Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Revised Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), 56131-56133 [2010-22861]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 15, 2010 / Notices
species of native shrimp. The refuge’s
volunteer program administers collegelevel educational programs and habitat
restoration activities on the unit. The
unit is closed to the general public.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd–668ee) (Refuge Administration
Act), as amended by the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997, requires us to develop a
CCP for each national wildlife refuge.
The purpose for developing a CCP is to
provide refuge managers with a 15-year
plan for achieving refuge purposes and
contributing toward the mission of the
National Wildlife Refuge System,
consistent with sound principles of fish
and wildlife management, conservation,
legal mandates, and our policies. In
addition to outlining broad management
direction on conserving wildlife and
their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities
available to the public, including
opportunities for hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation and photography,
and environmental education and
interpretation. We will review and
update the CCP at least every 15 years
in accordance with the Refuge
Administration Act.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Public Outreach
We began the public scoping phase of
the CCP planning process by publishing
a Notice of Intent (NOI) in the Federal
Register on December 1, 2008 (73 FR
72826), announcing our intention to
complete a CCP/EA for the James
Campbell and Pearl Harbor National
Wildlife Refuges. Simultaneously, we
released Planning Update 1. We invited
the public to two open house meetings
and requested public comments in the
NOI and in Planning Update 1. We held
the public open house meetings, in
Pearl City, Hawai‘i, on December 9,
2008, and in Kahuku, Hawai‘i, on
January 8, 2009. In Planning Update 2,
distributed in June 2009, we provided a
summary of the comments we received
and described refuge resources. We
considered all of the public comments
we received to date during development
of the Draft CCP/EA. We will announce
the public comment period for the
James Campbell National Wildlife
Refuge Draft CCP/EA in fall 2010.
Draft CCP Alternatives We Are
Considering
We drafted two alternatives for
managing the Pearl Harbor Refuge.
Under both alternatives entry into the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:57 Sep 14, 2010
Jkt 220001
fenced portions of the refuge units will
continue by special use permit. The
Betty Bliss Memorial Overlook will be
constructed outside the Honouliuli
Unit’s fence, to provide year-round
interpretation, wildlife viewing, and
photography opportunities. The coastal
foot trail outside the Kalaeloa Unit’s
fence will remain open to the public for
shoreline fishing. Both alternatives
would protect threatened and
endangered species and cultural
resources. Brief descriptions of the
alternatives follow.
Alternative A
Under Alternative A, we would
continue the current level of
management. On the wetlands of the
Honouliuli and Waiawa Units, we
would continue to control predators and
manage and protect habitat for
endangered Hawaiian waterbirds, as
part of the Statewide effort to
implement the Hawaiian Waterbird
Recovery Plan. Under Alternative A,
control of invasive plant species would
be modest, and intensive predator
control would continue. On the
Kalaeloa Unit, we would continue to
restore and manage endangered plants
and control invasive plants at the
current level. Protection would continue
for 14 existing anchialine pools on the
Kalaeloa Unit, but no additional pools
would be restored. We would continue
to cooperate with the Bishop Museum’s
effort to catalog avian and other fossil
remains from the pools.
Alternative B
Under Alternative B, our preferred
alternative, we would focus
management efforts at the Kalaeloa Unit
on increasing the restoration of native
and rare coralline plain habitat. We
would increase the existing 25-acre
restoration area to 37 acres. Controlling
and reducing invasive plants, and
establishing native plants, including the
‘akoko and ‘Ewa hinahina, would be
emphasized. We would develop a foot
trail system, protect 14 existing
anchialine pools, identify up to 30
additional pool sites for potential
restoration, and continue with
experimental translocation of
endangered damselflies (pinapinao) to
suitable habitat in the anchialine pools.
We would also expand volunteer,
research, and environmental education
opportunities, including working with
the Bishop Museum and the
Smithsonian Institute to pursue an indepth paleontological study of the entire
unit.
