Proposed Amendment of Habitat Conservation Plan and Associated Documents; Green Diamond Resource Company; Mason, Grays Harbor, Lewis, Pacific, and Thurston Counties, WA, 22278-22280 [2013-08766]

Download as PDF 22278 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 72 / Monday, April 15, 2013 / Notices respondents, frequency of response, and hours of response: The total number of annual burden hours is 226.5. The number of respondents is 151, the number of responses is 302, the frequency of response is semi-annually (6 months), and the burden hour per response is 0.75 (45 minutes). Status of the proposed information collection: This is a new information collection request. Authority: The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C., Chapter 35, as amended. Dated: April 5, 2013. Shelley Poticha, Director, Office of Sustainable Housing and Communities. [FR Doc. 2013–08808 Filed 4–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210–67–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R1–ES–2013–N085; FXES11120100000–134–FF01E00000] Proposed Amendment of Habitat Conservation Plan and Associated Documents; Green Diamond Resource Company; Mason, Grays Harbor, Lewis, Pacific, and Thurston Counties, WA Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments. AGENCY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have received an application, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as amended, from Green Diamond Resource Company (GDRCo) for a proposed loweffect amendment to their Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and Implementation Agreement (IA). If approved, the GDRCo incidental take permit (ITP), as well as the HCP and IA, would be amended to increase the amount of lands covered under the ITP and HCP; some of the HCP management prescriptions would change, including those associated with marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) habitat protection; and the IA would be amended to include a new clause and a new marbled murrelet habitat map. The amendment would change the management of GDRCo’s added lands from prescriptions currently required under the standard Washington State Forest Practices Rules (FP Rules) and Forest Practices HCP (FP HCP) to those of the GDRCo HCP. We invite public comment on the proposed amendment sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:00 Apr 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 of the ITP, HCP, IA, and associated documents. DATES: To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by May 15, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may download a copy of the permit application, HCP, and associated documents on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/wafwo/. The proposed amendment to the HCP and IA and the Draft Environmental Action Statement are available for review and comment. The original HCP, IA, and Final Environmental Impact Statement are available for review. Please specify permit number TE032463–0 on all correspondence. You may submit comments or requests for hard copies or a CD–ROM of the documents by one of the following methods: • Email: Louellyn_Jones@fws.gov. Include ‘‘Permit Number TE032463–0’’ in the subject line of the message. • Facsimile: Ken Berg, Manager, 360– 753–9405; Attn.: Lou Ellyn Jones, Permit number TE032463–0. • U.S. Mail: Please address written comments to Ken Berg, Manager; Attention: Lou Ellyn Jones; Washington Fish and Wildlife Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 510 Desmond Drive SE., Lacey, WA 98503. • In-Person: Written comments can be dropped off during regular business hours (8 a.m.–4:30 p.m.) at the above address. Call Lou Ellyn Jones, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at (360) 753–5822 to make an appointment to view or pick up draft documents. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lou Ellyn Jones, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at address under ADDRESSES, above; by email at Louellyn_Jones@fws.gov; or by telephone at (360) 753–5822. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and our implementing Federal regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR 17 prohibit the ‘‘take’’ of fish or wildlife species listed as endangered or threatened. Take of listed fish or wildlife is defined under the Act as ‘‘to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct’’ (16 U.S.C. 1532). However, under section 10 of the Act, for limited circumstances, we issue permits to authorize incidental take of threatened or endangered species—i.e., take that is incidental to, and not the purpose of, the carrying out of otherwise lawful activities. A permit to take bald eagles can also be issued under the Act when associated with a conservation PO 00000 Frm 00054 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 plan such as an HCP, as long as the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668–668c) standards are met. Regulations governing incidental take permits for threatened and endangered species are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 17.22, respectively. Regulations governing take of bald eagles are at 50 CFR 22. In addition to meeting other criteria, an incidental take permit must not jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed threatened or endangered species, and authorized take of bald eagles must be consistent