Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Potential Sonoran Desert Bald Eagle Distinct Population Segment as Threatened Under the Endangered Species Act, 23966-23970 [08-1203]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
23966
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 85 / Thursday, May 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
February 10, 2008, Contractor I
contributes $700,000 in cash to satisfy
the principal and interest payment for
the ESOP loan for FY 2007. This
contribution results in the bank
releasing 10,000 shares of stock. On
March 1, 2008, the ESOP allocates the
10,000 shares to individual employee
accounts satisfying the 2007 obligation.
The 10,000 shares of stock must be
assigned to FY 2007 (these shares
cannot be assigned to 2008).
I 8. Section 9904.415–63 is revised to
read as follows:
9904.415–63
Effective date.
(a) This Standard 9904.415 is effective
as of June 2, 2008.
(b) This Standard shall be followed by
each contractor on or after the start of
its next cost accounting period
beginning after the receipt of a contract
or subcontract to which this Standard is
applicable.
(c) Contractors with prior CAScovered contracts with full coverage
shall continue to follow Standard
9904.415 in effect prior to June 2, 2008
until this Standard, effective June 2,
2008, becomes applicable following
receipt of a contract or subcontract to
which this revised Standard applies.
(d) For contractors and subcontractors
that have established advance
agreements prior to June 2, 2008
regarding the recognition of the costs of
existing ESOPs, the awarding agency
and contractor shall comply with the
provisions of such advance agreement(s)
for these existing ESOPs, regardless of
whether the ESOP was previously
subject to CAS 412 or 415. These
advance agreements may be modified,
by mutual agreement, to incorporate the
requirements effective on June 2, 2008.
[FR Doc. E8–9376 Filed 4–30–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3110–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS—R2—ES—2008—0044; 40120—
1113—0000–B3]
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
RIN 1018—AW12
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Potential
Sonoran Desert Bald Eagle Distinct
Population Segment as Threatened
Under the Endangered Species Act
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:05 Apr 30, 2008
Jkt 214001
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), are issuing a
final rule to amend the regulations for
the Federal List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 by
designating bald eagles (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) in the Sonoran Desert
area of central Arizona as threatened
under the authority of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act).
We are also reinstating and clarifying
the former special rule at 50 CFR 17.41
that applied to threatened members of
this species. This action revises the CFR
to reflect a March 6, 2008, court order.
DATES: This action is effective May 1,
2008. However, the court order had
legal effect immediately upon being
filed on March 6, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona
Ecological Services Field Office, 2321
West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103,
Phoenix, Arizona 85021; telephone 602–
242–0210; facsimile 602–242–2513;
https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
arizona/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Information about the bald eagle’s life
history can be found in our July 9, 2007
(72 FR 37346), final delisting rule for
bald eagles in the lower 48 States.
Previous Federal Action
Information about previous Federal
actions was provided in our July 9, 2007
(72 FR 37346), final delisting rule for
bald eagles in the lower 48 States.
On October 6, 2004, we received a
petition, dated October 6, 2004, from the
Center for Biological Diversity (CBD),
the Maricopa Audubon Society, and the
Arizona Audubon Council requesting
that the ‘‘Southwestern desert nesting
bald eagle population’’ be classified as
a distinct population segment (DPS),
that this DPS be reclassified from a
threatened species to an endangered
species, and that we concurrently
designate critical habitat for the DPS
under the Act.
On March 27, 2006, the CBD and the
Maricopa Audubon Society filed a
lawsuit against the U.S. Department of
the Interior and the Service for failing to
make a timely finding on the petition.
The parties reached a settlement and the
Service agreed to complete its petition
finding by August 2006. We announced
our 90-day finding, required under 16
U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(A), on August 30,
2006 (71 FR 51549), that the petition did
not present substantial scientific or
commercial information indicating that
the petitioned action may be warranted.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
On January 5, 2007, the CBD and the
Maricopa Audubon Society filed a
lawsuit challenging the Service’s 90-day
finding that the ‘‘Sonoran Desert
population’’ of the bald eagle did not
qualify as a DPS, and further
challenging the Service’s 90-day finding
that the population should not be uplisted to endangered status.
On July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), we
published the final delisting rule for
bald eagles in the lower 48 States. In
that final delisting rule, we stated that
our findings on the status of the
Sonoran Desert population of bald
eagles superseded our 90-day petition
finding because the final delisting rule
constituted a final decision on whether
the Sonoran Desert population of bald
eagles qualified for listing as a DPS
under the Act.
