Issuance of Import Permits for Zimbabwe Elephant Trophies Taken on or After January 21, 2016, and on or Before December 31, 2018, 54405-54408 [2017-24974]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
Dated: November 13, 2017.
Pamela H. Patenaude,
Deputy Secretary.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Timothy J. Van Norman, (703) 358–2104
(telephone); (703) 358–2280 (fax); or
DMAFR@fws.gov (email).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[FR Doc. 2017–25024 Filed 11–16–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
Background
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–HQ–IA–2017–N116;
FXIA16710900000–XXX–FF09A30000]
Issuance of Import Permits for
Zimbabwe Elephant Trophies Taken on
or After January 21, 2016, and on or
Before December 31, 2018
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) has made a finding
that the killing of African elephant
trophy animals in Zimbabwe, on or after
January 21, 2016, and on or before
December 31, 2018, will enhance the
survival of the African elephant.
Applications to import trophies hunted
during this time period will be
considered to have met the
enhancement requirement, unless we
issue a new finding based on available
information. The Service may replace
this finding, without any notification in
the Federal Register, at any time that
this finding no longer reflects the
available information consistent with
the regulatory requirements. In
reviewing each application received for
import of such specimens, the Service
evaluates the information provided in
the application, as well as other
information available to the Service on
the status of the elephant population
and the management program for
elephants in the country to ensure that
the program is promoting the
conservation of the species. Each
application to import sport-hunted
elephant trophies must also meet all
other applicable permitting
requirements before it may be
authorized. This determination does not
affect previous determinations by the
Service regarding trophy animals taken
before January 21, 2016.
DATES: This finding is made November
17, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Timothy J. Van Norman,
Chief, Branch of Permits, Division of
Management Authority, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS: IA, 5275 Leesburg
Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803; fax
(703) 358–2280; or email DMAFR@
fws.gov.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
The African elephant (Loxodonta
africana) is listed as threatened under
the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (ESA or Act; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.), on the List of Endangered and
Threatened Wildlife in title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR
17.11(h)). It is also regulated under the
provisions of section 4(d) of the Act
(known as a ‘‘section 4(d) rule’’) with a
rule found at 50 CFR 17.40(e). The
section 4(d) rule includes specific
requirements for the import of sporthunted trophies. Under
§ 17.40(e)(6)(i)(B), in order for the
Service to authorize the import of a
sport-hunted elephant trophy, the
Service must find that the killing of the
trophy animal will enhance the survival
of the species in the wild (known as an
‘‘enhancement finding’’).
The Zimbabwe elephant population,
along with elephant populations in
Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa,
are also included in Appendix II of the
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and
Flora (CITES) for the exclusive purpose
of allowing certain trade subject to
annotation, including trade in hunting
trophies for noncommercial purposes.
All specimens not included in the
annotation are deemed Appendix I
specimens, and trade in them is
regulated accordingly. On August 22,
1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) published a proposed rule
announcing decisions by the Conference
of the Parties to CITES and seeking
comment on whether the United States
should enter a reservation for any of the
species that had been listed on CITES
Appendices I and II (62 FR 44627). We
discussed how the populations of
African elephants in Zimbabwe,
Botswana, and Namibia had been downlisted from CITES Appendix I to
Appendix II and noted that, because
African elephants are listed under the
ESA as threatened, the African elephant
section 4(d) rule found at 50 CFR
17.40(e) would continue to apply. This
rule required that we find that the
killing of the animal whose trophy was
intended for import would enhance the
survival of the species before a sporthunted trophy could be imported. We
also stated that, in making the required
enhancement finding for the import of
sport-hunted trophies, the Service must
review the status of the elephant
PO 00000
Frm 00090
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54405
population and the total management
program for the elephant in each
country to ensure the program is
promoting the conservation of the
species.