with the goal of maintaining stable or increasing breeding populations of this species. Introduction The GDRCo has requested an amendment to the HCP, IA, and ITP originally issued on October 13, 2000, with a term of 50 years. The species covered under the existing and amended ITP would remain the same; however, for some species, listing status has changed since the permit was issued. Covered species under the amended HCP include the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), which was listed as threatened on June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31693); the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus), which was listed as threatened on October 1, 1992 (57 FR 45328); and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), which was listed as threatened in Washington on February 14, 1978 (43 FR 6230), and delisted throughout the United States on July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346). Also covered are 5 anadromous fish species under the jurisdiction of the National Marine Fisheries Service, 2 of which are listed, and 43 additional non-listed species associated with western forests, streams, and wetlands. The northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), which was listed as threatened on June 26, 1990 (55 FR 26114), is not covered in the existing or proposed amendment to the HCP. Management of northern spotted owls and their habitat on GDRCo lands would continue to be guided by applicable FP Rules, as well as by the take prohibitions under the Act. Applicant’s Proposal The proposed amendment would add to the permit approximately 53,000 acres and 854 stream miles of covered lands, for a total of approximately 319,000 acres and 2,575 stream miles on GDRCo lands, to be managed in accordance with their HCP. Any additional lands that may be acquired by GDRCo within the Chehalis and Willapa Basins during the term of the permit may also be added to the HCP, E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM 15APN1 sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 72 / Monday, April 15, 2013 / Notices according to the process outlined in the amended IA. The area of the Chehalis (about 1.7 million acres) and Willapa (166,000 acres) Basins totals about 2,920 mi2 (about 1.87 million acres), which includes part of the original HCP boundary and the proposed expansion area. The new HCP boundary would include lands in Mason, Grays Harbor, Lewis, Pacific, and Thurston Counties in the State of Washington. The amendment would change the management of GDRCo’s added lands from prescriptions currently required under FP Rules and the FP HCP to those of the GDRCo HCP. The amendment also changes some of the original GDRCo HCP prescriptions. Under the amendment, suitable marbled murrelet habitat on the added lands and any future additions to the HCP would be determined based on the most recent (2011) Pacific Seabird Group criteria, which are more stringent than those of both FP Rules (WAC 222– 16–010) and the original GDRCo HCP. For example, under the new criteria, only one nesting platform, at least 10 cm (4 inches) wide, is required per acre to meet the definition of suitable marbled murrelet habitat. In contrast, under FP Rules, two nesting platforms, at least 18 cm (7 inches) wide, are required per acre. Most of the lands covered under the amended HCP are within the marbled murrelet special landscape (WAC 222– 16–087). FP Rules protect stands of occupied murrelet habitat and unsurveyed suitable habitat patches that are 5 acres or larger within the marbled murrelet special landscape and marbled murrelet detection areas. Elsewhere, occupied and unsurveyed suitable habitat patches 7 acres or larger are protected. Under the amended GDRCo HCP, suitable stands on the added lands that are 5 acres or larger would be protected, regardless of whether or not they are occupied or within the marbled murrelet special landscape or a detection area. The original HCP Area will continue to focus on protection of occupied murrelet habitat, per the original HCP prescriptions. The proposed amendment includes an update to HCP prescriptions based on the most recent Pacific Region guidelines to avoid disturbance and take at communal bald eagle roosts and important foraging areas. It also addresses protection of newly discovered bald eagle nests, roosts, and important foraging areas, and a yearly monitoring and reporting requirement. The Service may review yearly reports to evaluate whether prescriptions need to be updated to remain compliant with VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:00 Apr 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. The proposed amendment would change the forest cover prescriptions for rain-on-snow zones within the Chehalis Watershed to reflect a watershed analysis conducted for that watershed and consistent with FP Rules (WAC 222–20–100). Conservation measures that are part of the original HCP will continue to be applied in the added lands and lands acquired in the future. These include the implementation of the Riparian Conservation Reserve (RCR), wetland, and steep slope management programs. Established RCRs will be thinned to promote late seral stand characteristics, and they may develop into marbled murrelet and spotted owl habitat over time. No additional buffer areas will be established for murrelet habitat that