Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Lesser Prairie-Chicken as a Threatened Species With a Special Rule, 26302-26308 [2013-10497]
Download as PDF
26302
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; revision and
reopening of comment period.
measures that are necessary and
advisable to provide for the
conservation of the lesser prairiechicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus).
In addition, we announce the reopening
of the public comment period on the
December 11, 2012, proposed rule to list
the lesser prairie-chicken as a
threatened species under the Act. We
also announce the availability of a draft
rangewide conservation plan for the
lesser prairie-chicken, which has been
prepared by the Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Interstate Working Group, and request
comments on the plan as it relates to our
determination of status under section
4(a)(1) of the Act.
DATES: We will accept comments
received or postmarked on or before
June 20, 2013. Comments submitted
electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES,
below) must be received by 11:59 p.m.
Eastern Time on the closing date. We
must receive requests for public
hearings, in writing, at the address
shown in ADDRESSES by June 20, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–R2–ES–2012–0071, which is
the docket number for this rulemaking.
You may submit a comment by clicking
on ‘‘Comment Now!’’
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–ES–2012–
0071; Division of Policy and Directives
Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, MS
2042–PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments
only by one of the methods described
above. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us
(see the Public Comments section below
for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dixie Porter, Field Supervisor,
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field
Office, 9014 East 21st Street, Tulsa, OK
74129; by telephone 918–581–7458 or
by facsimile 918–581–7467. Persons
who use a telecommunications device
for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal
Information Relay Service (FIRS) at
800–877–8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, propose to create a
special rule under authority of section
4(d) of the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (Act), that provides
Executive Summary
This document consists of: (1) A
proposed special rule under section 4(d)
of the Endangered Species Act of 1973,
as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
Protection Specialist, Air Programs
Branch (AR–18J), Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 5, 77 West
Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, Illinois
60604, (312) 353–8777,
maietta.anthony@epa.gov.
In the
Final Rules section of this Federal
Register, EPA is approving the State’s
SIP submittal as a direct final rule
without prior proposal because the
Agency views this as a noncontroversial
submittal and anticipates no adverse
comments. A detailed rationale for the
approval is set forth in the direct final
rule. If no adverse comments are
received in response to this rule, no
further activity is contemplated. If EPA
receives adverse comments, the direct
final rule will be withdrawn and all
public comments received will be
addressed in a subsequent final rule
based on this proposed rule. EPA will
not institute a second comment period.
Any parties interested in commenting
on this action should do so at this time.
Please note that if EPA receives adverse
comment on an amendment, paragraph,
or section of this rule and if that
provision may be severed from the
remainder of the rule, EPA may adopt
as final those provisions of the rule that
are not the subject of an adverse
comment. For additional information,
see the direct final rule which is located
in the Rules section of this Federal
Register.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: February 13, 2013.
Susan Hedman,
Regional Administrator, Region 5.
[FR Doc. 2013–09296 Filed 5–3–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS–R2–ES–2012–0071; 4500030113]
RIN 1018–AY21
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Listing the Lesser PrairieChicken as a Threatened Species With
a Special Rule
AGENCY:
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
seq.), that outlines the prohibitions, and
exceptions to those prohibitions,
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the lesser prairiechicken; and (2) a reopening of the
comment period for the proposed rule to
list the lesser prairie-chicken as a
threatened species under the Act.
Why We Need To Publish a Proposed
Rule. On December 11, 2012, the
Service published a proposed rule to list
the lesser prairie-chicken as a
threatened species under the Act (77 FR
73828). At that time, the Service
indicated that we would consider
whether to subsequently propose a
section 4(d) special rule (hereafter
referred to as 4(d) special rule). Section
4(d) of the Act specifies that, for
threatened species, the Secretary shall
issue such regulations as [s]he deems
necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of the species. This
proposed 4(d) special rule provides
measures that are tailored to the
conservation needs of the lesser prairiechicken.
What Is the Effect of This Proposed
Rule? At the time of the 2012 proposed
listing rule (77 FR 73828), we indicated
that we would consider whether to
subsequently propose a 4(d) special rule
for the lesser prairie-chicken. We are
now proposing a 4(d) special rule and
intend to finalize it concurrent with the
final listing rule, if the results of our
final listing determination conclude that
threatened species status is appropriate.
The proposed 4(d) special rule allows
for take of the lesser prairie-chicken
incidental to activities conducted
pursuant to a comprehensive
conservation program that was
developed by or in coordination with a
State agency and that has been
determined by the Service pursuant to
the criteria outlined in this proposed
rule to provide a net conservation
benefit to the lesser prairie-chicken.
Additionally, the proposed 4(d) special
rule provides that any take of lesser
prairie-chickens incidental to
agricultural activities that are included
within a conservation plan developed
by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS) for private agricultural
lands in connection with NRCS’s Lesser
Prairie-Chicken Initiative (LPCI), as
specified in this proposed rule, is not a
prohibited action under the Act. If an
activity resulting in take of lesser
prairie-chicken is not exempted under
this 4(d) special rule, then the general
prohibitions at 50 CFR 17.31 would
apply. We would require a permit for
such an activity as specified in our
regulations. Nothing in this proposed
4(d) special rule affects the consultation
requirements under section 7 of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
The Basis for Our Action. Under
section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary of
the Interior has discretion to issue such
regulations as [s]he deems necessary
and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the species. The
Secretary also has the discretion to
prohibit by regulation with respect to a
threatened species any act prohibited by
section 9(a)(1) of the Act.
Public Comments
To allow the public to comment
simultaneously on this proposed 4(d)
special rule, the proposed listing rule,
and the draft rangewide conservation
plan for the lesser prairie-chicken
prepared by the Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Interstate Working Group, we also
announce the reopening of the comment
period on the Service’s December 11,
2012, proposed rule to list the lesser
prairie-chicken as a threatened species
under the Act. We intend to finalize the
4(d) special rule concurrent with the
final listing rule, if the result of our final
listing determination concludes that
threatened species status is appropriate.
Any final action resulting from the
proposed rules will be based on the best
scientific and commercial data available
and be as accurate and as effective as
possible. Therefore, we request
comments or information from other
concerned governmental agencies,
Native American tribes, the scientific
community, industry, general public,
and other interested parties concerning
the proposed listing rule and 4(d)
special rule. We particularly seek
comments regarding:
(1) The historical and current status
and distribution of the lesser prairiechicken, its biology and ecology,
specific threats (or lack thereof) and
regulations that may be addressing those
threats and ongoing conservation
measures for the species and its habitat.
(2) Information relevant to the factors
that are the basis for making a listing
determination for a species under
section 4(a) of the Act, which are:
(a) The present or threatened
destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species’ habitat or
range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial,
recreational, scientific, or educational
purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing
regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors
affecting its continued existence and
threats to the species or its habitat.
(3) Application of the Lesser PrairieChicken Interstate Working Group’s
draft rangewide conservation plan to
our determination of status under
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
section 4(a)(1) of the Act, particularly
comments or information to help us
assess the certainty that the rangewide
conservation plan will be effective in
conserving the lesser prairie-chicken
and will be implemented.
(4) Which areas would be appropriate
as critical habitat for the species and
why areas should or should not be
proposed for designation as critical
habitat, including whether any threats
to the species from human activity
would be expected to increase due to
the designation and whether that
increase in threat would outweigh the
benefit of designation such that the
designation of critical habitat may not
be prudent.
(5) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of
habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken;
(b) What may constitute ‘‘physical or
biological features essential to the
conservation of the species,’’ within the
geographical range currently occupied
by the species;
(c) Where these features are currently
found;
(d) Whether any of these features may
require special management
considerations or protection;
(e) What areas, that were occupied at
the time of listing (or are currently
occupied) and that contain features
essential to the conservation of the
species, should be included in the
designation and why; and
(f) What areas not occupied at the
time of listing are essential for the
conservation of the species and why.
(6) Information on the projected and
reasonably likely impacts of climate
change on the lesser prairie-chicken and
its habitat.
(7) Whether measures outlined in this
proposed 4(d) special rule are necessary
and advisable for the conservation and
management of the lesser prairiechicken.
(8) Information concerning whether it
would be appropriate to include in the
4(d) special rule a provision that would
allow continued enrollment in existing
Candidate Conservation Agreements
with Assurances for the lesser prairiechicken. These existing agreements
would be recognized as Serviceapproved conservation plans and their
take authorization and continued
enrollment would be provided for under
this 4(d) special rule.