The preamble to the 1997 proposed
rule noted that positive enhancement
findings for the countries of Zimbabwe,
Botswana, and Namibia had been made
and would remain in effect until the
Service found that the conditions of the
section 4(d) rule are no longer met and
published notice of a changed finding in
the Federal Register. On May 18, 2001,
we published a final rule again
announcing decisions made at a meeting
of the Conference of the Parties to
CITES, including the decision to downlist the South African population of
African elephants from CITES Appendix
I to Appendix II (66 FR 27601). We
again discussed the import requirements
for African elephant sport-hunted
trophies and stated that the
enhancement finding for South African
elephants would remain in effect until
the Service found that conditions of the
rule are no longer met and published
notice of a changed finding in the
Federal Register. The U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia, in Safari
Club International, et al. v. Jewell, et al.,
213 F. Supp. 3d 48 (D.D.C. Sept. 30,
2016), has held that the Service created
a binding duty on itself when it stated
in the preamble of the 1997 proposed
rule that it would publish notice in the
Federal Register before making a change
in its 1997 enhancement finding for
Zimbabwe, and that the Service then
violated this commitment when it
published the Federal Register notice
on May 12, 2014, several weeks after
making an interim negative
enhancement finding for Zimbabwe on
April 4, 2014. As remedy, the Court
ordered that the effective date of the
2014 enhancement finding is the date of
the Federal Register notice, May 12,
2014, meaning that trophies taken on or
before May 11, 2014 were allowed to
meet the enhancement requirement. We
did not intend to create a legal duty to
publish changed enhancement findings
through these Federal Register
preamble statements.
On June 6, 2016, the Service amended
the African elephant section 4(d) rule
(81 FR 36388). With this amendment,
ESA permits are required to import all
African elephant sport-hunted trophies,
including those from the CITES
Appendix II populations of Zimbabwe,
Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa.
Because all imports will be
accompanied by a threatened species
permit evaluated through the ESA
permit application process found at 50
CFR 17.32(a), we will no longer publish
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
54406
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
notice of changed enhancement findings
for African elephant sport-hunted
trophies in the Federal Register. In the
future, when there are subsequent
changes to the determination, the
individual applicant will be notified
regarding whether his or her permit
application was granted or denied,
including a brief statement of the
grounds for any denial. We may also
post information on the import of
African elephant hunting trophies on
the Service’s Web page (www.fws.gov/
international), as appropriate and
consistent with applicable laws and
regulations.
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Import Suspension
On April 4, 2014, the Service
announced an interim suspension of
imports of sport-hunted elephant
trophies taken in Zimbabwe during the
2014 season. We revised this finding on
April 17, 2014, primarily to clarify that
the suspension applied only to
elephants hunted on or after April 4,
2014. This determination was
announced in the Federal Register on
May 12, 2014 (79 FR 26986). Our
decision to establish an interim
suspension of imports of elephant
trophies from Zimbabwe was due to
having insufficient information on the
status of elephants in Zimbabwe and on
Zimbabwe’s current elephant
management program to make an
enhancement finding. On July 17, 2014,
the Service found that the import of
elephant trophies taken in Zimbabwe in
2014 on or after April 4, 2014, would be
suspended. We revised this finding on
July 22, 2014, to make non-substantive
corrections and announced this
determination in the Federal Register
on July 31, 2014 (79 FR 44459). The July
17, 2014, decision to uphold the April
4, 2014, suspension was due to the
Service being unable to make an
enhancement finding even after
receiving additional materials from the
Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife
Management Authority (ZPWMA) and
others. On March 26, 2015, the Service
made another determination to continue
the suspension (80 FR 42524, July 17,
2015). This decision was again due to
the Service being unable to make an
enhancement finding even after
receiving additional materials from
ZPWMA and others. The suspension
that resulted from the negative
enhancement findings did not prohibit
U.S. hunters from traveling to
Zimbabwe and participating in an
elephant hunt. The Act does not
prohibit take (e.g., hunting) within a
foreign country; it prohibits import of
trophies taken during such hunts
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
without required authorization under
the Act.
Following the Service’s March 26,
2015, finding, the Service sent a letter
on May 12, 2015, to the Honorable
Saviour Kasukuwere, (formerly)
Zimbabwe’s Minister of Environment,
Water and Climate, outlining the
concerns the Service still had regarding
elephant trophy imports from
Zimbabwe. The letter identified six
areas of concern: the lack of a current
management plan; the current
population status of elephants in
Zimbabwe; poaching levels and
prevention; regulations and enforcement
concerns; the sustainable utilization of
elephants in Zimbabwe; and the
utilization of hunting revenues.
On July 20, 2015, ZPWMA responded
to each of the questions outlined in the
Service’s letter and included a draft
version of the Action Plan for Elephant
Conservation and Management in
Zimbabwe (2015–2020). In January
2016, the Service received the final
version of the action plan, the
Zimbabwe National Elephant
Management Plan (2015–2020), that had
been approved and signed by the (then)
Director-General of ZPWMA Edson
Chidziya, on January 20, 2016, and the
Honorable Oppah Muchinguri-Kashiri,
Minister of Environment, Water and
Climate, on January 21, 2016.