lies within the RCRs, given the large extent of contiguous forest (17 percent of the plan area) within these areas. Text and exhibits in the IA would be amended to reflect the expanded HCP boundary around lands eligible for inclusion under the HCP, a new marbled murrelet habitat map, and the addition of a severability and savings clause. Anticipated Effects of Implementing the Amended HCP Bull trout are only occasionally found within the covered area for the amended HCP. The FP HCP and the GDRCo HCP contain similar conservation measures for the bull trout and other aquatic species. Given the low occurrence of bull trout within the covered area for the amended HCP and the similarity of the two sets of HCP conservation measures, the anticipated effects to the bull trout of changing from the FP HCP prescriptions to the GDRCo HCP prescriptions are negligible. All private timberlands in Washington State, including those under GDRCo ownership, are excluded from the area designated as bull trout critical habitat (75 FR 63898); therefore, the amendment would have no effect on designated bull trout critical habitat. Both beneficial and adverse impacts to marbled murrelet are anticipated. Under the amended HCP, it is anticipated that more acres of suitable marbled murrelet habitat would be protected than under standard FP Rules, due to the use of the more current and stringent suitable habitat criteria and due to protection of suitable habitat patches that are 5 acres or larger on the added lands regardless of their occupancy status or location relative to the marbled murrelet special emphasis area. PO 00000 Frm 00055 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 22279 Adverse effects to the marbled murrelet likely to be caused by the amended HCP are associated with removal of suitable habitat patches that are less than 5 acres. Very few suitable habitat patches less than 5 acres are anticipated because most of them would have already been removed under FP Rules unless they are within regulatory buffers or difficult-to-harvest locations. Thus, the area where these adverse effects could occur is very small. In addition, suitable murrelet habitat within GDRCo RCRs, wetland or steep slope buffers, or on adjacent ownerships could be degraded by windthrow or exposure to wind if harvest occurs within 300 feet of murrelet habitat. The probability of this is low, because suitable habitat is not likely to develop in the RCRs and other buffers for another 35–40 years. The same potential for adverse effects to the murrelet also exists under the original GDRCo HCP and FP rules. Although the Service considers this habitat degradation likely to occur, the area where this could occur is limited; moreover, due to the current declining population status of marbled murrelet, the Service is not reasonably certain that murrelet would occupy these small or marginal habitat areas. Therefore, we do not believe that take of marbled murrelet is likely to increase under the amended HCP. Despite the small possibility of adverse effects, the overall result of the modified marbled murrelet prescriptions is beneficial, because the modifications protect habitat that would not otherwise be protected under the FP Rules. Marbled murrelet critical habitat has not been designated on private lands in Washington State. A portion of designated critical habitat exists in the extreme eastern corner and on Stateowned lands within the covered area under the amended HCP. It is unlikely GDRCo would purchase land in the immediate area of marbled murrelet critical habitat, because access to many of these areas is difficult or they are within the Mineral Spotted Owl Special Emphasis Area, which has encumbrances on private lands. Therefore, the potential for affecting marbled murrelet critical habitat is very low. There are no anticipated effects to spotted owls in association with the amendment, because they are not a covered species under the original or amended GDRCo HCP, and management of their habitat would continue to comply with the requirements of FP Rules and the Federal ESA. Spotted owl critical habitat has been designated (77 FR 71875) in a small portion of the amended assessment area, but is not E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM 15APN1 22280 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 72 / Monday, April 15, 2013 / Notices sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES adjacent to any GDRCo lands. It is unlikely that GDRCo would purchase land adjacent to spotted owl critical habitat in the future. Thus, the effect of the amendment will be negligible on northern spotted owls and their designated critical habitat. Over the decades-long term of the amended HCP, it is estimated that there may be two occurrences of disturbance to a nesting pair of bald eagles. This low level of impact is expected to be consistent with maintaining stable or increasing numbers of bald eagles in the area covered by the amended HCP. Monitoring reports and Service reviews will ensure that implementation of the HCP will remain consistent with the requirements of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. There are 43 other non-listed covered species. Effects caused by the amended HCP are anticipated to be negligible for those non-listed covered species associated with mainstem streams and rivers as well as tributaries, because