy or

adversely modify critical habitat are defined as those actions that

``appreciably diminish the value of critical habitat for both the

survival and recovery'' of the species (50 CFR 402.02). Regardless of a

critical habitat designation, Federal agencies must ensure that their

actions are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the

listed species. Activities that jeopardize a species are defined as

those actions that ``reasonably would be expected, directly or

indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival

and recovery'' of the species (50 CFR 402.02). Using these definitions,

activities that are likely to destroy or adversely modify critical

habitat would also be likely to jeopardize the species. Therefore, the

protection provided by a critical habitat designation generally

duplicates the protection provided under the section 7 jeopardy

provision. Critical habitat may provide additional benefits to a

species in cases where areas outside of the species' current range have

been designated. In these cases, Federal agencies are required to

consult with NMFS under section 7 (50 CFR 402.14 (a)), when these

designated areas may be affected by their actions. The effects of these

actions on designated areas may not have been recognized but for the

critical habitat designation.

A designation of critical habitat provides Federal agencies with a

clearer indication as to when consultation under section 7 of the ESA

is required, particularly in cases where the action would not result in

direct mortality, injury, or harm to individuals of a listed species

(e.g., an action occurring within the critical habitat area when or

where Johnson's seagrass is not present). The critical habitat

designation, in describing the essential features of the habitat, also

helps determine which activities conducted outside the designated area

are subject to ESA section 7 (i.e., activities that may affect

essential features of the designated area)

activities. The

economic and other impacts of these actions would be considered at the

time regulations are proposed, and, therefore, are not considered in

the critical habitat designation process. Other Federal, state and

local laws or regulations, such as zoning or wetlands protection, may

also provide special protection for critical habitat areas.

Process for Designating Critical Habitat

Developing a proposed critical habitat designation involves three

main considerations. First, the biological needs of the species are

evaluated and essential habitat areas and features are identified. If

alternative areas exist that would provide for the conservation of the

species, such alternatives are also identified. Second, the need for

special management considerations or protection of the area(s) or

features is evaluated. Finally, the probable economic and other impacts

of designating these essential areas as critical habitat are evaluated.

After considering the requirements of the species, the need for special

management, and the impacts of the designation, a notification of the

proposed critical habitat is published in the Federal Register for

comment. After considering all comments and any new information

received on the proposal, the final critical habitat designation is

published. Final critical habitat designations may be revised, using

the same process, as new data become available.

A description of the critical habitat, need for special management

considerations, and impacts of designating critical habitat for

Johnson's seagrass and the proposed action, are described in the

following sections.

Critical Habitat of Johnson's Seagrass

abitat designation is

published. Final critical habitat designations may be revised, using

the same process, as new data become available.

A description of the critical habitat, need for special management

considerations, and impacts of designating critical habitat for

Johnson's seagrass and the proposed action, are described in the

following sections.

Critical Habitat of Johnson's Seagrass

The biology of Johnson's seagrass is discussed in the final rule to

list the species as threatened (63 FR 49035, September 14, 1998) and

includes information on the current status of the species, its life

history characteristics and habitat requirements, as well as projects,

activities and other factors affecting the species. The physical

habitat that supports Johnson's seagrass includes both shallow

intertidal as well as deeper subtidal zones. The species prospers and

is able to colonize and maintain stable populations either in water

that is clear and deep (2-5 m) or in water that is shallow and turbid.

In tidal channels, it inhabits coarse sand substrates.

Based on published reports and discussions with seagrass experts,

the distributional range of Johnson's seagrass is limited to the east

coast of Florida from central Biscayne Bay (25 deg.45' N. lat.) to

Sebastian Inlet (27 deg.51' N. lat.). There have been no reports of

healthy populations of this species outside the presently known range.

Although the species occurs throughout the Indian River Lagoon and Lake

Worth, the 10 specific areas proposed for critical habitat encompass

the largest known contiguous populations of Johnson's seagrass, those

areas known to have persistent populations, those populations known to

have persistent flowering, those populations found to have unique

genetic variability, and/or populations that include the northern and

southern limits of the species' range.

The species is distributed in patches within its range

tical habitat encompass

the largest known contiguous populations of Johnson's seagrass, those

areas known to have persistent populations, those populations known to

have persistent flowering, those populations found to have unique

genetic variability, and/or populations that include the northern and

southern limits of the species' range.

