Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Issuance of Annual Regulations Permitting the Hunting of Migratory Birds, 32686-32688 [2013-12443]

Download as PDF 32686 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Notices Hampton VA 23681 Landholding Agency: NASA Property Number: 71201320002 Status: Excess Comments: Located w/in secured area; public access denied & no alter. w/out compromising nat’l sec. Reasons: Secured Area [FR Doc. 2013–12758 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4210–67–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R3–ES–2013–N127; FXES11130300000F3–234–FF03E00000] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permit Applications Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability of permit applications; request for comments. AGENCY: tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), invite the public to comment on the following applications to conduct certain activities with endangered species. With some exceptions, the Endangered Species Act (Act) prohibits activities with endangered and threatened species unless a Federal permit allows such activity. The Act requires that we invite public comment before issuing these permits. DATES: We must receive any written comments on or before July 1, 2013. ADDRESSES: Send written comments by U.S. mail to the Regional Director, Attn: Lisa Mandell, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Ecological Services, 5600 American Blvd. West, Suite 990, Bloomington, MN 55437–1458; or by electronic mail to permitsR3ES@fws.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lisa Mandell, (612) 713–5343. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Background We invite public comment on the following permit applications for certain activities with endangered species authorized by section 10(a)(1)(A) of the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and our regulations governing the taking of endangered species in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 50 CFR part 17. Submit your written data, comments, or request for a copy of the complete application to the address shown in ADDRESSES. Permit Applications Permit Application Number: TE06873B. Applicant: Drew R. Carson, Cincinnati, OH. VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:40 May 30, 2013 Jkt 229001 The applicant requests a permit to take (capture and release) Indiana bats (Myotis sodalis) and Gray bats (Myotis grisescens) throughout the range of the species in Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Tennessee. Proposed activities are for the recovery and enhancement of survival of the species in the wild. Permit Application Number: TE07292B. Applicant: Matthew J. Clement, U.S. Geological Survey, Laurel, MD. The applicant requests a permit to take (capture and release) Indiana bats and gray bats within the States of Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, and Wisconsin. Proposed activities are for the recovery and enhancement of survival of the species in the wild. Permit Application Number: TE07293B. Applicant: Daniel J. Call, Dubuque, IA. The applicant requests a permit to take (capture and release) Higgins eye pearlymussel (Lampsilis higginsii), winged mapleleaf mussel (Quadrula fragosa), fat pocketbook (Potamilus capax), Scaleshell (Leptodea leptodon), Sheepnose (Plethobasus cyphyus), and Spectaclecase (Cumberlandia monodonta) within the Upper Mississippi River, Pool 12 (Illinois). The proposed activity is for the recovery and enhancement of survival of the species in the wild. Permit Application Number: TE07294B. Applicant: Ecological Specialties, LLC, Symsonia, KY. The applicant requests a permit to take (capture and release) Indiana bats, gray bats, Virginia big-eared bats (Corynorhinus townsendii virginianus), Ozark big-eared bats (Corynorhinus townsendii ingens), Mexican long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris nivalis), and Sanborn’s long-nosed bat (Leptonycteris sanborni (=yerbabuenae)) throughout the States of Alabama, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. Proposed activities are for the recovery and enhancement of survival of the species in the wild. Permit Application Number: TE07295B. Applicant: Blue Creek Wind Farm, LLC, Van Wert, OH. The applicant requests a permit to take (harm, harass, kill) Indiana bats in Paulding and Van Wert Counties, Ohio. Proposed activities include a research study of methods to reduce bat fatality PO 00000 Frm 00065 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 rates and a study of the meteorological conditions associated with casualty rates at the Blue Creek Wind Farm. Proposed activities are aimed at conservation of the species through reduction of impacts at wind energy facilities. Public Comments We seek public review and comments on these permit applications. Please refer to the permit number when you submit comments. Comments and materials we receive are available for public inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the address shown in the ADDRESSES section. Before including your address, phone number, email address, or other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire comment—including your personal identifying information—may be made publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. Dated: May 24, 2013. Lynn M. Lewis, Assistant Regional Director, Ecological Services, Midwest Region. [FR Doc. 2013–12895 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 a.m.] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS–R9–MB–2012–N056; FF09M21200– 134–FXMB1231099BPP0] Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Issuance of Annual Regulations Permitting the Hunting of Migratory Birds Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of availability. AGENCY: SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) has prepared a final supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for the issuance of annual regulations permitting the hunting of migratory birds. We published a draft environmental impact statement in July 2010. We considered over 280 public comments in revising the document. The SEIS analyzes a range of management alternatives for addressing the hunting of migratory birds. The analysis provided in the final SEIS is intended to: inform the public of the proposed action and alternatives; address public comments we received on the draft SEIS; and disclose the E:\FR\FM\31MYN1.SGM 31MYN1 tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Notices direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the proposed action and each of the alternatives. DATES: The public inspection period for the final SEIS will last 30 days and will end on July 1, 2013. ADDRESSES: You may inspect comments during normal business hours at the office of the Pacific Flyway Representative, 911 NE 11th Ave., Portland, OR 97232. The final SEIS is available by either writing to the street address indicated above or by viewing it on our Web site at https:// www.fws.gov/migratorybirds. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Trost, Pacific Flyway Representative, Division of Migratory Bird Management, (503) 231–6162; or Brad Bortner, Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management, (703) 358– 1714. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 8, 2005, and again on March 9, 2006, the Service published notice in the Federal Register (70 FR 53376 and 71 FR 12216, respectively) announcing that we intended to prepare a supplemental environmental impact statement for the issuance of annual regulations permitting the hunting of migratory birds. In those notices, we invited public comments on the scope and substance of the SEIS, particular issues the SEIS should address and why, and options or alternatives we should consider. Please refer to the notices (70 FR 53376 and 71 FR 12216) for further information about our regulatory process pertaining to the hunting of migratory birds. We received public comments on the notices, considered those comments, and developed a draft SEIS that we made available in a July 9, 2010, Federal Register notice (75 FR 39577) in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), its implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 to 1508), and Service procedures for compliance with those regulations. The final SEIS evaluates seven components of the proposed action regarding how we establish the annual regulations for the hunting of migratory birds. The first six components deal with the fall-winter hunting season and include: (1) Schedule and timing of the general regulatory process. Promulgation of annual hunting regulations relies on a well-defined process of monitoring, data collection, and scientific assessment. At key points during that process, Flyway Technical Committees, Flyway Councils, and the public review and provide valuable input on technical VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:40 May 30, 2013 Jkt 229001 assessments or other documents related to proposed regulatory frameworks. After we adopt final regulatory frameworks, each State selects its seasons, usually following its own schedule of public hearings and other deliberations. After State selections are completed, the Service adopts them as Federal regulations through publication in the Federal Register. In the final SEIS, we present four alternatives regarding the schedule and timing of the general regulatory process. (2) Frequency of review and adoption of duck regulatory packages. Duck regulatory packages are the set of framework regulations that apply to the general duck hunting seasons. Packages include opening and closing dates, season lengths, daily bag limits, and shooting hours. Current regulatory packages contain a set of frameworks for each of the four flyways and a set of four regulatory alternatives: restrictive (relatively short seasons and low daily bag limits), moderate (intermediate season lengths and daily bag limits), liberal (longer seasons and higher daily bag limits), and closed. In the final SEIS, we present two alternatives regarding how frequently duck regulatory packages should be reviewed and adopted. (3) Stock-specific harvest strategies. We define a stock as a species, population, or portion of a population that is treated separately for harvest management purposes. Harvest strategies have been developed for stocks deemed not biologically capable of sustaining the same harvest levels that jointly managed stocks are capable of sustaining, or whose migration and distribution do not conform