Michigan DNR: Application for an Incidental Take Permit, 4619-4620 [E8-1237]
Download as PDF
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
proposed for Wilderness designation.
However, only off-site drilling would be
allowed; there would be no surface
occupancy by Doyon. From Doyon, the
U.S. would receive title to a minimum
of 115,000 acres, but the actual amount
could be adjusted upward to equalize
values. The land consolidation
exchange and 12(b) reallocation
provisions of Phase I would proceed as
detailed in the Agreement in Principle.
Phase II of the exchange would proceed
as detailed in the Agreement, however
Doyon’s commitment to sell additional
lands to the U.S. would be reduced from
about 120,000 acres to about 81,000
acres. Potential access rights-of-way
would cross the proposed White-Crazy
Mountains Wilderness Area. If Doyon
were to produce oil or gas on the lands
received in the exchange, the Service
would receive a perpetual production
payment equal to 1.25% of the value at
the wellhead.
Alternative 3: No action (no
exchange). The U.S. would not enter
into a land exchange with Doyon.
Doyon currently owns about 1.055
million acres of land with oil and gas
potential inside the Refuge. Therefore,
any alternative, including the ‘‘no
action’’ alternative, could result in oil
and/or gas development on Doyonowned lands. If Doyon develops any of
its lands, including those received
through exchange, the resulting
infrastructure could facilitate
development on other private lands in
the Refuge. The impacts of development
on Doyon’s current land holdings, with
or without a land exchange, are
analyzed as Cumulative Effects in the
DEIS. In most cases, access to Doyon
lands would cross federally-owned
lands. In these cases, Doyon would be
required to apply for a right-of-way
permit under Title XI of ANILCA. At
that time, a separate NEPA process
would evaluate various transportation/
pipeline corridor alternatives as well as
the proposed oil field development.
During scoping, the Service identified
a number of issues that are analyzed in
detail in the DEIS. Most of the public
scoping comments focused on the
potential impacts of oil and gas
development in the Yukon Flats rather
than the land exchange itself. Therefore
much of the DEIS focuses on
development impacts. Specifically, the
DEIS addresses how the proposed
alternatives could affect fish and
wildlife; wetlands and aquatic habitats;
the physical environment (water quality
and quantity, hydrology, air quality,
climate); subsistence; cultural/
archaeological resources;
socioeconomics; refuge purposes;
biological integrity, diversity and
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
environmental health; land use
(including special designation areas,
recreation, visual resources) and
environmental justice (including human
health).
Section 810 of ANILCA requires the
Service to evaluate the effects of the
alternatives on subsistence activities
and to hold public hearings if any
alternative may significantly restrict
subsistence activities. The Service
analysis finds that the cumulative
effects, considered in conjunction with
the alternatives, meet the ‘‘may
significantly restrict’’ threshold.
Therefore, the Service will hold
subsistence hearings in conjunction
with the DEIS public hearings.
Public availability of comments:
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment-including your
personal identifying information-may be
made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Dated: January 17, 2008.
Thomas O. Melius,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Anchorage, Alaska.
[FR Doc. E8–1277 Filed 1–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Michigan DNR: Application for an
Incidental Take Permit
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of a Draft
Habitat Conservation Plan and Draft
Environmental Assessment for the
Karner blue butterfly; receipt of
application for an incidental take
permit; request for comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Michigan Department of
Natural Resources (Applicant) has
applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) for a 20-year incidental
take permit (ITP) for the federally
endangered Karner blue butterfly
(Lycaeides melissa samuelis) (KBB)
pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (Act). The ITP would allow
the Applicant to engage in habitat
management, right-of-way maintenance,
and certain development activities in
occupied KBB habitat on non-Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00104
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4619
land in Michigan. The permit
application includes a draft Habitat
Conservation Plan (HCP) and draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) that
describes the proposed action and
measures the Applicant will undertake
to minimize and mitigate take of KBB.
Section 9 of the Act and its
implementing regulations prohibit the
take of animal species listed as
endangered or threatened. The
definition of take under the Act
includes the following activities: to
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot,
wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect
listed animal species, or attempt to
engage in such conduct (16 U.S.C.
1538). Section 10 of the Act, 16 U.S.C.
1539, establishes a program whereby
persons seeking to pursue activities that
otherwise could give rise to liability for
unlawful ‘‘take’’ of federally protected
species may receive an ITP, which
protects them from such liability. To
obtain an ITP, an applicant must submit
a HCP containing appropriate
minimization and mitigation measures
and ensure that the taking is incidental
to, and not the purpose of, an otherwise
lawful activity (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(B)
and 1539(a)(2)(A). Once we have
determined the applicant has satisfied
these and other statutory criteria, we
may issue the ITP.