In September 2016, during the 17th
Meeting of the Conference of the Parties
to CITES, the Service met with
representatives from Zimbabwe to
further discuss the current status of the
Service’s evaluation of the importation
of elephant trophies. As a result of those
conversations, the Service received a
letter dated November 8, 2016, with
supplemental information regarding
Zimbabwe’s elephant management plan
priorities. Further, on January 27, 2017,
the Service received a letter from
ZPWMA containing a report, ‘‘The Role
of Trophy Hunting of Elephants in
Support of the Zimbabwe’s Communal
Areas Management Programme for
Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE)
Program: December 2016’’ that more
fully discussed the source and amount
of revenue generated between 2010 and
2015 through the CAMPFIRE program,
the current role of CAMPFIRE, and how
revenue generated by elephant hunting
has been utilized within communal
areas over this 6-year period and into
the future.
Under 50 CFR 17.40(e)(6)(i)(B), the
Service evaluates a number of factors to
determine whether the killing of the
trophy animal taken in a range country
will enhance the survival of African
elephants as well as taking into
consideration the permit issuance
PO 00000
Frm 00091
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
criteria outlined in 50 CFR 17.32(a)(2).
In evaluating each of these criteria, the
Service has considered the information
currently available to the Service as of
the date of this finding on elephant
hunting in Zimbabwe in 2016, 2017,
and 2018, including information
provided by the Government of
Zimbabwe, current applicants for
permits to import sport-hunted elephant
trophies, interested individuals and
organizations, and other information
available to the Service.
Zimbabwe’s Conservation Efforts for
Elephants
On January 21, 2016, Zimbabwe
adopted the Zimbabwe National
Elephant Management Plan (2015–2020)
(EMP) that replaced The Policy and Plan
for Elephant Management in Zimbabwe
(1997) and Elephant Management in
Zimbabwe, third edition (July 1996), the
former management plans. The EMP
incorporates an adaptive management
framework with higher level targets,
with key components, strategic
objectives, and outputs. Each key
component has management actions
that can be measured and verified
through ‘‘Key Performance Indicators.’’
A set deadline for each action was
identified. These measurable provisions
allow ZPWMA to monitor the success of
the new management plan and, through
an adaptive management approach,
address newly emerging concerns and
long-term management needs. The EMP
addresses the challenges identified by
the 2014 workshop participants and
concerns identified by the Service about
the previous management plans. The
EMP was developed as an outcome of
several national and regional workshops
that included government officials,
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
rural community leaders, and safari
outfitters and landowners.
The 2014 Pan African Elephant Aerial
Survey, also known as the Great
Elephant Census (GEC), available in
2015, provided ZPWMA with a better
elephant baseline population abundance
estimate to assess future hunting quotas,
management efforts, and anti-poaching
activities. Confirmed results from the
GEC reported an estimate for elephant
abundance in Zimbabwe to be 82,304
individuals (73,715–90,893). The
International Union for Conservation of
Nature’s African Elephant Specialist
Group (IUCN AfESG) African Elephant
Status Report–2016 estimated
Zimbabwe’s elephant population at
82,630 ± 8,589 across a range of 81,228
km2. The results of the 2014 GEC, and
subsequent survey data reported in the
2016 AfESG report, are more reliable
and provide a better basis for
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
establishing management priorities than
previous surveys and guesses, and are
now utilized in the EMP and quota
setting.
As identified in the 2015 finding, the
Service explained that, if properly
implemented, the ZPWMA regulatory
mechanisms for managing elephants
appear to be adequate. A key issue in
the 2015 finding was whether an
adequate mechanism is in place to
reliably document the financial benefits
that U.S. hunters provide for elephant
conservation through participation in a
hunting program that addresses
management needs of the species and
whether the funds were utilized in a
meaningful manner. Since the 2015
finding, the Service has received
information regarding the Tourism
Receipts Accounting System (TRAS)
and its web-based system (TRAS2)
under which the Reserve Bank of
Zimbabwe, in collaboration with
relevant stakeholders, can now track all
revenue generated through hunting
activities. Under this system, all
authorized hunts are now being
registered, allowing for the capture of
hunting data, such as the origin of
clients, value of trophies and hunts, and
area hunted, so that officials can
monitor hunting quota utilization and
track hunted trophies. This system will
provide data that was not previously
easily obtained and greatly improve the
ability to track hunting revenue.
One concern expressed by the Service
in its previous findings was whether
ZPWMA was responding to the
apparent poaching crisis facing
Zimbabwe. Based on communication
from ZPWMA, as well as information
received from other sources, ZPWMA
has stepped up its anti-poaching efforts
nationally by adopting a number of
‘‘Urgent Measures.’’ As shown in their
July 2015 response to Service questions,
most of ZPWMA’s budget (77 percent) is
allocated to staff costs and patrol
provisions. These expenditures
reportedly fund anti-poaching efforts
throughout the elephant range. ZPWMA
reportedly has a staff of 1,504 active
field rangers and has stated that there is
intent to increase this number.