to patterns followed by the most commonly harvested species. The final SEIS presents three alternatives regarding the use of stock-specific harvest strategies. (4) Special regulations. Special regulations differ from stock harvest strategies because they entail additional days of harvest opportunity outside the established frameworks for general seasons. Special regulations are employed to provide additional harvest opportunity on overabundant species, species that are lightly harvested and can sustain greater harvest pressure, or stocks whose migration and distribution provide opportunities outside the time period in which regular seasons are held. In the final SEIS, we offer two alternatives concerning the development of special regulations. (5) Management scale for the harvest of migratory birds. We define management scale as the geographic area in which stocks are monitored and harvest is managed. The finer the scale PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 32687 of management employed in harvest management, the higher the cost of monitoring to management agencies. The desire for smaller management scales is driven by the potential for increased harvest opportunity associated with more refined geographic management. The final SEIS presents three alternatives regarding the scale at which migratory birds should be managed. (6) Zones and split seasons. A zone is a geographic area or portion of a State, with a contiguous boundary, for which an independent season may be selected. A split is a situation where a season is broken into two or more segments with a closed period between segments. The combination of zones and split seasons allows a State to maximize harvest opportunity within the Federal frameworks without exceeding the number of days allowed for a given season. In the final SEIS, we present two alternatives regarding the use of zones and split seasons. In addition, the final SEIS considers a seventh component of the proposed action concerning the subsistence hunting regulations process for Alaska. Regulations governing the subsistence harvest of migratory birds provide a framework that enables the continuation of customary and traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska. These regulations are subject to annual review and are developed under a comanagement process involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and Alaska Native representatives. This annual review process establishes regulations that prescribe frameworks for dates when harvesting of birds may occur, species that can be taken, and methods and means that are excluded from use. In the final SEIS, we offer two alternatives regarding the subsistence harvest of migratory birds in Alaska. In the final SEIS, we also discuss the impact of cumulative harvest of migratory bird hunting on national wildlife refuges. Finally, the final SEIS provides and analyzes alternatives for each of these seven components with regard to their potential impacts on migratory bird species, other wildlife species, special status species, vegetation, outdoor recreational activities, physical and cultural resources, and the socioeconomic/administrative environment. On July 9, 2010 (75 FR 39527), the Environmental Protection Agency published a notice of availability of our draft SEIS. On July 9, 2010 (75 FR 39577), we also published our own notice of availability of the draft SEIS. E:\FR\FM\31MYN1.SGM 31MYN1 32688 Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 105 / Friday, May 31, 2013 / Notices We published a notice of intent to prepare an SEIS on September 8, 2005 (70 FR 53376) and a notice of meetings on the SEIS on March 9, 2006 (71 FR 12216). Comments were accepted until May 30, 2006. We received public comments on the draft SEIS from three private individuals, eight State wildlife resource agencies, three nongovernmental organizations, four Flyway Councils, the National Flyway Council, and two Federal agencies. For six of the seven components outlined in the draft SEIS, the Service’s preferred alternative was supported by the majority. We modified the draft SEIS to respond to concerns and issues expressed by individuals, agencies, and organizations. Dated: April 2, 2013. Daniel M. Ashe, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. [FR Doc. 2013–12443 Filed 5–30–13; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4310–55–P DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Bureau of Land Management [LLCA9300000;L14300000;EU0000;CACA 53961] Notice of Realty Action, Segregation Terminated, Direct Sale of Public Land in San Bernardino County, CA Bureau of Land Management, Interior. ACTION: Notice. tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES AGENCY: SUMMARY: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Needles Field Office, proposes to sell a parcel of public land totaling approximately 133.19 acres in San Bernardino County, California. The public land would be sold to the California Department of Transportation for the appraised fair market value of $55,000. DATES: Comments regarding the proposed sale must be received by the BLM on or before July 15, 2013. ADDRESSES: Written comments concerning the proposed sale should be sent to the Field Manager, BLM, Needles Field Office, 1303 S. U.S. Highway 95, Needles, CA 92363. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: George R. Meckfessel, Planning and Environmental Coordinator, BLM Needles Field Office, telephone 760– 326–7008; address 1303 S. U.S. Highway 95, Needles, California 92363. Persons who use a telecommunications device for the deaf (TDD) may call the Federal Information Relay Service VerDate Mar<15>2010 17:40 May 30, 2013 Jkt 229001 (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339 to contact the above individual during normal business hours. The FIRS is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, to leave a message or question with the above individual. You will receive a reply during normal business hours. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following public land is proposed for direct sale in accordance with Sections 203 and 209 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended (43 U.S.C. 1713 and 1719). San Bernardino Meridian, T. 16 N., R. 14 E., Sec. 11, lot 1; Sec. 12, lots 2, 4, 6, 9, 11, and 14; Sec. 13, lot 2; Sec. 14, lots 1, 4, 7, 11, and 12; Sec. 23, lots 3, 6, 9, and 11. The area described contains 133.19 acres in San Bernardino County, and is proposed for sale to the State of California, Department of Transportation, for the appraised fair market value of $55,000. The California Department of Transportation wishes to purchase the public land described above for construction of a facility to inspect agricultural products and commercial vehicles entering California. The BLM has determined that the sale of the land for this purpose would serve an important public objective which cannot be achieved prudently or feasibly on other lands. The BLM has concluded that a competitive sale is not appropriate and that the public interest would best be served by a direct sale to the California Department of Transportation. A portion of the public land described above was not identified for sale in the 1980 California Desert Conservation Area Plan, as amended, and a plan amendment is required to sell the land. The BLM has released a proposed plan amendment and environmental assessment that identifies the land as suitable for sale pursuant to Section 203 of FLPMA. Information on the proposed plan amendment is available at the location identified in ADDRESSES above. The BLM has completed a mineral potential report that concluded that there are no known mineral values in the land proposed for sale and the BLM is proposing to convey all mineral interests. Conveyance of all Federal mineral interests would occur simultaneously with the sale of the land. The purchaser would be required to pay a $50 nonrefundable filing fee for processing the conveyance of the mineral interests. The BLM previously segregated the above described land from appropriation under the public land laws and the general mining laws PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 in a Notice published in the Federal Register on February 10, 2010 (75 FR 6702). This previous segregation will terminate on May 31, 2013 and be replaced with a segregation which would allow sale of the land as described in the next section. On May 31, 2013, the above described land will be segregated from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining laws, except for the sale provisions of the FLPMA. Until completion of the sale, the BLM will no longer accept land use applications affecting the identified public lands, except applications for the amendment of previously filed right-ofway applications or existing authorizations to increase the term of the grants in accordance with 43 CFR 2802.15 and 2886.15. The segregation terminates upon issuance of a patent, publication in the Federal Register of a termination of the segregation, or on June 1, 2015, unless extended by the BLM State Director in accordance with 43 CFR 2711.1–2(d) prior to the termination date. The land would not be sold until at least July 30, 2013. Any conveyance document issued would contain the following terms, conditions, and reservations: 1. A reservation of a right-of-way (ROW) to the United States for ditches and canals constructed by authority of the United States under the Act of August 30, 1890 (43 U.S.C 945). 2. Subject to a ROW for a buried fiber optic cable issued to U.S. Sprint Communications under serial number CACA 20105. 3. Subject to a ROW for a buried fiber optic cable issued to AT&T under serial number CACA 21604. 4. A condition that the conveyance be subject to all valid existing rights of record. 5. An appropriate indemnification clause protecting the United States from claims arising out of the patentee’s use, occupancy, or operations on the patented lands. 6. Additional terms and conditions that the authorized officer deems appropriate. Detailed information concerning the proposed sale including the appraisal, planning and environmental documents, and mineral report are available for review at the location identified in ADDRESSES above. Public comments regarding the proposed sale may be submitted in writing to the attention of the BLM Needles Field Manager (see ADDRESSES above) on or before July 15, 2013. Comments received in electronic form, such as email will not be considered. Any adverse comments regarding the E:\FR\FM\31MYN1.SGM 31MYN1