This notice, provided pursuant to
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered
Species Act, as amended, advises the
public and other agencies of the
availability of the draft HCP and draft
EA for review and comment.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we
must receive your written comments on
or before March 25, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments or
request information by any of the
following methods:
• U.S. Mail: Comments should be
sent to the Regional Director, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Division of
Ecological Services, 1 Federal Drive,
Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111–4056.
• Facsimile: 612–713–5292.
• E-Mail: hcp_MichiganKBB@fws.gov.
All comments received become part of
the official public record. Public
requests for comments submitted will be
handled in accordance with the
Freedom of Information Act and the
Council on Environmental Quality’s
NEPA regulations [40 CFR 1506.6(f)].
Our practice is to make comments,
including names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review
during regular business hours.
Individual respondents may request we
withhold their home address from the
record, which we will honor to the
extent allowable by law. If a respondent
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
4620
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 17 / Friday, January 25, 2008 / Notices
wishes us to withhold his/her name
and/or address, this must be stated
prominently at the beginning of the
comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter Fasbender at 612–713–5343 or
peter_fasbender@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Availability of Documents
Individuals requesting copies of the
draft EA and draft HCP should contact
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by
telephone at (612) 713–5343 or by letter
(see ADDRESSES above). Copies of the
draft EA and draft HCP also are
available for public review during
normal business hours (8–4:30) at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s
Regional Office, located at 1 Federal
Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111,
and at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service’s East Lansing Field Office,
located at 2651 Coolidge Road, Suite
101, East Lansing, Michigan 48823. Both
documents are also available for review
at the Service’s Regional Web site at:
https://www.fws.gov/midwest/
Endangered/permits/hcp/.
Draft Habitat Conservation Plan
The purpose of the draft HCP is to
manage habitat to promote recovery of
the species and to minimize incidental
take of KBB, mitigate the effects of any
such take to the maximum extent
practicable, and otherwise avoid any
appreciable reduction in the likelihood
of the survival and recovery of the KBB
in the wild. The Applicant developed
the draft HCP to facilitate conservation
of oak savanna ecosystems (KBB habitat)
and to help maintain occupied KBB
habitat on both public and private land
in Michigan. The goals of the HCP are
to: (1) Support persistence of a
functioning oak savanna ecosystem in
Michigan; (2) support maintenance of
oak-savanna habitats in a condition and
configuration necessary to sustain
existing populations of KBB and other
associated species of concern; and (3)
integrate diverse land uses with the
conservation of the oak savanna
ecosystem, KBB and other associated
species of concern.
Active management of KBB habitat is
necessary for the conservation of KBB
and oak savanna. However, some
management practices (e.g., prescribed
burning, mowing) necessary for
maintaining early-successional habitats
may result in incidental take of KBB,
and section 9 of the ESA prohibits take
of an endangered species. Therefore, to
obtain the legal authority to manage
KBB habitat with the potential resultant
take of KBB, the Applicant has applied
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:59 Jan 24, 2008
Jkt 214001
for an ITP which would allow habitat
management, utility and transportation
right-of-way maintenance, and certain
development activities that avoid or
minimize and mitigate take when
conducted in occupied KBB habitat.
The Applicant has applied for a
statewide ITP and developed a
statewide HCP with the intent that other
land managers and/or landowners may
participate as sub-permittees, subject to
the conditions of the final permit, in the
event their otherwise lawful activities
result in take of KBB. Currently, land
managers and landowners need to
obtain authorization on a project-byproject basis to conduct legally the
activities listed above. This situation
results in a patchwork of projects
conducted with little coordinated
planning or consideration of range-wide
impacts to KBB and other species of
concern. By contrast, projects
implemented under the HCP would be
done according to consistent procedures
in a highly coordinated effort. The HCP
will facilitate efforts to evaluate and
minimize the cumulative adverse
impacts of individual projects to KBB
populations.
Actions conducted under the HCP are
not intended or expected to either
increase or decrease the amount of
occupied KBB habitat in Michigan.
Rather, management action will be
conducted to help prevent the loss of
occupied habitat on non-Federal land.
Maintenance of existing populations is
a critical component of the KBB
conservation program in Michigan. It is
also consistent with objectives of the
Federal Recovery Plan, which outlines a
strategy for ‘‘maintaining extant
populations’’ and ‘‘improving and
stabilizing populations where the
butterfly is imperiled.’’ Nevertheless,
other management actions may take
place on non-federal lands in Michigan
not occupied by KBB that result in an
increase in occupied habitat. The ITP
and HCP described herein also are
intended to cover any occupied KBB
habitat that may develop in the future.