On August 17, 2007, the CBD and the
Maricopa Audubon Society filed a
motion for summary judgment,
requesting the court to make a decision
on their January 5, 2007, lawsuit. On
March 5, 2008, the U.S. District Court
for the District of Arizona ruled in favor
of the CBD and the Maricopa Audubon
Society. The court order (Center for
Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne, CV
07–0038–PHX–MHM (D. Ariz)), was
filed on March 6, 2008.
The court ruled for the plaintiffs and
found that the Service:
(1) Finding on the status of the
Sonoran Desert population of bald
eagles in our July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346),
final delisting rule did not moot the
plaintiff’s challenge to the August 30,
2006, negative 90-day petition finding;
(2) Applied an inappropriately strict
evidentiary burden on the petition at the
90-day review stage and thus arbitrarily
and capriciously concluded that the
petition did not present substantial
information that listing the ‘‘Desert bald
eagle population’’ may be warranted;
and
(3) Arbitrarily and capriciously
conducted the 90-day review of the
petition by soliciting information and
opinions from a limited outside source.
The court provided the following
remedies and ordered the Service to:
(1) Conduct a status review of the
Desert bald eagle population pursuant to
the Act to determine whether listing
that population as a DPS is warranted,
and if so, whether listing that DPS as
threatened or endangered pursuant to
the Act is warranted;
(2) Issue a 12-month finding, pursuant
to 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B), on whether
listing the Desert bald eagle population
as a DPS is warranted, and if so,
whether listing that DPS as threatened
or endangered is warranted; and
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 85 / Thursday, May 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
(3) Issue the 12-month finding within
nine months of the court order,
pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B),
which translates to on or before
December 5, 2008.
Further, the court enjoined the
Service’s application of the July 9, 2007
(72 FR 37346), final delisting rule to the
Sonoran Desert population of bald
eagles pending the outcome of our
status review and 12-month petition
finding. The ‘‘Desert bald eagle
population’’ referenced in the court
order consists of those bald eagles in the
Sonoran Desert of the southwest that
reside in central Arizona and
northwestern Mexico. Because these
Sonoran Desert bald eagles were only
listed under the Act in Arizona (and not
in Mexico) at the time of the petition,
the court’s order enjoining our final
delisting decision applies only to those
bald eagles found in the Sonoran Desert
region of the American Southwest. In
other words, the court’s order
temporarily reinstated the listing of the
bald eagle as a threatened species, but
only with respect to the eagles that
reside in the Sonoran Desert of central
Arizona. The court order was effective
as of March 6, 2008, the date it was
filed.
In order to determine the geographic
area where the bald eagle would remain
listed as threatened in Arizona, we
examined the CBD’s letter sent to us on
March 5, 2005, clarifying their
petitioned October 2004 Distinct
Population Segment boundary. We used
the information provided by the CBD
because the court found that their
October 2004 90-day petition ‘‘may be
warranted’’ and, therefore, the petition
represents the basis for determining the
geographic extent of the area affected by
this final rule.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:05 Apr 30, 2008
Jkt 214001
The CBD cited two documents
describing vegetation communities
(Brown 1973, 1994) and an Arizona
Game and Fish Department (AGFD) bald
eagle nest search report (Canaca et al.
2004). The CBD notes in the petition
that information is provided to support
listing a ‘‘distinct population segment of
Southwestern Desert Nesting Bald Eagle
consistent with the geographical
boundaries including the Sonoran
Desert riparian areas of Central Arizona
and northwestern Mexico.’’ With
regards to the Arizona portion, the
petition notes that this area in central
Arizona exists between 329 and 1719
meters (1080 and 5640 feet) in elevation,
falling within the Upper and Lower
Sonoran Life Zones and transition areas
as described by Brown 1994. We used
the above three references and the
specific elevation text to define the
geographic boundary of the petitioned
DPS.
Therefore, while we had specific
clarification with respect to elevational
boundaries, bald eagle breeding areas,
the Upper and Lower Sonoran Life
Zones, and the State of Arizona, we also
received ambiguous direction with
respect to the boundaries of ‘‘central
Arizona’’ and which transition areas
outside of the Upper and Lower
Sonoran Life Zones to include. Because
of these ambiguities and lack of a
specific map in the petition, we were
left to interpret their clarification,
primarily at the perimeters of the
boundary.