The species is distributed in patches within its range. The

dimensions of patches range from a few square centimeters to

approximately 327 square meters (sq.m.). The survival of the species

likely depends on maintaining its existing viable populations,

especially the areas where the larger patches are found. The Sebastian

Inlet population is believed to be the northern limit of its

distribution and includes flowering patches that have a known

persistence of at least 10 years. Ft. Pierce Inlet and Jupiter Inlet

are also found to have persistent and flowering populations. The other

areas proposed for critical habitat designation represent the core

range of the species where Johnson's seagrass is found to be abundant

compared to other parts of its range, exhibits unique genetic make-up,

or comprises the southern limit of its range. Spread of the species

into new areas is limited by its reproductive potential. Johnson's

seagrass possesses only female flowers; thus vegetative propagation,

most likely through asexual branching, appears to be its only means of

reproduction and dispersal. If an established community is disturbed,

regrowth and reestablishment are extremely unlikely. If extirpated from

an area, it is doubtful that the species would be capable of

repopulation. This species' method of reproduction impedes the ability

to increase distribution as establishment of new vegetation requires

considerable stability in environmental conditions and protection from

human-induced disturbances

community is disturbed,

regrowth and reestablishment are extremely unlikely. If extirpated from

an area, it is doubtful that the species would be capable of

repopulation. This species' method of reproduction impedes the ability

to increase distribution as establishment of new vegetation requires

considerable stability in environmental conditions and protection from

human-induced disturbances.

Based on the best available information, general physical and

biological features of the areas proposed for critical habitat

designation include adequate water quality, salinity levels, water

transparency, and stable, unconsolidated sediments that are free from

physical disturbance. The specific areas occupied by Johnson's seagrass

are those with one or more of the following criteria: (1) Locations

with populations that have persisted for 10 years; (2) locations with

persistent flowering populations; (3) locations at the northern and

southern range limits of the species; (4) locations with unique genetic

diversity; and (5) locations with a documented high abundance of

Johnson's seagrass compared to other areas in the species' range.

Explanations for these criteria are:

1. Persistent populations. Surveys of H. johnsonii distribution and

abundance in the Indian River Lagoon indicate that populations

fluctuate dramatically. In some areas populations disappear and re-

appear on both intra- and inter-annual time scales (Virnstein et al.,

1997). Some populations have disappeared and not returned. Since sexual

reproduction and seed dispersal are unknown, this species may rely on

vegetative fragmentation for recruitment and establishment of new

populations. Recruitment from fragmentation and migration are random

processes which do not guarantee the persistence of the species in any

one location. Perennial populations which have persisted for 10 years

exist in several locations, including Sebastian Inlet, Fort Pierce

Inlet, Jupiter Inlet and Hobe Sound

ies may rely on

vegetative fragmentation for recruitment and establishment of new

populations. Recruitment from fragmentation and migration are random

processes which do not guarantee the persistence of the species in any

one location. Perennial populations which have persisted for 10 years

exist in several locations, including Sebastian Inlet, Fort Pierce

Inlet, Jupiter Inlet and Hobe Sound. Environmental characteristics of

these sites appear favorable to the species, while in other locations

in the lagoon, populations have disappeared. Locations where

populations have persisted should receive critical habitat

consideration.

2. Persistent flowering populations. The existence of male flowers

or recruitment by seed have not been documented for H. johnsonii. These

observations suggest that this species does not reproduce sexually, and

if it does, it is a very rare event. Yet, large clones of mature female

plants flower prolifically at several locations, including Sebastian

Inlet, Fort Pierce Inlet, Jupiter Inlet and Lake Worth Lagoon. The

environmental conditions at these sites appears to be suitable for

flowering, and if there are any males present, these would be likely

habitats for successful reproduction. Locations where there are

persistent flowering populations should receive critical habitat

consideration.