(9) Information concerning whether it
would be appropriate to include in the
4(d) special rule a provision for take of
lesser prairie-chickens in accordance
with applicable State law for
educational or scientific purposes, the
enhancement of propagation or survival
of the species, zoological exhibition,
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26303
and other conservation purposes
consistent with the Act.
(10) Information concerning whether
it would be appropriate to include in
the 4(d) special rule a provision for take
of lesser prairie-chickens in the course
of State-managed hunting programs for
the lesser prairie-chicken or incidental
to hunting activities directed at greater
prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus cupido),
including any information about State
management plans related to hunting
regulations and any measures within
those plans that may avoid or minimize
the risk of lesser prairie-chicken
mortality incidental to lawful hunting
for the greater prairie-chicken.
(11) Whether and how the Service
should expand the scope of this 4(d)
special rule to encourage landowners
removing their lands from the
Conservation Reserve Program to
continue managing those areas for the
benefit of the lesser prairie-chicken.
(12) Whether and how the Service
should expand the scope of this 4(d)
special rule to encourage farmers and
ranchers not participating in the Natural
Resources Conservation Service’s Lesser
Prairie-Chicken Initiative to manage
their lands for the benefit of the lesser
prairie-chicken.
(13) Whether the Service should
expand the scope of this 4(d) special
rule to allow incidental take of lesser
prairie-chickens if the take results from
implementation of a comprehensive
lesser prairie-chicken conservation
program that was developed by an
entity other than a State agency or their
agent(s).
(14) Additional provisions the Service
may wish to consider for a 4(d) special
rule in order to conserve, recover, and
manage the lesser prairie-chicken.
We will consider all comments and
information received during our
preparation of a final determination on
the status of the species and the 4(d)
special rule. Accordingly, the final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Please note that comments merely
stating support for or opposition to the
actions under consideration without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered
in making a determination, as section
4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any
species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ‘‘solely on the
basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.’’
You may submit your comments and
materials concerning this proposed rule
by one of the methods listed in
ADDRESSES. We request that you send
comments only by the methods
described in ADDRESSES.
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
26304
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
If you submit information via https://
www.regulations.gov, your entire
submission—including any personal
identifying information—will be posted
on the Web site. If your submission is
made via a hardcopy that includes
personal identifying information, you
may request at the top of your document
that we withhold this information from
public review. However, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so.
We will post all hardcopy submissions
on https://www.regulations.gov. Please
include sufficient information with your
comments to allow us to verify any
scientific or commercial information
you include.
Comments and materials we receive,
as well as supporting documentation we
used in preparing this proposed rule,
will be available for public inspection
on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business
hours, at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Oklahoma Ecological Services
Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
A settlement agreement in In re
Endangered Species Act Section 4
Deadline Litigation, No. 10–377 (EGS),
MDL Docket No. 2165 (D.D.C. May 10,
2011) was reached with WildEarth
Guardians in which we agreed to submit
a proposed listing rule for the lesser
prairie-chicken to the Federal Register
for publication by September 30, 2012.
On September 27, 2012, the settlement
agreement was modified to require that
the proposed listing rule be submitted to
the Federal Register on or before
November 29, 2012. On December 11,
2012, we published in the Federal
Register a proposed rule to list the
lesser prairie-chicken as a threatened
species under the Act (77 FR 73828).
The proposed listing rule had a 90-day
comment period, ending March 11,
2013. We held a public meeting and
hearing in Woodward, Oklahoma, on
February 5, 2013; in Garden City,
Kansas, on February 7, 2013; in
Lubbock, Texas, on February 11, 2013;
and in Roswell, New Mexico, on
February 12, 2013. Pursuant to the
settlement agreement, a final listing
determination is to be submitted to the
Federal Register on or before September
30, 2013, unless the Secretary finds that
substantial disagreement exists
regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of
the available data relevant to the listing
determination, in which case the final
listing determination is to be submitted
to the Federal Register on or before
March 31, 2014.
For information on previous Federal
actions pertaining to the lesser prairie-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
chicken, please refer to the proposed
listing rule, which we published in the
Federal Register on December 11, 2012
(77 FR 73828).
Background
This document discusses only those
topics directly relevant to the proposed
4(d) special rule for the lesser prairiechicken. For more information on the
lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat,
please refer to the December 11, 2012,
proposed listing rule (77 FR 73828),
which is available online at https://
www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number
FWS–R2–ES–2012–0071) or from the
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
As discussed in the proposed listing
rule, the primary factors supporting the
proposed threatened species status for
the lesser prairie-chicken are the
impacts of cumulative habitat loss and
fragmentation. These impacts are the
result of conversion of grasslands to
agricultural uses; encroachment by
invasive woody plants; wind energy
development; petroleum production;
and presence of roads and manmade
vertical structures including towers,
utility lines, fences, turbines, wells, and
buildings.
The Act does not specify particular
prohibitions, or exceptions to those
prohibitions, for threatened species.
Instead, under section 4(d) of the Act,
the Secretary of the Interior has the
discretion to issue such regulations as
[s]he deems necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation of such
species. The Secretary also has the
discretion to prohibit by regulation with
respect to any threatened species, any
act prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of
the Act. Exercising this discretion, the
Service developed general prohibitions
(50 CFR 17.31) and exceptions to those
prohibitions (50 CFR 17.32) under the
Act that apply to most threatened
species. Alternately, for other
threatened species, the Service may
develop specific prohibitions and
exceptions that are tailored to the
specific conservation needs of the
species. In such cases, some of the
prohibitions and authorizations under
50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 may be
appropriate for the species and
incorporated into a special rule under
section 4(d) of the Act, but the 4(d)
special rule will also include provisions
that are tailored to the specific
conservation needs of the threatened
species and may be more or less
restrictive than the general provisions at
50 CFR 17.31.
At the time of the proposed listing
rule, we indicated that we would
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
consider whether to subsequently
propose a 4(d) special rule for the lesser
prairie-chicken. In that proposed rule,
we solicited public comments as to
which prohibitions, and exceptions to
those prohibitions, are necessary and
advisable to provide for the
conservation of the lesser prairiechicken. In recognition of conservation
efforts that provide for conservation and
management of the lesser prairiechicken and its habitat in a manner
consistent with the purposes of the Act,
we are now proposing a 4(d) special rule
that outlines the prohibitions, and
exceptions to those prohibitions,
necessary and advisable for the
conservation of the lesser prairiechicken.
Since the time of the proposed listing
rule, the Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Interstate Working Group, in association
with the Western Association of Fish
and Wildlife Agencies, has drafted a
rangewide conservation plan for the
lesser prairie-chicken. We would like to
consider the conservation measures in
this plan in our final listing
determination for the lesser prairiechicken. As such, we are reopening the
comment period to allow the public an
opportunity to provide comment on the
draft plan as it applies to our
determination of status under section
4(a)(1) of the Act, particularly comments
or information to help us assess the
certainty that the rangewide
conservation plan will be effective in
conserving the lesser prairie-chicken
and will be implemented. The draft plan
is available on the Internet in Docket
No. FWS–R2–ES–2012–0071 at https://
www.regulations.gov.
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Special
Rule for the Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
Secretary may publish a special rule
that modifies the standard protections
for threatened species with special
measures tailored to the conservation of
the species that are determined to be
necessary and advisable. Under this
proposed 4(d) special rule, the Service
proposes that all of the prohibitions
under 50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 will
apply to the lesser prairie-chicken,
except as noted below. The proposed
4(d) special rule will not remove or alter
in any way the consultation
requirements under section 7 of the Act.
Conservation Programs
The Service proposes that take
incidental to activities conducted
pursuant to a comprehensive
conservation program that was
developed by or in coordination with
the State agency or agencies responsible
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
for the management and conservation of
fish and wildlife within the affected
State(s), or their agent(s), that has a clear
mechanism for enrollment of
participating landowners, and that has
been determined by the Service to
provide a net conservation benefit to the
lesser prairie-chicken, will not be
prohibited. In making its determination,
the Service will consider:
(i) Whether the program
comprehensively addresses all the
threats affecting the lesser prairiechicken within the program area;
(ii) Whether the program establishes
objective, measurable biological goals
and objectives for population and
habitat necessary to ensure a net
conservation benefit, and provides the
mechanisms by which those goals and
objectives will be achieved;
(iii) Whether the program
administrators demonstrate the
capability and funding mechanisms for
effectively implementing all elements of
the conservation program, including
enrollment of participating landowners,
monitoring of program activities, and
enforcement of program requirements;
(iv) Whether the program employs an
adaptive management strategy to ensure
future program adaptation as necessary
and appropriate; and
(v) Whether the program includes
appropriate monitoring of effectiveness
and compliance.
