Policy on Wilderness Stewardship, 67876-67882 [E8-27014]
Download as PDF
67876
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
U.S.C. 5121–5207 (the Stafford Act), as
follows:
I have determined that the damage in
certain areas of the State of Arkansas
resulting from Tropical Storm Ike during the
period of September 13–23, 2008, is of
sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant
a major disaster declaration under the Robert
T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency
Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121–5207 (the
Stafford Act). Therefore, I declare that such
a major disaster exists in the State of
Arkansas.
In order to provide Federal assistance, you
are hereby authorized to allocate from funds
available for these purposes such amounts as
you find necessary for Federal disaster
assistance and administrative expenses.
You are authorized to provide Public
Assistance in the designated areas, Hazard
Mitigation throughout the State, and any
other forms of assistance under the Stafford
Act that you deem appropriate. Consistent
with the requirement that Federal assistance
be supplemental, any Federal funds provided
under the Stafford Act for Hazard Mitigation
will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. Federal funds provided under
the Stafford Act for Public Assistance also
will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, except for any particular
projects that are eligible for a higher Federal
cost-sharing percentage under the FEMA
Public Assistance Pilot Program instituted
pursuant to 6 U.S.C. 777. If Other Needs
Assistance under Section 408 of the Stafford
Act is later requested and warranted, Federal
funding under that program also will be
limited to 75 percent of the total eligible
costs.
Further, you are authorized to make
changes to this declaration to the extent
allowable under the Stafford Act.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
The Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice that
pursuant to the authority vested in the
Administrator, under Executive Order
12148, as amended, Kenneth M. Riley,
of FEMA is appointed to act as the
Federal Coordinating Officer for this
declared disaster.
The following areas of the State of
Arkansas have been designated as
adversely affected by this declared
major disaster:
Carroll, Clay, Craighead, Greene,
Hempstead, Howard, Izard, Lafayette,
Lawrence, Little River, Madison, Miller,
Newton, Randolph, Sharp, and Van Buren
Counties for Public Assistance.
All counties within the State of Arkansas
are eligible to apply for assistance under the
Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.
(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used
for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030,
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora
Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034,
Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA);
97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant;
97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to
Individuals and Households In Presidentially
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049,
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance—
Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals
and Households; 97.050, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals
and Households—Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants—Public Assistance
(Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
Hazard Mitigation Grant.)
R. David Paulison,
Administrator, Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
[FR Doc. E8–27142 Filed 11–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111–23–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
RIN 1018–AU27
Policy on Wilderness Stewardship
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We establish policy for
implementing the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of
1966, as amended, and the Wilderness
Act of 1964 as Part 610 Chapters 1–5 of
the Fish and Wildlife Service Manual.
In the Wilderness Act, Congress called
for the establishment of a National
Wilderness Preservation System to
secure an ‘‘enduring resource of
wilderness’’ for the American public.
This policy updates guidance on
administrative and public activities on
wilderness within the National Wildlife
Refuge System (Refuge System).
ADDRESSES: You may download a copy
of this policy at: https://www.fws.gov/
refuges/policyMakers/NWRpolicies.html
or request a copy from: National
Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Attn: Nancy Roeper,
National Wilderness Coordinator, 4401
North Fairfax Drive, Room 657,
Arlington, VA 22203; fax (703) 358–
1929.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Roeper, National Wilderness
Coordinator, National Wildlife Refuge
System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 657,
Arlington, Virginia 22203 (telephone:
703–358–2389, fax: 703–358–1929).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We
published a draft Wilderness
Stewardship policy in the Federal
Register on January 16, 2001 (66 FR
3708) and invited the public to provide
comments on the draft policy by March
19, 2001. During this comment period,
we received several requests to extend
the comment period. In response to
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
these requests and in order to ensure
that the public had an adequate
opportunity to review and comment on
the draft policy, we extended the
comment period until April 19, 2001 (66
FR 15136). We reopened the comment
period from May 15 to June 14, 2001 (66
FR 26879). On June 21, 2001, we again
reopened the comment period until June
30, 2001 (66 FR 33268), and corrected
the May 15, 2001, notice to reflect that
comments received between April 19
and May 15, 2001, would be considered,
and need not be resubmitted.
During the 8 years since publication,
we made numerous revisions to the
draft Wilderness Stewardship policy
based on public comments and on
internal reviews and discussions by
Service managers and staff. We also
developed Intergovernmental Personnel
Agreements (IPAs) with representatives
from five States to facilitate an effective
means of involving the State fish and
wildlife agencies in the development
and implementation of Refuge System
policies and guidance, including the
Wilderness Stewardship policy. The
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, as amended
in 1997 by the Improvement Act (16
U.S.C. 668dd–668ee, as amended)
(Administration Act), requires that, in
administering the Refuge System, the
Fish and Wildlife Service ensure
effective coordination, interaction, and
cooperation with State fish and wildlife
agencies. (State employees under these
agreements are on assignment to the
Service, serve as Service staff, and are
subject to the provisions of law
governing the ethical and other conduct
of Federal employees.)
This policy is intended to improve the
internal management of the Service, and
it is not intended to, and does not,
create any right or benefit, substantive
or procedural, enforceable at law or
equity by a party against the United
States, its Departments, agencies,
instrumentalities or entities, its officers
or employees, or any other person.
Purpose of This Policy and Authorities
The purpose of this policy is to
implement the Administration Act and
the Wilderness Act of 1964, within the
Refuge System. This policy replaces
existing policy found in the Refuge
Manual at 6 RM 8.
The Administration Act provides a
mission and goals for the Refuge
System. As specially designated areas
encompassed within the Refuge System,
wilderness directly contributes to the
fulfillment of the mission and goals by,
for example, protecting a diversity of
fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats
and providing opportunities for
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
compatible wildlife-dependent
recreation.
The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C.
1131–1136) provides the basis for
wilderness protection of the Refuge
System. It clearly establishes that, as we
carry out the Service mission, the
Refuge System mission and goals, and
the individual refuge establishing
purposes in areas designated as
wilderness, we do so in a way that
preserves wilderness character. This
policy gives refuge managers uniform
direction and procedures for making
decisions regarding conservation and
uses of the Refuge System wilderness
areas and incorporates provisions of the
Administration Act. The policy
prescribes how the refuge manager
preserves the character and qualities of
designated wilderness while managing
for refuge establishing purpose(s),
maintaining outstanding opportunities
for solitude or a primitive and
unconfined type of recreation, and
conducting minimum requirements
analyses before taking any action in
wilderness.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
United States Border Security
The Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) has waived all of the
requirements of a number of Federal
statutes, including the Administration
Act and the Wilderness Act, with
respect to the construction of roads and
fixed and mobile barriers in areas of
high illegal entry in the vicinity of the
southwestern U.S. border. See 73 FR
19078 (April 8, 2008). None of the
provisions of the Wilderness Act or the
Service’s policy on wilderness
Stewardship apply to the activities
determined by DHS to fall within the
waiver. However, there may be other
activities related to border security that
are geographically removed from the
areas of high illegal entry which are not
covered by the DHS waiver. Where such
an activity is proposed to be located
within designated wilderness in the
Refuge System and is a generally
prohibited use under the Wilderness
Act, the Service will conduct minimum
requirement analyses. This will
determine whether the proposed
activities are necessary to administer the
area as wilderness and to accomplish
the purposes of the refuge, including
Wilderness Act purposes.
Policy Summary
For clarity, we reorganized the
content of the policy from seven
chapters, as first published in 2001, into
five chapters as explained in more detail
in ‘‘Summary of Comments and Changes
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
to the Final Policy.’’ It is now organized
as follows:
Chapter 1 identifies our priorities in
implementing the policy, establishes the
responsibility for wilderness
stewardship, defines terms, describes
the broad framework within which we
manage wilderness, discusses the
philosophical underpinnings of
wilderness, and requires compliance
with the requirements of the Wilderness
Act. It also establishes a process for
conducting minimum requirement
analyses and establishes training
requirements for specific Service
employees.
Chapter 2 addresses general
administration, natural and cultural
resource management, and public use
management in wilderness. It clarifies
the circumstances under which
generally prohibited uses (temporary
roads, motor vehicles, motorized
equipment, motorboats, mechanical
transport, landing of aircraft, structures,
and installations) may be necessary for
wilderness preservation. It addresses
commercial uses, research, and public
access. It affirms that we will generally
not modify ecosystems, species
population levels, or natural processes
in refuge wilderness unless doing so
maintains or restores biological
integrity, diversity, or environmental
health that has been degraded or is
necessary to protect or recover
threatened or endangered species. It
describes how we respond to wildland
fires and how we may use prescribed
fire. It also explains that in wilderness
areas, we will emphasize providing
opportunities for solitude or a primitive
and unconfined type of recreation.