3. Northern and southern ranges of the populations. The

geographical limits of the distributional range of a species can

indicate a reduction or expansion of the species' range. Greater

adaptative stresses can occur at the limits of the species' range. If

the range extension were shrinking, the edges should be protected to

prevent further loss. Second, the distribution limits may be a point

where the populations are expanding and invading new environments. The

unique phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of these populations

could be an important reservoir for characteristics resistant to

extinction and conducive to survival and growth

If

the range extension were shrinking, the edges should be protected to

prevent further loss. Second, the distribution limits may be a point

where the populations are expanding and invading new environments. The

unique phenotypic and genotypic characteristics of these populations

could be an important reservoir for characteristics resistant to

extinction and conducive to survival and growth. The northern and

southern ranges of Johnson's seagrass are defined as Sebastian Inlet

and central Biscayne Bay, respectively. These limits to the species'

range should receive critical habitat consideration.

4. Populations with unique genetic variability. The Boca Raton and

Boynton Beach sites have populations which are distinguished by a

higher index of genetic variation than any of the central and northern

populations examined to date. These two sites possibly represent a

genetically semi-isolated group which could be the reservoir of a large

part of the overall genetic variation found in this species.

Information is lacking on the geographic extent of this genetic

variability. Locations with populations that have unique genetic

variability should receive critical habitat consideration.

5. Areas of abundance. The Lake Worth Lagoon and Palm Beach County

seagrass populations represent an abundant core of Halophila species,

including Johnson's seagrass. Previously a freshwater lake, Lake Worth,

was transformed into a lagoon beginning in 1877 when an ocean inlet was

stabilized. With dredging of the Intracoastal Waterway, shoreline

development, and sewage disposal, the lagoon was permanently altered.

Presently, there are about 2000 acres of seagrass in the lagoon

covering 35 percent of the bottom. It is estimated that between 20 and

25 percent of the seagrass coverage is comprised of mixed assemblages

of H. decipiens and H. johnsonii. This is proportionately more

Halophila coverage than occurs elsewhere along the southeast coast of

Florida

ge disposal, the lagoon was permanently altered.

Presently, there are about 2000 acres of seagrass in the lagoon

covering 35 percent of the bottom. It is estimated that between 20 and

25 percent of the seagrass coverage is comprised of mixed assemblages

of H. decipiens and H. johnsonii. This is proportionately more

Halophila coverage than occurs elsewhere along the southeast coast of

Florida. Presently, conditions within Lake Worth Lagoon and in Palm

Beach County in general appear to be conducive to the survival of H.

johnsonii. Locations within Lake Worth and Palm Beach County should be

considered as critical habitat.

The area proposed for critical habitat in Lake Worth Lagoon, near

Bingham Island, consists of the largest recorded contiguous patch of

Johnson's seagrass: a 30-acre meadow of Johnson's seagrass intermixed

with sparse coverage of H. decipiens and Halodule wrightii (Smith and

Mezich, 1991 and 1999).

Need for Special Management Consideration or Protection

NMFS has determined that the essential areas and features described

here are at risk and may require special management consideration or

protection. Special management may be required because of the following

activities: (1) Vessel traffic and the resulting propeller dredging and

anchor mooring; (2) dredging; (3) dock, marina, and bridge construction

and shading from these structures; (4) water pollution; and (5) land

use practices including shoreline development, agriculture, and

aquaculture. Activities associated with recreational boat traffic

account for the majority of human use associated with the proposed

critical habitat areas. The destruction of the benthic community due to

boating activities, propeller dredging, anchor mooring, and dock and

marina construction was observed at all sites during a study by NMFS

from 1990 to 1992. These activities severely disrupt the benthic

habitat, breaching root systems, severing rhizomes, and significantly

reducing the viability of the seagrass community

critical habitat areas. The destruction of the benthic community due to

boating activities, propeller dredging, anchor mooring, and dock and

marina construction was observed at all sites during a study by NMFS

from 1990 to 1992. These activities severely disrupt the benthic

habitat, breaching root systems, severing rhizomes, and significantly

reducing the viability of the seagrass community. Propeller dredging

and anchor mooring in shallow areas are a major disturbance to even the

most robust seagrasses. This destruction is expected to worsen with the

predicted increase in boating activity. Trampling of seagrass beds, a

secondary effect of recreational boating, also disturbs seagrass

habitat. Populations of Johnson's seagrass inhabiting shallow water and

water close to inlets, where vessel traffic is concentrated, will be

most affected.