The Service proposes this 4(d) special
rule in recognition of the significant
conservation planning efforts occurring
throughout the range of the lesser
prairie-chicken for the purpose of
reducing or eliminating threats affecting
the species. Multiple Federal and State
agencies have developed localized
conservation programs throughout the
range of the lesser prairie-chicken, and
these programs have provided a
conservation benefit to the species.
However, existing programs do not
address the suite of factors contributing
to cumulative habitat loss and
fragmentation, the species’ primary
threat, across the entire five-state range
of the lesser prairie-chicken.
The criteria presented here are meant
to encourage the development of a
coordinated and comprehensive effort to
improve habitat conditions and the
status of the species across its entire
range. For the Service to approve
coverage of a comprehensive
conservation program under this 4(d)
special rule, the program must provide
a net conservation benefit to the lesser
prairie-chicken population.
Conservation, as defined in section 3(3)
of the Act, means ‘‘to use and the use
of all methods and procedures which
are necessary to bring any endangered
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
species or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary.’’ The program must also be
periodically reviewed by the Service
and determined that it continues to
provide a net conservation benefit to the
lesser prairie-chicken. As a result of this
provision, the Service expects that
rangewide conservation actions will be
implemented with a high level of
certainty that the program will lead to
the long-term conservation of the lesser
prairie-chicken.
Agricultural Activities
The Service proposes that take of the
lesser prairie-chicken will not be
prohibited provided the take is
incidental to activities that are
conducted in accordance with NRCS’s
Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative (LPCI).
The LPCI provides financial and
technical assistance to participating
landowners to implement practices
beneficial to the lesser prairie-chicken
that also contribute to the sustainability
of landowners’ agricultural operations.
Conservation practice standards
encompassed by the LPCI focus
primarily on upland wildlife habitat
management and include brush
management, prescribed grazing, range
planting, prescribed burning and
restoration of rare and declining
habitats. In all, 22 conservation practice
standards are implemented under the
LPCI.
The Service issued a conference
report to the NRCS in connection with
the NRCS’s LPCI on June 30, 2011
(https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/
FSE_DOCUMENTS/
stelprdb1044884.pdf), in which the
Service determined that the proposed
action, which incorporates the
procedures, practice standards, and
conservation measures of the LPCI, is
not likely to jeopardize the continued
existence of the lesser prairie-chicken.
Conference procedures under section 7
of the Act are required only when a
Federal agency (action agency) proposes
an activity that is likely to jeopardize
the continued existence of a species that
has been proposed for listing under the
Act or when the proposed activity is
likely to destroy or adversely modify
proposed critical habitat. However,
conference procedures may also be used
to assist an action agency in planning a
proposed action so that potential
conflicts may be identified and resolved
early in the planning process. During
the conference, the Service may provide
recommendations on ways to avoid or
minimize adverse effects of the
proposed action. The conclusions
reached during a conference and any
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
26305
subsequent recommendations are then
provided to the action agency in a
conference report.
This provision of the proposed 4(d)
special rule for agricultural activities
will promote conservation of the species
by encouraging landowners and
ranchers to continue managing the
remaining landscape in ways that meet
the needs of their operation while
simultaneously providing suitable
habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken.
Proposed Determination
Section 4(d) of the Act states that ‘‘the
Secretary shall issue such regulations as
[s]he deems necessary and advisable to
provide for the conservation’’ of species
listed as a threatened species.
Conservation is defined in the Act to
mean ‘‘to use and the use of all methods
and procedures which are necessary to
bring any endangered species or
threatened species to the point at which
the measures provided pursuant to [the
Act] are no longer necessary.’’
Additionally, section 4(d) states that the
Secretary ‘‘may by regulation prohibit
with respect to any threatened species
any act prohibited under section
9(a)(1).’’
The courts have recognized the extent
of the Secretary’s discretion under this
standard to develop rules that are
appropriate for the conservation of a
species. For example, the Secretary may
find that it is necessary and advisable
not to include a taking prohibition, or to
include a limited taking prohibition. See
Alsea Valley Alliance v. Lautenbacher,
2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or.
2007); Washington Environmental
Council v. National Marine Fisheries
Service, and 2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432
(W.D. Wash. 2002). In addition, as
affirmed in State of Louisiana v. Verity,
853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988), the rule
need not address all the threats to the
species. As noted by Congress when the
Act was initially enacted, ‘‘once an
animal is on the threatened list, the
Secretary has an almost infinite number
of options available to him with regard
to the permitted activities for those
species. [S]he may, for example, permit
taking, but not importation of such
species,’’ or [s]he may choose to forbid
both taking and importation but allow
the transportation of such species, as
long as the measures will ‘‘serve to
conserve, protect, or restore the species
concerned in accordance with the
purposes of the Act’’ (H.R. Rep. No. 412,
93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973).
Section 9 prohibitions make it illegal
for any person subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States to take (including
harass, harm, pursue, shoot, wound,
kill, trap, capture, or collect; or attempt
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
26306
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
any of these), import or export, ship in
interstate commerce in the course of
commercial activity, or sell or offer for
sale in interstate or foreign commerce
any wildlife species listed as an
endangered species, without written
authorization. It also is illegal under
section 9(a)(1) of the Act to possess, sell,
deliver, carry, transport, or ship any
such wildlife that is taken illegally.
Prohibited actions consistent with
section 9 of the Act are outlined for
threatened species in 50 CFR 17.31(a)
and (b). This proposed 4(d) special rule
proposes that all prohibitions in 50 CFR
17.31(a) and (b) will apply to the lesser
prairie-chicken, except in two instances.
First, we propose that none of the
provisions in 50 CFR 17.31 would apply
to actions that result from activities
associated with a comprehensive
conservation program developed by or
in coordination with the State agency or
agencies responsible for the
management and conservation of fish
and wildlife within the affected State(s),
or their agent(s), and that the Service
determines provides a net conservation
benefit for the lesser prairie-chicken.
The 4(d) special rule identifies a set of
criteria the Service proposes to use to
evaluate such programs. Among
additional considerations, the approval
criteria require that the program
provides lesser prairie-chicken
population and habitat targets necessary
to ensure a net conservation benefit for
the species across the plan area in
addition to mechanisms for achieving
those targets. In this way, actions in the
comprehensive conservation program
will ultimately contribute to the
conservation of the species.
Conservation is defined in section 3(3)
of the Act as ‘‘to use and the use of all
methods and procedures which are
necessary to bring any endangered
species or threatened species to the
point at which the measures provided
pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary.’’ As a result of this provision,
the Service expects that rangewide
conservation actions will be
implemented with a high level of
certainty that the program will lead to
the long-term conservation of the lesser
prairie-chicken.
Second, we also propose that none of
the provisions in 50 CFR 17.31 would
apply to actions resulting from activities
that are included in or covered under
NRCS’s Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative
(LPCI). According to the proposed rule,
the primary factors supporting the
proposed threatened status for the lesser
prairie-chicken are the impacts of
cumulative habitat loss and
fragmentation. Allowing the
continuation of agricultural operations
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
consistent with these criteria encourages
landowners to continue managing the
remaining landscape in ways that meet
the needs of their operation while
simultaneously providing suitable
habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken.
Based on the rationale explained
above, the provisions included in this
proposed 4(d) special rule are necessary
and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the lesser prairiechicken. Nothing in this proposed 4(d)
special rule changes in any way the
recovery planning provisions of section
4(f) and consultation requirements
under section 7 of the Act or the ability
of the Service to enter into partnerships
for the management and protection of
the lesser prairie-chicken.
Additional Provisions Under
Consideration
The Service is considering several
additional provisions and specifically
seeks information and comment on the
following issues at this time.
First, several approved candidate
conservation agreements (CCAs) and
candidate conservation agreements with
assurances (CCAAs) are in place for the
lesser prairie-chicken. We are seeking
comment on a provision that would
allow continued enrollment in the
existing CCAs and CCAAs beyond the
effective date of a final listing
determination, if the results of our final
listing determination conclude that
threatened species status is appropriate.
The approved agreements for the lesser
prairie-chicken include the CCA/CCAA
for Lesser Prairie-Chicken and Sand
Dune Lizard in New Mexico, developed
cooperatively by the Service, the Bureau
of Land Management, and the Center for
Excellence for Hazardous Materials
Management (2008); the Agricultural
CCAA for Lesser Prairie-Chickens
between Oklahoma Department of
Wildlife Conservation and the Service
(2013); and the CCAA for Lesser PrairieChickens Between Texas Parks and
Wildlife Department and the Service
(2006).
