Draft Environmental Assessment; Export Program for Certain Native Species Under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, 13360-13361 [2017-04872]

Agencies

• Fish and Wildlife Service
• DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 46 (Friday, March 10, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13360-13361]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-04872]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0012; FF09A30000FXIA1671090000178]


Draft Environmental Assessment; Export Program for Certain Native 
Species Under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability; request for public comments.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of a draft environmental assessment (EA) in accordance 
with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for our CITES Export 
Program (CEP) for certain native furbearer species. Some native 
furbearers are listed under the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES, or Convention), 
including bobcat (Lynx rufus), river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada 
lynx (Lynx canadensis), gray wolf (Canis lupus), and brown bear (Ursus 
arctos). These species have been listed in CITES Appendix II since the 
1970s. Export from the United States of specimens of CITES Appendix-II 
species requires a CITES export permit issued by the Service. We have 
decided to prepare an EA on our export program for certain native 
furbearer species to help us conduct a thorough review of all relevant 
factors and potential impacts on the quality of the human environment 
as envisioned under NEPA.

DATES: We will consider all information and comments we receive on or 
before April 10, 2017.

ADDRESSES: Written comments: You may submit comments pertaining to the 
draft EA by one of the following methods:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In 
the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0012, which is the docket number 
for this notice. Click ``Comment Now!'' to comment.
     U.S. mail or hand-delivery: Public Comments Processing, 
Attn: FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0012, Division of Policy, Performance, and 
Management Programs; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 5275 Leesburg 
Pike; MS: BPHC; Falls Church, VA 22041.
    We request that you send comments by only one of the methods 
described above. All information received will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any 
personal information you provide us (see Public Availability of 
Comments, below, for more information).
    Availability of documents: You may obtain copies of the draft EA 
and related documents:
     On the Internet: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search 
box, enter FWS-HQ-IA-2017-0012, which is the docket number for this 
notice. Click the ``Open Docket Folder'' link.
     In person, by appointment and written request only, from 8 
a.m. to 4 p.m. at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of 
Management Authority, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Craig Hoover, Chief, Division of 
Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: IA; 5275 
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; telephone 703-358-2095; 
facsimile 703-358-2298. If you use a telecommunications device for the 
deaf (TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We are making available a draft 
environmental assessment (EA) under the National Environmental Policy 
Act of 1969 (NEPA); 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq., for the U.S. CITES Export 
Program (CEP) for certain native furbearer species listed under the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora (CITES), 27 U.S.T. 1087 (March 3, 1973). Bobcat (Lynx rufus), 
river otter (Lontra canadensis), Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), gray 
wolf (Canis lupus), and brown bear (Ursus arctos) have been listed in 
CITES Appendix II since the 1970s. CITES documents are required for 
export of these species from the United States, including parts and 
products of these species. Before a permit can be issued for the export 
of an Appendix-II species, the Service must be able to determine that 
the export will not be detrimental to the survival of the species and 
that the specimens to be exported have not been obtained in violation 
of laws for their protection.
    Export from the United States of specimens of CITES Appendix-II 
species requires a CITES export permit issued by the Service. Our 
CITES-implementing regulations are found in title 50 of the Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR) at part 23 (50 CFR part 23). Under the 
Department of the Interior policy and procedures for the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service, the issuance, denial, suspension, and revocation of 
permits for activities involving fish, wildlife or plants, including 
permits involving species listed under CITES, are categorically 
excluded from the requirement for preparation of an EA or an EIS under 
NEPA when such permits cause no or negligible environmental disturbance 
(Departmental Manual, part 516, chapter 8.5, paragraph C(1)). However, 
we have prepared a draft EA on our CEP for certain native furbearer 
species to ensure that we have conducted a thorough review of all 
relevant factors and potential impacts on the quality of the human 
environment as envisioned under NEPA. This draft EA considers the 
direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the U.S. CEP for bobcat, 
river otter, Canada lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear harvested in the 
United States.
    Service regulations governing the export of bobcat, river otter, 
Canada lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear harvested in the United States 
are set forth at 50 CFR 23.69. Our regulations allow States and Tribes 
to request approval for participation in our CEP for these native 
furbearers. States and Tribes set up and maintain management and 
harvest programs designed to monitor and protect CITES furbearers from 
overharvest. When a State or Tribe with a management program provides 
the Service with the necessary information, we make programmatic 
findings and have specific requirements that allow export under CITES. 
We must still issue a CITES export permit for each export, but the CEP 
provides for a more streamlined and efficient permitting process. Under 
the CEP, a State or Tribe must provide sufficient information for us to 
determine that its management program and harvest controls are 
appropriate to ensure that CITES furbearers harvested within its 
jurisdiction are legally acquired and that export will not be 
detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild.