On the Honouliuli and Waiawa Units,
our focus would be on an increased
level of wetland management to
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56131
improve the units’ overall capacity to
support endangered waterbirds. Under
this Alternative B, water level and
vegetation management, invasive
species control, including predator
control, would be improved or
increased as part of the Statewide effort
to implement the Hawaiian Waterbird
Recovery Plan. On the Honouliuli Unit,
we would remove mangrove on 5 acres
to improve and maintain intertidal
mudflat habitat, and determine the
feasibility of installing a predator-proof
fence. On the Waiawa Unit, we would
work with partners and neighbors to
determine the feasibility of developing
an additional refuge overlook.
Public Availability of Documents
We encourage you to stay involved in
the CCP planning process by reviewing
and commenting on the proposals we
have developed in the Draft CCP/EA.
Copies of the Draft CCP/EA are available
by request from David Ellis or via the
Internet (see ADDRESSES).
Next Steps
After this comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them in the final CCP/EA.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address,
telephone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information
in your comment, you should be aware
that your entire comment—including
your personal identifying information—
may be made publicly available at any
time. While you can ask us in your
comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public
review, we cannot guarantee that we
will be able to do so.
Dated: September 10, 2010.
David Patte,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, Portland,
Oregon.
[FR Doc. 2010–23102 Filed 9–14–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R1–ES–2010–N184; 10120–1113–
0000–C2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Draft Revised Recovery
Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl
(Strix occidentalis caurina)
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of document availability
for review and comment.
AGENCY:
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
56132
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 15, 2010 / Notices
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce the
availability of the Draft Revised
Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted
Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), a
northwestern U.S. species listed as
threatened under the Endangered
Species Act (Act). The Act requires the
development of recovery plans for listed
species, unless such a plan would not
promote the conservation of a particular
species. Recovery plans help guide
conservation efforts by describing
actions considered necessary for the
recovery of the species, establishing
criteria for downlisting or delisting
listed species, and estimating time and
cost for implementing the measures
needed for recovery. We invite public
review and comment on the Draft
Revised Recovery Plan.
DATES: We must receive comments on
the draft revised recovery plan on or
before November 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the
draft revised recovery plan are available
online at: https://www.fws.gov/
endangered/species/recovery-plans.html
and https://www.fws.gov/species/nso.
Printed copies of the draft revised
recovery plan are available by request
from the Field Supervisor, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and
Wildlife Office, 2600 SE. 98th Avenue,
Ste. 100, Portland, OR 97266 (phone:
503/231–6179). Written comments and
materials regarding this recovery plan
should be addressed to the above
Portland address or sent by e-mail to:
NSORPComments@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Brendan White, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, at the above address and
phone number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Background
Recovery of endangered or threatened
animals and plants is a primary goal of
our endangered species program and the
Endangered Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C.
1531 et seq.). Recovery means
improvement of the status of listed
species to the point at which listing is
no longer necessary under the criteria
set out in section 4(a)(1) of the Act.
The Act requires the development of
recovery plans for listed species unless
such a plan would not promote the
conservation of a particular species.
Recovery plans help guide conservation
efforts by describing such site-specific
management actions as may be
necessary to achieve the plan’s goal for
the conservation and survival of the
species, establishing criteria for
delisting in accordance with the
provisions of ESA Section 4, and
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:57 Sep 14, 2010
Jkt 220001
estimating the time and cost for
implementing those measures needed to
achieve the plan’s goal and to achieve
intermediate steps toward that goal.
Section 4(f) of the Act requires that
public notice and an opportunity for
public review and comment be provided
during recovery plan development. We
will consider all comments we receive
during the public comment period on
the substance of the recovery plan.
Comments regarding recovery plan
implementation will be forwarded to
appropriate Federal or other entities so
that they can take them into account
during the course of implementing
recovery actions. Responses to
individual commenters will not be
provided, but we will provide a
summary of how we addressed
substantive comments in an appendix to
the final recovery plan.
The northern spotted owl (hereafter,
spotted owl) was Federally listed as a
threatened species on June 26, 1990 (55
FR 26114). The current range of the
spotted owl extends from southwest
British Columbia through the Cascade
Mountains, coastal ranges, and
intervening forested lands in
Washington, Oregon, and California, as
far south as Marin County. Spotted owls
generally rely on older forested habitats
because such forests contain the
structures and characteristics required
for nesting, roosting, and foraging.