Appropriate recreational uses in
wilderness include the six wildlifedependent recreational uses (hunting,
fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, and environmental
education and interpretation) identified
in the Improvement Act if they are
compatible and do not involve generally
prohibited uses. The chapter also
addresses special needs for persons with
disabilities.
Chapter 3 provides guidance on
developing wilderness stewardship
plans (WSP). The WSP is a step-down
management plan that provides detailed
strategies and implementation
schedules for meeting the broader
wilderness goals and objectives
identified in the refuge comprehensive
conservation plan. The WSP also
includes minimum requirement
analyses for all refuge management
activities and compatibility
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67877
determinations for refuge uses in the
wilderness area.
Chapter 4 describes the three-part
process we follow in conducting
wilderness reviews in accordance with
the refuge planning process outlined in
the planning policy (602 FW 1, 3, and
4). We conduct an inventory to identify
areas that meet the basic definition of
wilderness and carry out a study to
evaluate all the values, resources, and
uses within the area. The findings of the
study determine whether we will
recommend an area for designation as
wilderness.
Chapter 5 addresses special
provisions of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act
(ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 4lOhh-3233, 43
U.S.C. 1602–1784) for wilderness
stewardship in Alaska. The chapter
consolidates and adds to the provisions
that were scattered throughout the
policy in the previous draft.
Summary of Comments and Changes to
the Final Policy
We received approximately 4,130
comment letters in response to the 2001
publication in the Federal Register. The
comments were from Federal, State, and
local government agencies;
nongovernmental organizations; and
individuals. Some comments addressed
specific elements in the draft policy,
while many comments expressed
general support without addressing
specific elements. We considered all of
the information and recommendations
for improvement included in the
comments and made appropriate
changes to the draft policy.
In general, we combined chapters 1
and 2 of the proposed policy into
chapter 1 (General Overview); combined
chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the proposed
policy into chapter 2 (Wilderness
Administration and Resource
Stewardship); renumbered chapter 6 as
chapter 3 (Wilderness Stewardship
Planning); and renumbered chapter 7 as
chapter 4 (Wilderness Review and
Evaluation). We added a new chapter 5
to cover special provisions for
wilderness in Alaska, which were
scattered throughout the draft policy.
Key to Changes From the 2001 Draft
Policy to the Final Policy
The following table compares the
format of the 2001 draft and final
policies. The table lists each section in
chapters 1–5 of the final policy and
indicates whether the section is new or
where the information was located in
the 2001 draft policy.
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
67878
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
Final policy
Chapter 1
2001 Draft policy
General Overview of Wilderness Stewardship Policy
1.1 What is the purpose of Part 610 and this chapter?
1.2 What does this chapter cover?
1.3 What are the authorities for this policy?
1.4 What are the priorities in implementing this policy?
1.5 What do these terms mean?
1.6 Who is responsible for wilderness stewardship in the Service?
1.7 What is wilderness?
1.8 What are the purposes of the Wilderness Act?
1.9 What is the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS)?
1.10 How does the Service coordinate stewardship of the NWPS with other Federal agencies?
1.11 How does the Service coordinate wilderness stewardship with State fish arid wildlife agencies?
1.12 What is the broad framework the Service uses to administer wilderness?
1.13 What is wilderness character?
1.14 What are the principles for administering wilderness?
1.15 What is the relationship between wilderness stewardship and compatibility?
1.16 What activities does the Service prohibit in wilderness?
1.17 How do refuge managers accomplish both the establishing purpose(s) of a refuge and the purposes of the Wilderness Act?
1.18 How does the Service determine if a proposed refuge management activity is the minimum requirement for administering the area as wilderness and necessary to accomplish the purposes the refuge, including Wilderness Act
purposes?
1.19 When must the Refuge System conduct a minimum requirement analysis?
1.20 Who makes minimum requirement decisions?
1.21 What is the relationship of the Minimum Requirement Analysis to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act?
1.22 What effects do emergencies have on the uses generally prohibited by the Wilderness Act?
1.23 What effect does the Department of Homeland Security waiver of the Administration Act and the Wilderness Act
have on the uses generally prohibited by the Wilderness Act?
1.24 What are the training requirements for Refuge System staff?
1.25 What are the training requirements for Endangered Species and fisheries and Habitat Conservation staff?
1.26 When should State employees attend wilderness training?
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Chapter 2
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
2.10, 2.15.
2.14.
2.16.
New.
2.13.
New.
1.7.
1.8.
1.9.
Wilderness Administration and Resource Stewardship
2.1 What is the purpose of this chapter?
2.2 What does this chapter cover?
2.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness stewardship on Service lands?
2.4 What is the Service’s general policy for wilderness administration and the stewardship of natural and cultural resources in wilderness?
2.5 Can the Service allow structures and installations in wilderness?
2.6 Can the Service allow roads and trails in wilderness?
2.7 Can the Service allow use of motorized vehicles, motorized equipment, and mechanical transport in wilderness?
2.8 Can the Service manage aircraft use in and over wilderness?
2.9 How does wilderness designation affect existing private rights?
2.10 Can the Service authorize access through wilderness to non-Federal land where rights to access do not exist?
2.11 Can the Service authorize rights-of-way in wilderness?
2.12 Can the Service authorize commercial enterprises and services in wilderness?
2.13 How does the Service manage permits for commercial services?
2.14 Can the Service authorize mineral exploration and development activities in wilderness areas?
2.15 Will the Service propose names for geographic features in wilderness?
2.16 How does the Service conserve wildlife and habitat in 2.12, wilderness?
2.17 Can the Service introduce, transplant, or stock fish, wildlife, and plants in wilderness?
2.18 Can the Service use livestock grazing as a refuge management economic activity?
2.19 Can the Service control invasive species, pests, and diseases in wilderness?
2.20 Can the Service control predation in wilderness?
2.21 What is the Service’s general policy for managing wilderness fires?
2.22 Can the Service manage wildland fire in wilderness?
2.23 Can the Service use prescribed fire in wilderness?
2.24 How does the Service accomplish emergency stabilization and rehabilitation in wilderness following a wildfire?
2.25 How does the Service protect air resources in wilderness?
2.26 How does the Service protect natural night skies and natural soundscapes in wilderness?
2.27 How does the Service conduct research in wilderness?
2.28 How does the Service conduct inventory and monitoring 3.6.B, activities in wilderness?
2.29 How does the Service protect cultural resources in wilderness?
2.30 What are the Service’s general public use guidelines 4.4, for wilderness?
2.31 What types of public uses does the Service prohibit in wilderness?
2.32 Can the Service allow use and grazing of recreational pack and saddle stock in wilderness?
2.33 How does the Service address visitor safety in wilderness?
2.34 How does the Service enhance solitude or opportunities for primitive and unconfined recreation in wilderness?
2.35 How can the Service best preserve a quality wilderness experience as well as the wilderness itself?
2.36 How does the Service inform and educate the public about wilderness?
2.37 What is the Leave No Trace (LNT) program?
VerDate Aug<31>2005
1.1.
1.2.
1.3.
New.
1.6.
1.4.
New.
2.7.
New.
2.19.
1.5.
2.4.
2.5.
2.6.
New.
2.9, 2.11.
2.8.
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5A., 4.13.
3.5B. and C., 4.13H.
3.5D.
3.6A., 4.6E.
New.
3.5E.
3.5G.
3.5F.
3.5F.
3.5H.
3.51.
3.6C.
3.6C.(3).
3.6C.(2).
3.6C.(4).
3.6C.(6).
5.4.
5.5.
5.6.
New.
3.6.D
New.
3.6.A.
4.12.
3.7.
4.5.
4.6.
4.6.C.
4.9.
4.8.
4.7.
4.10.
2.17, 4.11.
67879
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
Final policy
2.38
2001 Draft policy
How does the Service address special needs for people with disabilities in wilderness?
Chapter 3
4.14.
Wilderness Stewardship Planning
3.1 What is the purpose of this chapter?
3.2 What does this chapter cover?
3.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness stewardship on Service lands?