We used all the factors provided by
the CBD (i.e., bald eagle territories,
elevation, life zones, and transition
areas) and established a boundary that
included all known bald eagle breeding
areas within central Arizona. The
boundary was difficult to interpret on
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23967
the ground due to irregular lines or gaps
in elevation from layers of electronic
geographical data. Therefore, we used
more identifiable and easily understood
boundaries of county lines and
highways that were found at the outer
edges of the erratic boundaries. It is
important to note that known bald eagle
breeding habitat of the Sonoran Desert,
as described in the petition, is not
contiguous between Arizona and
northwestern Mexico. The somewhat
disjointed nature of bald eagle breeding
habitat and its well known distribution
in Arizona is likely why the petitioners
specified ‘‘central Arizona.’’ Thus, the
counties in the southern half of Arizona
were not included in this final rule
because they do not possess known bald
eagle breeding areas, known suitable
habitat for breeding eagles, and fall
outside of the petitioner’s geographic
description.
We determined that the affected area
covers the following eight Arizona
counties: (1) Yavapai, Gila, Graham,
Pinal, and Maricopa Counties in their
entirety; and (2) southern Mohave
County (that portion south and east of
the centerline of Interstate Highway 40
and east of Arizona Highway 95),
eastern LaPaz County (that portion east
of the centerline of U.S. and Arizona
Highways 95), and northern Yuma
County (that portion east of the
centerline of U.S. Highway 95 and north
of the centerline of Interstate Highway
8). All bald eagles found within this
area are protected as a threatened
species under the Act, with a special
rule under our regulations at 50 CFR
17.41. Please refer to the following map
for details of the geographic area
affected by this action.
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 85 / Thursday, May 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
BILLING CODE 4310–55–C
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:38 Apr 30, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
ER01MY08.005</GPH>
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
23968
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 85 / Thursday, May 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
Administrative Procedure
This rulemaking is necessary to
comply with a March 6, 2008, court
order. Therefore, under these
circumstances, the Director has
determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b),
that prior notice and opportunity for
public comment are impractical and
unnecessary. The Director has further
determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d),
the agency has good cause to make this
rule effective upon publication and
require compliance retroactively to the
date of the court order.
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
Effects of the Rule
Any and all bald eagles, including
migrants, found within the boundaries
of the Sonoran Desert area of central
Arizona, as delineated by the map
included as part of this rule, are hereby
listed as a threatened species under the
Act, with a special rule found at 50 CFR
17.41.
The provisions of the special rule at
50 CFR 17.41 that we are adding here
under the Act are the same as those in
the prior special rule that was removed
per our July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final
delisting rule removing the threatened
status for bald eagles in the lower 48
States. This special rule now applies
only to bald eagles in the Sonoran
Desert area of central Arizona, the only
such population of bald eagles so listed
under the Act. Under this special rule,
bald eagle banding and marking permits
issued under the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703–712) and its
implementing regulations at 50 CFR
21.22, and also under the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA)
(16 U.S.C. 668–668d) and its
implementing regulations at 50 CFR part
22, will be deemed to also satisfy the
requirements for a permit under the Act
and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR 17.31 and 17.32. The BGEPA
regulations at 50 CFR part 22 authorize
permits for taking, possession, and
transportation within the United States
for scientific, educational, and
depredation control purposes and for
the religious purposes of American
Indian tribes. This part also governs the
transportation into or out of the United
States of bald and golden eagle parts for
scientific, educational, and Indian
religious purposes. Under this special
rule, it will not be necessary to obtain
a separate permit under the Act for the
same activities already authorized under
the MBTA and BGEPA permits
described above.
Although the petition also included
Sonoran Desert bald eagles in
northwestern Mexico, these bald eagles
remain unlisted because bald eagles in
VerDate Aug<31>2005
16:38 Apr 30, 2008
Jkt 214001
this area were not previously listed
pursuant to the Act and thus their status
was unaffected by the court order
limiting the effects of our July 9, 2007
(72 FR 37346), final delisting rule.
Consistent with the court’s March 6,
2008 order, this rule will be in effect
‘‘pending the outcome of the status
review and 12-month finding.’’
However, we will immediately remove
the bald eagle in the Sonoran Desert
area of central Arizona from the List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife if
the court’s March 6, 2008, order is
stayed or reversed in any subsequent
judicial proceeding, or if, after
completion of the status review, we
publish a 12-month finding that listing
the Sonoran Desert bald eagle is not
warranted. No decision has been made
as to whether the government will
appeal that order.
We will publish a notice requesting
public input for the status review
required under the March 6, 2008, court
order in the Federal Register in the near
future. This status review will consider
the population of bald eagles as
described in the October 6, 2004,
petition and any other relevant
information received during the public
comment period and will be based upon
the best scientific and commercial data
available, pursuant to the Act.