The constant sedimentation patterns in and around inlets require

frequent maintenance dredging, which could either directly remove

essential seagrass habitat or indirectly affect it by redistributing

sediments, burying plants and destabilizing the bottom structure.

Altering benthic topography or burying the plants may remove them from

the photic zone.

Permitted dredging of channels, basins, and other in-and on-water

construction projects cause loss of Johnson's seagrass and its habitat

through direct removal of the plant, fragmentation of habitat, and

shading. Docking facilities that, upon meeting certain provisions, are

exempt from state permitting also contribute to loss of Johnson's

seagrass through construction impacts and shading. Fixed add-ons to

exempt docks (such as finger piers, floating docks, or boat lifts) have

recently been documented as an additional source of seagrass loss due

to shading (Smith and Mezich, 1999).

Decreased water transparency caused by suspended sediments, water

color, and chlorophylls could have significant detrimental effects on

the distribution and abundance of the deeper water populations of

Johnson's seagrass

t docks (such as finger piers, floating docks, or boat lifts) have

recently been documented as an additional source of seagrass loss due

to shading (Smith and Mezich, 1999).

Decreased water transparency caused by suspended sediments, water

color, and chlorophylls could have significant detrimental effects on

the distribution and abundance of the deeper water populations of

Johnson's seagrass. A distribution survey in Hobe and Jupiter Sounds

indicates that the abundance of this seagrass diminishes in the more

turbid interior portion of the lagoon where reduced light limits

photosynthesis.

Other areas of concern include seagrass beds located in proximity

to rivers and canal mouths where low salinity, highly colored water is

discharged. Freshwater discharge into areas adjacent to seagrass beds

may provoke physiological stress upon the plants by reducing the

salinity levels. Additionally, colored waters released into these areas

reduce the amount of sunlight available for photosynthesis by rapidly

attenuating shorter wavelengths of Photosynthetically Active Radiation.

Also, continuing and increasing degradation of water quality due to

increased land use and water management threatens the welfare of

seagrass communities. Nutrient over-enrichment caused by inorganic and

organic nitrogen and phosphorous loading via urban and agricultural

land run-off stimulates increased algal growth that may smother

Johnson's seagrass, shade rooted vegetation, and diminish the oxygen

content of the water. Low oxygen conditions have a demonstrated

negative impact on seagrasses and associated communities.

Special consideration and protection for these and other habitat

features are evaluated in the ESA section 7 consultation process.

Special management needs and the protection of these habitat features

are being addressed in the development and implementation of the

recovery plan.

Activities That May Affect Critical Habitat

monstrated

negative impact on seagrasses and associated communities.

Special consideration and protection for these and other habitat

features are evaluated in the ESA section 7 consultation process.

Special management needs and the protection of these habitat features

are being addressed in the development and implementation of the

recovery plan.

Activities That May Affect Critical Habitat

A wide range of activities funded, authorized or carried out by

Federal agencies may affect the essential habitat requirements of

Johnson's seagrass. These include authorization by the COE for beach

nourishment, dredging, and

related activities including construction of docks and marinas; bridge

construction projects funded by the Federal Highway Administration;

actions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the COE to

manage freshwater discharges into waterways; regulation of vessel

traffic by the U.S. Coast Guard; management of national refuges and

protected species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; management of

vessel traffic (and other activities) by the U.S. Navy; approval of

changes to Florida's coastal zone management plan by NOAA's National

Ocean Service, and management of commercial fishing and protected

species by NMFS.

Expected Impacts of Designating Critical Habitat

This designation will identify specific habitat areas that have

been determined to be essential for the conservation of Johnson's

seagrass and that may be in need of special management considerations

or protection. It will require Federal agencies to evaluate their

activities with respect to the critical habitat of this species and to

consult with NMFS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA before engaging in

any action that may affect the critical habitat.

As discussed in the section on activities that may impact essential

habitat and features, the Federal activities that may affect critical

habitat are the same activities that may affect the species itself

activities with respect to the critical habitat of this species and to

consult with NMFS pursuant to section 7 of the ESA before engaging in

any action that may affect the critical habitat.

As discussed in the section on activities that may impact essential

habitat and features, the Federal activities that may affect critical

habitat are the same activities that may affect the species itself. For

plants, this is particularly true when analyzing the impacts of

designating critical habitat. For example, the activities that affect

water quality, an essential feature of critical habitat, will also be

considered in terms of how they affect the species itself.