3.4 What is a wilderness stewardship plan (WSP)?
3.5 Does every wilderness area need a WSP?
3.6 Can refuge managers prepare a WSP for wilderness study areas (WSA) recommended for wilderness designation in a finalCCP, recommended wilderness areas, or proposed wilderness areas?
3.7 Can refuge managers combine other step-down management plans with the WSP?
3.8 What should a WSP contain?
3.9 How does the Service coordinate with States, other Federal agencies, and tribes in wilderness stewardship planning?
3.10 How does the Service involve the public in wilderness stewardship planning?
3.11 How does the Service administer wilderness areas that do not have an approved WSP?
3.12 May the Service decide to implement a WSP that was completed before development of the refuge CCP?
3.13 How frequently should the Service revise WSPs?
3.14 How does wilderness stewardship planning work whenService wilderness adjoins wilderness of another Federal
agency?
Chapter 4
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4 How do the special provisions of ANILCA affect the need for a minimum requirement analysis (MRA) for proposed refuge management activities and facilities in Alaska wilderness?
5.5 What special provisions apply to public access for traditional activities and travel to and from villages and homesites?
5.6 What special provisions apply to access to inholdings in Alaska wilderness areas?
5.7 What special provisions apply to public access to subsistence resources?
5.8 What special provisions apply to authorization of temporary access to non-Federal lands?
5.9 What special provisions apply to helicopter access in Alaska wilderness areas?
5.10 What special provisions apply to rights-of-way for transportation and utility systems in and across Alaska wilderness areas?
5.11 What special provisions apply to assessment, exploration, and development of mineral resources on Alaska wilderness areas?
5.12 Does the Service allow the use of motorized equipment in Alaska wilderness areas?
5.13 What provisions apply to commercial enterprises and services in Alaska wilderness areas?
5.14 What special provisions apply to management of structures and installations in Alaska wilderness areas?
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
PO 00000
6.8.
6.9.
6.10.
6.11.
6.12.
7.1.
7.2.
7.3.
7.4.
7.5, 7.7.
7.6.
7.8.
7.9.
7.10.
7.11.
7.12.
7.13.
New.
New.
New.
New.
7.14.
7.15.
7.16.
7.14.
7.17.
New.
7.18.
Special Provisions for Alaska Wilderness
What is the purpose of this chapter?
What does this chapter cover?
How do the other chapters in the Service’s wilderness policy (610 FW 1–4) apply to Alaska wilderness?
VerDate Aug<31>2005
New.
6.7.
New.
Wilderness Review and Evaluation
4.1 What is the purpose of this chapter?
4.2 What does this chapter cover?
4.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness reviews and management of WSAs, recommended wilderness, and proposed wilderness on Service lands?
4.4 What is a wilderness review?
4.5 When should the Service conduct a wilderness review?
4.6 How do wilderness reviews relate to acquisition planning?
4.7 How does the Service identify WSAs in the wilderness inventory?
4.8 How does the Service evaluate the size criteria to identify a WSA during inventory?
4.9 How does the Service evaluate the naturalness criteria to identify a WSA during inventory?
4.10 How does the Service evaluate outstanding opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of recreation during inventory?
4.11 Must an area contain ecological, geological, or other features of scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value
to qualify as a WSA?
4.12 What factors does the Service consider when conducting a wilderness study?
4.13 In the wilderness study, how does the Service evaluate whether a WSA can be effectively managed as wilderness?
4.14 What is the relationship between the wilderness study conclusions and the final CCP decisions?
4.15 What level of NEPA documentation does the Service require for wilderness proposals?
4.16 How does the Service involve stakeholders in wilderness reviews?
4.17 What is the process for the Director’s review and approval of wilderness recommendations in CCPs?
4.18 What is included in the wilderness study report?
4.19 What additional documents does the Service need to prepare for Secretarial approval of the wilderness recommendation?
4.20 What are the steps for forwarding or reporting the Service’s wilderness recommendations?
4.21 What is the Service’s general policy for managing WSAs?
4.22 What is the Service’s general policy for managing recommended wilderness?
4.23 What is the Service’s general policy for managing proposed wilderness?
Chapter 5
6.1.
6.2.
6.3.
6.4, 6.5.
6.6.
New.
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
New.
New.
1.2, 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, 5.2,
6.2, 7.2.
2.llA., 3.5A.(3), 3.5D.
3.5E.(2).
3.5E.(1).
2.18.
New.
New.
3.5G.
3.5H.(1).
3.5D.
3.5F.
3.5A.
67880
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
Final policy
2001 Draft policy
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
5.15 What temporary facilities and equipment related to the taking of fish and wildlife does the Service authorize in
Alaska wilderness areas?
5.16 What special provisions apply to management of fish populations on Alaska wilderness areas?
5.17 Does the Service conduct wilderness reviews of refuge lands in Alaska?
5.18 What is the Service’s general policy for managing wilderness study areas (WSAs), recommended wilderness,
and proposed wilderness in Alaska?
Required Determinations.
Regulatory Planning and Review. The
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this policy
is significant and has reviewed this
policy under Executive Order 12866
(E.O. 12866). OMB bases its
determination upon the following four
criteria:
(a) Whether the policy will have an
annual effect of $100 million or more on
the economy or adversely affect an
economic sector, productivity, jobs, the
environment, or other units of the
government.
(b) Whether the policy will create
inconsistencies with other Federal
agencies’ actions.
(c) Whether the policy will materially
affect entitlements, grants, user fees,
loan programs, or the rights and
obligations of their recipients.
(d) Whether the policy raises novel
legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended
by the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act {SBREFA} of
1996) (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), whenever
a Federal agency is required to publish
a notice of rulemaking for any proposed
or final policy, it must prepare and
make available for public comment a
regulatory flexibility analysis that
describes the effect of the policy on
small entities (i.e., small businesses,
small organizations, and small
government jurisdictions). However, no
regulatory flexibility analysis is required
if the head of an agency certifies that the
policy would not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. Thus, for a
regulatory flexibility analysis to be
required, impacts must exceed a
threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a
threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of
small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b).
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the
factual basis for certifying that a policy
would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This policy is administrative, legal,
technical, and procedural in nature and
provides updated instructions for the
maintenance of wilderness areas on the
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
National Wildlife Refuge System. This
policy does not increase the types of
recreation allowed on the System but
establishes an emphasis on the
characteristics desired for a wilderness
experience. As a result, there may be
opportunities for an increase in
wilderness experiences on national
wildlife refuges with designated
wilderness areas. The changes in the
wilderness areas are likely to increase
visitor activity on these national
wildlife refuges.
From 1999 to 2003, the number of
wilderness visitors averaged 501,147
visitors annually, comprising about 1.3
percent of all refuge visitors. There are
insufficient data to provide more than
broad estimates about the effects of this
updated policy on public use of
wilderness areas on national wildlife
refuges. The Service expects that refuges
that improve the quality of their
wilderness areas, and thereby increase
the opportunities for high-quality
wilderness experiences, will see an
increase in public use. With this policy,
the Service estimates that on balance
there will be up to a 10 percent increase
in the public’s use of wilderness areas
on refuges. Thus, we expect an increase
of approximately 50,115 wilderness
visitors annually.
New recreational user days generate
expenditures associated with
recreational activities on refuges’
wilderness areas. Due to the
unavailability of site-specific
expenditure data, we use the national
estimates from the 2006 National Survey
of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife
Associated Recreation to identify
expenditures for food and lodging,
transportation, and other incidental
expenses. Using the average trip-related
expenditures for fishing, hunting, and
wildlife watching activities with the
maximum expected additional
participation on the Refuge System
yields approximately $1.8 million in
wilderness-related expenditures (50,115
days × $35.35 per day).
By having ripple effects throughout
the economy, these direct expenditures
are only part of the economic impact of
wilderness recreation. Using an average
national impact multiplier for hunting
and fishing activities (2.72) derived
from the reports ‘‘Economic Importance
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1.6W., 3.5F.(l).
New.
New.
New.
of Hunting in America’’ and
‘‘Sportfishing in America’’ for the
estimated increase in direct
expenditures yields a total economic
impact of approximately $4.8 million
(2007 dollars) (Southwick Associates,
Inc., 2007). (Using a local impact
multiplier would yield more accurate
and smaller results. However, we
employed the national impact
multiplier due to the difficulty in
developing local multipliers for each
specific region.)