Under this final rule, the prohibitions
and conservation measures provided by
the Act, particularly sections 7, 9, and
10, apply to bald eagles in the Sonoran
Desert area of central Arizona. Federal
agencies are required under the court
order and this final rule to consult with
us under section 7 of the Act in the
event that activities they authorize,
fund, or carry out may affect listed bald
eagles.
In addition to the conservation
measures provided by the Act, the
Conservation Assessment and Strategy
for Bald Eagles in Arizona (CAS)
(Driscoll et al. 2006) contains guidance
on measures to eliminate, reduce, or
minimize effects to eagles in Arizona.
On January 22, 2007, the Service signed
a Memorandum of Understanding with
the AGFD supporting the
implementation of the AGFD’s CAS.
The Memorandum of Understanding
was also signed by the following Federal
agencies: Bureau of Reclamation,
Bureau of Land Management, National
Park Service, Forest Service, and the
Department of Defense, including the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The CAS
provides additional valuable guidance
for protecting bald eagles in Arizona,
and we support using it in conjunction
with our Bald Eagle National
Management Guidelines to protect bald
eagles in Arizona.
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
23969
All bald eagles, of course, will
continue to be protected under the
BGEPA and MBTA. We recommend that
persons use our Bald Eagle National
Management Guidelines (Guidelines),
announced in the Federal Register on
June 5, 2007 (72 FR 31156), as guidance
for minimizing the risk of violating the
protections afforded to all bald eagles
under these various Acts and their
respective implementing regulations.
The Guidelines include suggestions for
protecting bald eagles and their habitat
while they are nesting, feeding, and
roosting. While eagles originating in the
Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona
would not be protected by the Act if
they traveled to other parts of the
United States, they would still be
afforded the protections under the
BGEPA and MBTA.
This rule will not affect the bald
eagle’s status under State laws or
suspend any other legal protections
provided by State law. This rule will not
affect the bald eagle’s Appendix II status
under the Convention on International
Trade of Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES).
Additionally, pursuant to section 6 of
the Act, we are able to grant available
funds to the State of Arizona for
management actions promoting the
protection of bald eagles in the Sonoran
Desert area of central Arizona.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that we do not
need to prepare an Environmental
Assessment, as defined in the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in connection with
regulations adopted pursuant to section
4(a) of the Endangered Species Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244).
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994,
‘‘Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments’’ (59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175, and the Department of
Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility
to consult with Federally recognized
Tribes on a government-to-government
basis. Accordingly, we will promptly
consult with the affected Tribes
regarding the effects of the court’s
March 6, 2008, order and this final rule.
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
23970
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 85 / Thursday, May 1, 2008 / Rules and Regulations
We will also consult with the affected
tribes as we conduct our new status
review concerning the Sonoran Desert
nesting bald eagle population.
References Cited
Brown, D. 1973. The Natural Vegetative
Communities of Arizona. Arizona Game
and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ.
Brown, D. (editor). 1994. Biotic Communities
of the Southwestern United States and
Northwestern New Mexico. The
University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City,
UT.
Canaca, J.S., K.V. Jacobson, and J.T. Driscoll.
2004. Arizona Bald Eagle 2003 Nest
Survey, Nongame and Endangered
Wildlife Program Technical Report 226.
Arizona Game and Fish Department,
Phoenix, AZ.
Driscoll, J.T., K.V. Jacobson, G.L. Beatty, J.S.
Canaca, and J.G. Koloszar. 2006.
Conservation Assessment and strategy
for the bald eagle in Arizona. Nongame
and Endangered Wildlife Program
Technical Report 173. Arizona Game and
Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and
Transportation.
Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth
below:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
I
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 16 U.S.C.
1531–1544; 16 U.S.C. 4201–4245; Pub. L. 99–
625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
§ 17.11
[Amended]
2. In § 17.11(h), an entry for ‘‘Eagle,
Bald’’ is added under BIRDS to read as
follows:
I
Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the
I
Species
Common
name
*
Vertebrate population where
endangered or threatened
Historic range
Scientific name
*
*
*
Status
*
When
listed
Critical
habitat
*
Special
rules
*
BIRDS
*
Eagle, bald
*
*
Haliaeetus leucocephalus ..
*
North Arizona: South
to northern Mexico.
*
*
3. Section 17.41 is amended by adding
paragraph (a) to read as follows:
I
rfrederick on PROD1PC67 with RULES
§ 17.41
Special rules—birds.