Should this proposed designation of critical habitat be adopted,

Federal agencies will continue to engage in ESA section 7 consultations

to determine if the actions they authorize, fund or carry out are

likely to jeopardize the continued existence of Johnson's seagrass;

however, with designation, they would also need to address explicitly

impacts to the species' critical habitat. This is not expected to

affect materially the scope of future consultations or result in

greater economic impacts, since most impacts to Johnson's seagrass

habitat will already be considered in ESA section 7 consultations.

The economic costs to be considered in a critical habitat

designation are the incremental costs of designation above the economic

impacts attributable to listing or attributable to authorities other

than the ESA. NMFS has determined that there are few, if any,

incremental net costs for areas within the species' current

distribution, and no areas outside the current range are proposed for

critical habitat designation.

Proposed Critical Habitat; Geographic Extent

re the incremental costs of designation above the economic

impacts attributable to listing or attributable to authorities other

than the ESA. NMFS has determined that there are few, if any,

incremental net costs for areas within the species' current

distribution, and no areas outside the current range are proposed for

critical habitat designation.

Proposed Critical Habitat; Geographic Extent

Based on available information, NMFS proposes to designate critical

habitat that is considered essential for the survival and that may

require special management consideration or protection. The critical

habitat designation proposed by this rule includes: (1) Locations with

populations that have persisted for 10 years; (2) locations with

persistent flowering populations; (3) locations at the northern and

southern range limits of the species; (4) locations with unique genetic

diversity; and (5) core locations with a documented high abundance of

Johnson's seagrass compared to other areas in the species' range.

NMFS is not including in the proposed designation any areas outside

the species' currently known geographical area. NMFS has concluded

that, at this time, proper management of the essential features of the

areas around Sebastian and Ft. Pierce Inlet, Hobe Sound, Jupiter Inlet,

Lake Worth, Boca Raton, and northern Key Biscayne will be sufficient to

provide for the survival and recovery of this species. NMFS may

reconsider this evaluation and propose additional areas for critical

habitat at any time. Johnson's seagrass occurs in numerous locations

throughout its range in areas outside of those currently being proposed

for critical habitat. Information on genetic variability and

persistence of Johnson's seagrass is currently lacking in these areas

or the survival and recovery of this species. NMFS may

reconsider this evaluation and propose additional areas for critical

habitat at any time. Johnson's seagrass occurs in numerous locations

throughout its range in areas outside of those currently being proposed

for critical habitat. Information on genetic variability and

persistence of Johnson's seagrass is currently lacking in these areas.

Future research, however, involving genetic studies and comprehensive,

long-term field surveys, could identify additional areas that are

essential to the conservation of the species and require special

management considerations, and would, therefore, warrant designation as

critical habitat. Also, if a male flower of Johnson's seagrass is

identified in an area, this area should be designated as critical

habitat.

The 10 areas proposed for critical habitat designation include:

(1) A portion of the Indian River, Florida, north of Sebastian

Inlet Channel, defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.51'15.03''N, 80 deg.27'55.49''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.51'16.57''N, 80 deg.27'53.05''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.51'08.85''N, 80 deg.27'50.48''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.51'11.58''N, 80 deg.27'47.35''W

(2) A portion of the Indian River, Florida, south of the Sebastian

Inlet Channel, defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.51'01.32''N, 80 deg.27'46.10''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.51'02.69''N, 80 deg.27'45.27''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.50'59.08''N, 80 deg.27'41.84''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.51'01.07''N, 80 deg.27'40.50''W

t corner: 27 deg.51'11.58''N, 80 deg.27'47.35''W

(2) A portion of the Indian River, Florida, south of the Sebastian

Inlet Channel, defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.51'01.32''N, 80 deg.27'46.10''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.51'02.69''N, 80 deg.27'45.27''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.50'59.08''N, 80 deg.27'41.84''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.51'01.07''N, 80 deg.27'40.50''W

(3) A portion of the Indian River Lagoon in the vicinity of the

Fort Pierce Inlet. This site is located on the north side of the

entrance channel just west of a small mangrove vegetated island where

the main entrance channel bifurcates to the north. The area is defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.28'06.00''N, 80 deg.18'48.89''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.28'04.43''N, 80 deg.18'42.25''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.28'02.86''N, 80 deg.18'49.06''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.28'01.46''N, 80 deg.18'42.42''W

(4) A portion of the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, north of the St.