Since we know that most of the
fishing and hunting occurs within 100
miles of a participant’s residence, then
it is unlikely that most of this spending
would be ‘‘new’’ money coming into a
local economy; therefore, this spending
would be offset with a decrease in some
other sector of the local economy. The
net gain to the local economies would
be no more than $4.8 million, and most
likely considerably less. Since 80
percent of the participants travel less
than 100 miles to engage in hunting and
fishing activities, their spending
patterns would not add new money into
the local economy. Furthermore, the
probability of all refuges with
wilderness programs being upgraded to
true wilderness characteristics, as
defined by Congress, is very low.
Resource constraints have kept these
refuges from upgrading wilderness
experiences and it is unlikely that this
updated policy will cause all refuges
with wilderness designation to upgrade
their programs immediately. As a result,
the real impact would be on the order
of $964,000 annually.
Many small businesses within the
retail trade industry (such as hotels, gas
stations, taxidermy shops, bait and
tackle shops, etc.) may benefit from
increased refuge visitation. A large
percentage of these retail trade
establishments near the refuges most
likely qualify as small businesses. We
expect that the incremental recreational
opportunities will be scattered across
the refuges that offer wilderness
recreational opportunities, and so we do
not expect that the policy will have a
significant economic effect (benefit) on
a substantial number of small entities in
any region or nationally.
With the small increase in overall
spending anticipated from this policy, it
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
is unlikely that a substantial number of
small entities will have more than a
small benefit from the increased
spending near the affected refuges.
Therefore, we certify that this policy
will not have a significant economic
effect on a substantial number of small
entities as defined under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). An
initial/final Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis is not required. Accordingly, a
Small Entity Compliance Guide is not
required.
Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. The policy is
not a major policy under 5 U.S.C.
804(2), the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. This policy:
a. Does not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
The addition of some wilderness
experience opportunities at refuges
would generate expenditures by
wilderness participants with an
economic impact estimated at $964,000
million per year. Consequently, the
maximum benefit of this policy for
businesses both small and large would
not be sufficient to make this a major
policy. The impact would be scattered
across the country and would most
likely not be significant in any local
area.
b. Will not cause a major increase in
costs or prices for consumers,
individual industries, Federal, State, or
local government agencies, or
geographic regions. This policy will
have a small effect on the expenditures
of new participants for wilderness
opportunities of Americans. Under the
assumption that all wilderness
opportunities would be of high quality,
participants would be attracted to the
refuge system. If the refuge were closer
to the participant’s residence than
alternative sources of wilderness
experiences then a reduction in travel
costs would occur and benefit the
participants. The Service does not have
information to quantify this reduction in
travel cost but has to assume that since
most people travel less than 100 miles
to hunt and fish, that the reduced travel
cost would be small for the additional
days of wilderness activities generated
by this policy. This policy is not
expected to significantly affect the
supply or demand for wilderness
opportunities in the U.S. and therefore
should not affect prices for equipment
and supplies, or the retailers that sell
equipment. Refuge system wilderness
opportunities account for a small
portion of the wilderness opportunities
available in the contiguous United
States.
c. Does not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S. based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Because this policy represents such a
small proportion of wildlife related
recreational spending, there will be no
measurable economic effect on the
wildlife-dependent industry which has
annual sales of equipment and travel
expenditures of $72 billion nationwide.
Refuge visitors averaged 501,147 visits
to refuges for wilderness activities from
1999 to 2003 compared to 37.1 million
visitors for all activities on refuge
system lands. This policy seeks to
preserve wilderness characteristics for
those participants who want this
experience and is aimed at providing
guidance to Federal managers in
establishing quality programs where the
opportunity exists for wilderness
programs. Refuges that have or establish
wilderness programs may hire
additional staff from the local
community to assist with the programs
but this would not be a significant
increase with a total of 66 refuges
participating. Consequently, there is no
significant employment or small
business effects.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. In
accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501, et
seq.):
a. This policy will not ‘‘significantly
or uniquely’’ affect small governments.
A Small Government Agency Plan is not
required. See B(1)(a).
b. This policy will not produce a
Federal mandate of $100 million or
greater in any year, i.e., it is not a
‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. V
Takings. In accordance with Executive
Order 12630, the policy does not have
significant takings implications. A
takings implication assessment is not
required. This policy will not change
the ability of inholders to access their
property, although it may affect the way
in which they may access it. Depending
on the specifics of the easements of
record, outstanding rights-of-way,
enabling legislation, or other rights
granted by law, inholders may be
required to modify their modify their:
routes of entry so that access will be
through a non-wilderness area; method
of access, and use non-motorized
means; or time of entry, to disturb the
fewest wilderness users.
Federalism. As discussed in B(1)a,
this policy does not have significant
Federalism effects to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment
under Executive Order 12612. This
policy will not have substantial direct
effects on the States, in their
relationship between the Federal
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
67881
Government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.
Civil Justice Reform. In accordance
with Executive Order 12988, it has been
determined that the policy does not
unduly burden the judicial system and
meets the requirements of sections 3(a)
and 3(b)(2) of the Order. The policy will
clarify established policy and result in
better understanding of the policies by
refuge wilderness visitors.
Paperwork Reduction Act. This policy
does not require any information
collection from 10 or more parties and
a submission under the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act.
We have analyzed this policy in
accordance with the criteria of the
National Environmental Policy Act and
40 CFR 1508. This policy does not
constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment. This policy is
administrative, legal, technical, and
procedural in nature and provides
updated instructions for the
stewardship of wilderness areas on the
National Wildlife Refuge System. The
environmental effects are too
speculative or conjectural to lend
themselves to meaningful analysis and
will later be subjected to the NEPA
process on a case-by-case basis.
Extraordinary circumstances may exist
for individual actions that may occur in
implementing this policy that would
constitute an exception to the
categorical exclusion of the policy as a
whole. Again, those individual actions
will be subject to future NEPA analysis.
An environmental assessment is not
required at this time. (See B(1)d.)
Wilderness stewardship plans will
need to be developed for all refuges
with wilderness. These plans will either
be incorporated directly into refuge
comprehensive conservation plans or as
step-down management plans, pursuant
to our refuge planning guidance in 602
FW 1–3. We prepare these plans in
compliance with section 102(2)(C) of
NEPA, and the Council on
Environmental Quality’s regulations for
implementing NEPA in 40 CFR parts
1500–1508. We invite the affected
public to participate in the review,
development, and implementation of
these plans.
Government-to-Government
Relationship with Tribes. In accordance
with the President’s memorandum of
April 29, 1994, ‘‘Government-toGovernment Relations with Native
American Tribal Governments’’ (59 FR
22951) and 512 DM 2 we have evaluated
possible effects on Federally-recognized
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
67882
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 222 / Monday, November 17, 2008 / Notices
Indian tribes and have determined that
there are no effects. We coordinate
wilderness use on national wildlife
refuges with Tribal governments having
adjoining or overlapping jurisdiction.
Dated: November 7, 2008.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. E8–27014 Filed 11–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–M
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
2009 Meetings of the Big Cypress
National Preserve Off-Road Vehicle
(ORV) Advisory Committee
Pedro Ramos,
Acting Superintendent, Big Cypress National
Preserve.
[FR Doc. E8–27166 Filed 11–14–08; 8:45 am]
Department of the Interior,
National Park Service, ORV Advisory
Committee.
ACTION: Notice of meetings.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
BILLING CODE 4310–70–P
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub.
L. 92–463, 86 Stat. 770, 5 U.S.C. App 1,
10), notice is hereby given of the
meetings of the Big Cypress National
Preserve ORV Advisory Committee for
2009.
DATES: The Committee will meet on the
following dates:
Tuesday, January 20, 2009, 3:30–8
p.m.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009, 3:30–8 p.m.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009, 3:30–8 p.m.
Tuesday, July 21, 2009, 3:30–8 p.m.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009, 3:30–8
p.m.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009, 3:30–8
p.m.
ADDRESSES: The January, March, and
December meetings will be held at Big
Cypress National Preserve Headquarters,
33100 Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee,
Florida. The May, July, and September
meetings will be held at the Everglades
City Community Center, 205 Buckner
Avenue, Everglades City, Florida.