According to ‘‘The Zimbabwe National
Elephant Supplementary Management
Plan (2015–2020)’’, provided to the
Service in late 2016, over 80 percent of
spending under the new EMP has been
on law enforcement (anti-poaching) and
training, with law enforcement
identified as the top priority going
forward.
With the adoption of the EMP on
January 21, 2016, it appears that
ZPWMA has the means to successfully
implement these laws and regulations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
Moreover, ZPWMA has a mechanism in
place to monitor the effects of the EMP
and adapt to changing environmental
and social factors that would adversely
affect elephant populations within
Zimbabwe.
According to the information
provided to the Service in late 2014 and
2015, Zimbabwe had established
hunting quotas for all areas of the
country. However, it was not until late
2015 and early 2016 that the Service
received more specific information on
how these quotas are established,
including how other forms of take, such
as poaching and problem animal
control, were taken into account.
Further, it was not until the EMP was
signed into effect on January 21, 2016,
that the Service had confidence that
ZWPMA had in place effective
mechanisms to ensure long-term
sustainability of its elephant population.
According to ZPWMA, quotas that
were established before the EMP were
set to maximize the sustainable
production of high-quality trophies
without detriment to the population.
With the establishment of the EMP,
there is a more systematic, scientific
approach to establish national quotas.
While ZPWMA still currently starts
with an annual quota of 500 elephants,
the quota is not immediately divided
among all of the hunting areas. Instead,
ZPWMA takes into consideration the
results of the 2014 survey and
subsequent surveys, results from
research efforts, the size of the hunting
area in relation to elephant habitat
requirements, illegal harvest and other
forms of take, how the hunting areas are
managed in relation to land use or
fencing, human–wildlife conflicts that
have occurred previously, and
recommended sustainable harvest levels
developed based on ecological
assessments of the hunting area. This
information is then further evaluated in
consideration of other species within
the hunting area, past elephant trophy
quality, and community benefits of
proposed harvests.
Since our findings in 2014 and 2015,
CAMPFIRE has provided more
information on how their programs
support the conservation of elephants
and provide benefits to and promote
greater tolerance of wildlife in rural
communities, including new efforts to
improve the effectiveness of CAMPFIRE
and new revenue-sharing guidelines. An
overarching analysis of CAMPFIRE,
supported by a grant of 12 million Euros
from the European Union, is currently
being conducted and is scheduled to be
completed by the end of 2017. Although
this review is still under way, more
information has been provided to the
PO 00000
Frm 00092
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
54407
Service regarding how funds are utilized
and the basis for hunting quotas.
Since our 2014 and 2015 findings,
there are strong indications that the
efforts of private landowners and
consortiums to manage elephants within
their areas of control have received
greater support from ZPWMA and the
Zimbabwean Government. ZPWMA has
devolved authority to manage and
benefit from wildlife on communal and
private lands to the landholders. There
now appears to be a greater effort on the
part of ZPWMA to work with NGOs,
landowners, and safari area
concessionaires to improve elephant
management and anti-poaching efforts.
According to their July 2015 response to
the Service, and supported by the report
on the implementation of the EMP,
ZPWMA is engaging private players in
co-management in some areas and
entering into long-term lease agreements
(10–25 years) to manage some protected
areas. In certain areas, ZPWMA is
reportedly collaborating with safari
operators; in others, they collaborate
with NGOs, such as the Tashinga
Initiative in the Zambezi Valley and
World Wildlife Fund in the HwangeSanyati Biological Corridor. There is
increased support from the Central
Government and Rural District Councils
to expand and support local
conservation efforts, and there is
evidence that local conservation efforts
are meeting management deficiencies
that the Service identified previously.
Current Finding
Therefore, in accordance with the
regulatory requirements, the Service is
able to make a determination that the
killing of trophy animals in Zimbabwe,
on or after January 21, 2016, and on or
before December 31, 2018, will enhance
the survival of the African elephant.
With the information currently
available, applications to import
trophies hunted during this time period
will be considered to have met this
requirement unless we issue a new
finding based on available information.