riparian buffer requirements are very similar under the amended GDRCo HCP compared to those of the FP Rules and FP HCP. Effects are anticipated to be beneficial for species associated with forested wetlands and headwater areas, because the GDRCo HCP prescriptions protect forested wetlands and riparian buffers on headwater streams, while the FP Rules do not. Effects are also anticipated to be beneficial for snagdependent species, due to the higher number of conserved wildlife trees required under the GDRCo HCP. Our Preliminary Determination The proposed amendment of the ITP is a Federal action that triggers the need for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA). The Service has made a preliminary determination that the permit application, the proposed amendment of the HCP, and the pending issuance of an amended ITP are eligible for categorical exclusion under NEPA as provided by the Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Appendix 2 and 516 DM 8), based on the following criteria: (1) Implementation of the amended HCP would result in minor or negligible adverse effects on federally listed, proposed, and candidate species and their habitats; (2) implementation of the amended HCP would result in minor or negligible adverse effects on other environmental values or resources; and (3) impacts of the amended HCP, considered together with the impacts of other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable similarly-situated projects, VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:00 Apr 12, 2013 Jkt 229001 would not result, over time, in cumulative adverse effects to environmental values or resources which would be considered significant. We explain the basis for this preliminary determination above under Anticipated Effects of Implementing the Amended HCP, and in more detail in a draft Environmental Action Statement that is also available for public review. Based upon our review of public comments that we receive in response to this notice, this preliminary determination may be revised. Next Steps The public process for the proposed Federal permit action will be completed after the public comment period, at which time we will evaluate the permit amendment application and comments submitted thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of section 10(a) of the Act, applicable regulations, and NEPA requirements. If we determine that those requirements are met, we will amend the ITP to reflect the revised HCP and IA. Public Comments We invite public comment on the proposed amendments of the ITP, HCP, and IA. If you wish to comment on the proposed amendment of the ITP, HCP, and associated documents, you may submit comments by any one of the methods discussed above under ADDRESSES. Public Availability of Comments Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting documentation we use in preparing the EIS under NEPA, will become part of the public record and will be available for public inspection by appointment, during regular business hours, at the Service’s Washington Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comments, 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 This notice is provided in accordance with section 10 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6). PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 Dated: April 5, 2013. Richard R. Hannan, Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. [FR Doc. 2013–08766 Filed 4–12–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCO9230000–L14300000–FQ0000; COC– 28247] Public Land Order No. 7812; Partial Revocation of a Secretarial Order Dated April 27, 1905; CO Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Public Land Order. AGENCY: This order partially revokes a withdrawal created by a Secretarial Order insofar as it affects 35.89 acres of public land withdrawn on behalf of the Bureau of Reclamation for the Gore Canyon Reservoir, Colorado River Storage Project. DATES: Effective Date: April 15, 2013. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: John D. Beck, BLM Colorado State Office, 2850 Youngfield Street, Lakewood, Colorado 80215–7093, 303–239–3882. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to contact the above individual. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Bureau of Reclamation has determined that a portion of the withdrawal created by a Secretarial Order dated April 27, 1905, for the Gore Canyon Reservoir, Colorado River Storage Project, is no longer needed for the purpose for which the land was withdrawn and has requested this partial revocation. The land will remain closed to settlement, sale, location, or entry under the general land laws, including the United States mining laws, by Public Land Order No. 7466 (65 FR 61182 (2000)). The lands have been and will remain open to mineral leasing. SUMMARY: Order By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 43 U.S.C. 1714, it is ordered as follows: The withdrawal created by a Secretarial Order dated April 27, 1905, which withdrew public lands from all E:\FR\FM\15APN1.SGM 15APN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 72 (Monday, April 15, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22278-22280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08766]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R1-ES-2013-N085; FXES11120100000-134-FF01E00000]