The Service is also considering
whether it is appropriate to include a
provision for take of lesser prairiechicken when that take is in accordance
with applicable State law for
educational or scientific purposes, the
enhancement of propagation or survival
of the species, zoological exhibition,
and other conservation purposes
consistent with the Act. An example of
an activity that could be covered under
such a provision includes presence/
absence and population monitoring
surveys. Such surveys are typically
conducted during the breeding season
and may cause disturbance on the
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
breeding grounds, particularly when
flush counts are used to estimate the
number of birds attending those leks.
Occasionally recorded calls are used to
aid in the detection of known or
suspected leks, which may cause some
disturbance of courting males. However,
if surveys are conducted in accordance
with scientifically accepted
methodologies, minimal short-term
impact to lesser prairie-chickens,
primarily in the form of harassment,
should occur.
The Service is also considering
whether it is appropriate to include a
provision for take of lesser prairiechickens in the course of State-managed
hunting programs for the lesser prairiechicken or incidental to legal hunting
activities directed at greater prairiechickens. These two species, which are
similar in appearance, overlap in
portions of approximately 12 counties
in Kansas. Limited mortality of lesser
prairie-chickens occurs as a result of
hunting activities directed at greater
prairie-chickens. We request
information and comment on these
issues, including State management
plans related to hunting regulations and
any measures within those plans that
may avoid or minimize the risk of lesser
prairie-chicken mortality from hunting
for greater prairie-chickens.
Finally, the Service is also
considering whether it is appropriate to
expand the scope of the 4(d) special rule
to: (a) Encourage landowners removing
their lands from the Conservation
Reserve Program to continue managing
those areas for the benefit of the lesser
prairie-chicken; (b) encourage farmers
and ranchers not participating in the
Natural Resources Conservation
Service’s Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Initiative to manage their lands for the
benefit of the lesser prairie-chicken; and
(c) allow incidental take of lesser
prairie-chickens if the take results from
implementation of a comprehensive
lesser prairie-chicken conservation
program that was developed by an
entity other than a State agency or their
agent(s) or was developed without
coordination with a State agency or
their agent(s).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy
published in the Federal Register on
July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek
the expert opinions of at least three
appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The
purpose of such review is to ensure that
our determination of status for this
species is based on scientifically sound
data, assumptions, and analyses. We
will send peer reviewers copies of this
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
26307
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
proposed rule immediately following
publication in the Federal Register. We
will invite these peer reviewers to
comment, during the reopening of the
public comment period, on our use and
interpretation of the science used in
developing our proposed rule to list the
lesser prairie-chicken and this proposed
4(d) special rule.
We will consider all comments and
information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule
during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final
decision may differ from this proposal.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders
12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1,
1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we
publish must: (a) Be logically organized;
(b) use the active voice to address
readers directly; (c) use clear language
rather than jargon; (d) be divided into
short sections and sentences; and (e) use
lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the proposed rule,
your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new
collections of information that require
approval by the Office of Management
and Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. This rule will not
impose recordkeeping or reporting
requirements on State or local
governments, individuals, businesses, or
organizations. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not
required to respond to, a collection of
information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that
environmental assessments and
environmental impact statements, as
defined under the authority of the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, need not be prepared in
connection with listing a species as an
endangered or threatened species under
the Endangered Species Act. We
published a notice outlining our reasons
for this determination in the Federal
Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). We intend to incorporate this
proposed special rule into our final
determination concerning the listing of
the species or withdrawal of the
proposal if new information is provided
that supports that decision.
Government-to-Government
Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President’s
memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations
with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive
Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments), and the Department of
the Interior’s manual at 512 DM 2, we
readily acknowledge our responsibility
to communicate meaningfully with
recognized Federal Tribes on a
government-to-government basis. In
accordance with Secretarial Order 3206
of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal
Rights, Federal-Tribal Trust
Responsibilities, and the Endangered
Species Act), we readily acknowledge
our responsibilities to work directly
with tribes in developing programs for
healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge that
tribal lands are not subject to the same
controls as Federal public lands, to
remain sensitive to Indian culture, and
to make information available to tribes.
By letter dated April 19, 2011, we
contacted known tribal governments
throughout the historical range of the
lesser prairie-chicken. We sought their
input on our development of a proposed
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
Species
Vertebrate
population
where
endangered or
threatened
Historic range
Common name
*
BIRDS
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Scientific name
*
14:19 May 03, 2013
*
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
*
Frm 00028
Fmt 4702
Status
rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken and
encouraged them to contact the
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field
Office if any portion of our request was
unclear or to request additional
information. We did not receive any
comments regarding this request.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited
in this proposed rule is available on the
Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2012–0071 or
upon request from the Field Supervisor,
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed
rule are the staff members of the
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field
Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species,
Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and
Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further
amend part 17, subchapter B of chapter
I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, as proposed to be amended
at 77 FR 73828 (December 11, 2012) as
follows:
PART 17—[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for part 17
continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361–1407; 1531–
1544; 4201–4245; unless otherwise noted.
2. Amend § 17.11(h) by adding an
entry for ‘‘Prairie-chicken, lesser’’ to the
List of Endangered and Threatened
Wildlife in alphabetical order under
Birds to read as set forth below:
■
§ 17.11 Endangered and threatened
wildlife.
*
*
*
(h) * * *
When listed
*
Sfmt 4702
*
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
*
06MYP1
*
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
*
26308
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 87 / Monday, May 6, 2013 / Proposed Rules
Species
Vertebrate
population
where
endangered or
threatened
Historic range
Common name
*
Prairie-chicken, lesser
*
Scientific name
*
(Tympanuchus
pallidicinctus).
*
*
U.S.A. (CO, KS, NM,
OK, TX).
*
*
3. Amend § 17.41 by adding paragraph
(a) to read as follows:
■
pmangrum on DSK3VPTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS-1
§ 17.41
Special rules—birds.
(a) Lesser prairie-chicken
(Tympanuchus pallidicinctus).
(1) Prohibitions. Except as noted in
paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and (a)(2)(ii) of this
section, all prohibitions and provisions
of §§ 17.31 and 17.32 apply to the lesser
prairie-chicken.
(2) Exemptions from prohibitions.
Incidental take of the lesser prairiechicken will not be considered a
violation of section 9 of the Act if the
take results from any of the following:
(i) Implementation of a
comprehensive lesser prairie-chicken
conservation program that:
(A) Was developed by or in
coordination with the State agency or
agencies, or their agent(s), responsible
for the management and conservation of
fish and wildlife within the affected
State(s);
(B) Has a clear mechanism for
enrollment of participating landowners;
and
(C) Was determined by the Service to
provide a net conservation benefit to the
lesser prairie chicken, in consideration
of the following:
(1) Comprehensively addresses all of
the threats affecting the lesser prairiechicken within the program area;
(2) Establishes objective, measurable
biological goals and objectives for
population and habitat necessary to
ensure a net conservation benefit, and
provides the mechanisms by which
those goals and objectives will be
achieved;
(3) Includes the administrative and
funding mechanisms necessary for
effectively implementing all elements of
the program, including enrollment of
participating landowners, monitoring of
program activities, and enforcement of
program requirements;
(4) Employs an adaptive management
strategy to ensure future program
adaptation as necessary and
appropriate; and
(5) Includes appropriate monitoring of
effectiveness and compliance.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
14:19 May 03, 2013
Jkt 229001
Status
*
Entire
T
*
Dated: April 29, 2013.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013–10497 Filed 5–3–13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2012–0053;
Docket No. FWS–R6–ES–2013–0020;
4500030114]
RIN 1018–AY11; 1018–AZ39
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Proposed Threatened
Status for Coral Pink Sand Dunes Tiger
Beetle and Designation of Critical
Habitat
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; reopening of the
comment period.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, announce the
reopening of the public comment period
on our October 2, 2012, proposed listing
decision and proposed designation of
critical habitat for Coral Pink Sand
Dunes tiger beetle under the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended. We
SUMMARY:
Frm 00029
Fmt 4702
Critical
habitat
Special
rules
*
....................
NA
*
17.41(a)
*
(D) Is periodically reviewed by the
Service as meeting the objective for
which it was originally established
under paragraph (a)(2)(i)(B) of this
section.
(ii) Conservation practices on
privately owned agricultural land
which:
(A) Are carried out in accordance
with a conservation plan for such land
developed by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS); and
(B) Were evaluated in the June 30,
2011, conference report issued by the
Service to the NRCS in connection with
the NRCS’s Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Initiative.