Agencies

[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 105 (Friday, May 31, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32686-32688]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-12443]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R9-MB-2012-N056; FF09M21200-134-FXMB1231099BPP0]


Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on the Issuance 
of Annual Regulations Permitting the Hunting of Migratory Birds

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service or we) has 
prepared a final supplemental environmental impact statement (SEIS) for 
the issuance of annual regulations permitting the hunting of migratory 
birds. We published a draft environmental impact statement in July 
2010. We considered over 280 public comments in revising the document. 
The SEIS analyzes a range of management alternatives for addressing the 
hunting of migratory birds. The analysis provided in the final SEIS is 
intended to: inform the public of the proposed action and alternatives; 
address public comments we received on the draft SEIS; and disclose the

[[Page 32687]]

direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental effects of the proposed 
action and each of the alternatives.

DATES: The public inspection period for the final SEIS will last 30 
days and will end on July 1, 2013.

ADDRESSES: You may inspect comments during normal business hours at the 
office of the Pacific Flyway Representative, 911 NE 11th Ave., 
Portland, OR 97232. The final SEIS is available by either writing to 
the street address indicated above or by viewing it on our Web site at 
https://www.fws.gov/migratorybirds.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Trost, Pacific Flyway 
Representative, Division of Migratory Bird Management, (503) 231-6162; 
or Brad Bortner, Chief, Division of Migratory Bird Management, (703) 
358-1714.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On September 8, 2005, and again on March 9, 
2006, the Service published notice in the Federal Register (70 FR 53376 
and 71 FR 12216, respectively) announcing that we intended to prepare a 
supplemental environmental impact statement for the issuance of annual 
regulations permitting the hunting of migratory birds. In those 
notices, we invited public comments on the scope and substance of the 
SEIS, particular issues the SEIS should address and why, and options or 
alternatives we should consider. Please refer to the notices (70 FR 
53376 and 71 FR 12216) for further information about our regulatory 
process pertaining to the hunting of migratory birds.
    We received public comments on the notices, considered those 
comments, and developed a draft SEIS that we made available in a July 
9, 2010, Federal Register notice (75 FR 39577) in accordance with the 
requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), its implementing regulations (40 CFR parts 1500 
to 1508), and Service procedures for compliance with those regulations.
    The final SEIS evaluates seven components of the proposed action 
regarding how we establish the annual regulations for the hunting of 
migratory birds. The first six components deal with the fall-winter 
hunting season and include:
    (1) Schedule and timing of the general regulatory process. 
Promulgation of annual hunting regulations relies on a well-defined 
process of monitoring, data collection, and scientific assessment. At 
key points during that process, Flyway Technical Committees, Flyway 
Councils, and the public review and provide valuable input on technical 
assessments or other documents related to proposed regulatory 
frameworks. After we adopt final regulatory frameworks, each State 
selects its seasons, usually following its own schedule of public 
hearings and other deliberations. After State selections are completed, 
the Service adopts them as Federal regulations through publication in 
the Federal Register. In the final SEIS, we present four alternatives 
regarding the schedule and timing of the general regulatory process.
    (2) Frequency of review and adoption of duck regulatory packages. 
Duck regulatory packages are the set of framework regulations that 
apply to the general duck hunting seasons. Packages include opening and 
closing dates, season lengths, daily bag limits, and shooting hours. 
Current regulatory packages contain a set of frameworks for each of the 
four flyways and a set of four regulatory alternatives: restrictive 
(relatively short seasons and low daily bag limits), moderate 
(intermediate season lengths and daily bag limits), liberal (longer 
seasons and higher daily bag limits), and closed. In the final SEIS, we 
present two alternatives regarding how frequently duck regulatory 