Features that support nesting and
roosting typically include a moderateto-high forest canopy closure (60 to 90
percent); a multi-layered, multi-species
forest canopy with large overstory trees;
a high incidence of large trees with
various deformities (large cavities,
broken tops, mistletoe infections, and
other evidence of decadence); large
snags; large accumulations of fallen
trees and other woody debris on the
ground; and sufficient open space below
the forest canopy for spotted owls to fly.
Foraging habitat generally has attributes
similar to nesting and roosting habitat,
but may also include areas with less
structural diversity and lower canopy
cover.
The spotted owl was listed as
threatened throughout its range due to
the loss of suitable habitat to timber
harvesting, exacerbated by catastrophic
events such as fire and wind storms.
Today we recognize past habitat loss,
current habitat loss, and competition
from barred owls (Strix varia) as the
most pressing threats to spotted owl
persistence. The recovery actions in this
draft revised recovery plan are designed
to address these and other threats
within the range of the spotted owl.
The draft revised plan prioritizes
recovery tasks aimed at: (1) Maintaining
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
and managing for an adequate amount
of spotted owl habitat across the
species’ range through active forest
restoration and management, where
appropriate; (2) restoring natural
processes in the dry-forest landscapes
such that the impacts of habitat loss
through fire are minimized; and (3)
conducting large-scale experiments on
the effects of barred owl removal in
areas where the two species co-occur.
The goal of this recovery plan is to
improve the status of the spotted owl so
it no longer requires the protections of
the Endangered Species Act.
In May of 2008 we published the
Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted
Owl and announced its availability in
the Federal Register (May 21, 2008; 73
FR 29471). The 2008 Recovery Plan
formed the basis for our revised
designation of spotted owl critical
habitat, which we published in the
Federal Register on August 13, 2008 (73
FR 47325). Both the 2008 critical habitat
designation and the 2008 recovery plan
were challenged in court. Carpenters’
Industrial Council v. Salazar, Case No.
1:08-cv-01409-EGS (D.DC). In addition,
on December 15, 2008, the Inspector
General of the Department of the
Interior issued a report entitled
‘‘Investigative Report of The Endangered
Species Act and the Conflict between
Science and Policy’’ which concluded
that the integrity of the agency decisionmaking process for the spotted owl
recovery plan was potentially
jeopardized by improper political
influence. As a result, the Federal
government filed a motion in the
lawsuit for remand of the 2008 recovery
plan and critical habitat designation. On
September 1, 2010, the Court issued an
opinion remanding the 2008 recovery
plan to us for issuance of a revised plan
within nine months. The Court also
indicated that it will remand the 2008
critical habitat designation pending
resolution of a schedule for a new
rulemaking. This notice is part of the
process to consider revisions to the 2008
recovery plan.
The draft revised recovery plan is
based on a review of all relevant
biology, including new scientific
information that has become available
and critical peer-review comments we
received on the 2008 Recovery Plan
from three professional scientific
associations: The Wildlife Society, the
American Ornithologists’ Union, and
The Society for Conservation Biology.
Like several previous plans for
conserving and recovering the spotted
owl, the 2008 Recovery Plan
recommended a network of large habitat
blocks, or Managed Owl Conservation
Areas (MOCAs), intended to support
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 178 / Wednesday, September 15, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
long-term recovery of the species. The
peer-review comments, however, were
critical of this network for several
reasons, including that we did not use
updated modeling techniques to design
the network and assess its efficacy.
The draft revised recovery plan
focuses on six main topics: (1)
Adequacy of spotted owl habitat
reserves on the west side of the Cascade
Mountains, (2) lack of habitat reserves
on the east side of the Cascade
Mountains, (3) the role of non-Federal
lands in spotted owl recovery, (4)
adequacy of the existing strategy for
conservation of dispersal habitat, (5)
protection of high-quality habitat, and
(6) protection of occupied spotted owl
sites.