*
*
*
*
*
PO 00000
When listed
Sfmt 4702
*
*
announce the availability of a draft
economic analysis (DEA), a draft
environmental assessment (EA), an
amendment to the 2009 Conservation
Agreement and Strategy for the Coral
Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle, and an
amended required determinations
section of the proposal. We also
announce the availability of 2012 Coral
Pink Sand Dunes tiger beetle survey
results that were not available when the
proposed rule was being written. We are
reopening the comment period to allow
all interested parties an opportunity to
comment simultaneously on the
proposed rule, the associated DEA, the
Draft EA, the Conservation Agreement
amendment, and the amended required
determinations section. We also
announce a public hearing to be held in
Kanab, Utah.
DATES: Written Comments: We will
consider all comments received or
postmarked on or before June 5, 2013.
Comments submitted electronically
using the Federal eRulemaking Portal
(see ADDRESSES section, below) must be
received by 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on
the closing date.
Public Information Meeting: We will
hold a public information meeting in
Kanab, Utah, on May 22, 2013, from 4
p.m. to 6 p.m. (see ADDRESSES section,
below).
Public Hearing: We will hold a public
hearing in Kanab, Utah, on May 22,
2013, from 7 p.m. to 9 p.m. (see
ADDRESSES section, below).
ADDRESSES: Document Availability: You
may obtain copies of the proposed rule
on the Internet at https://
www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS–R6–ES–2012–0053 or by
contacting the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Utah Field Office, Ecological
Services Field Office directly (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT). You
may obtain a copy of the draft economic
analysis (DEA), the draft environmental
assessment (Draft EA), the 2009
Conservation Agreement and Strategy
for the Coral Pink Sand Dunes tiger
beetle (Conservation Agreement)
amendment, and the 2012 Coral Pink
Sand Dunes tiger beetle survey results at
E:\FR\FM\06MYP1.SGM
06MYP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 87 (Monday, May 6, 2013)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 26302-26308]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-10497]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[FWS-R2-ES-2012-0071; 4500030113]
RIN 1018-AY21
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Listing the Lesser
Prairie-Chicken as a Threatened Species With a Special Rule
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; revision and reopening of comment period.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, propose to create a
special rule under authority of section 4(d) of the Endangered Species
Act of 1973, as amended (Act), that provides measures that are
necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of the lesser
prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus). In addition, we announce
the reopening of the public comment period on the December 11, 2012,
proposed rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken as a threatened
species under the Act. We also announce the availability of a draft
rangewide conservation plan for the lesser prairie-chicken, which has
been prepared by the Lesser Prairie-Chicken Interstate Working Group,
and request comments on the plan as it relates to our determination of
status under section 4(a)(1) of the Act.
DATES: We will accept comments received or postmarked on or before June
20, 2013. Comments submitted electronically using the Federal
eRulemaking Portal (see ADDRESSES, below) must be received by 11:59
p.m. Eastern Time on the closing date. We must receive requests for
public hearings, in writing, at the address shown in ADDRESSES by June
20, 2013.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-R2-ES-2012-0071,
which is the docket number for this rulemaking. You may submit a
comment by clicking on ``Comment Now!''
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2012-0071; Division of Policy and
Directives Management; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 N. Fairfax
Drive, MS 2042-PDM; Arlington, VA 22203.
We request that you send comments only by one of the methods
described above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see the Public Comments section
below for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dixie Porter, Field Supervisor,
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field Office, 9014 East 21st Street,
Tulsa, OK 74129; by telephone 918-581-7458 or by facsimile 918-581-
7467. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD)
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 800-877-8339.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
This document consists of: (1) A proposed special rule under
section 4(d) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), that outlines the prohibitions, and exceptions to
those prohibitions, necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the lesser prairie-chicken; and (2) a reopening of the
comment period for the proposed rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken
as a threatened species under the Act.
Why We Need To Publish a Proposed Rule. On December 11, 2012, the
Service published a proposed rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken as
a threatened species under the Act (77 FR 73828). At that time, the
Service indicated that we would consider whether to subsequently
propose a section 4(d) special rule (hereafter referred to as 4(d)
special rule). Section 4(d) of the Act specifies that, for threatened
species, the Secretary shall issue such regulations as [s]he deems
necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of the species.
This proposed 4(d) special rule provides measures that are tailored to
the conservation needs of the lesser prairie-chicken.
What Is the Effect of This Proposed Rule? At the time of the 2012
proposed listing rule (77 FR 73828), we indicated that we would
consider whether to subsequently propose a 4(d) special rule for the
lesser prairie-chicken. We are now proposing a 4(d) special rule and
intend to finalize it concurrent with the final listing rule, if the
results of our final listing determination conclude that threatened
species status is appropriate.
The proposed 4(d) special rule allows for take of the lesser
prairie-chicken incidental to activities conducted pursuant to a
comprehensive conservation program that was developed by or in
coordination with a State agency and that has been determined by the
Service pursuant to the criteria outlined in this proposed rule to
provide a net conservation benefit to the lesser prairie-chicken.
Additionally, the proposed 4(d) special rule provides that any take of
lesser prairie-chickens incidental to agricultural activities that are
included within a conservation plan developed by the Natural Resources
Conservation Service (NRCS) for private agricultural lands in
connection with NRCS's Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative (LPCI), as
specified in this proposed rule, is not a prohibited action under the
Act. If an activity resulting in take of lesser prairie-chicken is not
exempted under this 4(d) special rule, then the general prohibitions at
50 CFR 17.31 would apply. We would require a permit for such an
activity as specified in our regulations. Nothing in this proposed 4(d)
special rule affects the consultation requirements under section 7 of
the Act.
[[Page 26303]]
The Basis for Our Action. Under section 4(d) of the Act, the
Secretary of the Interior has discretion to issue such regulations as
[s]he deems necessary and advisable to provide for the conservation of
the species. The Secretary also has the discretion to prohibit by
regulation with respect to a threatened species any act prohibited by
section 9(a)(1) of the Act.
Public Comments
To allow the public to comment simultaneously on this proposed 4(d)
special rule, the proposed listing rule, and the draft rangewide
conservation plan for the lesser prairie-chicken prepared by the Lesser
Prairie-Chicken Interstate Working Group, we also announce the
reopening of the comment period on the Service's December 11, 2012,
proposed rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken as a threatened
species under the Act. We intend to finalize the 4(d) special rule
concurrent with the final listing rule, if the result of our final
listing determination concludes that threatened species status is
appropriate. Any final action resulting from the proposed rules will be
based on the best scientific and commercial data available and be as
accurate and as effective as possible. Therefore, we request comments
or information from other concerned governmental agencies, Native
American tribes, the scientific community, industry, general public,
and other interested parties concerning the proposed listing rule and
4(d) special rule. We particularly seek comments regarding:
(1) The historical and current status and distribution of the
lesser prairie-chicken, its biology and ecology, specific threats (or
lack thereof) and regulations that may be addressing those threats and
ongoing conservation measures for the species and its habitat.
(2) Information relevant to the factors that are the basis for
making a listing determination for a species under section 4(a) of the
Act, which are:
(a) The present or threatened destruction, modification, or
curtailment of the species' habitat or range;
(b) Overutilization for commercial, recreational, scientific, or
educational purposes;
(c) Disease or predation;
(d) The inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms; or
(e) Other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued
existence and threats to the species or its habitat.
(3) Application of the Lesser Prairie-Chicken Interstate Working
Group's draft rangewide conservation plan to our determination of
status under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, particularly comments or
information to help us assess the certainty that the rangewide
conservation plan will be effective in conserving the lesser prairie-
chicken and will be implemented.
(4) Which areas would be appropriate as critical habitat for the
species and why areas should or should not be proposed for designation
as critical habitat, including whether any threats to the species from
human activity would be expected to increase due to the designation and
whether that increase in threat would outweigh the benefit of
designation such that the designation of critical habitat may not be
prudent.
(5) Specific information on:
(a) The amount and distribution of habitat for the lesser prairie-
chicken;
(b) What may constitute ``physical or biological features essential
to the conservation of the species,'' within the geographical range
currently occupied by the species;
(c) Where these features are currently found;
(d) Whether any of these features may require special management
considerations or protection;
(e) What areas, that were occupied at the time of listing (or are
currently occupied) and that contain features essential to the
conservation of the species, should be included in the designation and
why; and
(f) What areas not occupied at the time of listing are essential
for the conservation of the species and why.
(6) Information on the projected and reasonably likely impacts of
climate change on the lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat.