Written comments may be sent to:
Superintendent, Big Cypress National
Preserve, 33100 Tamiami Trail East,
Ochopee, FL 34141–1000, Attn: ORV
Advisory Committee.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Pedro Ramos, Acting Superintendent,
Big Cypress National Preserve, 33100
Tamiami Trail East, Ochopee, Florida
34141–1000; 239–695–1103, or go to the
Web site https://parkplanning.nps.gov/
projectHome.cfm?parkId=352&
projectId=20437.
The
Committee was established (Federal
Register, August 1, 2007, pp. 42108–
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:18 Nov 14, 2008
Jkt 217001
42109) pursuant to the Preserve’s 2000
Recreational Off-road Vehicle
Management Plan and the Federal
Advisory Committee Act of 1972 (5
U.S.C. Appendix) to examine issues and
make recommendations regarding the
management of off-road vehicles (ORVs)
in the Preserve. The agendas for these
meetings will be published by press
release and on the https://parkplanning.
nps.gov/projectHome.cfm?parkId=352&
projectId=20437 Web site. The meetings
will be open to the public, and time will
be reserved for public comment.
Oral comments will be summarized
for the record. If individuals wish to
have their comments recorded verbatim,
they must submit them in writing.
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Notice of Lodging of Agreement and
Order Regarding Modification of the
Consent Decree Under the Clean Water
Act
Notice is hereby given that on
November 10, 2008, a proposed
Agreement and Order Regarding
Modification of the Consent Decree
(‘‘Agreement and Order’’) in United
States of America and State of
Louisiana v. City of Baton Rouge and
Parish of East Baton Rouge, Civil Action
No 01–978–B–M3 was lodged with the
United States District Court for the
Middle District of Louisiana.
This action was originally filed in
2001 by the United States and the State
of Louisiana under Clean Water Act
(‘‘CWA’’) Section 301, 33 U.S.C. 1311,
seeking civil penalties and injunctive
relief for violations related to the
publically owned treatment works
owned and operated by the City of
Baton Rouge and the Parish of East
Baton Rouge (collectively ‘‘the City/
Parish’’). On March 14, 2001, the Court
entered a Consent Decree resolving all
claims in the Complaint (‘‘the 2002
Consent Decree’’). Among other
requirements, the 2002 Consent Decree
required the City/Parish to implement a
13–15 year project to improve its sewage
collection system. Pursuant to these
requirements, the City/Parish proposed
a Second Remedial Measures Action
Plan (‘‘Second RMAP’’) in which it
selected a remedial measure for the
collection system. Pursuant to
Paragraph 40(a) of the 2002 Consent
Decree, the Second RMAP was
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
approved on July 10, 2007. If entered by
the Court, the proposed Agreement and
Order would modify the 2002 Consent
Decree by amending the approved
Second RMAP to allow the City/Parish
to decommission the Central
Wastewater Treatment plant located at
2443 River Road in East Baton Rouge
Parish, Louisiana (‘‘the Central Plant’’)
and the redirect the flows to the South
Wastewater Treatment Plant located at
2850 Gardere Lane in East Baton Rouge
Parish, Louisiana (the South Plant’’).
The Department of Justice will receive
for a period of thirty (30) days from the
date of this publication comments
relating to the Agreement and Order.
Comments should be addressed to the
Assistant Attorney General,
Environment and Natural Resources
Division, and either e-mailed to
pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov or
mailed to P.O. Box 7611, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington, DC
20044–7611, and should refer to U.S.
and La. v. City of Baton Rouge, D.J. Ref.
90–5–1–1–2769/1.
The Agreement and Order may be
examined at the Office of the United
States Attorney for the Middle District
of Louisiana, 777 Florida St., Suite 208,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70801, and at
U.S. Environmental Protection AgencyRegion 6, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas,
Texas 75202. During the public
comment period, the Agreement and
Order, may also be examined on the
following Department of Justice Web
site: https://www.usdoj.gov/enrd/
Consent_Decrees.html. A copy of the
Agreement and Order may also be
obtained by mail from the Consent
Decree Library, P.O. Box 7611, U.S.
Department of Justice, Washington, DC
20044–7611 or by faxing or e-mailing a
request to Tonia Fleetwood
(tonia.fleetwood@usdoj.gov), fax no.
(202) 514–0097, phone confirmation
number (202) 514–1547. In requesting a
copy from the Consent Decree Library,
please enclose a check in the amount of
$9.00 (25 cents per page reproduction
cost) payable to the U.S. Treasury or, if
by email or fax, forward a check in that
amount to the Consent Decree Library at
the stated address.
Thomas A. Mariani, Jr.,
Assistant Chief, Environmental Enforcement
Section, Environment and Natural Resources
Division.
[FR Doc. E8–27216 Filed 11–14–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410–15–P
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 222 (Monday, November 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67876-67882]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-27014]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
RIN 1018-AU27
Policy on Wilderness Stewardship
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We establish policy for implementing the National Wildlife
Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, as amended, and the
Wilderness Act of 1964 as Part 610 Chapters 1-5 of the Fish and
Wildlife Service Manual. In the Wilderness Act, Congress called for the
establishment of a National Wilderness Preservation System to secure an
``enduring resource of wilderness'' for the American public. This
policy updates guidance on administrative and public activities on
wilderness within the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System).
ADDRESSES: You may download a copy of this policy at: https://
www.fws.gov/refuges/policyMakers/NWRpolicies.html or request a copy
from: National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Attn: Nancy Roeper, National Wilderness Coordinator, 4401 North Fairfax
Drive, Room 657, Arlington, VA 22203; fax (703) 358-1929.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Roeper, National Wilderness
Coordinator, National Wildlife Refuge System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 657, Arlington, Virginia 22203
(telephone: 703-358-2389, fax: 703-358-1929).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We published a draft Wilderness Stewardship
policy in the Federal Register on January 16, 2001 (66 FR 3708) and
invited the public to provide comments on the draft policy by March 19,
2001. During this comment period, we received several requests to
extend the comment period. In response to these requests and in order
to ensure that the public had an adequate opportunity to review and
comment on the draft policy, we extended the comment period until April
19, 2001 (66 FR 15136). We reopened the comment period from May 15 to
June 14, 2001 (66 FR 26879). On June 21, 2001, we again reopened the
comment period until June 30, 2001 (66 FR 33268), and corrected the May
15, 2001, notice to reflect that comments received between April 19 and
May 15, 2001, would be considered, and need not be resubmitted.
During the 8 years since publication, we made numerous revisions to
the draft Wilderness Stewardship policy based on public comments and on
internal reviews and discussions by Service managers and staff. We also
developed Intergovernmental Personnel Agreements (IPAs) with
representatives from five States to facilitate an effective means of
involving the State fish and wildlife agencies in the development and
implementation of Refuge System policies and guidance, including the
Wilderness Stewardship policy. The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, as amended in 1997 by the Improvement Act
(16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee, as amended) (Administration Act), requires
that, in administering the Refuge System, the Fish and Wildlife Service
ensure effective coordination, interaction, and cooperation with State
fish and wildlife agencies. (State employees under these agreements are
on assignment to the Service, serve as Service staff, and are subject
to the provisions of law governing the ethical and other conduct of
Federal employees.)
This policy is intended to improve the internal management of the
Service, and it is not intended to, and does not, create any right or
benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or equity by a
party against the United States, its Departments, agencies,
instrumentalities or entities, its officers or employees, or any other
person.
Purpose of This Policy and Authorities
The purpose of this policy is to implement the Administration Act
and the Wilderness Act of 1964, within the Refuge System. This policy
replaces existing policy found in the Refuge Manual at 6 RM 8.
The Administration Act provides a mission and goals for the Refuge
System. As specially designated areas encompassed within the Refuge
System, wilderness directly contributes to the fulfillment of the
mission and goals by, for example, protecting a diversity of fish,
wildlife, plants, and their habitats and providing opportunities for
[[Page 67877]]
compatible wildlife-dependent recreation.
The Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136) provides the basis
for wilderness protection of the Refuge System. It clearly establishes
that, as we carry out the Service mission, the Refuge System mission
and goals, and the individual refuge establishing purposes in areas
designated as wilderness, we do so in a way that preserves wilderness
character. This policy gives refuge managers uniform direction and
procedures for making decisions regarding conservation and uses of the
Refuge System wilderness areas and incorporates provisions of the
Administration Act. The policy prescribes how the refuge manager
preserves the character and qualities of designated wilderness while
managing for refuge establishing purpose(s), maintaining outstanding
opportunities for solitude or a primitive and unconfined type of
recreation, and conducting minimum requirements analyses before taking
any action in wilderness.