Proposed Amendment of Habitat Conservation Plan and Associated
Documents; Green Diamond Resource Company; Mason, Grays Harbor, Lewis,
Pacific, and Thurston Counties, WA

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), have received an
application, under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (Act), as
amended, from Green Diamond Resource Company (GDRCo) for a proposed
low-effect amendment to their Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) and
Implementation Agreement (IA). If approved, the GDRCo incidental take
permit (ITP), as well as the HCP and IA, would be amended to increase
the amount of lands covered under the ITP and HCP; some of the HCP
management prescriptions would change, including those associated with
marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus marmoratus) habitat protection; and the
IA would be amended to include a new clause and a new marbled murrelet
habitat map. The amendment would change the management of GDRCo's added
lands from prescriptions currently required under the standard
Washington State Forest Practices Rules (FP Rules) and Forest Practices
HCP (FP HCP) to those of the GDRCo HCP. We invite public comment on the
proposed amendment of the ITP, HCP, IA, and associated documents.

DATES: To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by
May 15, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may download a copy of the permit application, HCP, and
associated documents on the Internet at https://www.fws.gov/wafwo/. The
proposed amendment to the HCP and IA and the Draft Environmental Action
Statement are available for review and comment. The original HCP, IA,
and Final Environmental Impact Statement are available for review.
Please specify permit number TE032463-0 on all correspondence. You
may submit comments or requests for hard copies or a CD-ROM of the
documents by one of the following methods:
Email: Louellyn_Jones@fws.gov. Include ``Permit Number
TE032463-0'' in the subject line of the message.
Facsimile: Ken Berg, Manager, 360-753-9405; Attn.: Lou
Ellyn Jones, Permit number TE032463-0.
U.S. Mail: Please address written comments to Ken Berg,
Manager; Attention: Lou Ellyn Jones; Washington Fish and Wildlife
Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 510 Desmond Drive SE., Lacey,
WA 98503.
In-Person: Written comments can be dropped off during
regular business hours (8 a.m.-4:30 p.m.) at the above address. Call
Lou Ellyn Jones, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, at (360) 753-5822 to make
an appointment to view or pick up draft documents.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lou Ellyn Jones, Fish and Wildlife
Biologist, at address under ADDRESSES, above; by email at Louellyn_Jones@fws.gov; or by telephone at (360) 753-5822.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

Section 9 of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and our implementing
Federal regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR
17 prohibit the ``take'' of fish or wildlife species listed as
endangered or threatened. Take of listed fish or wildlife is defined
under the Act as ``to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such
conduct'' (16 U.S.C. 1532). However, under section 10 of the Act, for
limited circumstances, we issue permits to authorize incidental take of
threatened or endangered species--i.e., take that is incidental to, and
not the purpose of, the carrying out of otherwise lawful activities. A
permit to take bald eagles can also be issued under the Act when
associated with a conservation plan such as an HCP, as long as the Bald
and Golden Eagle Protection Act (16 U.S.C. 668-668c) standards are met.
Regulations governing incidental take permits for threatened and
endangered species are at 50 CFR 17.32 and 17.22, respectively.
Regulations governing take of bald eagles are at 50 CFR 22. In addition
to meeting other criteria, an incidental take permit must not
jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed threatened or
endangered species, and authorized take of bald eagles must be
consistent with the goal of maintaining stable or increasing breeding
populations of this species.

Introduction

The GDRCo has requested an amendment to the HCP, IA, and ITP
originally issued on October 13, 2000, with a term of 50 years. The
species covered under the existing and amended ITP would remain the
same; however, for some species, listing status has changed since the
permit was issued. Covered species under the amended HCP include the
bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), which was listed as threatened on
June 10, 1998 (63 FR 31693); the marbled murrelet (Brachyramphus
marmoratus), which was listed as threatened on October 1, 1992 (57 FR
45328); and the bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), which was listed
as threatened in Washington on February 14, 1978 (43 FR 6230), and
delisted throughout the United States on July 9, 2007 (72 FR 37346).
Also covered are 5 anadromous fish species under the jurisdiction of
the National Marine Fisheries Service, 2 of which are listed, and 43
additional non-listed species associated with western forests, streams,
and wetlands.
The northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina), which was
listed as threatened on June 26, 1990 (55 FR 26114), is not covered in
the existing or proposed amendment to the HCP. Management of northern
spotted owls and their habitat on GDRCo lands would continue to be
guided by applicable FP Rules, as well as by the take prohibitions
under the Act.

Applicant's Proposal

The proposed amendment would add to the permit approximately 53,000
acres and 854 stream miles of covered lands, for a total of
approximately 319,000 acres and 2,575 stream miles on GDRCo lands, to
be managed in accordance with their HCP. Any additional lands that may
be acquired by GDRCo within the Chehalis and Willapa Basins during the
term of the permit may also be added to the HCP,

[[Page 22279]]