The draft revised recovery plan is
different from the 2008 Recovery Plan in
several respects. We are conducting a
scientifically rigorous, multi-step, rangewide modeling effort to design a habitat
conservation network and assess its
ability to provide for long-term recovery
of the spotted owl. Consequently, we are
not proposing to rely on the MOCA
network recommended in the 2008
Recovery Plan and will instead use the
model results to help evaluate several
habitat conservation network scenarios.
Until the barred owl threat is reduced,
the draft revised plan recommends
maintaining all occupied sites and
unoccupied high-quality spotted owl
habitat on all lands within the range of
the spotted owl. The draft revised plan
also recognizes the possibility of
needing additional conservation
contributions from non-Federal lands.
Finally, the draft revised plan affirms
our support for forest restoration
management actions that are neutral or
beneficial to spotted owl recovery.
Request for Public Comments
We invite written comments on the
draft revised recovery plan. While all
comments we receive by the date
specified above will be considered in
developing a final revised recovery
plan, we encourage commenters to focus
on those portions of the recovery plan
that have been revised, particularly
those topics noted above. Comments
and materials we receive will be
available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the Oregon Fish and Wildlife
Office in Portland (see ADDRESSES).
Before including your address, phone
number, e-mail address, or other
personal identifying information in your
comment, you should be aware that
your entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—may
be made publicly available at any time.
While you can ask us in your comment
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:57 Sep 14, 2010
Jkt 220001
to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so.
Authority
The authority for this action is section
4(f) of the Endangered Species Act, 16
U.S.C. 1533 (f).
Dated: September 2, 2010.
David Patte,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–22861 Filed 9–14–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R4–R–2010–N035; 40136–1265–0000–
S3]
Savannah Coastal Refuges’ Complex,
GA and SC
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: Draft
comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive
conservation plan and environmental
assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for the
Savannah Coastal Refuges’ Complex
(Complex) for public review and
comment. In this Draft CCP/EA, we
describe the alternative we propose to
use to manage this Complex for the 15
years following approval of the final
CCP. The Complex consists of the
following refuges: Pinckney Island;
Savannah; Tybee; Wassaw; Harris Neck;
Blackbeard Island; and Wolf Island. A
separate CCP was prepared for the Wolf
Island National Wildlife Refuge.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we
must receive your written comments by
October 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of
the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Ms.
Laura Housh, via U.S. mail at
Okefenokee NWR, 2700 Suwannee
Canal Road, Folkston, GA 31537, or via
e-mail at laura_housh@fws.gov.
Alternatively, you may download the
document from our Internet site at
https://southeast.fws.gov/planning under
‘‘Draft Documents.’’ Submit comments
on the Draft CCP/EA to the above postal
address or e-mail address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Laura Housh, Refuge Planner,
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
56133
telephone: 912/496–7366, ext. 244; fax:
912/496–3322.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP
process for the Savannah Coastal
Refuges’ Complex. We started the
process through a notice in the Federal
Register on May 19, 2008 (73 FR 28838).
For more about the Complex and this
process, please see that notice.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd–668ee), as amended by the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to
develop a CCP for each national wildlife
refuge. The purpose for developing a
CCP is to provide refuge managers with
a 15-year plan for achieving refuge
purposes and contributing toward the
mission of the National Wildlife Refuge
System, consistent with sound
principles of fish and wildlife
management, conservation, legal
mandates, and our policies. In addition
to outlining broad management
direction on conserving wildlife and
their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities
available to the public, including
opportunities for hunting, fishing,
wildlife observation, wildlife
photography, and environmental
education and interpretation. We will
review and update the CCP at least
every 15 years in accordance with the
Administration Act.
CCP Alternatives, Including our
Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for
managing the Complex and chose
Alternative B as the proposed
alternative. A full description of each
alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We
summarize each alternative below.
Alternative A—No Action Alternative
This alternative is the ‘‘no-action’’ or
‘‘status quo’’ alternative in which no
major management changes would be
initiated by the Service. Management
emphasis would continue to focus on
maintaining biological integrity of
habitats found on each refuge. Under
this alternative, we would protect and
maintain all refuge lands, primarily
focusing on the needs of threatened and
endangered species, with additional
emphasis on the needs of migratory
birds and resident wildlife.