In accordance with the section 4(d) rule
for the African elephant at 50 CFR
17.40(e), the Service will review each
application received for import of such
specimens on a case-by-case basis and
each application also needs to meet all
other applicable permitting
requirements before it may be
authorized. On an ongoing basis and as
it evaluates each application, the
Service will continue to monitor the
status of the elephant population, the
management program for elephants in
the country to ensure that the program
is promoting the conservation of the
species, and whether the participation
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
54408
Federal Register / Vol. 82, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2017 / Notices
of U.S. hunters in the program provides
a clear benefit to the species.
Accordingly, the Service may modify its
determination based on available
information consistent with the
regulatory requirements. In addition, the
Service will reevaluate the status of
African elephants in Zimbabwe before
the end of 2018 and make a new finding
in the beginning of 2019 for, at least, the
2019 hunting season.
Today’s enhancement finding has
been posted at https://www.fws.gov/
international/pdf/enhancement-finding2017-elephant-Zimbabwe.PDF. In
addition, a list of frequently asked
questions regarding the importation of
sport-hunted elephant trophies from
Zimbabwe is available on the Service’s
web page at https://www.fws.gov/
international/permits/by-activity/sporthunted-trophies-elephants.html.
Brenda Tapia,
Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch
of Permits, Division of Management
Authority.
[FR Doc. 2017–24974 Filed 11–16–17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[XXX.LLAZG02000.71220000.KD0000
.LVTFA0958340;AZA3116]
Notice of Availability of the Draft Ray
Land Exchange/Plan Amendment
Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement, Arizona
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (NEPA), as amended, and the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act of 1976 (FLPMA), as amended, the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM),
Gila District, Tucson Field Office has
prepared a Draft Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)
for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment and by this Notice is
announcing its availability and the
opening of the comment period.
DATES: To ensure comments will be
considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Ray Land
Exchange/Plan Amendment Draft
Supplemental EIS within 90 days
following the date the Environmental
Protection Agency publishes its Notice
of Availability in the Federal Register.
The BLM will announce future meetings
or hearings and any other public
sradovich on DSK3GMQ082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:32 Nov 16, 2017
Jkt 244001
involvement activities at least 15 days
in advance through public notices,
media releases, or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
related to the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Draft Supplemental EIS by
any of the following methods:
• Web site: https://go.usa.gov/xn2FG.
• Email: blm_az_raylandexchange@
blm.gov.
• Fax: 602–417–9454.
• Mail: BLM Arizona State Office,
Attn: Ray Land Exchange, One North
Central Avenue, Suite 800, Phoenix, AZ
85004–4427.
Copies of the Ray Land Exchange/
Plan Amendment Draft Supplemental
EIS are available in the BLM Arizona
State Office at the above address; the
BLM Tucson Field Office at 3201 East
Universal Way, Tucson, AZ 85756; the
BLM Kingman Field Office at 2755
Mission Boulevard, Kingman, AZ
86401; and the Kearny Public Library at
912–A Tilbury Road, Kearny, AZ 85137.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Michael Werner, Project Manager,
telephone 602–417–9561; address: One
North Central Avenue, Suite 800,
Phoenix, AZ 85004–4427; email:
mwerner@blm.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The BLM
Gila District, Tucson Field Office, is
issuing the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Supplemental EIS to
augment the environmental impact
analysis in the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment Final EIS completed by the
BLM in 1999. The BLM issued the Final
EIS for the Ray Land Exchange/Plan
Amendment in June 1999 and the
Record of Decision in May 2000. The
decision approved a land exchange
between ASARCO LLC (ASARCO) and
the BLM for approximately 10,976 acres
of public lands and federally owned
mineral estate for acquisition by
ASARCO (the Selected Lands) in
exchange for approximately 7,304 acres
of private land owned by ASARCO and
identified by the BLM as desirable for
improving access for hunting and other
recreation (the Offered Lands). The
decision was challenged
administratively and in Federal court,
with the plaintiffs ultimately prevailing
in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in
November 2010. The court concluded
that the BLM violated NEPA and
FLPMA ‘‘in assuming without
explanation that ASARCO would
perform mining operations on the
selected lands in the same manner
regardless of the land exchange’’ (Center
for Biological Diversity v. U.S.