according to the process outlined in the amended IA. The area of the
Chehalis (about 1.7 million acres) and Willapa (166,000 acres) Basins
totals about 2,920 mi\2\ (about 1.87 million acres), which includes
part of the original HCP boundary and the proposed expansion area. The
new HCP boundary would include lands in Mason, Grays Harbor, Lewis,
Pacific, and Thurston Counties in the State of Washington. The
amendment would change the management of GDRCo's added lands from
prescriptions currently required under FP Rules and the FP HCP to those
of the GDRCo HCP. The amendment also changes some of the original GDRCo
HCP prescriptions.
Under the amendment, suitable marbled murrelet habitat on the added
lands and any future additions to the HCP would be determined based on
the most recent (2011) Pacific Seabird Group criteria, which are more
stringent than those of both FP Rules (WAC 222-16-010) and the original
GDRCo HCP. For example, under the new criteria, only one nesting
platform, at least 10 cm (4 inches) wide, is required per acre to meet
the definition of suitable marbled murrelet habitat. In contrast, under
FP Rules, two nesting platforms, at least 18 cm (7 inches) wide, are
required per acre.
Most of the lands covered under the amended HCP are within the
marbled murrelet special landscape (WAC 222-16-087). FP Rules protect
stands of occupied murrelet habitat and unsurveyed suitable habitat
patches that are 5 acres or larger within the marbled murrelet special
landscape and marbled murrelet detection areas. Elsewhere, occupied and
unsurveyed suitable habitat patches 7 acres or larger are protected.
Under the amended GDRCo HCP, suitable stands on the added lands that
are 5 acres or larger would be protected, regardless of whether or not
they are occupied or within the marbled murrelet special landscape or a
detection area. The original HCP Area will continue to focus on
protection of occupied murrelet habitat, per the original HCP
prescriptions.
The proposed amendment includes an update to HCP prescriptions
based on the most recent Pacific Region guidelines to avoid disturbance
and take at communal bald eagle roosts and important foraging areas. It
also addresses protection of newly discovered bald eagle nests, roosts,
and important foraging areas, and a yearly monitoring and reporting
requirement. The Service may review yearly reports to evaluate whether
prescriptions need to be updated to remain compliant with the Bald and
Golden Eagle Protection Act.
The proposed amendment would change the forest cover prescriptions
for rain-on-snow zones within the Chehalis Watershed to reflect a
watershed analysis conducted for that watershed and consistent with FP
Rules (WAC 222-20-100). Conservation measures that are part of the
original HCP will continue to be applied in the added lands and lands
acquired in the future. These include the implementation of the
Riparian Conservation Reserve (RCR), wetland, and steep slope
management programs. Established RCRs will be thinned to promote late
seral stand characteristics, and they may develop into marbled murrelet
and spotted owl habitat over time. No additional buffer areas will be
established for murrelet habitat that lies within the RCRs, given the
large extent of contiguous forest (17 percent of the plan area) within
these areas.
Text and exhibits in the IA would be amended to reflect the
expanded HCP boundary around lands eligible for inclusion under the
HCP, a new marbled murrelet habitat map, and the addition of a
severability and savings clause.

Anticipated Effects of Implementing the Amended HCP

Bull trout are only occasionally found within the covered area for
the amended HCP. The FP HCP and the GDRCo HCP contain similar
conservation measures for the bull trout and other aquatic species.
Given the low occurrence of bull trout within the covered area for the
amended HCP and the similarity of the two sets of HCP conservation
measures, the anticipated effects to the bull trout of changing from
the FP HCP prescriptions to the GDRCo HCP prescriptions are negligible.
All private timberlands in Washington State, including those under
GDRCo ownership, are excluded from the area designated as bull trout
critical habitat (75 FR 63898); therefore, the amendment would have no
effect on designated bull trout critical habitat.
Both beneficial and adverse impacts to marbled murrelet are
anticipated. Under the amended HCP, it is anticipated that more acres
of suitable marbled murrelet habitat would be protected than under
standard FP Rules, due to the use of the more current and stringent
suitable habitat criteria and due to protection of suitable habitat
patches that are 5 acres or larger on the added lands regardless of
their occupancy status or location relative to the marbled murrelet
special emphasis area.
Adverse effects to the marbled murrelet likely to be caused by the
amended HCP are associated with removal of suitable habitat patches
that are less than 5 acres. Very few suitable habitat patches less than
5 acres are anticipated because most of them would have already been
removed under FP Rules unless they are within regulatory buffers or
difficult-to-harvest locations. Thus, the area where these adverse
effects could occur is very small. In addition, suitable murrelet
habitat within GDRCo RCRs, wetland or steep slope buffers, or on
adjacent ownerships could be degraded by windthrow or exposure to wind
if harvest occurs within 300 feet of murrelet habitat. The probability
of this is low, because suitable habitat is not likely to develop in
the RCRs and other buffers for another 35-40 years. The same potential
for adverse effects to the murrelet also exists under the original
GDRCo HCP and FP rules. Although the Service considers this habitat
degradation likely to occur, the area where this could occur is
limited; moreover, due to the current declining population status of
marbled murrelet, the Service is not reasonably certain that murrelet
would occupy these small or marginal habitat areas. Therefore, we do
not believe that take of marbled murrelet is likely to increase under
the amended HCP. Despite the small possibility of adverse effects, the
overall result of the modified marbled murrelet prescriptions is
beneficial, because the modifications protect habitat that would not
otherwise be protected under the FP Rules.
Marbled murrelet critical habitat has not been designated on
private lands in Washington State. A portion of designated critical
habitat exists in the extreme eastern corner and on State-owned lands
within the covered area under the amended HCP. It is unlikely GDRCo
would purchase land in the immediate area of marbled murrelet critical
habitat, because access to many of these areas is difficult or they are
within the Mineral Spotted Owl Special Emphasis Area, which has
encumbrances on private lands. Therefore, the potential for affecting
marbled murrelet critical habitat is very low.
There are no anticipated effects to spotted owls in association
with the amendment, because they are not a covered species under the
original or amended GDRCo HCP, and management of their habitat would
continue to comply with the requirements of FP Rules and the Federal
ESA. Spotted owl critical habitat has been designated (77 FR 71875) in
a small portion of the amended assessment area, but is not

