[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 37 (Friday, February 23, 1996)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 6964-6965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-4116]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AD20
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Special
Rule for the Conservation of the Northern Spotted Owl on Non-Federal
Lands
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Draft Environmental Alternatives
Analysis for the Proposed Special Rule for the Conservation of the
Northern Spotted Owl on Non-Federal Lands and Extension of Public
Comment Period on the Proposed Special Rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Service has prepared a Draft Environmental Alternatives
Analysis (EAA) for the proposed special rule for the conservation of
the northern spotted owl on non-Federal lands in California and
Washington. The proposed special rule was published in the Federal
Register on February 17, 1995 (60 FR, No. 33, Page 9484). The
implementing regulations for threatened wildlife generally incorporate
the prohibitions of Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended, for endangered wildlife, except when a ``special
rule'' promulgated pursuant to Section 4(d) of the Act has been issued
with respect to a particular threatened species. At the time the
northern spotted owl, Strix occidentalis caurina, (spotted owl) was
listed as a threatened species in 1990, the Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) did not promulgate a special Section 4(d) rule and,
therefore, all of the Section 9 prohibitions, including the ``take''
prohibitions, became applicable to the species. Subsequent to the
listing of the spotted owl, a Federal Late-Successional and Old-growth
(LSOG) forest management strategy (Plan) was developed and then
formally adopted on April 13, 1994, in a Record of Decision (ROD) that
amended land management plans for Federal forests in northern
California, Oregon, and Washington. Although this proposed rule refers
to the Federal LSOG forest strategy as the ``Forest Plan'', it is noted
that the strategy is not a stand-alone management plan but rather
effected a series of amendments to Forest Service and Bureau of Land
Management planning documents. In recognition of the significant
contribution the Plan does make toward spotted owl conservation and
management, the Service proposed a special rule, pursuant to Section
4(d) of the Act, to replace the blanket prohibition against incidental
take of spotted owls with a narrower, more tailor-made set of standards
that reduce prohibitions applicable to timber harvest and related
activities on specified non-Federal forest lands in Washington and
California.
The Service seeks comments from the interested public, agencies,
and interest groups on the Draft EAA and for its proposed 4(d) rule.
The comment period for the proposed rule has been extended repeatedly
since the proposed rule's publication in February of 1995, and will be
extended one more time to coincide with the end of the public comment
period on the Draft EAA.
DATES: Comments from all interested parties must be received by April
8, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this Draft Environmental
Alternatives Analysis and the proposed rule should be sent to Mr.
Michael J. Spear, Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 911 N.E. 11th Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181. The
complete file for this proposed rule will be available for public
inspection, by appointment during normal business hours, at the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Technical Support for Forest
Resources, 333 S.W. 1st Avenue, 4th Floor, Portland, Oregon 97204,
(503/326-6218).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Curt Smitch, Assistant Regional
Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 3704 Griffin Lane
S.E., Suite 102, Olympia, Washington 98501, (206/534-9330); or Ron
Crete, Office of Technical Support for Forest Resources, 333 S.W. 1st
Avenue, Portland, Oregon 97232-4181, (503/326-6218).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Service has prepared a draft document
called an Environmental Alternatives Analysis (EAA) that describes and
analyzes the potential environmental effects of the proposed special
rule and six alternatives for the conservation of the northern spotted
owl on non-Federal lands in Washington and California. Each alternative
would revise to varying degrees the Federal prohibitions and exceptions
regarding the incidental take of spotted owls on non-Federal lands in
California and Washington. The proposed rule, analyzed in the Draft EAA
as Alternative 3, was published in the Federal Register on February 17,
1995 (60 FR, No. 33, Page 9484). The new document was prepared as a
draft EAA rather than as a draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
because in the 1995 Rescissions Act signed in July of 1995, Congress
specifically exempted the Service from preparing an EIS under the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for this action. While not
subject to the provisions of NEPA as a matter of law, the Draft EAA
nevertheless follows the same general format and addresses the same
range of issues as is generally found in a draft EIS.