Department of Interior, 623 F.3d 633
[9th Cir. 2010]). The court recognized
that ASARCO has the right to conduct
PO 00000
Frm 00093
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
mining and related activities under the
General Mining Law, based on
ASARCO’s mining and mill site claims
on the Selected Lands. But the court
believed that the manner and extent of
mining were likely to differ, depending
on whether the Selected Lands are
owned by the United States as public
lands subject to the BLM’s surface use
regulations at 43 CFR 3809 or by
ASARCO as private lands in fee simple,
in which case the BLM’s surface-use
regulations would not apply. The Ninth
Circuit Court stated that ASARCO is not
required to prepare and submit a Mine
Plan of Operations (MPO) for future
activities on the Selected Lands to
complete the exchange. Instead, ‘‘the
BLM must make a meaningful
comparison of the environmental
consequences of ASARCO’s likely
mining operations with and without the
requirement that MPOs be prepared by
ASARCO and approved by the BLM—
that is, with and without the proposed
exchange.’’ Because the BLM did not
perform this ‘‘with and without’’
comparison, the court held that the BLM
did not adequately consider the
environmental impacts of the land
exchange or Resource Management Plan
(RMP) amendments. For the same
reason, the court also held that the BLM
did not properly analyze whether the
public interest will be served by making
the exchange under FLPMA, section
206(a).
In accordance with the courts’ rulings
and remand orders, the Draft
Supplemental EIS for the Ray Land
Exchange provides the ‘‘with and
without’’ comparative analysis found
lacking by the Ninth Circuit Court. The
‘‘with and without’’ analysis compares
two scenarios of potential
environmental impacts on the Selected
Lands from mining operations. One
scenario analyzes potential impacts that
could occur as a result of mining
activities on the Selected Lands if they
are not exchanged and remain under
BLM jurisdiction (i.e., mining occurs
with BLM regulations). The other
scenario analyzes potential impacts that
could occur as a result of mining
activities if the Selected Lands are
exchanged and become privately owned
lands (i.e., mining occurs without BLM
regulations). The Draft Supplemental
EIS also addresses any substantial
changes in the land exchange or plan
amendments and any significant new
information or circumstances that are
relevant to analyzing the impacts of the
land exchange or plan amendments (see
40 CFR 1502.9(c); BLM NEPA
Handbook, Section 5.3 [January 2008]).
The purpose of the proposed Ray
Land Exchange would be to exchange
E:\FR\FM\17NON1.SGM
17NON1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 221 (Friday, November 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 54405-54408]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-24974]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-HQ-IA-2017-N116; FXIA16710900000-XXX-FF09A30000]
Issuance of Import Permits for Zimbabwe Elephant Trophies Taken
on or After January 21, 2016, and on or Before December 31, 2018
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has made a
finding that the killing of African elephant trophy animals in
Zimbabwe, on or after January 21, 2016, and on or before December 31,
2018, will enhance the survival of the African elephant. Applications
to import trophies hunted during this time period will be considered to
have met the enhancement requirement, unless we issue a new finding
based on available information. The Service may replace this finding,
without any notification in the Federal Register, at any time that this
finding no longer reflects the available information consistent with
the regulatory requirements. In reviewing each application received for
import of such specimens, the Service evaluates the information
provided in the application, as well as other information available to
the Service on the status of the elephant population and the management
program for elephants in the country to ensure that the program is
promoting the conservation of the species. Each application to import
sport-hunted elephant trophies must also meet all other applicable
permitting requirements before it may be authorized. This determination
does not affect previous determinations by the Service regarding trophy
animals taken before January 21, 2016.
DATES: This finding is made November 17, 2017.
ADDRESSES: Timothy J. Van Norman, Chief, Branch of Permits, Division of
Management Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, MS: IA, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803; fax (703) 358-2280; or
email DMAFR@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Timothy J. Van Norman, (703) 358-2104
(telephone); (703) 358-2280 (fax); or DMAFR@fws.gov (email).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The African elephant (Loxodonta africana) is listed as threatened
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA or Act; 16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), on the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR 17.11(h)). It is
also regulated under the provisions of section 4(d) of the Act (known
as a ``section 4(d) rule'') with a rule found at 50 CFR 17.40(e). The
section 4(d) rule includes specific requirements for the import of
sport-hunted trophies. Under Sec. 17.40(e)(6)(i)(B), in order for the
Service to authorize the import of a sport-hunted elephant trophy, the
Service must find that the killing of the trophy animal will enhance
the survival of the species in the wild (known as an ``enhancement
finding'').