(a) Bald eagles (Haliaeetus
leucocephalus) wherever listed as
threatened under § 17.11(h). All
provisions of §§ 17.31 and 17.32 apply
to any threatened bald eagle, with the
following exceptions:
(1) The Service will consider any
permit that we issue for bald eagles
under § 21.22 (banding and marking
permits) or part 22 of this chapter
(permits for certain activities with bald
or golden eagles) to satisfy all
requirements of § 17.31 and the permits
we issue under § 17.32.
(2) The Service will not require a
second permit under § 17.32 for any
activity that is covered by a permit
issued under § 21.22 or part 22 of this
chapter.
(3) The Service will require a permit
under § 17.32 for any activity that is not
VerDate Aug<31>2005
15:05 Apr 30, 2008
*
*
Arizona:
(1)
Yavapai,
Gila,
Graham, Pinal, and Maricopa,
Counties; and
(2) Southern Mohave County (that
portion south and east of the
center of Interstate Highway 40
and east of Arizona Highway
95), eastern LaPaz County (that
portion east of the centerline of
U.S. and Arizona Highways 95),
and north of the centerline of
Interstate Highway 8).
Jkt 214001
*
*
covered by a permit issued under
§ 21.22 or part 22 of this chapter.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: April 18, 2008.
H. Dale Hall,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 08–1203 Filed 4–28–08; 4:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
PO 00000
*
T ........
*
.........
NA ........
*
17.41(a).
*
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 229
[Docket No. 080103017–8598–03]
RIN 0648–AS01
Taking of Marine Mammals Incidental
to Commercial Fishing Operations;
Atlantic Large Whale Take Reduction
Plan Regulations
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule; notice of OMB
approval of collection -of-information
collection requirements.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: NMFS announces approval by
the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) of collection-of-information
requirements contained in regulations
Frm 00032
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\01MYR1.SGM
01MYR1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 85 (Thursday, May 1, 2008)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 23966-23970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 08-1203]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS--R2--ES--2008--0044; 40120--1113--0000-B3]
RIN 1018--AW12
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the
Potential Sonoran Desert Bald Eagle Distinct Population Segment as
Threatened Under the Endangered Species Act
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), are issuing
a final rule to amend the regulations for the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife at 50 CFR 17.11 by designating bald
eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) in the Sonoran Desert area of central
Arizona as threatened under the authority of the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (Act). We are also reinstating and clarifying the
former special rule at 50 CFR 17.41 that applied to threatened members
of this species. This action revises the CFR to reflect a March 6,
2008, court order.
DATES: This action is effective May 1, 2008. However, the court order
had legal effect immediately upon being filed on March 6, 2008.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Spangle, Field Supervisor, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Arizona Ecological Services Field Office,
2321 West Royal Palm Road, Suite 103, Phoenix, Arizona 85021; telephone
602-242-0210; facsimile 602-242-2513; https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
arizona/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Information about the bald eagle's life history can be found in our
July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final delisting rule for bald eagles in the
lower 48 States.
Previous Federal Action
Information about previous Federal actions was provided in our July
9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final delisting rule for bald eagles in the
lower 48 States.
On October 6, 2004, we received a petition, dated October 6, 2004,
from the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), the Maricopa Audubon
Society, and the Arizona Audubon Council requesting that the
``Southwestern desert nesting bald eagle population'' be classified as
a distinct population segment (DPS), that this DPS be reclassified from
a threatened species to an endangered species, and that we concurrently
designate critical habitat for the DPS under the Act.
On March 27, 2006, the CBD and the Maricopa Audubon Society filed a
lawsuit against the U.S. Department of the Interior and the Service for
failing to make a timely finding on the petition. The parties reached a
settlement and the Service agreed to complete its petition finding by
August 2006. We announced our 90-day finding, required under 16 U.S.C.
1533(b)(3)(A), on August 30, 2006 (71 FR 51549), that the petition did
not present substantial scientific or commercial information indicating
that the petitioned action may be warranted.
On January 5, 2007, the CBD and the Maricopa Audubon Society filed
a lawsuit challenging the Service's 90-day finding that the ``Sonoran
Desert population'' of the bald eagle did not qualify as a DPS, and
further challenging the Service's 90-day finding that the population
should not be up-listed to endangered status.
On July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), we published the final delisting
rule for bald eagles in the lower 48 States. In that final delisting
rule, we stated that our findings on the status of the Sonoran Desert
population of bald eagles superseded our 90-day petition finding
because the final delisting rule constituted a final decision on
whether the Sonoran Desert population of bald eagles qualified for
listing as a DPS under the Act.