We would continue mandated
activities for protection of federally
E:\FR\FM\15SEN1.SGM
15SEN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 178 (Wednesday, September 15, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 56131-56133]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22861]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R1-ES-2010-N184; 10120-1113-0000-C2]
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Draft Revised
Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina)
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of document availability for review and comment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 56132]]
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the
availability of the Draft Revised Recovery Plan for the Northern
Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), a northwestern U.S. species
listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (Act). The Act
requires the development of recovery plans for listed species, unless
such a plan would not promote the conservation of a particular species.
Recovery plans help guide conservation efforts by describing actions
considered necessary for the recovery of the species, establishing
criteria for downlisting or delisting listed species, and estimating
time and cost for implementing the measures needed for recovery. We
invite public review and comment on the Draft Revised Recovery Plan.
DATES: We must receive comments on the draft revised recovery plan on
or before November 15, 2010.
ADDRESSES: Electronic copies of the draft revised recovery plan are
available online at: https://www.fws.gov/endangered/species/recovery-plans.html and https://www.fws.gov/species/nso. Printed copies of the
draft revised recovery plan are available by request from the Field
Supervisor, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife
Office, 2600 SE. 98th Avenue, Ste. 100, Portland, OR 97266 (phone: 503/
231-6179). Written comments and materials regarding this recovery plan
should be addressed to the above Portland address or sent by e-mail to:
NSORPComments@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brendan White, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, at the above address and phone number.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Recovery of endangered or threatened animals and plants is a
primary goal of our endangered species program and the Endangered
Species Act (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). Recovery means improvement
of the status of listed species to the point at which listing is no
longer necessary under the criteria set out in section 4(a)(1) of the
Act.
The Act requires the development of recovery plans for listed
species unless such a plan would not promote the conservation of a
particular species. Recovery plans help guide conservation efforts by
describing such site-specific management actions as may be necessary to
achieve the plan's goal for the conservation and survival of the
species, establishing criteria for delisting in accordance with the
provisions of ESA Section 4, and estimating the time and cost for
implementing those measures needed to achieve the plan's goal and to
achieve intermediate steps toward that goal.
Section 4(f) of the Act requires that public notice and an
opportunity for public review and comment be provided during recovery
plan development. We will consider all comments we receive during the
public comment period on the substance of the recovery plan. Comments
regarding recovery plan implementation will be forwarded to appropriate
Federal or other entities so that they can take them into account
during the course of implementing recovery actions. Responses to
individual commenters will not be provided, but we will provide a
summary of how we addressed substantive comments in an appendix to the
final recovery plan.
The northern spotted owl (hereafter, spotted owl) was Federally
listed as a threatened species on June 26, 1990 (55 FR 26114). The
current range of the spotted owl extends from southwest British
Columbia through the Cascade Mountains, coastal ranges, and intervening
forested lands in Washington, Oregon, and California, as far south as
Marin County. Spotted owls generally rely on older forested habitats
because such forests contain the structures and characteristics
required for nesting, roosting, and foraging. Features that support
nesting and roosting typically include a moderate-to-high forest canopy
closure (60 to 90 percent); a multi-layered, multi-species forest
canopy with large overstory trees; a high incidence of large trees with
various deformities (large cavities, broken tops, mistletoe infections,
and other evidence of decadence); large snags; large accumulations of
fallen trees and other woody debris on the ground; and sufficient open
space below the forest canopy for spotted owls to fly. Foraging habitat
generally has attributes similar to nesting and roosting habitat, but
may also include areas with less structural diversity and lower canopy
cover.
The spotted owl was listed as threatened throughout its range due
to the loss of suitable habitat to timber harvesting, exacerbated by
catastrophic events such as fire and wind storms. Today we recognize
past habitat loss, current habitat loss, and competition from barred
owls (Strix varia) as the most pressing threats to spotted owl
persistence. The recovery actions in this draft revised recovery plan
are designed to address these and other threats within the range of the
spotted owl.