Lucie Inlet, from South Nettles Island to the Florida Oceanographic

Institute, defined with the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.14'00.00''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.12'51.33''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'46.80''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'02.50''W

(5) Hobe Sound beginning at State Road 708 (27 deg.03'49.90''N,

80 deg.07'20.57''W) and extending south to 27 deg.00'00.00''N,

80 deg.05#32.54''W.

llowing coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.14'00.00''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.12'51.33''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'46.80''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'02.50''W

(5) Hobe Sound beginning at State Road 708 (27 deg.03'49.90''N,

80 deg.07'20.57''W) and extending south to 27 deg.00'00.00''N,

80 deg.05#32.54''W.

(6) Jupiter Inlet at a site located just west of the entrance to

Zeek's Marina on the south side of Jupiter Inlet and defined by the

following coordinates (note a south central point was included to

better define the shape of the southern boundary):

Northwest corner: 26 deg.56'43.34''N, 80 deg.04'47.84''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.56'40.93''N, 80 deg.04'42.61''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.56'40.73''N, 80 deg.04'48.65''W

South central point: 26 deg.56'38.11''N, 80 deg.04'45.83''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.56'38.31''N, 80 deg.04'42.41''W

(7) A portion of Lake Worth, Florida, just north of Bingham Island

defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.40'44.00''N, 80 deg.02'39.00''

Northeast corner: 26 deg.40'40.00''N, 80 deg.02'34.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.40'32.00''N, 80 deg.02'44.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.40'33.00''N, 80 deg.02'35.00''W

(8) A portion of Lake Worth Lagoon, Florida, located just north of

the Boynton Inlet, on the west side of the Intracoastal Waterway,

defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.33'28.00''N, 80 deg.02'54.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.33'30.00''N, 80 deg.03'04.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.32'50.00''N, 80 deg.03'11.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.32'50.00''N, 80 deg.02'58.00''W

(9) A portion of northeast Lake Wyman, Boca Raton, Florida, defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'23.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'18.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'22.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'19.00''W

g.03'11.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.32'50.00''N, 80 deg.02'58.00''W

(9) A portion of northeast Lake Wyman, Boca Raton, Florida, defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'23.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'18.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'22.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'19.00''W

(10) A portion of Northern Biscayne Bay, Florida, defined by the

following: The northern boundary of Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve, N.E.

163rd Street, and including all parts of the Biscayne Bay Aquatics

Preserve as defined in 18-18.002 of the Florida Administrative Code

(F.A.C.) excluding the Ortega River beyond its mouth, and all Federal

navigation channels at the Port of Miami, not including the

Intracoastal Waterway, to the currently documented southern-most range

of Johnson's seagrass, Central Key Biscayne (25 deg.45'N).

Maps are provided for reference purposes to guide Federal agencies

and other interested parties in locating the general boundaries of the

proposed critical habitat. They do not constitute the definition of the

boundaries of critical habitat. Persons must refer to the regulations

at 50 CFR 226.91 for the actual boundaries of the designated critical

habitat. Figures 1 through 9 illustrate the ten areas proposed as

critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass.

Request for Comments

NMFS is soliciting information, comments and/or recommendations on

any aspect of this proposal from all interested parties. NMFS will

consider all information, comments and recommendations received before

reaching a final decision.

The public hearing on this proposed action has been scheduled for

Thursday, December 2, 1999. Interested parties will have an opportunity

to provide oral and written testimony at the public hearing.

Special Accommodations

ons on

any aspect of this proposal from all interested parties. NMFS will

consider all information, comments and recommendations received before

reaching a final decision.

The public hearing on this proposed action has been scheduled for

Thursday, December 2, 1999. Interested parties will have an opportunity

to provide oral and written testimony at the public hearing.

Special Accommodations

This meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities.

Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids

should be directed to Layne Bolen (see ADDRESSES).

References

The complete citations for the references used in this document are

available upon request (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).