[[Page 22280]]

adjacent to any GDRCo lands. It is unlikely that GDRCo would purchase
land adjacent to spotted owl critical habitat in the future. Thus, the
effect of the amendment will be negligible on northern spotted owls and
their designated critical habitat.
Over the decades-long term of the amended HCP, it is estimated that
there may be two occurrences of disturbance to a nesting pair of bald
eagles. This low level of impact is expected to be consistent with
maintaining stable or increasing numbers of bald eagles in the area
covered by the amended HCP. Monitoring reports and Service reviews will
ensure that implementation of the HCP will remain consistent with the
requirements of the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
There are 43 other non-listed covered species. Effects caused by
the amended HCP are anticipated to be negligible for those non-listed
covered species associated with mainstem streams and rivers as well as
tributaries, because riparian buffer requirements are very similar
under the amended GDRCo HCP compared to those of the FP Rules and FP
HCP. Effects are anticipated to be beneficial for species associated
with forested wetlands and headwater areas, because the GDRCo HCP
prescriptions protect forested wetlands and riparian buffers on
headwater streams, while the FP Rules do not. Effects are also
anticipated to be beneficial for snag-dependent species, due to the
higher number of conserved wildlife trees required under the GDRCo HCP.

Our Preliminary Determination

The proposed amendment of the ITP is a Federal action that triggers
the need for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) (NEPA). The Service has made
a preliminary determination that the permit application, the proposed
amendment of the HCP, and the pending issuance of an amended ITP are
eligible for categorical exclusion under NEPA as provided by the
Department of the Interior Manual (516 DM 2 Appendix 2 and 516 DM 8),
based on the following criteria: (1) Implementation of the amended HCP
would result in minor or negligible adverse effects on federally
listed, proposed, and candidate species and their habitats; (2)
implementation of the amended HCP would result in minor or negligible
adverse effects on other environmental values or resources; and (3)
impacts of the amended HCP, considered together with the impacts of
other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable similarly-situated
projects, would not result, over time, in cumulative adverse effects to
environmental values or resources which would be considered
significant. We explain the basis for this preliminary determination
above under Anticipated Effects of Implementing the Amended HCP, and in
more detail in a draft Environmental Action Statement that is also
available for public review. Based upon our review of public comments
that we receive in response to this notice, this preliminary
determination may be revised.

Next Steps

The public process for the proposed Federal permit action will be
completed after the public comment period, at which time we will
evaluate the permit amendment application and comments submitted
thereon to determine whether the application meets the requirements of
section 10(a) of the Act, applicable regulations, and NEPA
requirements. If we determine that those requirements are met, we will
amend the ITP to reflect the revised HCP and IA.

Public Comments

We invite public comment on the proposed amendments of the ITP,
HCP, and IA. If you wish to comment on the proposed amendment of the
ITP, HCP, and associated documents, you may submit comments by any one
of the methods discussed above under ADDRESSES.

Public Availability of Comments

Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we use in preparing the EIS under NEPA, will become part
of the public record and will be available for public inspection by
appointment, during regular business hours, at the Service's Washington
Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES). Before including your
address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying
information in your comments, 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

This notice is provided in accordance with section 10 of the Act
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

Dated: April 5, 2013.
Richard R. Hannan,
Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Portland, Oregon.
[FR Doc. 2013-08766 Filed 4-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.