The Zimbabwe elephant population, along with elephant populations
in Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa, are also included in Appendix
II of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) for the exclusive purpose of allowing
certain trade subject to annotation, including trade in hunting
trophies for noncommercial purposes. All specimens not included in the
annotation are deemed Appendix I specimens, and trade in them is
regulated accordingly. On August 22, 1997, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service) published a proposed rule announcing decisions by the
Conference of the Parties to CITES and seeking comment on whether the
United States should enter a reservation for any of the species that
had been listed on CITES Appendices I and II (62 FR 44627). We
discussed how the populations of African elephants in Zimbabwe,
Botswana, and Namibia had been down-listed from CITES Appendix I to
Appendix II and noted that, because African elephants are listed under
the ESA as threatened, the African elephant section 4(d) rule found at
50 CFR 17.40(e) would continue to apply. This rule required that we
find that the killing of the animal whose trophy was intended for
import would enhance the survival of the species before a sport-hunted
trophy could be imported. We also stated that, in making the required
enhancement finding for the import of sport-hunted trophies, the
Service must review the status of the elephant population and the total
management program for the elephant in each country to ensure the
program is promoting the conservation of the species.
The preamble to the 1997 proposed rule noted that positive
enhancement findings for the countries of Zimbabwe, Botswana, and
Namibia had been made and would remain in effect until the Service
found that the conditions of the section 4(d) rule are no longer met
and published notice of a changed finding in the Federal Register. On
May 18, 2001, we published a final rule again announcing decisions made
at a meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES, including the
decision to down-list the South African population of African elephants
from CITES Appendix I to Appendix II (66 FR 27601). We again discussed
the import requirements for African elephant sport-hunted trophies and
stated that the enhancement finding for South African elephants would
remain in effect until the Service found that conditions of the rule
are no longer met and published notice of a changed finding in the
Federal Register. The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia,
in Safari Club International, et al. v. Jewell, et al., 213 F. Supp. 3d
48 (D.D.C. Sept. 30, 2016), has held that the Service created a binding
duty on itself when it stated in the preamble of the 1997 proposed rule
that it would publish notice in the Federal Register before making a
change in its 1997 enhancement finding for Zimbabwe, and that the
Service then violated this commitment when it published the Federal
Register notice on May 12, 2014, several weeks after making an interim
negative enhancement finding for Zimbabwe on April 4, 2014. As remedy,
the Court ordered that the effective date of the 2014 enhancement
finding is the date of the Federal Register notice, May 12, 2014,
meaning that trophies taken on or before May 11, 2014 were allowed to
meet the enhancement requirement. We did not intend to create a legal
duty to publish changed enhancement findings through these Federal
Register preamble statements.
On June 6, 2016, the Service amended the African elephant section
4(d) rule (81 FR 36388). With this amendment, ESA permits are required
to import all African elephant sport-hunted trophies, including those
from the CITES Appendix II populations of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia,
and South Africa. Because all imports will be accompanied by a
threatened species permit evaluated through the ESA permit application
process found at 50 CFR 17.32(a), we will no longer publish
[[Page 54406]]
notice of changed enhancement findings for African elephant sport-
hunted trophies in the Federal Register. In the future, when there are
subsequent changes to the determination, the individual applicant will
be notified regarding whether his or her permit application was granted
or denied, including a brief statement of the grounds for any denial.
We may also post information on the import of African elephant hunting
trophies on the Service's Web page (www.fws.gov/international), as
appropriate and consistent with applicable laws and regulations.
Import Suspension
On April 4, 2014, the Service announced an interim suspension of
imports of sport-hunted elephant trophies taken in Zimbabwe during the
2014 season. We revised this finding on April 17, 2014, primarily to
clarify that the suspension applied only to elephants hunted on or
after April 4, 2014. This determination was announced in the Federal
Register on May 12, 2014 (79 FR 26986). Our decision to establish an
interim suspension of imports of elephant trophies from Zimbabwe was
due to having insufficient information on the status of elephants in
Zimbabwe and on Zimbabwe's current elephant management program to make
an enhancement finding. On July 17, 2014, the Service found that the
import of elephant trophies taken in Zimbabwe in 2014 on or after April
4, 2014, would be suspended. We revised this finding on July 22, 2014,
to make non-substantive corrections and announced this determination in
the Federal Register on July 31, 2014 (79 FR 44459). The July 17, 2014,
decision to uphold the April 4, 2014, suspension was due to the Service
being unable to make an enhancement finding even after receiving
additional materials from the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife Management
Authority (ZPWMA) and others. On March 26, 2015, the Service made
another determination to continue the suspension (80 FR 42524, July 17,
2015). This decision was again due to the Service being unable to make
an enhancement finding even after receiving additional materials from
ZPWMA and others. The suspension that resulted from the negative
enhancement findings did not prohibit U.S. hunters from traveling to
Zimbabwe and participating in an elephant hunt. The Act does not
prohibit take (e.g., hunting) within a foreign country; it prohibits
import of trophies taken during such hunts without required
authorization under the Act.