Classification

NMFS has determined that Environmental Assessments or an

Environmental Impact Statement, as defined under the authority of the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared for

this critical habitat designation. See Douglas County v. Babbitt, 48

F.3d 1495 (9th Cir. 1995), cert. denied, 116 S.Ct. 698 (1996).

NMFS proposes to designate 10 areas in the range of Johnson's

seagrass as critical habitat. This designation will not impose any

additional requirements or economic effects upon small entities beyond

those which may accrue from section 7 of the ESA. Section 7 requires

Federal agencies to ensure that any action they carry out, authorize,

or fund is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any

listed species or to result in the destruction or adverse modification

of critical habitat (ESA section 7(a)(2)). The consultation

requirements of section 7 are nondiscretionary and are effective at the

time of species' listing. Therefore, Federal agencies must consult with

NMFS and ensure that their actions do not jeopardize a listed species,

regardless of whether critical habitat is designated

ted species or to result in the destruction or adverse modification

of critical habitat (ESA section 7(a)(2)). The consultation

requirements of section 7 are nondiscretionary and are effective at the

time of species' listing. Therefore, Federal agencies must consult with

NMFS and ensure that their actions do not jeopardize a listed species,

regardless of whether critical habitat is designated.

In the future, should NMFS determine that designation of additional

habitat areas in the species' range and/or outside the species' current

range is necessary for conservation and recovery, NMFS will analyze the

incremental costs of the action and assess its potential impacts on

small entities, as required by the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Accordingly, the Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of

Commerce has certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small

Business Administration that the proposed critical habitat designation,

if adopted, would not have a significant economic impact on a

substantial number of small entities, as described in the Regulatory

Flexibility Act.

The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, has determined

that the proposed designation is consistent to the maximum extent

practicable with the approved Coastal Zone Management Program of the

State of Florida. This determination has been submitted for review by

the responsible State agency under section 307 of the Coastal Zone

Management Act.

The Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, NOAA, has determined

this rule is not significant for purposes of E.O. 12866.

This proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information

requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

In accordance with E.O. 13132, NMFS has prepared the following

federalism summary impact statement. When NMFS issued a proposed rule

to designate critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass in 1994, NMFS

began consulting with the State of Florida

nt for purposes of E.O. 12866.

This proposed rule does not contain a collection-of-information

requirement for purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act.

In accordance with E.O. 13132, NMFS has prepared the following

federalism summary impact statement. When NMFS issued a proposed rule

to designate critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass in 1994, NMFS

began consulting with the State of Florida. While the State expressed

support for protection of Johnson's seagrass, it also expressed concern

over the possible economic impacts of a critical habitat designation.

NMFS understands the concerns of the State regarding timely maintenance

of state and federal navigation channels, ports, and inlets, and NMFS'

goal is to protect the species with minimal effects to these

activities. Concerns regarding possible economic impacts of a critical

habitat designation are addressed in the preamble to this rule. In

addition, NMFS has completed a conference opinion with the COE on the

effects of maintenance dredging on Johnson's seagrass and its proposed

critical habitat. NMFS expects that operations on ports will not be

negatively impacted by this proposed critical habitat designation.

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.032

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.033

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.034

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.035

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.036

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.037

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.038

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.039

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TP02DE99.040

BILLING CODE 3510-22-C

List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 226

Endangered and threatened species.

Dated: November 29, 1999.

Penelope D. Dalton,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries

Service.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 226 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 226--DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT

1. The authority citation for part 226 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1533.

Endangered and threatened species.

Dated: November 29, 1999.

Penelope D. Dalton,

Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries

Service.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, 50 CFR part 226 is

proposed to be amended as follows:

PART 226--DESIGNATED CRITICAL HABITAT

1. The authority citation for part 226 continues to read as

follows:

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1533.

2. Section 226.211 is added to part 226 to read as follows:

Sec. 226.211 Critical habitat for Johnson's seagrass

Critical habitat is designated to include substrate and water in

the following ten portions of the Indian River Lagoon and Biscayne Bay

within the current range of Johnson's seagrass.