On August 17, 2007, the CBD and the Maricopa Audubon Society filed
a motion for summary judgment, requesting the court to make a decision
on their January 5, 2007, lawsuit. On March 5, 2008, the U.S. District
Court for the District of Arizona ruled in favor of the CBD and the
Maricopa Audubon Society. The court order (Center for Biological
Diversity v. Kempthorne, CV 07-0038-PHX-MHM (D. Ariz)), was filed on
March 6, 2008.
The court ruled for the plaintiffs and found that the Service:
(1) Finding on the status of the Sonoran Desert population of bald
eagles in our July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final delisting rule did not
moot the plaintiff's challenge to the August 30, 2006, negative 90-day
petition finding;
(2) Applied an inappropriately strict evidentiary burden on the
petition at the 90-day review stage and thus arbitrarily and
capriciously concluded that the petition did not present substantial
information that listing the ``Desert bald eagle population'' may be
warranted; and
(3) Arbitrarily and capriciously conducted the 90-day review of the
petition by soliciting information and opinions from a limited outside
source.
The court provided the following remedies and ordered the Service
to:
(1) Conduct a status review of the Desert bald eagle population
pursuant to the Act to determine whether listing that population as a
DPS is warranted, and if so, whether listing that DPS as threatened or
endangered pursuant to the Act is warranted;
(2) Issue a 12-month finding, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B),
on whether listing the Desert bald eagle population as a DPS is
warranted, and if so, whether listing that DPS as threatened or
endangered is warranted; and
[[Page 23967]]
(3) Issue the 12-month finding within nine months of the court
order, pursuant to 16 U.S.C. 1533(b)(3)(B), which translates to on or
before December 5, 2008.
Further, the court enjoined the Service's application of the July
9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final delisting rule to the Sonoran Desert
population of bald eagles pending the outcome of our status review and
12-month petition finding. The ``Desert bald eagle population''
referenced in the court order consists of those bald eagles in the
Sonoran Desert of the southwest that reside in central Arizona and
northwestern Mexico. Because these Sonoran Desert bald eagles were only
listed under the Act in Arizona (and not in Mexico) at the time of the
petition, the court's order enjoining our final delisting decision
applies only to those bald eagles found in the Sonoran Desert region of
the American Southwest. In other words, the court's order temporarily
reinstated the listing of the bald eagle as a threatened species, but
only with respect to the eagles that reside in the Sonoran Desert of
central Arizona. The court order was effective as of March 6, 2008, the
date it was filed.
In order to determine the geographic area where the bald eagle
would remain listed as threatened in Arizona, we examined the CBD's
letter sent to us on March 5, 2005, clarifying their petitioned October
2004 Distinct Population Segment boundary. We used the information
provided by the CBD because the court found that their October 2004 90-
day petition ``may be warranted'' and, therefore, the petition
represents the basis for determining the geographic extent of the area
affected by this final rule.
The CBD cited two documents describing vegetation communities
(Brown 1973, 1994) and an Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) bald
eagle nest search report (Canaca et al. 2004). The CBD notes in the
petition that information is provided to support listing a ``distinct
population segment of Southwestern Desert Nesting Bald Eagle consistent
with the geographical boundaries including the Sonoran Desert riparian
areas of Central Arizona and northwestern Mexico.'' With regards to the
Arizona portion, the petition notes that this area in central Arizona
exists between 329 and 1719 meters (1080 and 5640 feet) in elevation,
falling within the Upper and Lower Sonoran Life Zones and transition
areas as described by Brown 1994. We used the above three references
and the specific elevation text to define the geographic boundary of
the petitioned DPS.
Therefore, while we had specific clarification with respect to
elevational boundaries, bald eagle breeding areas, the Upper and Lower
Sonoran Life Zones, and the State of Arizona, we also received
ambiguous direction with respect to the boundaries of ``central
Arizona'' and which transition areas outside of the Upper and Lower
Sonoran Life Zones to include. Because of these ambiguities and lack of
a specific map in the petition, we were left to interpret their
clarification, primarily at the perimeters of the boundary.
We used all the factors provided by the CBD (i.e., bald eagle
territories, elevation, life zones, and transition areas) and
established a boundary that included all known bald eagle breeding
areas within central Arizona. The boundary was difficult to interpret
on the ground due to irregular lines or gaps in elevation from layers
of electronic geographical data. Therefore, we used more identifiable
and easily understood boundaries of county lines and highways that were
found at the outer edges of the erratic boundaries. It is important to
note that known bald eagle breeding habitat of the Sonoran Desert, as
described in the petition, is not contiguous between Arizona and
northwestern Mexico. The somewhat disjointed nature of bald eagle
breeding habitat and its well known distribution in Arizona is likely
why the petitioners specified ``central Arizona.'' Thus, the counties
in the southern half of Arizona were not included in this final rule
because they do not possess known bald eagle breeding areas, known
suitable habitat for breeding eagles, and fall outside of the
petitioner's geographic description.