(7) Whether measures outlined in this proposed 4(d) special rule
are necessary and advisable for the conservation and management of the
lesser prairie-chicken.
(8) Information concerning whether it would be appropriate to
include in the 4(d) special rule a provision that would allow continued
enrollment in existing Candidate Conservation Agreements with
Assurances for the lesser prairie-chicken. These existing agreements
would be recognized as Service-approved conservation plans and their
take authorization and continued enrollment would be provided for under
this 4(d) special rule.
(9) Information concerning whether it would be appropriate to
include in the 4(d) special rule a provision for take of lesser
prairie-chickens in accordance with applicable State law for
educational or scientific purposes, the enhancement of propagation or
survival of the species, zoological exhibition, and other conservation
purposes consistent with the Act.
(10) Information concerning whether it would be appropriate to
include in the 4(d) special rule a provision for take of lesser
prairie-chickens in the course of State-managed hunting programs for
the lesser prairie-chicken or incidental to hunting activities directed
at greater prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus cupido), including any
information about State management plans related to hunting regulations
and any measures within those plans that may avoid or minimize the risk
of lesser prairie-chicken mortality incidental to lawful hunting for
the greater prairie-chicken.
(11) Whether and how the Service should expand the scope of this
4(d) special rule to encourage landowners removing their lands from the
Conservation Reserve Program to continue managing those areas for the
benefit of the lesser prairie-chicken.
(12) Whether and how the Service should expand the scope of this
4(d) special rule to encourage farmers and ranchers not participating
in the Natural Resources Conservation Service's Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Initiative to manage their lands for the benefit of the lesser prairie-
chicken.
(13) Whether the Service should expand the scope of this 4(d)
special rule to allow incidental take of lesser prairie-chickens if the
take results from implementation of a comprehensive lesser prairie-
chicken conservation program that was developed by an entity other than
a State agency or their agent(s).
(14) Additional provisions the Service may wish to consider for a
4(d) special rule in order to conserve, recover, and manage the lesser
prairie-chicken.
We will consider all comments and information received during our
preparation of a final determination on the status of the species and
the 4(d) special rule. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from
this proposal.
Please note that comments merely stating support for or opposition
to the actions under consideration without providing supporting
information, although noted, will not be considered in making a
determination, as section 4(b)(1)(A) of the Act directs that
determinations as to whether any species is a threatened or endangered
species must be made ``solely on the basis of the best scientific and
commercial data available.''
You may submit your comments and materials concerning this proposed
rule by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We request that you
send comments only by the methods described in ADDRESSES.
[[Page 26304]]
If you submit information via https://www.regulations.gov, your
entire submission--including any personal identifying information--will
be posted on the Web site. If your submission is made via a hardcopy
that includes personal identifying information, you may request at the
top of your document that we withhold this information from public
review. However, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will post all hardcopy submissions on https://www.regulations.gov.
Please include sufficient information with your comments to allow us to
verify any scientific or commercial information you include.
Comments and materials we receive, as well as supporting
documentation we used in preparing this proposed rule, will be
available for public inspection on https://www.regulations.gov, or by
appointment, during normal business hours, at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Oklahoma Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Previous Federal Actions
A settlement agreement in In re Endangered Species Act Section 4
Deadline Litigation, No. 10-377 (EGS), MDL Docket No. 2165 (D.D.C. May
10, 2011) was reached with WildEarth Guardians in which we agreed to
submit a proposed listing rule for the lesser prairie-chicken to the
Federal Register for publication by September 30, 2012. On September
27, 2012, the settlement agreement was modified to require that the
proposed listing rule be submitted to the Federal Register on or before
November 29, 2012. On December 11, 2012, we published in the Federal
Register a proposed rule to list the lesser prairie-chicken as a
threatened species under the Act (77 FR 73828). The proposed listing
rule had a 90-day comment period, ending March 11, 2013. We held a
public meeting and hearing in Woodward, Oklahoma, on February 5, 2013;
in Garden City, Kansas, on February 7, 2013; in Lubbock, Texas, on
February 11, 2013; and in Roswell, New Mexico, on February 12, 2013.
Pursuant to the settlement agreement, a final listing determination is
to be submitted to the Federal Register on or before September 30,
2013, unless the Secretary finds that substantial disagreement exists
regarding the sufficiency or accuracy of the available data relevant to
the listing determination, in which case the final listing
determination is to be submitted to the Federal Register on or before
March 31, 2014.
For information on previous Federal actions pertaining to the
lesser prairie-chicken, please refer to the proposed listing rule,
which we published in the Federal Register on December 11, 2012 (77 FR
73828).
Background
This document discusses only those topics directly relevant to the
proposed 4(d) special rule for the lesser prairie-chicken. For more
information on the lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat, please refer
to the December 11, 2012, proposed listing rule (77 FR 73828), which is
available online at https://www.regulations.gov (at Docket Number FWS-
R2-ES-2012-0071) or from the Oklahoma Ecological Services Field Office
(see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
As discussed in the proposed listing rule, the primary factors
supporting the proposed threatened species status for the lesser
prairie-chicken are the impacts of cumulative habitat loss and
fragmentation. These impacts are the result of conversion of grasslands
to agricultural uses; encroachment by invasive woody plants; wind
energy development; petroleum production; and presence of roads and
manmade vertical structures including towers, utility lines, fences,
turbines, wells, and buildings.
The Act does not specify particular prohibitions, or exceptions to
those prohibitions, for threatened species. Instead, under section 4(d)
of the Act, the Secretary of the Interior has the discretion to issue
such regulations as [s]he deems necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation of such species. The Secretary also has the discretion
to prohibit by regulation with respect to any threatened species, any
act prohibited under section 9(a)(1) of the Act. Exercising this
discretion, the Service developed general prohibitions (50 CFR 17.31)
and exceptions to those prohibitions (50 CFR 17.32) under the Act that
apply to most threatened species. Alternately, for other threatened
species, the Service may develop specific prohibitions and exceptions
that are tailored to the specific conservation needs of the species. In
such cases, some of the prohibitions and authorizations under 50 CFR
17.31 and 17.32 may be appropriate for the species and incorporated
into a special rule under section 4(d) of the Act, but the 4(d) special
rule will also include provisions that are tailored to the specific
conservation needs of the threatened species and may be more or less
restrictive than the general provisions at 50 CFR 17.31.
At the time of the proposed listing rule, we indicated that we
would consider whether to subsequently propose a 4(d) special rule for
the lesser prairie-chicken. In that proposed rule, we solicited public
comments as to which prohibitions, and exceptions to those
prohibitions, are necessary and advisable to provide for the
conservation of the lesser prairie-chicken. In recognition of
conservation efforts that provide for conservation and management of
the lesser prairie-chicken and its habitat in a manner consistent with
the purposes of the Act, we are now proposing a 4(d) special rule that
outlines the prohibitions, and exceptions to those prohibitions,
necessary and advisable for the conservation of the lesser prairie-
chicken.
Since the time of the proposed listing rule, the Lesser Prairie-
Chicken Interstate Working Group, in association with the Western
Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, has drafted a rangewide
conservation plan for the lesser prairie-chicken. We would like to
consider the conservation measures in this plan in our final listing
determination for the lesser prairie-chicken. As such, we are reopening
the comment period to allow the public an opportunity to provide
comment on the draft plan as it applies to our determination of status
under section 4(a)(1) of the Act, particularly comments or information
to help us assess the certainty that the rangewide conservation plan
will be effective in conserving the lesser prairie-chicken and will be
implemented. The draft plan is available on the Internet in Docket No.
FWS-R2-ES-2012-0071 at https://www.regulations.gov.
Provisions of the Proposed 4(d) Special Rule for the Lesser Prairie-
Chicken
Under section 4(d) of the Act, the Secretary may publish a special
rule that modifies the standard protections for threatened species with
special measures tailored to the conservation of the species that are
determined to be necessary and advisable. Under this proposed 4(d)
special rule, the Service proposes that all of the prohibitions under
50 CFR 17.31 and 17.32 will apply to the lesser prairie-chicken, except
as noted below. The proposed 4(d) special rule will not remove or alter
in any way the consultation requirements under section 7 of the Act.