United States Border Security
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has waived all of the
requirements of a number of Federal statutes, including the
Administration Act and the Wilderness Act, with respect to the
construction of roads and fixed and mobile barriers in areas of high
illegal entry in the vicinity of the southwestern U.S. border. See 73
FR 19078 (April 8, 2008). None of the provisions of the Wilderness Act
or the Service's policy on wilderness Stewardship apply to the
activities determined by DHS to fall within the waiver. However, there
may be other activities related to border security that are
geographically removed from the areas of high illegal entry which are
not covered by the DHS waiver. Where such an activity is proposed to be
located within designated wilderness in the Refuge System and is a
generally prohibited use under the Wilderness Act, the Service will
conduct minimum requirement analyses. This will determine whether the
proposed activities are necessary to administer the area as wilderness
and to accomplish the purposes of the refuge, including Wilderness Act
purposes.
Policy Summary
For clarity, we reorganized the content of the policy from seven
chapters, as first published in 2001, into five chapters as explained
in more detail in ``Summary of Comments and Changes to the Final
Policy.'' It is now organized as follows:
Chapter 1 identifies our priorities in implementing the policy,
establishes the responsibility for wilderness stewardship, defines
terms, describes the broad framework within which we manage wilderness,
discusses the philosophical underpinnings of wilderness, and requires
compliance with the requirements of the Wilderness Act. It also
establishes a process for conducting minimum requirement analyses and
establishes training requirements for specific Service employees.
Chapter 2 addresses general administration, natural and cultural
resource management, and public use management in wilderness. It
clarifies the circumstances under which generally prohibited uses
(temporary roads, motor vehicles, motorized equipment, motorboats,
mechanical transport, landing of aircraft, structures, and
installations) may be necessary for wilderness preservation. It
addresses commercial uses, research, and public access. It affirms that
we will generally not modify ecosystems, species population levels, or
natural processes in refuge wilderness unless doing so maintains or
restores biological integrity, diversity, or environmental health that
has been degraded or is necessary to protect or recover threatened or
endangered species. It describes how we respond to wildland fires and
how we may use prescribed fire. It also explains that in wilderness
areas, we will emphasize providing opportunities for solitude or a
primitive and unconfined type of recreation. Appropriate recreational
uses in wilderness include the six wildlife-dependent recreational uses
(hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation) identified in the
Improvement Act if they are compatible and do not involve generally
prohibited uses. The chapter also addresses special needs for persons
with disabilities.
Chapter 3 provides guidance on developing wilderness stewardship
plans (WSP). The WSP is a step-down management plan that provides
detailed strategies and implementation schedules for meeting the
broader wilderness goals and objectives identified in the refuge
comprehensive conservation plan. The WSP also includes minimum
requirement analyses for all refuge management activities and
compatibility determinations for refuge uses in the wilderness area.
Chapter 4 describes the three-part process we follow in conducting
wilderness reviews in accordance with the refuge planning process
outlined in the planning policy (602 FW 1, 3, and 4). We conduct an
inventory to identify areas that meet the basic definition of
wilderness and carry out a study to evaluate all the values, resources,
and uses within the area. The findings of the study determine whether
we will recommend an area for designation as wilderness.
Chapter 5 addresses special provisions of the Alaska National
Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) (16 U.S.C. 4lOhh-3233, 43
U.S.C. 1602-1784) for wilderness stewardship in Alaska. The chapter
consolidates and adds to the provisions that were scattered throughout
the policy in the previous draft.
Summary of Comments and Changes to the Final Policy
We received approximately 4,130 comment letters in response to the
2001 publication in the Federal Register. The comments were from
Federal, State, and local government agencies; nongovernmental
organizations; and individuals. Some comments addressed specific
elements in the draft policy, while many comments expressed general
support without addressing specific elements. We considered all of the
information and recommendations for improvement included in the
comments and made appropriate changes to the draft policy.
In general, we combined chapters 1 and 2 of the proposed policy
into chapter 1 (General Overview); combined chapters 3, 4, and 5 of the
proposed policy into chapter 2 (Wilderness Administration and Resource
Stewardship); renumbered chapter 6 as chapter 3 (Wilderness Stewardship
Planning); and renumbered chapter 7 as chapter 4 (Wilderness Review and
Evaluation). We added a new chapter 5 to cover special provisions for
wilderness in Alaska, which were scattered throughout the draft policy.
Key to Changes From the 2001 Draft Policy to the Final Policy
The following table compares the format of the 2001 draft and final
policies. The table lists each section in chapters 1-5 of the final
policy and indicates whether the section is new or where the
information was located in the 2001 draft policy.
[[Page 67878]]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final policy 2001 Draft policy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1 General Overview of Wilderness Stewardship Policy
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1.1 What is the purpose of Part 610 and this chapter? 1.1.
1.2 What does this chapter cover? 1.2.
1.3 What are the authorities for this policy? 1.3.
1.4 What are the priorities in implementing this policy? New.
1.5 What do these terms mean? 1.6.
1.6 Who is responsible for wilderness stewardship in the Service? 1.4.
1.7 What is wilderness? New.
1.8 What are the purposes of the Wilderness Act? 2.7.
1.9 What is the National Wilderness Preservation System (NWPS)? New.
1.10 How does the Service coordinate stewardship of the NWPS with other Federal 2.19.
agencies?
1.11 How does the Service coordinate wilderness stewardship with State fish arid 1.5.
wildlife agencies?
1.12 What is the broad framework the Service uses to administer wilderness? 2.4.
1.13 What is wilderness character? 2.5.
1.14 What are the principles for administering wilderness? 2.6.
1.15 What is the relationship between wilderness stewardship and compatibility? New.
1.16 What activities does the Service prohibit in wilderness? 2.9, 2.11.
1.17 How do refuge managers accomplish both the establishing purpose(s) of a 2.8.
refuge and the purposes of the Wilderness Act?
1.18 How does the Service determine if a proposed refuge management activity is 2.10, 2.15.
the minimum requirement for administering the area as wilderness and necessary
to accomplish the purposes the refuge, including Wilderness Act purposes?
1.19 When must the Refuge System conduct a minimum requirement analysis? 2.14.
1.20 Who makes minimum requirement decisions? 2.16.
1.21 What is the relationship of the Minimum Requirement Analysis to the New.
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act?
1.22 What effects do emergencies have on the uses generally prohibited by the 2.13.
Wilderness Act?
1.23 What effect does the Department of Homeland Security waiver of the New.
Administration Act and the Wilderness Act have on the uses generally prohibited
by the Wilderness Act?
1.24 What are the training requirements for Refuge System staff? 1.7.
1.25 What are the training requirements for Endangered Species and fisheries and 1.8.
Habitat Conservation staff?
1.26 When should State employees attend wilderness training? 1.9.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 2 Wilderness Administration and Resource Stewardship
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.1 What is the purpose of this chapter? 3.1.
2.2 What does this chapter cover? 3.2.
2.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness stewardship on 3.3.
Service lands?
2.4 What is the Service's general policy for wilderness administration and the 3.4.
stewardship of natural and cultural resources in wilderness?
2.5 Can the Service allow structures and installations in wilderness? 3.5A., 4.13.
2.6 Can the Service allow roads and trails in wilderness? 3.5B. and C., 4.13H.
2.7 Can the Service allow use of motorized vehicles, motorized equipment, and 3.5D.
mechanical transport in wilderness?
2.8 Can the Service manage aircraft use in and over wilderness? 3.6A., 4.6E.
2.9 How does wilderness designation affect existing private rights? New.
2.10 Can the Service authorize access through wilderness to non-Federal land 3.5E.
where rights to access do not exist?
2.11 Can the Service authorize rights-of-way in wilderness? 3.5G.
2.12 Can the Service authorize commercial enterprises and services in wilderness? 3.5F.
2.13 How does the Service manage permits for commercial services? 3.5F.
2.14 Can the Service authorize mineral exploration and development activities in 3.5H.
wilderness areas?
2.15 Will the Service propose names for geographic features in wilderness? 3.51.
2.16 How does the Service conserve wildlife and habitat in 2.12, wilderness? 3.6C.
2.17 Can the Service introduce, transplant, or stock fish, wildlife, and plants 3.6C.(3).
in wilderness?
2.18 Can the Service use livestock grazing as a refuge management economic 3.6C.(2).
activity?