Proposed Action

    The proposed action, which is also the ``no action'' alternative 
and the preferred alternative, is to continue the CEP in its current 
form, which includes the mandatory tagging of skins of bobcat, river 
otter, Canada lynx, gray wolf, and brown bear to be exported from the 
United States, as required under our current regulations at 50 CFR 
23.69. The species of furbearers

[[Page 13361]]

included in this EA are managed by the wildlife agencies of individual 
States and Tribes. The CEP in its current form allows for regular 
review of approved export programs for these species, including through 
annual reporting by approved programs. States and Tribes provide data 
to the Service on a voluntary basis to qualify their species for export 
and, once approved, must report annually on any changes to the 
applicable State or tribal regulations or the status of the species in 
those jurisdictions. The proposed action, and preferred alternative, 
will facilitate the continued efficient export of these species from 
the United States, thereby allowing access to international markets, 
while still meeting CITES requirements. The CEP for these species has 
proven to be effective over the past 40 years by allowing the Service 
to fulfill its obligations regarding these species pursuant to CITES. 
The proposed action, and the Convention it implements, only applies to 
international trade. The proposed action does not include State and 
tribal programs for these species. States and Tribes regulate the take 
of these species through their own management programs.

Alternatives

    We are also considering three alternatives to the proposed action:
    1. No Tag Alternative--Under this alternative, the Service would 
not issue tags or require skins to be tagged prior to export. Our 
current regulations require the tagging of the skins of these species 
(unless an alternative method has been approved) in order for the skins 
to be eligible for export under the CEP. This tagging requirement is 
not a CITES requirement; it is a stricter domestic measure promulgated 
by the Service through the U.S. CITES implementing regulations. Under 
our current regulations, the Service could institute a different 
verification system for legal acquisition that relies on paper 
recordkeeping at the State, tribal, or exporter level, provided such an 
alternative method is able to provide us with the necessary information 
to make the required findings to allow export under CITES. This could 
consist of affidavits or trapper diaries or other bookkeeping 
mechanisms if they provide substantially the same information as the 
tagging system. This no tag alternative is essentially a substitute for 
the tagging system. This alternative would require devising a new 
chain-of-custody documentation system, and would require re-educating 
trappers, exporters, and State and Federal law enforcement on the new 
system.
    2. No Permit Alternative--This alternative would require the 
Service to revise 50 CFR 23.69 so that no export of these species 
legally taken from the wild is permitted. Under the no permit 
alternative, these species and their parts and products taken from the 
wild could not be exported, even where the required findings to allow 
export under CITES can be made. Skins from captive-bred animals would 
be eligible for export; however, currently there is very little captive 
production of these species for commercial trade. Operation of the CEP 
for these five species over the past 40 years has demonstrated that the 
export of these species from the United States does not threaten their 
survival in the wild and may be authorized consistent with CITES. 
Elimination of export approval for specimens of these species taken 
from the wild would not further the purposes of CITES, when we are able 
to make the required determinations that the specimens were legally 
acquired and that the export is not detrimental to the survival of the 
species.
    3. No Approved CITES Export Program Alternative--Currently, when a 
State or Tribe with a management program designed to monitor and 
protect CITES furbearers from overharvest provides us with the 
necessary information, we make programmatic findings and have specific 
requirements that allow export under CITES for these CITES furbearers 
harvested within their jurisdictions. While permits are still required, 
approval of State or tribal export programs facilitates the permitting 
process by allowing us to issue permits more efficiently. Under this 
alternative, the Service would no longer approve State or tribal export 
programs, but individuals may still seek permits on a case-by-case 
basis for each specimen to be exported. This would also require the 
Service to make individual legal acquisition findings for each specimen 
to be exported, as the Service currently does for specimens originating 
from States or Tribes without an approved program. This alternative 
would increase the length of time for exporters to obtain permits and 
would be overly burdensome to both the Service and exporters.

Public Availability of Comments

    We will not consider comments sent by email or fax, or to an 
address not listed above in ADDRESSES. Comments and materials we 
receive in response to this notice will be available for public 
inspection on https://www.regulations.gov or by appointment, between 8 
a.m. and 4 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays, at the 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 5275 
Leesburg Pike, 2nd Floor, Falls Church, VA 22041; telephone 703-358-
2095.
    Written comments that we receive become part of the public record 
associated with this action. 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--maybe made publicly available at 
any time. While you may request in your comment that we withhold your 
personal identifying information from public review, we cannot 
guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their 
entirety.

Authority

    We provide this notice under NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and its 
implementing regulations (40 CFR 1506.6).

    Dated: March 7, 2017.
James W. Kurth,
Acting Director, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-04872 Filed 3-8-17; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 4333-15-P