Conservation Programs
The Service proposes that take incidental to activities conducted
pursuant to a comprehensive conservation program that was developed by
or in coordination with the State agency or agencies responsible
[[Page 26305]]
for the management and conservation of fish and wildlife within the
affected State(s), or their agent(s), that has a clear mechanism for
enrollment of participating landowners, and that has been determined by
the Service to provide a net conservation benefit to the lesser
prairie-chicken, will not be prohibited. In making its determination,
the Service will consider:
(i) Whether the program comprehensively addresses all the threats
affecting the lesser prairie-chicken within the program area;
(ii) Whether the program establishes objective, measurable
biological goals and objectives for population and habitat necessary to
ensure a net conservation benefit, and provides the mechanisms by which
those goals and objectives will be achieved;
(iii) Whether the program administrators demonstrate the capability
and funding mechanisms for effectively implementing all elements of the
conservation program, including enrollment of participating landowners,
monitoring of program activities, and enforcement of program
requirements;
(iv) Whether the program employs an adaptive management strategy to
ensure future program adaptation as necessary and appropriate; and
(v) Whether the program includes appropriate monitoring of
effectiveness and compliance.
The Service proposes this 4(d) special rule in recognition of the
significant conservation planning efforts occurring throughout the
range of the lesser prairie-chicken for the purpose of reducing or
eliminating threats affecting the species. Multiple Federal and State
agencies have developed localized conservation programs throughout the
range of the lesser prairie-chicken, and these programs have provided a
conservation benefit to the species. However, existing programs do not
address the suite of factors contributing to cumulative habitat loss
and fragmentation, the species' primary threat, across the entire five-
state range of the lesser prairie-chicken.
The criteria presented here are meant to encourage the development
of a coordinated and comprehensive effort to improve habitat conditions
and the status of the species across its entire range. For the Service
to approve coverage of a comprehensive conservation program under this
4(d) special rule, the program must provide a net conservation benefit
to the lesser prairie-chicken population. Conservation, as defined in
section 3(3) of the Act, means ``to use and the use of all methods and
procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or
threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant
to the Act are no longer necessary.'' The program must also be
periodically reviewed by the Service and determined that it continues
to provide a net conservation benefit to the lesser prairie-chicken. As
a result of this provision, the Service expects that rangewide
conservation actions will be implemented with a high level of certainty
that the program will lead to the long-term conservation of the lesser
prairie-chicken.
Agricultural Activities
The Service proposes that take of the lesser prairie-chicken will
not be prohibited provided the take is incidental to activities that
are conducted in accordance with NRCS's Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Initiative (LPCI).
The LPCI provides financial and technical assistance to
participating landowners to implement practices beneficial to the
lesser prairie-chicken that also contribute to the sustainability of
landowners' agricultural operations. Conservation practice standards
encompassed by the LPCI focus primarily on upland wildlife habitat
management and include brush management, prescribed grazing, range
planting, prescribed burning and restoration of rare and declining
habitats. In all, 22 conservation practice standards are implemented
under the LPCI.
The Service issued a conference report to the NRCS in connection
with the NRCS's LPCI on June 30, 2011 (https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1044884.pdf), in which the Service
determined that the proposed action, which incorporates the procedures,
practice standards, and conservation measures of the LPCI, is not
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the lesser prairie-
chicken. Conference procedures under section 7 of the Act are required
only when a Federal agency (action agency) proposes an activity that is
likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a species that has been
proposed for listing under the Act or when the proposed activity is
likely to destroy or adversely modify proposed critical habitat.
However, conference procedures may also be used to assist an action
agency in planning a proposed action so that potential conflicts may be
identified and resolved early in the planning process. During the
conference, the Service may provide recommendations on ways to avoid or
minimize adverse effects of the proposed action. The conclusions
reached during a conference and any subsequent recommendations are then
provided to the action agency in a conference report.
This provision of the proposed 4(d) special rule for agricultural
activities will promote conservation of the species by encouraging
landowners and ranchers to continue managing the remaining landscape in
ways that meet the needs of their operation while simultaneously
providing suitable habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken.
Proposed Determination
Section 4(d) of the Act states that ``the Secretary shall issue
such regulations as [s]he deems necessary and advisable to provide for
the conservation'' of species listed as a threatened species.
Conservation is defined in the Act to mean ``to use and the use of all
methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered
species or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to [the Act] are no longer necessary.'' Additionally,
section 4(d) states that the Secretary ``may by regulation prohibit
with respect to any threatened species any act prohibited under section
9(a)(1).''
The courts have recognized the extent of the Secretary's discretion
under this standard to develop rules that are appropriate for the
conservation of a species. For example, the Secretary may find that it
is necessary and advisable not to include a taking prohibition, or to
include a limited taking prohibition. See Alsea Valley Alliance v.
Lautenbacher, 2007 U.S. Dist. Lexis 60203 (D. Or. 2007); Washington
Environmental Council v. National Marine Fisheries Service, and 2002
U.S. Dist. Lexis 5432 (W.D. Wash. 2002). In addition, as affirmed in
State of Louisiana v. Verity, 853 F.2d 322 (5th Cir. 1988), the rule
need not address all the threats to the species. As noted by Congress
when the Act was initially enacted, ``once an animal is on the
threatened list, the Secretary has an almost infinite number of options
available to him with regard to the permitted activities for those
species. [S]he may, for example, permit taking, but not importation of
such species,'' or [s]he may choose to forbid both taking and
importation but allow the transportation of such species, as long as
the measures will ``serve to conserve, protect, or restore the species
concerned in accordance with the purposes of the Act'' (H.R. Rep. No.
412, 93rd Cong., 1st Sess. 1973).
Section 9 prohibitions make it illegal for any person subject to
the jurisdiction of the United States to take (including harass, harm,
pursue, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect; or attempt
[[Page 26306]]
any of these), import or export, ship in interstate commerce in the
course of commercial activity, or sell or offer for sale in interstate
or foreign commerce any wildlife species listed as an endangered
species, without written authorization. It also is illegal under
section 9(a)(1) of the Act to possess, sell, deliver, carry, transport,
or ship any such wildlife that is taken illegally. Prohibited actions
consistent with section 9 of the Act are outlined for threatened
species in 50 CFR 17.31(a) and (b). This proposed 4(d) special rule
proposes that all prohibitions in 50 CFR 17.31(a) and (b) will apply to
the lesser prairie-chicken, except in two instances.
First, we propose that none of the provisions in 50 CFR 17.31 would
apply to actions that result from activities associated with a
comprehensive conservation program developed by or in coordination with
the State agency or agencies responsible for the management and
conservation of fish and wildlife within the affected State(s), or
their agent(s), and that the Service determines provides a net
conservation benefit for the lesser prairie-chicken. The 4(d) special
rule identifies a set of criteria the Service proposes to use to
evaluate such programs. Among additional considerations, the approval
criteria require that the program provides lesser prairie-chicken
population and habitat targets necessary to ensure a net conservation
benefit for the species across the plan area in addition to mechanisms
for achieving those targets. In this way, actions in the comprehensive
conservation program will ultimately contribute to the conservation of
the species. Conservation is defined in section 3(3) of the Act as ``to
use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to
bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at
which the measures provided pursuant to the Act are no longer
necessary.'' As a result of this provision, the Service expects that
rangewide conservation actions will be implemented with a high level of
certainty that the program will lead to the long-term conservation of
the lesser prairie-chicken.
Second, we also propose that none of the provisions in 50 CFR 17.31
would apply to actions resulting from activities that are included in
or covered under NRCS's Lesser Prairie-Chicken Initiative (LPCI).
According to the proposed rule, the primary factors supporting the
proposed threatened status for the lesser prairie-chicken are the
impacts of cumulative habitat loss and fragmentation. Allowing the
continuation of agricultural operations consistent with these criteria
encourages landowners to continue managing the remaining landscape in
ways that meet the needs of their operation while simultaneously
providing suitable habitat for the lesser prairie-chicken.
Based on the rationale explained above, the provisions included in
this proposed 4(d) special rule are necessary and advisable to provide
for the conservation of the lesser prairie-chicken. Nothing in this
proposed 4(d) special rule changes in any way the recovery planning
provisions of section 4(f) and consultation requirements under section
7 of the Act or the ability of the Service to enter into partnerships
for the management and protection of the lesser prairie-chicken.
Additional Provisions Under Consideration
The Service is considering several additional provisions and
specifically seeks information and comment on the following issues at
this time.
First, several approved candidate conservation agreements (CCAs)
and candidate conservation agreements with assurances (CCAAs) are in
place for the lesser prairie-chicken. We are seeking comment on a
provision that would allow continued enrollment in the existing CCAs
and CCAAs beyond the effective date of a final listing determination,
if the results of our final listing determination conclude that
threatened species status is appropriate. The approved agreements for
the lesser prairie-chicken include the CCA/CCAA for Lesser Prairie-
Chicken and Sand Dune Lizard in New Mexico, developed cooperatively by
the Service, the Bureau of Land Management, and the Center for
Excellence for Hazardous Materials Management (2008); the Agricultural
CCAA for Lesser Prairie-Chickens between Oklahoma Department of
Wildlife Conservation and the Service (2013); and the CCAA for Lesser
Prairie-Chickens Between Texas Parks and Wildlife Department and the
Service (2006).