2.19 Can the Service control invasive species, pests, and diseases in wilderness? 3.6C.(4).
2.20 Can the Service control predation in wilderness? 3.6C.(6).
2.21 What is the Service's general policy for managing wilderness fires? 5.4.
2.22 Can the Service manage wildland fire in wilderness? 5.5.
2.23 Can the Service use prescribed fire in wilderness? 5.6.
2.24 How does the Service accomplish emergency stabilization and rehabilitation New.
in wilderness following a wildfire?
2.25 How does the Service protect air resources in wilderness? 3.6.D
2.26 How does the Service protect natural night skies and natural soundscapes in New.
wilderness?
2.27 How does the Service conduct research in wilderness? 3.6.A.
2.28 How does the Service conduct inventory and monitoring 3.6.B, activities in 4.12.
wilderness?
2.29 How does the Service protect cultural resources in wilderness? 3.7.
2.30 What are the Service's general public use guidelines 4.4, for wilderness? 4.5.
2.31 What types of public uses does the Service prohibit in wilderness? 4.6.
2.32 Can the Service allow use and grazing of recreational pack and saddle stock 4.6.C.
in wilderness?
2.33 How does the Service address visitor safety in wilderness? 4.9.
2.34 How does the Service enhance solitude or opportunities for primitive and 4.8.
unconfined recreation in wilderness?
2.35 How can the Service best preserve a quality wilderness experience as well as 4.7.
the wilderness itself?
2.36 How does the Service inform and educate the public about wilderness? 4.10.
2.37 What is the Leave No Trace (LNT) program? 2.17, 4.11.
[[Page 67879]]
2.38 How does the Service address special needs for people with disabilities in 4.14.
wilderness?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 3 Wilderness Stewardship Planning
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.1 What is the purpose of this chapter? 6.1.
3.2 What does this chapter cover? 6.2.
3.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness stewardship on 6.3.
Service lands?
3.4 What is a wilderness stewardship plan (WSP)? 6.4, 6.5.
3.5 Does every wilderness area need a WSP? 6.6.
3.6 Can refuge managers prepare a WSP for wilderness study areas (WSA) New.
recommended for wilderness designation in a finalCCP, recommended wilderness
areas, or proposed wilderness areas?
3.7 Can refuge managers combine other step-down management plans with the WSP? New.
3.8 What should a WSP contain? 6.7.
3.9 How does the Service coordinate with States, other Federal agencies, and New.
tribes in wilderness stewardship planning?
3.10 How does the Service involve the public in wilderness stewardship planning? 6.8.
3.11 How does the Service administer wilderness areas that do not have an 6.9.
approved WSP?
3.12 May the Service decide to implement a WSP that was completed before 6.10.
development of the refuge CCP?
3.13 How frequently should the Service revise WSPs? 6.11.
3.14 How does wilderness stewardship planning work whenService wilderness adjoins 6.12.
wilderness of another Federal agency?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 4 Wilderness Review and Evaluation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.1 What is the purpose of this chapter? 7.1.
4.2 What does this chapter cover? 7.2.
4.3 What are the authorities that directly affect wilderness reviews and 7.3.
management of WSAs, recommended wilderness, and proposed wilderness on Service
lands?
4.4 What is a wilderness review? 7.4.
4.5 When should the Service conduct a wilderness review? 7.5, 7.7.
4.6 How do wilderness reviews relate to acquisition planning? 7.6.
4.7 How does the Service identify WSAs in the wilderness inventory? 7.8.
4.8 How does the Service evaluate the size criteria to identify a WSA during 7.9.
inventory?
4.9 How does the Service evaluate the naturalness criteria to identify a WSA 7.10.
during inventory?
4.10 How does the Service evaluate outstanding opportunities for solitude or a 7.11.
primitive and unconfined type of recreation during inventory?
4.11 Must an area contain ecological, geological, or other features of 7.12.
scientific, educational, scenic, or historic value to qualify as a WSA?
4.12 What factors does the Service consider when conducting a wilderness study? 7.13.
4.13 In the wilderness study, how does the Service evaluate whether a WSA can be New.
effectively managed as wilderness?
4.14 What is the relationship between the wilderness study conclusions and the New.
final CCP decisions?
4.15 What level of NEPA documentation does the Service require for wilderness New.
proposals?
4.16 How does the Service involve stakeholders in wilderness reviews? New.
4.17 What is the process for the Director's review and approval of wilderness 7.14.
recommendations in CCPs?
4.18 What is included in the wilderness study report? 7.15.
4.19 What additional documents does the Service need to prepare for Secretarial 7.16.
approval of the wilderness recommendation?
4.20 What are the steps for forwarding or reporting the Service's wilderness 7.14.
recommendations?
4.21 What is the Service's general policy for managing WSAs? 7.17.
4.22 What is the Service's general policy for managing recommended wilderness? New.
4.23 What is the Service's general policy for managing proposed wilderness? 7.18.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 5 Special Provisions for Alaska Wilderness
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.1 What is the purpose of this chapter? New.
5.2 What does this chapter cover? New.
5.3 How do the other chapters in the Service's wilderness policy (610 FW 1-4) 1.2, 2.2, 3.2, 4.2, 5.2, 6.2,
apply to Alaska wilderness? 7.2.
5.4 How do the special provisions of ANILCA affect the need for a minimum 2.llA., 3.5A.(3), 3.5D.
requirement analysis (MRA) for proposed refuge management activities and
facilities in Alaska wilderness?
5.5 What special provisions apply to public access for traditional activities and 3.5E.(2).
travel to and from villages and homesites?
5.6 What special provisions apply to access to inholdings in Alaska wilderness 3.5E.(1).
areas?
5.7 What special provisions apply to public access to subsistence resources? 2.18.
5.8 What special provisions apply to authorization of temporary access to non- New.
Federal lands?
5.9 What special provisions apply to helicopter access in Alaska wilderness New.
areas?
5.10 What special provisions apply to rights-of-way for transportation and 3.5G.
utility systems in and across Alaska wilderness areas?
5.11 What special provisions apply to assessment, exploration, and development of 3.5H.(1).
mineral resources on Alaska wilderness areas?
5.12 Does the Service allow the use of motorized equipment in Alaska wilderness 3.5D.
areas?
5.13 What provisions apply to commercial enterprises and services in Alaska 3.5F.
wilderness areas?
5.14 What special provisions apply to management of structures and installations 3.5A.
in Alaska wilderness areas?
[[Page 67880]]
5.15 What temporary facilities and equipment related to the taking of fish and 1.6W., 3.5F.(l).
wildlife does the Service authorize in Alaska wilderness areas?
5.16 What special provisions apply to management of fish populations on Alaska New.
wilderness areas?
5.17 Does the Service conduct wilderness reviews of refuge lands in Alaska? New.
5.18 What is the Service's general policy for managing wilderness study areas New.
(WSAs), recommended wilderness, and proposed wilderness in Alaska?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Required Determinations.
Regulatory Planning and Review. The Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) has determined that this policy is significant and has reviewed
this policy under Executive Order 12866 (E.O. 12866). OMB bases its
determination upon the following four criteria:
(a) Whether the policy will have an annual effect of $100 million
or more on the economy or adversely affect an economic sector,
productivity, jobs, the environment, or other units of the government.
(b) Whether the policy will create inconsistencies with other
Federal agencies' actions.
(c) Whether the policy will materially affect entitlements, grants,
user fees, loan programs, or the rights and obligations of their
recipients.
(d) Whether the policy raises novel legal or policy issues.
Regulatory Flexibility Act. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(as amended by the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
{SBREFA{time} of 1996) (5 U.S.C. 601, et seq.), whenever a Federal
agency is required to publish a notice of rulemaking for any proposed
or final policy, it must prepare and make available for public comment
a regulatory flexibility analysis that describes the effect of the
policy on small entities (i.e., small businesses, small organizations,
and small government jurisdictions). However, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required if the head of an agency certifies that the policy
would not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities. Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis to be
required, impacts must exceed a threshold for ``significant impact''
and a threshold for a ``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5
U.S.C. 605(b). SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require
Federal agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for
certifying that a policy would not have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities.
This policy is administrative, legal, technical, and procedural in
nature and provides updated instructions for the maintenance of
wilderness areas on the National Wildlife Refuge System. This policy
does not increase the types of recreation allowed on the System but
establishes an emphasis on the characteristics desired for a wilderness
experience. As a result, there may be opportunities for an increase in
wilderness experiences on national wildlife refuges with designated
wilderness areas. The changes in the wilderness areas are likely to
increase visitor activity on these national wildlife refuges.