We determined that the affected area covers the following eight
Arizona counties: (1) Yavapai, Gila, Graham, Pinal, and Maricopa
Counties in their entirety; and (2) southern Mohave County (that
portion south and east of the centerline of Interstate Highway 40 and
east of Arizona Highway 95), eastern LaPaz County (that portion east of
the centerline of U.S. and Arizona Highways 95), and northern Yuma
County (that portion east of the centerline of U.S. Highway 95 and
north of the centerline of Interstate Highway 8). All bald eagles found
within this area are protected as a threatened species under the Act,
with a special rule under our regulations at 50 CFR 17.41. Please refer
to the following map for details of the geographic area affected by
this action.
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
[[Page 23968]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR01MY08.005
BILLING CODE 4310-55-C
[[Page 23969]]
Administrative Procedure
This rulemaking is necessary to comply with a March 6, 2008, court
order. Therefore, under these circumstances, the Director has
determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(b), that prior notice and
opportunity for public comment are impractical and unnecessary. The
Director has further determined, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 553(d), the
agency has good cause to make this rule effective upon publication and
require compliance retroactively to the date of the court order.
Effects of the Rule
Any and all bald eagles, including migrants, found within the
boundaries of the Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona, as delineated
by the map included as part of this rule, are hereby listed as a
threatened species under the Act, with a special rule found at 50 CFR
17.41.
The provisions of the special rule at 50 CFR 17.41 that we are
adding here under the Act are the same as those in the prior special
rule that was removed per our July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final
delisting rule removing the threatened status for bald eagles in the
lower 48 States. This special rule now applies only to bald eagles in
the Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona, the only such population of
bald eagles so listed under the Act. Under this special rule, bald
eagle banding and marking permits issued under the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act (MBTA) (16 U.S.C. 703-712) and its implementing regulations
at 50 CFR 21.22, and also under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection
Act (BGEPA) (16 U.S.C. 668-668d) and its implementing regulations at 50
CFR part 22, will be deemed to also satisfy the requirements for a
permit under the Act and its implementing regulations at 50 CFR 17.31
and 17.32. The BGEPA regulations at 50 CFR part 22 authorize permits
for taking, possession, and transportation within the United States for
scientific, educational, and depredation control purposes and for the
religious purposes of American Indian tribes. This part also governs
the transportation into or out of the United States of bald and golden
eagle parts for scientific, educational, and Indian religious purposes.
Under this special rule, it will not be necessary to obtain a separate
permit under the Act for the same activities already authorized under
the MBTA and BGEPA permits described above.
Although the petition also included Sonoran Desert bald eagles in
northwestern Mexico, these bald eagles remain unlisted because bald
eagles in this area were not previously listed pursuant to the Act and
thus their status was unaffected by the court order limiting the
effects of our July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346), final delisting rule.
Consistent with the court's March 6, 2008 order, this rule will be
in effect ``pending the outcome of the status review and 12-month
finding.'' However, we will immediately remove the bald eagle in the
Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona from the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife if the court's March 6, 2008, order is stayed or
reversed in any subsequent judicial proceeding, or if, after completion
of the status review, we publish a 12-month finding that listing the
Sonoran Desert bald eagle is not warranted. No decision has been made
as to whether the government will appeal that order.
We will publish a notice requesting public input for the status
review required under the March 6, 2008, court order in the Federal
Register in the near future. This status review will consider the
population of bald eagles as described in the October 6, 2004, petition
and any other relevant information received during the public comment
period and will be based upon the best scientific and commercial data
available, pursuant to the Act.
Under this final rule, the prohibitions and conservation measures
provided by the Act, particularly sections 7, 9, and 10, apply to bald
eagles in the Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona. Federal agencies
are required under the court order and this final rule to consult with
us under section 7 of the Act in the event that activities they
authorize, fund, or carry out may affect listed bald eagles.
In addition to the conservation measures provided by the Act, the
Conservation Assessment and Strategy for Bald Eagles in Arizona (CAS)
(Driscoll et al. 2006) contains guidance on measures to eliminate,
reduce, or minimize effects to eagles in Arizona. On January 22, 2007,
the Service signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the AGFD
supporting the implementation of the AGFD's CAS. The Memorandum of
Understanding was also signed by the following Federal agencies: Bureau
of Reclamation, Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service,
Forest Service, and the Department of Defense, including the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers. The CAS provides additional valuable guidance for
protecting bald eagles in Arizona, and we support using it in
conjunction with our Bald Eagle National Management Guidelines to
protect bald eagles in Arizona.