The Service is also considering whether it is appropriate to
include a provision for take of lesser prairie-chicken when that take
is in accordance with applicable State law for educational or
scientific purposes, the enhancement of propagation or survival of the
species, zoological exhibition, and other conservation purposes
consistent with the Act. An example of an activity that could be
covered under such a provision includes presence/absence and population
monitoring surveys. Such surveys are typically conducted during the
breeding season and may cause disturbance on the breeding grounds,
particularly when flush counts are used to estimate the number of birds
attending those leks. Occasionally recorded calls are used to aid in
the detection of known or suspected leks, which may cause some
disturbance of courting males. However, if surveys are conducted in
accordance with scientifically accepted methodologies, minimal short-
term impact to lesser prairie-chickens, primarily in the form of
harassment, should occur.
The Service is also considering whether it is appropriate to
include a provision for take of lesser prairie-chickens in the course
of State-managed hunting programs for the lesser prairie-chicken or
incidental to legal hunting activities directed at greater prairie-
chickens. These two species, which are similar in appearance, overlap
in portions of approximately 12 counties in Kansas. Limited mortality
of lesser prairie-chickens occurs as a result of hunting activities
directed at greater prairie-chickens. We request information and
comment on these issues, including State management plans related to
hunting regulations and any measures within those plans that may avoid
or minimize the risk of lesser prairie-chicken mortality from hunting
for greater prairie-chickens.
Finally, the Service is also considering whether it is appropriate
to expand the scope of the 4(d) special rule to: (a) Encourage
landowners removing their lands from the Conservation Reserve Program
to continue managing those areas for the benefit of the lesser prairie-
chicken; (b) encourage farmers and ranchers not participating in the
Natural Resources Conservation Service's Lesser Prairie-Chicken
Initiative to manage their lands for the benefit of the lesser prairie-
chicken; and (c) allow incidental take of lesser prairie-chickens if
the take results from implementation of a comprehensive lesser prairie-
chicken conservation program that was developed by an entity other than
a State agency or their agent(s) or was developed without coordination
with a State agency or their agent(s).
Peer Review
In accordance with our joint policy published in the Federal
Register on July 1, 1994 (59 FR 34270), we will seek the expert
opinions of at least three appropriate and independent specialists
regarding this proposed rule. The purpose of such review is to ensure
that our determination of status for this species is based on
scientifically sound data, assumptions, and analyses. We will send peer
reviewers copies of this
[[Page 26307]]
proposed rule immediately following publication in the Federal
Register. We will invite these peer reviewers to comment, during the
reopening of the public comment period, on our use and interpretation
of the science used in developing our proposed rule to list the lesser
prairie-chicken and this proposed 4(d) special rule.
We will consider all comments and information we receive during the
comment period on this proposed rule during preparation of a final
rulemaking. Accordingly, the final decision may differ from this
proposal.
Required Determinations
Clarity of the Rule
We are required by Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and by the
Presidential Memorandum of June 1, 1998, to write all rules in plain
language. This means that each rule we publish must: (a) Be logically
organized; (b) use the active voice to address readers directly; (c)
use clear language rather than jargon; (d) be divided into short
sections and sentences; and (e) use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the proposed rule, your comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections
or paragraphs that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences
are too long, the sections where you feel lists or tables would be
useful, etc.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501, et seq.)
This rule does not contain any new collections of information that
require approval by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act. This rule will not impose recordkeeping or
reporting requirements on State or local governments, individuals,
businesses, or organizations. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and
a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information
unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.)
We have determined that environmental assessments and environmental
impact statements, as defined under the authority of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, need not be prepared in connection
with listing a species as an endangered or threatened species under the
Endangered Species Act. We published a notice outlining our reasons for
this determination in the Federal Register on October 25, 1983 (48 FR
49244). We intend to incorporate this proposed special rule into our
final determination concerning the listing of the species or withdrawal
of the proposal if new information is provided that supports that
decision.
Government-to-Government Relationship With Tribes
In accordance with the President's memorandum of April 29, 1994
(Government-to-Government Relations with Native American Tribal
Governments; 59 FR 22951), Executive Order 13175 (Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments), and the Department of the
Interior's manual at 512 DM 2, we readily acknowledge our
responsibility to communicate meaningfully with recognized Federal
Tribes on a government-to-government basis. In accordance with
Secretarial Order 3206 of June 5, 1997 (American Indian Tribal Rights,
Federal-Tribal Trust Responsibilities, and the Endangered Species Act),
we readily acknowledge our responsibilities to work directly with
tribes in developing programs for healthy ecosystems, to acknowledge
that tribal lands are not subject to the same controls as Federal
public lands, to remain sensitive to Indian culture, and to make
information available to tribes.
By letter dated April 19, 2011, we contacted known tribal
governments throughout the historical range of the lesser prairie-
chicken. We sought their input on our development of a proposed rule to
list the lesser prairie-chicken and encouraged them to contact the
Oklahoma Ecological Services Field Office if any portion of our request
was unclear or to request additional information. We did not receive
any comments regarding this request.
References Cited
A complete list of all references cited in this proposed rule is
available on the Internet at https://www.regulations.gov at Docket No.
FWS-R2-ES-2012-0071 or upon request from the Field Supervisor, Oklahoma
Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT).
Authors
The primary authors of this proposed rule are the staff members of
the Oklahoma Ecological Services Field Office (see FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, and Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, we propose to further amend part 17, subchapter B of
chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, as proposed to
be amended at 77 FR 73828 (December 11, 2012) as follows:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
0
1. The authority citation for part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 1531-1544; 4201-4245; unless
otherwise noted.
0
2. Amend Sec. 17.11(h) by adding an entry for ``Prairie-chicken,
lesser'' to the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in
alphabetical order under Birds to read as set forth below:
Sec. 17.11 Endangered and threatened wildlife.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Vertebrate
---------------------------------------------------------- population
Historic range where Status When listed Critical Special
Common name Scientific name endangered or habitat rules
threatened
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* * * * * * *
Birds
[[Page 26308]]
* * * * * * *
Prairie-chicken, lesser........... (Tympanuchus U.S.A. (CO, KS, NM, Entire T ............ NA 17.41(a)
pallidicinctus). OK, TX).
* * * * * * *
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
3. Amend Sec. 17.41 by adding paragraph (a) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.41 Special rules--birds.
(a) Lesser prairie-chicken (Tympanuchus pallidicinctus).
(1) Prohibitions. Except as noted in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) and
(a)(2)(ii) of this section, all prohibitions and provisions of
Sec. Sec. 17.31 and 17.32 apply to the lesser prairie-chicken.
(2) Exemptions from prohibitions. Incidental take of the lesser
prairie-chicken will not be considered a violation of section 9 of the
Act if the take results from any of the following:
(i) Implementation of a comprehensive lesser prairie-chicken
conservation program that:
(A) Was developed by or in coordination with the State agency or
agencies, or their agent(s), responsible for the management and
conservation of fish and wildlife within the affected State(s);
(B) Has a clear mechanism for enrollment of participating
landowners; and
(C) Was determined by the Service to provide a net conservation
benefit to the lesser prairie chicken, in consideration of the
following:
(1) Comprehensively addresses all of the threats affecting the
lesser prairie-chicken within the program area;
(2) Establishes objective, measurable biological goals and
objectives for population and habitat necessary to ensure a net
conservation benefit, and provides the mechanisms by which those goals
and objectives will be achieved;
(3) Includes the administrative and funding mechanisms necessary
for effectively implementing all elements of the program, including
enrollment of participating landowners, monitoring of program
activities, and enforcement of program requirements;
(4) Employs an adaptive management strategy to ensure future
program adaptation as necessary and appropriate; and
(5) Includes appropriate monitoring of effectiveness and
compliance.
(D) Is periodically reviewed by the Service as meeting the
objective for which it was originally established under paragraph
(a)(2)(i)(B) of this section.
(ii) Conservation practices on privately owned agricultural land
which:
(A) Are carried out in accordance with a conservation plan for such
land developed by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS);
and
(B) Were evaluated in the June 30, 2011, conference report issued
by the Service to the NRCS in connection with the NRCS's Lesser
Prairie-Chicken Initiative.
* * * * *
Dated: April 29, 2013.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-10497 Filed 5-3-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P