From 1999 to 2003, the number of wilderness visitors averaged
501,147 visitors annually, comprising about 1.3 percent of all refuge
visitors. There are insufficient data to provide more than broad
estimates about the effects of this updated policy on public use of
wilderness areas on national wildlife refuges. The Service expects that
refuges that improve the quality of their wilderness areas, and thereby
increase the opportunities for high-quality wilderness experiences,
will see an increase in public use. With this policy, the Service
estimates that on balance there will be up to a 10 percent increase in
the public's use of wilderness areas on refuges. Thus, we expect an
increase of approximately 50,115 wilderness visitors annually.
New recreational user days generate expenditures associated with
recreational activities on refuges' wilderness areas. Due to the
unavailability of site-specific expenditure data, we use the national
estimates from the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and
Wildlife Associated Recreation to identify expenditures for food and
lodging, transportation, and other incidental expenses. Using the
average trip-related expenditures for fishing, hunting, and wildlife
watching activities with the maximum expected additional participation
on the Refuge System yields approximately $1.8 million in wilderness-
related expenditures (50,115 days x $35.35 per day).
By having ripple effects throughout the economy, these direct
expenditures are only part of the economic impact of wilderness
recreation. Using an average national impact multiplier for hunting and
fishing activities (2.72) derived from the reports ``Economic
Importance of Hunting in America'' and ``Sportfishing in America'' for
the estimated increase in direct expenditures yields a total economic
impact of approximately $4.8 million (2007 dollars) (Southwick
Associates, Inc., 2007). (Using a local impact multiplier would yield
more accurate and smaller results. However, we employed the national
impact multiplier due to the difficulty in developing local multipliers
for each specific region.)
Since we know that most of the fishing and hunting occurs within
100 miles of a participant's residence, then it is unlikely that most
of this spending would be ``new'' money coming into a local economy;
therefore, this spending would be offset with a decrease in some other
sector of the local economy. The net gain to the local economies would
be no more than $4.8 million, and most likely considerably less. Since
80 percent of the participants travel less than 100 miles to engage in
hunting and fishing activities, their spending patterns would not add
new money into the local economy. Furthermore, the probability of all
refuges with wilderness programs being upgraded to true wilderness
characteristics, as defined by Congress, is very low. Resource
constraints have kept these refuges from upgrading wilderness
experiences and it is unlikely that this updated policy will cause all
refuges with wilderness designation to upgrade their programs
immediately. As a result, the real impact would be on the order of
$964,000 annually.
Many small businesses within the retail trade industry (such as
hotels, gas stations, taxidermy shops, bait and tackle shops, etc.) may
benefit from increased refuge visitation. A large percentage of these
retail trade establishments near the refuges most likely qualify as
small businesses. We expect that the incremental recreational
opportunities will be scattered across the refuges that offer
wilderness recreational opportunities, and so we do not expect that the
policy will have a significant economic effect (benefit) on a
substantial number of small entities in any region or nationally.
With the small increase in overall spending anticipated from this
policy, it
[[Page 67881]]
is unlikely that a substantial number of small entities will have more
than a small benefit from the increased spending near the affected
refuges. Therefore, we certify that this policy will not have a
significant economic effect on a substantial number of small entities
as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
An initial/final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is not required.
Accordingly, a Small Entity Compliance Guide is not required.
Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act. The policy is
not a major policy under 5 U.S.C. 804(2), the Small Business Regulatory
Enforcement Fairness Act. This policy:
a. Does not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million or
more. The addition of some wilderness experience opportunities at
refuges would generate expenditures by wilderness participants with an
economic impact estimated at $964,000 million per year. Consequently,
the maximum benefit of this policy for businesses both small and large
would not be sufficient to make this a major policy. The impact would
be scattered across the country and would most likely not be
significant in any local area.
b. Will not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers, individual industries, Federal, State, or local government
agencies, or geographic regions. This policy will have a small effect
on the expenditures of new participants for wilderness opportunities of
Americans. Under the assumption that all wilderness opportunities would
be of high quality, participants would be attracted to the refuge
system. If the refuge were closer to the participant's residence than
alternative sources of wilderness experiences then a reduction in
travel costs would occur and benefit the participants. The Service does
not have information to quantify this reduction in travel cost but has
to assume that since most people travel less than 100 miles to hunt and
fish, that the reduced travel cost would be small for the additional
days of wilderness activities generated by this policy. This policy is
not expected to significantly affect the supply or demand for
wilderness opportunities in the U.S. and therefore should not affect
prices for equipment and supplies, or the retailers that sell
equipment. Refuge system wilderness opportunities account for a small
portion of the wilderness opportunities available in the contiguous
United States.
c. Does not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S. based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises.
Because this policy represents such a small proportion of wildlife
related recreational spending, there will be no measurable economic
effect on the wildlife-dependent industry which has annual sales of
equipment and travel expenditures of $72 billion nationwide. Refuge
visitors averaged 501,147 visits to refuges for wilderness activities
from 1999 to 2003 compared to 37.1 million visitors for all activities
on refuge system lands. This policy seeks to preserve wilderness
characteristics for those participants who want this experience and is
aimed at providing guidance to Federal managers in establishing quality
programs where the opportunity exists for wilderness programs. Refuges
that have or establish wilderness programs may hire additional staff
from the local community to assist with the programs but this would not
be a significant increase with a total of 66 refuges participating.
Consequently, there is no significant employment or small business
effects.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. In accordance with the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1501, et seq.):
a. This policy will not ``significantly or uniquely'' affect small
governments. A Small Government Agency Plan is not required. See
B(1)(a).
b. This policy will not produce a Federal mandate of $100 million
or greater in any year, i.e., it is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. V Takings. In
accordance with Executive Order 12630, the policy does not have
significant takings implications. A takings implication assessment is
not required. This policy will not change the ability of inholders to
access their property, although it may affect the way in which they may
access it. Depending on the specifics of the easements of record,
outstanding rights-of-way, enabling legislation, or other rights
granted by law, inholders may be required to modify their modify their:
routes of entry so that access will be through a non-wilderness area;
method of access, and use non-motorized means; or time of entry, to
disturb the fewest wilderness users.
Federalism. As discussed in B(1)a, this policy does not have
significant Federalism effects to warrant the preparation of a
Federalism Assessment under Executive Order 12612. This policy will not
have substantial direct effects on the States, in their relationship
between the Federal Government and the States, or on the distribution
of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government.
Civil Justice Reform. In accordance with Executive Order 12988, it
has been determined that the policy does not unduly burden the judicial
system and meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of the
Order. The policy will clarify established policy and result in better
understanding of the policies by refuge wilderness visitors.
Paperwork Reduction Act. This policy does not require any
information collection from 10 or more parties and a submission under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 is not required.
National Environmental Policy Act. We have analyzed this policy in
accordance with the criteria of the National Environmental Policy Act
and 40 CFR 1508. This policy does not constitute a major Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. This
policy is administrative, legal, technical, and procedural in nature
and provides updated instructions for the stewardship of wilderness
areas on the National Wildlife Refuge System. The environmental effects
are too speculative or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful
analysis and will later be subjected to the NEPA process on a case-by-
case basis. Extraordinary circumstances may exist for individual
actions that may occur in implementing this policy that would
constitute an exception to the categorical exclusion of the policy as a
whole. Again, those individual actions will be subject to future NEPA
analysis. An environmental assessment is not required at this time.
(See B(1)d.)
Wilderness stewardship plans will need to be developed for all
refuges with wilderness. These plans will either be incorporated
directly into refuge comprehensive conservation plans or as step-down
management plans, pursuant to our refuge planning guidance in 602 FW 1-
3. We prepare these plans in compliance with section 102(2)(C) of NEPA,
and the Council on Environmental Quality's regulations for implementing
NEPA in 40 CFR parts 1500-1508. We invite the affected public to
participate in the review, development, and implementation of these
plans.
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) and 512 DM 2 we have evaluated possible effects on Federally-
recognized
[[Page 67882]]
Indian tribes and have determined that there are no effects. We
coordinate wilderness use on national wildlife refuges with Tribal
governments having adjoining or overlapping jurisdiction.
Dated: November 7, 2008.
Rowan W. Gould,
Acting Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E8-27014 Filed 11-14-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M