packages should be reviewed and adopted.
    (3) Stock-specific harvest strategies. We define a stock as a 
species, population, or portion of a population that is treated 
separately for harvest management purposes. Harvest strategies have 
been developed for stocks deemed not biologically capable of sustaining 
the same harvest levels that jointly managed stocks are capable of 
sustaining, or whose migration and distribution do not conform to 
patterns followed by the most commonly harvested species. The final 
SEIS presents three alternatives regarding the use of stock-specific 
harvest strategies.
    (4) Special regulations. Special regulations differ from stock 
harvest strategies because they entail additional days of harvest 
opportunity outside the established frameworks for general seasons. 
Special regulations are employed to provide additional harvest 
opportunity on overabundant species, species that are lightly harvested 
and can sustain greater harvest pressure, or stocks whose migration and 
distribution provide opportunities outside the time period in which 
regular seasons are held. In the final SEIS, we offer two alternatives 
concerning the development of special regulations.
    (5) Management scale for the harvest of migratory birds. We define 
management scale as the geographic area in which stocks are monitored 
and harvest is managed. The finer the scale of management employed in 
harvest management, the higher the cost of monitoring to management 
agencies. The desire for smaller management scales is driven by the 
potential for increased harvest opportunity associated with more 
refined geographic management. The final SEIS presents three 
alternatives regarding the scale at which migratory birds should be 
managed.
    (6) Zones and split seasons. A zone is a geographic area or portion 
of a State, with a contiguous boundary, for which an independent season 
may be selected. A split is a situation where a season is broken into 
two or more segments with a closed period between segments. The 
combination of zones and split seasons allows a State to maximize 
harvest opportunity within the Federal frameworks without exceeding the 
number of days allowed for a given season. In the final SEIS, we 
present two alternatives regarding the use of zones and split seasons.
    In addition, the final SEIS considers a seventh component of the 
proposed action concerning the subsistence hunting regulations process 
for Alaska. Regulations governing the subsistence harvest of migratory 
birds provide a framework that enables the continuation of customary 
and traditional subsistence uses of migratory birds in Alaska. These 
regulations are subject to annual review and are developed under a co-
management process involving the Service, the Alaska Department of Fish 
and Game, and Alaska Native representatives. This annual review process 
establishes regulations that prescribe frameworks for dates when 
harvesting of birds may occur, species that can be taken, and methods 
and means that are excluded from use. In the final SEIS, we offer two 
alternatives regarding the subsistence harvest of migratory birds in 
Alaska.
    In the final SEIS, we also discuss the impact of cumulative harvest 
of migratory bird hunting on national wildlife refuges.
    Finally, the final SEIS provides and analyzes alternatives for each 
of these seven components with regard to their potential impacts on 
migratory bird species, other wildlife species, special status species, 
vegetation, outdoor recreational activities, physical and cultural 
resources, and the socioeconomic/administrative environment.
    On July 9, 2010 (75 FR 39527), the Environmental Protection Agency 
published a notice of availability of our draft SEIS. On July 9, 2010 
(75 FR 39577), we also published our own notice of availability of the 
draft SEIS.

[[Page 32688]]

We published a notice of intent to prepare an SEIS on September 8, 2005 
(70 FR 53376) and a notice of meetings on the SEIS on March 9, 2006 (71 
FR 12216). Comments were accepted until May 30, 2006.
    We received public comments on the draft SEIS from three private 
individuals, eight State wildlife resource agencies, three 
nongovernmental organizations, four Flyway Councils, the National 
Flyway Council, and two Federal agencies. For six of the seven 
components outlined in the draft SEIS, the Service's preferred 
alternative was supported by the majority.
    We modified the draft SEIS to respond to concerns and issues 
expressed by individuals, agencies, and organizations.

    Dated: April 2, 2013.
Daniel M. Ashe,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2013-12443 Filed 5-30-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P