All bald eagles, of course, will continue to be protected under the
BGEPA and MBTA. We recommend that persons use our Bald Eagle National
Management Guidelines (Guidelines), announced in the Federal Register
on June 5, 2007 (72 FR 31156), as guidance for minimizing the risk of
violating the protections afforded to all bald eagles under these
various Acts and their respective implementing regulations. The
Guidelines include suggestions for protecting bald eagles and their
habitat while they are nesting, feeding, and roosting. While eagles
originating in the Sonoran Desert area of central Arizona would not be
protected by the Act if they traveled to other parts of the United
States, they would still be afforded the protections under the BGEPA
and MBTA.
This rule will not affect the bald eagle's status under State laws
or suspend any other legal protections provided by State law. This rule
will not affect the bald eagle's Appendix II status under the
Convention on International Trade of Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES).
Additionally, pursuant to section 6 of the Act, we are able to
grant available funds to the State of Arizona for management actions
promoting the protection of bald eagles in the Sonoran Desert area of
central Arizona.
Required Determinations
National Environmental Policy Act
We have determined that we do not need to prepare an Environmental
Assessment, as defined in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), in connection with regulations adopted
pursuant to section 4(a) of the Endangered Species Act. We published a
notice outlining our reasons for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR 49244).
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994,
``Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments'' (59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175, and the Department
of Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to consult with Federally recognized Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. Accordingly, we will promptly consult
with the affected Tribes regarding the effects of the court's March 6,
2008, order and this final rule.
[[Page 23970]]
We will also consult with the affected tribes as we conduct our new
status review concerning the Sonoran Desert nesting bald eagle
population.
References Cited
Brown, D. 1973. The Natural Vegetative Communities of Arizona.
Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ.
Brown, D. (editor). 1994. Biotic Communities of the Southwestern
United States and Northwestern New Mexico. The University of Utah
Press, Salt Lake City, UT.
Canaca, J.S., K.V. Jacobson, and J.T. Driscoll. 2004. Arizona Bald
Eagle 2003 Nest Survey, Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program
Technical Report 226. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, AZ.
Driscoll, J.T., K.V. Jacobson, G.L. Beatty, J.S. Canaca, and J.G.
Koloszar. 2006. Conservation Assessment and strategy for the bald
eagle in Arizona. Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Program Technical
Report 173. Arizona Game and Fish Department, Phoenix, Arizona.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Regulation Promulgation
0
Accordingly, we amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Pub. L. 99-625, 100 Stat. 3500; unless otherwise noted.
Sec. 17.11 [Amended]
0
2. In Sec. 17.11(h), an entry for ``Eagle, Bald'' is added under BIRDS
to read as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate population
----------------------------------------------------- Historic range where endangered or Status When Critical Special
Common name Scientific name threatened listed habitat rules
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Birds
* * * * * * *
Eagle, bald..... Haliaeetus leucocephalus.......... North Arizona: South to Arizona: (1) Yavapai, T........ ...... NA........ 17.41(a).
northern Mexico. Gila, Graham, Pinal, and
Maricopa, Counties; and
(2) Southern Mohave County
(that portion south and
east of the center of
Interstate Highway 40 and
east of Arizona Highway
95), eastern LaPaz County
(that portion east of the
centerline of U.S. and
Arizona Highways 95), and
north of the centerline
of Interstate Highway 8).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Section 17.41 is amended by adding paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.41 Special rules--birds.
(a) Bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) wherever listed as
threatened under Sec. 17.11(h). All provisions of Sec. Sec. 17.31 and
17.32 apply to any threatened bald eagle, with the following
exceptions:
(1) The Service will consider any permit that we issue for bald
eagles under Sec. 21.22 (banding and marking permits) or part 22 of
this chapter (permits for certain activities with bald or golden
eagles) to satisfy all requirements of Sec. 17.31 and the permits we
issue under Sec. 17.32.
(2) The Service will not require a second permit under Sec. 17.32
for any activity that is covered by a permit issued under Sec. 21.22
or part 22 of this chapter.
(3) The Service will require a permit under Sec. 17.32 for any
activity that is not covered by a permit issued under Sec. 21.22 or
part 22 of this chapter.
* * * * *
Dated: April 18, 2008.
H. Dale Hall,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 08-1203 Filed 4-28-08; 4:00 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