The Service believes that it is important to seek public comment on
the environmental analysis it has conducted on the various alternative
approaches to this proposed action. Therefore, a 45-day comment period
is provided.
The implementing regulations for threatened wildlife generally
incorporate the prohibitions of Section 9 of the Endangered Species Act
(Act) of 1973, as amended, for endangered wildlife, except when a
``special rule'' promulgated pursuant to Section 4(d) of the Act has
been issued with respect to a particular threatened species. When the
northern spotted owl, Strix occidentalis caurina, (spotted owl) was
listed as a threatened species in 1990, the Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) did not promulgate a special 4(d) rule. Therefore, all of the
Section 9 prohibitions for endangered species were made applicable to
the spotted owl throughout its range, including the prohibitions
against ``take'' that apply to endangered species under the Act.
Subsequent to the listing of the spotted owl, a new Federal forest
management strategy was developed and proposed by the Forest Ecosystem
Management Assessment Team (FEMAT), which was established by President
Clinton following the April 2, 1993, Forest Conference, in Portland,
Oregon. FEMAT outlined those options in the report, Forest Ecosystem
Management: An Ecological, Economic, and Social Assessment, which drew
heavily upon previous scientific studies conducted on the northern
spotted owl. On July 1, 1993, the President identified ``Option 9'' in
the FEMAT Report as the preferred alternative for managing
[[Page 6965]]
Federal LSOG forests in northern California, Oregon, and Washington.
The Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on FEMAT was
completed in February 1994, and the Record of Decision was signed on
April 13, 1994. This process culminated in the formal administrative
adoption of Alternative 9 as the President's Forest Plan. This Plan was
viewed as providing a firm foundation for the conservation needs of the
spotted owl, especially in light of the net addition of approximately
600,000 acres of Federal forest lands to protected reserve status
between its original formulation in the FEMAT Report and the Record of
Decision.
Despite enhanced owl protection under the final Forest Plan,
however, the Service believed that some supplemental support from non-
Federal forest lands remained necessary and advisable for owl
conservation in certain parts of the range of the owl.
The Service published a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Federal
Register (58 FR, Page 69132) on December 29, 1993, to issue a 4(d) rule
on the spotted owl, and sent out a mailer advising the public of its
intention to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the
proposal. In response, the Service received and evaluated more than
8,500 public comments. Taking these comments into consideration, and
based upon additional analyses, the Service subsequently proposed a
special rule that would reduce the prohibition against incidental take
of spotted owls in the course of timber harvest and related activities
on specified non-Federal forest lands in Washington and California.
The Service did not include Oregon within the geographic scope of
the proposed special rule at the request of the Oregon Congressional
delegation. The Service was asked to wait for state officials and
private landowners to develop an alternative owl conservation strategy
for the state. By excluding Oregon altogether from the proposed special
rule, the Service retained for Oregon the original level of protection
against take for the owl established when the species was listed on
June 26, 1990.
Although the release of this Draft EAA represents another important
milestone in the development of a 4(d) rule for the northern spotted
owl, the Service wants to reiterate that the ability to finalize such a
rule, providing relief to non-Federal landowners, is directly dependent
upon the continued strength of the President's Forest Plan, as well as
the continued viability of the assumptions underlying that Plan. Should
litigation or legislative enactments ultimately nullify key elements of
the Forest Plan, the Service would have to reassess its ability to
finalize any 4(d) rule.
The Draft EAA is being mailed to all persons who previously
requested a copy. A 35 page Executive Summary also is available by
calling (503) 326-6218. The document, including all maps, tables,
charts, and graphs, is available on the Internet's World Wide Web at
http://www.rl.fws.gov/4deaa/welcome.html.
Dated: February 15, 1996.
Michael J. Spear,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Region 1, Portland,
Oregon.
[FR Doc. 96-4116 Filed 2-22-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