The draft revised plan prioritizes recovery tasks aimed at: (1)
Maintaining and managing for an adequate amount of spotted owl habitat
across the species' range through active forest restoration and
management, where appropriate; (2) restoring natural processes in the
dry-forest landscapes such that the impacts of habitat loss through
fire are minimized; and (3) conducting large-scale experiments on the
effects of barred owl removal in areas where the two species co-occur.
The goal of this recovery plan is to improve the status of the spotted
owl so it no longer requires the protections of the Endangered Species
Act.
In May of 2008 we published the Recovery Plan for the Northern
Spotted Owl and announced its availability in the Federal Register (May
21, 2008; 73 FR 29471). The 2008 Recovery Plan formed the basis for our
revised designation of spotted owl critical habitat, which we published
in the Federal Register on August 13, 2008 (73 FR 47325). Both the 2008
critical habitat designation and the 2008 recovery plan were challenged
in court. Carpenters' Industrial Council v. Salazar, Case No. 1:08-cv-
01409-EGS (D.DC). In addition, on December 15, 2008, the Inspector
General of the Department of the Interior issued a report entitled
``Investigative Report of The Endangered Species Act and the Conflict
between Science and Policy'' which concluded that the integrity of the
agency decision-making process for the spotted owl recovery plan was
potentially jeopardized by improper political influence. As a result,
the Federal government filed a motion in the lawsuit for remand of the
2008 recovery plan and critical habitat designation. On September 1,
2010, the Court issued an opinion remanding the 2008 recovery plan to
us for issuance of a revised plan within nine months. The Court also
indicated that it will remand the 2008 critical habitat designation
pending resolution of a schedule for a new rulemaking. This notice is
part of the process to consider revisions to the 2008 recovery plan.
The draft revised recovery plan is based on a review of all
relevant biology, including new scientific information that has become
available and critical peer-review comments we received on the 2008
Recovery Plan from three professional scientific associations: The
Wildlife Society, the American Ornithologists' Union, and The Society
for Conservation Biology. Like several previous plans for conserving
and recovering the spotted owl, the 2008 Recovery Plan recommended a
network of large habitat blocks, or Managed Owl Conservation Areas
(MOCAs), intended to support
[[Page 56133]]
long-term recovery of the species. The peer-review comments, however,
were critical of this network for several reasons, including that we
did not use updated modeling techniques to design the network and
assess its efficacy.
The draft revised recovery plan focuses on six main topics: (1)
Adequacy of spotted owl habitat reserves on the west side of the
Cascade Mountains, (2) lack of habitat reserves on the east side of the
Cascade Mountains, (3) the role of non-Federal lands in spotted owl
recovery, (4) adequacy of the existing strategy for conservation of
dispersal habitat, (5) protection of high-quality habitat, and (6)
protection of occupied spotted owl sites.
The draft revised recovery plan is different from the 2008 Recovery
Plan in several respects. We are conducting a scientifically rigorous,
multi-step, range-wide modeling effort to design a habitat conservation
network and assess its ability to provide for long-term recovery of the
spotted owl. Consequently, we are not proposing to rely on the MOCA
network recommended in the 2008 Recovery Plan and will instead use the
model results to help evaluate several habitat conservation network
scenarios. Until the barred owl threat is reduced, the draft revised
plan recommends maintaining all occupied sites and unoccupied high-
quality spotted owl habitat on all lands within the range of the
spotted owl. The draft revised plan also recognizes the possibility of
needing additional conservation contributions from non-Federal lands.
Finally, the draft revised plan affirms our support for forest
restoration management actions that are neutral or beneficial to
spotted owl recovery.
Request for Public Comments
We invite written comments on the draft revised recovery plan.
While all comments we receive by the date specified above will be
considered in developing a final revised recovery plan, we encourage
commenters to focus on those portions of the recovery plan that have
been revised, particularly those topics noted above. Comments and
materials we receive will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at the Oregon Fish and
Wildlife Office in Portland (see ADDRESSES).
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Authority
The authority for this action is section 4(f) of the Endangered
Species Act, 16 U.S.C. 1533 (f).
Dated: September 2, 2010.
David Patte,
Acting Regional Director, Region 1, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-22861 Filed 9-14-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