Draft Environmental Assessment
The purpose of the draft EA is to
evaluate and publicly disclose the
possible environmental consequences
issuance of an ITP and implementation
of the draft HCP could have on the
quality of the physical, biological, and
human environment, as required by the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969.
Prior to issuing the ITP, the Service is
required to analyze alternatives
considered in the development of the
HCP. This analysis is contained in the
draft EA, as required by the National
PO 00000
Frm 00105
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), for
the Federal action of issuing an ITP
under section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The
draft EA considers two ‘‘action’’
alternatives and one ‘‘no action’’
alternative.
The area encompassed by the HCP
may contain facilities eligible to be
listed on the National Register of
Historic Places and other historical or
archeological resources may be present.
The National Historic Preservation Act
and other laws require these properties
and resources be identified and
considered in project planning. The
public is requested to inform the Service
of concerns about archeological sites,
buildings and structures, historic
events, sacred and traditional areas, and
other historic preservation concerns.
Decisions
The public process for the proposed
Federal action will be completed after
the public comment period, at which
time the Service will evaluate the
permit application (if appropriate to the
selected alternative), the HCP, and
comments submitted thereon to
determine whether the application
meets the requirements of 10(a)(1)(B) of
the Act. If the requirements are met, the
Service will issue an ITP to the
Applicant for incidental take of KBB.
Dated: December 13, 2007.
Lynn Lewis,
Deputy Assistant Regional Director,
Ecological Services, Region 3.
[FR Doc. E8–1237 Filed 1–24–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Geological Survey
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Comment Request
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS),
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed extension of an
information collection (1028–0078).
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: To comply with the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(PRA), we are notifying the public that
we will submit to the Office of
management and Budget (OMB) an
information collection request (ICR) to
renew approval of the paperwork
requirements for the North American
Amphibian Monitoring Program
(NAAMP). This notice provides the
public an opportunity to comment on
the ICR.
DATES: Submit written comments by
March 25, 2007.
E:\FR\FM\25JAN1.SGM
25JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 17 (Friday, January 25, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4619-4620]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-1237]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Michigan DNR: Application for an Incidental Take Permit
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of a Draft Habitat Conservation Plan and
Draft Environmental Assessment for the Karner blue butterfly; receipt
of application for an incidental take permit; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Michigan Department of Natural Resources (Applicant) has
applied to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) for a 20-year
incidental take permit (ITP) for the federally endangered Karner blue
butterfly (Lycaeides melissa samuelis) (KBB) pursuant to section
10(a)(1)(B) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
The ITP would allow the Applicant to engage in habitat management,
right-of-way maintenance, and certain development activities in
occupied KBB habitat on non-Federal land in Michigan. The permit
application includes a draft Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and draft
Environmental Assessment (EA) that describes the proposed action and
measures the Applicant will undertake to minimize and mitigate take of
KBB. Section 9 of the Act and its implementing regulations prohibit the
take of animal species listed as endangered or threatened. The
definition of take under the Act includes the following activities: to
harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or
collect listed animal species, or attempt to engage in such conduct (16
U.S.C. 1538). Section 10 of the Act, 16 U.S.C. 1539, establishes a
program whereby persons seeking to pursue activities that otherwise
could give rise to liability for unlawful ``take'' of federally
protected species may receive an ITP, which protects them from such
liability. To obtain an ITP, an applicant must submit a HCP containing
appropriate minimization and mitigation measures and ensure that the
taking is incidental to, and not the purpose of, an otherwise lawful
activity (16 U.S.C. 1539(a)(1)(B) and 1539(a)(2)(A). Once we have
determined the applicant has satisfied these and other statutory
criteria, we may issue the ITP.
This notice, provided pursuant to section 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Endangered Species Act, as amended, advises the public and other
agencies of the availability of the draft HCP and draft EA for review
and comment.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
on or before March 25, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments or request information by any of the
following methods:
U.S. Mail: Comments should be sent to the Regional
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Ecological
Services, 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111-4056.
Facsimile: 612-713-5292.
E-Mail: hcp_MichiganKBB@fws.gov.
All comments received become part of the official public record.