(a) A portion of the Indian River, Florida, north of Sebastian

Inlet Channel, defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.51'15.03''N, 80 deg.27'55.49''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.51'16.57''N, 80 deg.27'53.05''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.51'08.85''N, 80 deg.27'50.48''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.51'11.58''N, 80 deg.27'47.35''W

(b) A portion of the Indian River, Florida, south of the Sebastian

Inlet Channel, defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.51'01.32''N, 80 deg.27'46.10''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.51'02.69''N, 80 deg.27'45.27''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.50'59.08''N, 80 deg.27'41.84''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.51'01.07''N, 80 deg.27'40.50''W

(c) A portion of the Indian River Lagoon in the vicinity of the

Fort Pierce Inlet. This site is located on the north side of the

entrance channel just west of a small mangrove vegetated island where

the main entrance channel bifurcates to the north. The area is defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.28'06.00''N, 80 deg.18'48.89''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.28'04.43''N, 80 deg.18'42.25''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.28'02.86''N, 80 deg.18'49.06''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.28'01.46''N, 80 deg.18'42.42''W

ntrance channel just west of a small mangrove vegetated island where

the main entrance channel bifurcates to the north. The area is defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.28'06.00''N, 80 deg.18'48.89''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.28'04.43''N, 80 deg.18'42.25''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.28'02.86''N, 80 deg.18'49.06''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.28'01.46''N, 80 deg.18'42.42''W

(d) A portion of the Indian River Lagoon, Florida, North of the St.

Lucie Inlet; from South Nettles Island to the Florida Oceanographic

Institute, defined with the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.14'00.00''W

Northeast corner: 27 deg.16'44.04''N, 80 deg.12'51.33''W

Southwest corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'46.80''W

Southeast corner: 27 deg.12'49.70''N, 80 deg.11'02.50''W

(e) Hobe Sound beginning at State Road 708 (27 deg.03'49.90''N,

80 deg.07'20.57''W) and extending south to 27 deg.00'00.00''N,

80 deg.05'32.54''W.

(f) Jupiter Inlet at a site located just west of the entrance to

Zeek's Marina on the south side of Jupiter Inlet and defined by the

following coordinates (note a south central point was included to

better define the shape of the southern boundary):

Northwest corner: 26 deg.56'43.34''N, 80 deg.04'47.84''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.56'40.93''N, 80 deg.04'42.61''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.56'40.73''N, 80 deg.04'48.65''W

South central point: 26 deg.56'38.11''N, 80 deg.04'45.83''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.56'38.31''N, 80 deg.04'42.41''W

(g) A portion of Lake Worth, Florida, just north of Bingham Island

defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.40'44.00''N, 80 deg.02'39.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.40'40.00''N, 80 deg.02'34.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.40'32.00''N, 80 deg.02'44.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.40'33.00''N, 80 deg.02'35.00''W

5.83''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.56'38.31''N, 80 deg.04'42.41''W

(g) A portion of Lake Worth, Florida, just north of Bingham Island

defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.40'44.00''N, 80 deg.02'39.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.40'40.00''N, 80 deg.02'34.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.40'32.00''N, 80 deg.02'44.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.40'33.00''N, 80 deg.02'35.00''W

(h) A portion of Lake Worth Lagoon, Florida, located just north of

the Boynton Inlet, on the west side of the Intracoastal Waterway,

defined by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.33'28.00''N, 80 deg.02'54.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.33'30.00''N, 80 deg.03'04.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.32'50.00''N, 80 deg.03'11.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.32'50.00''N, 80 deg.02'58.00''W

(i) A portion of northeast Lake Wyman, Boca Raton, Florida, defined

by the following coordinates:

Northwest corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'23.00''W

Northeast corner: 26 deg.22'27.00''N, 80 deg.04'18.00''W

Southwest corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'22.00''W

Southeast corner: 26 deg.22'23.00''N, 80 deg.04'19.00''W

(j) A portion of Northern Biscayne Bay, Florida, defined by the

following: The northern boundary of Biscayne Bay Aquatic Preserve, NE.

163rd Street, and including all parts of the Biscayne Bay Aquatics

Preserve as defined in 18-18.002 of the Florida Administrative Code

(F.A.C.) excluding the Ortega River beyond its mouth, and all Federal

navigation channels at the Port of Miami, not including the

Intracoastal Waterway, to the currently documented southernmost range

of Johnson's seagrass, Central Key Biscayne (25 deg. 45#N).

[FR Doc. 99-31304 Filed 11-29-99; 4:07 pm]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P