Public requests for comments submitted will be handled in accordance
with the Freedom of Information Act and the Council on Environmental
Quality's NEPA regulations [40 CFR 1506.6(f)]. Our practice is to make
comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available
for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents
may request we withhold their home address from the record, which we
will honor to the extent allowable by law. If a respondent
[[Page 4620]]
wishes us to withhold his/her name and/or address, this must be stated
prominently at the beginning of the comment.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Fasbender at 612-713-5343 or
peter_fasbender@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Availability of Documents
Individuals requesting copies of the draft EA and draft HCP should
contact the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by telephone at (612) 713-
5343 or by letter (see ADDRESSES above). Copies of the draft EA and
draft HCP also are available for public review during normal business
hours (8-4:30) at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Regional Office,
located at 1 Federal Drive, Fort Snelling, Minnesota 55111, and at the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's East Lansing Field Office, located at
2651 Coolidge Road, Suite 101, East Lansing, Michigan 48823. Both
documents are also available for review at the Service's Regional Web
site at: https://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/permits/hcp/.
Draft Habitat Conservation Plan
The purpose of the draft HCP is to manage habitat to promote
recovery of the species and to minimize incidental take of KBB,
mitigate the effects of any such take to the maximum extent
practicable, and otherwise avoid any appreciable reduction in the
likelihood of the survival and recovery of the KBB in the wild. The
Applicant developed the draft HCP to facilitate conservation of oak
savanna ecosystems (KBB habitat) and to help maintain occupied KBB
habitat on both public and private land in Michigan. The goals of the
HCP are to: (1) Support persistence of a functioning oak savanna
ecosystem in Michigan; (2) support maintenance of oak-savanna habitats
in a condition and configuration necessary to sustain existing
populations of KBB and other associated species of concern; and (3)
integrate diverse land uses with the conservation of the oak savanna
ecosystem, KBB and other associated species of concern.
Active management of KBB habitat is necessary for the conservation
of KBB and oak savanna. However, some management practices (e.g.,
prescribed burning, mowing) necessary for maintaining early-
successional habitats may result in incidental take of KBB, and section
9 of the ESA prohibits take of an endangered species. Therefore, to
obtain the legal authority to manage KBB habitat with the potential
resultant take of KBB, the Applicant has applied for an ITP which would
allow habitat management, utility and transportation right-of-way
maintenance, and certain development activities that avoid or minimize
and mitigate take when conducted in occupied KBB habitat.
The Applicant has applied for a statewide ITP and developed a
statewide HCP with the intent that other land managers and/or
landowners may participate as sub-permittees, subject to the conditions
of the final permit, in the event their otherwise lawful activities
result in take of KBB. Currently, land managers and landowners need to
obtain authorization on a project-by-project basis to conduct legally
the activities listed above. This situation results in a patchwork of
projects conducted with little coordinated planning or consideration of
range-wide impacts to KBB and other species of concern. By contrast,
projects implemented under the HCP would be done according to
consistent procedures in a highly coordinated effort. The HCP will
facilitate efforts to evaluate and minimize the cumulative adverse
impacts of individual projects to KBB populations.
Actions conducted under the HCP are not intended or expected to
either increase or decrease the amount of occupied KBB habitat in
Michigan. Rather, management action will be conducted to help prevent
the loss of occupied habitat on non-Federal land. Maintenance of
existing populations is a critical component of the KBB conservation
program in Michigan. It is also consistent with objectives of the
Federal Recovery Plan, which outlines a strategy for ``maintaining
extant populations'' and ``improving and stabilizing populations where
the butterfly is imperiled.'' Nevertheless, other management actions
may take place on non-federal lands in Michigan not occupied by KBB
that result in an increase in occupied habitat. The ITP and HCP
described herein also are intended to cover any occupied KBB habitat
that may develop in the future.
Draft Environmental Assessment
The purpose of the draft EA is to evaluate and publicly disclose
the possible environmental consequences issuance of an ITP and
implementation of the draft HCP could have on the quality of the
physical, biological, and human environment, as required by the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969.
Prior to issuing the ITP, the Service is required to analyze
alternatives considered in the development of the HCP. This analysis is
contained in the draft EA, as required by the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA), for the Federal action of issuing an ITP under
section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. The draft EA considers two ``action''
alternatives and one ``no action'' alternative.
The area encompassed by the HCP may contain facilities eligible to
be listed on the National Register of Historic Places and other
historical or archeological resources may be present. The National
Historic Preservation Act and other laws require these properties and
resources be identified and considered in project planning. The public
is requested to inform the Service of concerns about archeological
sites, buildings and structures, historic events, sacred and
traditional areas, and other historic preservation concerns.
Decisions
The public process for the proposed Federal action will be
completed after the public comment period, at which time the Service
will evaluate the permit application (if appropriate to the selected
alternative), the HCP, and comments submitted thereon to determine
whether the application meets the requirements of 10(a)(1)(B) of the
Act. If the requirements are met, the Service will issue an ITP to the
Applicant for incidental take of KBB.
Dated: December 13, 2007.
Lynn Lewis,
Deputy Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Region 3.
[FR Doc. E8-1237 Filed 1-24-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P