Following the Service's March 26, 2015, finding, the Service sent a
letter on May 12, 2015, to the Honorable Saviour Kasukuwere, (formerly)
Zimbabwe's Minister of Environment, Water and Climate, outlining the
concerns the Service still had regarding elephant trophy imports from
Zimbabwe. The letter identified six areas of concern: the lack of a
current management plan; the current population status of elephants in
Zimbabwe; poaching levels and prevention; regulations and enforcement
concerns; the sustainable utilization of elephants in Zimbabwe; and the
utilization of hunting revenues.
On July 20, 2015, ZPWMA responded to each of the questions outlined
in the Service's letter and included a draft version of the Action Plan
for Elephant Conservation and Management in Zimbabwe (2015-2020). In
January 2016, the Service received the final version of the action
plan, the Zimbabwe National Elephant Management Plan (2015-2020), that
had been approved and signed by the (then) Director-General of ZPWMA
Edson Chidziya, on January 20, 2016, and the Honorable Oppah
Muchinguri-Kashiri, Minister of Environment, Water and Climate, on
January 21, 2016.
In September 2016, during the 17th Meeting of the Conference of the
Parties to CITES, the Service met with representatives from Zimbabwe to
further discuss the current status of the Service's evaluation of the
importation of elephant trophies. As a result of those conversations,
the Service received a letter dated November 8, 2016, with supplemental
information regarding Zimbabwe's elephant management plan priorities.
Further, on January 27, 2017, the Service received a letter from ZPWMA
containing a report, ``The Role of Trophy Hunting of Elephants in
Support of the Zimbabwe's Communal Areas Management Programme for
Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) Program: December 2016'' that more
fully discussed the source and amount of revenue generated between 2010
and 2015 through the CAMPFIRE program, the current role of CAMPFIRE,
and how revenue generated by elephant hunting has been utilized within
communal areas over this 6-year period and into the future.
Under 50 CFR 17.40(e)(6)(i)(B), the Service evaluates a number of
factors to determine whether the killing of the trophy animal taken in
a range country will enhance the survival of African elephants as well
as taking into consideration the permit issuance criteria outlined in
50 CFR 17.32(a)(2). In evaluating each of these criteria, the Service
has considered the information currently available to the Service as of
the date of this finding on elephant hunting in Zimbabwe in 2016, 2017,
and 2018, including information provided by the Government of Zimbabwe,
current applicants for permits to import sport-hunted elephant
trophies, interested individuals and organizations, and other
information available to the Service.
Zimbabwe's Conservation Efforts for Elephants
On January 21, 2016, Zimbabwe adopted the Zimbabwe National
Elephant Management Plan (2015-2020) (EMP) that replaced The Policy and
Plan for Elephant Management in Zimbabwe (1997) and Elephant Management
in Zimbabwe, third edition (July 1996), the former management plans.
The EMP incorporates an adaptive management framework with higher level
targets, with key components, strategic objectives, and outputs. Each
key component has management actions that can be measured and verified
through ``Key Performance Indicators.'' A set deadline for each action
was identified. These measurable provisions allow ZPWMA to monitor the
success of the new management plan and, through an adaptive management
approach, address newly emerging concerns and long-term management
needs. The EMP addresses the challenges identified by the 2014 workshop
participants and concerns identified by the Service about the previous
management plans. The EMP was developed as an outcome of several
national and regional workshops that included government officials,
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), rural community leaders, and
safari outfitters and landowners.
The 2014 Pan African Elephant Aerial Survey, also known as the
Great Elephant Census (GEC), available in 2015, provided ZPWMA with a
better elephant baseline population abundance estimate to assess future
hunting quotas, management efforts, and anti-poaching activities.
Confirmed results from the GEC reported an estimate for elephant
abundance in Zimbabwe to be 82,304 individuals (73,715-90,893). The
International Union for Conservation of Nature's African Elephant
Specialist Group (IUCN AfESG) African Elephant Status Report-2016
estimated Zimbabwe's elephant population at 82,630 8,589
across a range of 81,228 km\2\. The results of the 2014 GEC, and
subsequent survey data reported in the 2016 AfESG report, are more
reliable and provide a better basis for
[[Page 54407]]
establishing management priorities than previous surveys and guesses,
and are now utilized in the EMP and quota setting.
As identified in the 2015 finding, the Service explained that, if
properly implemented, the ZPWMA regulatory mechanisms for managing
elephants appear to be adequate. A key issue in the 2015 finding was
whether an adequate mechanism is in place to reliably document the
financial benefits that U.S. hunters provide for elephant conservation
through participation in a hunting program that addresses management
needs of the species and whether the funds were utilized in a
meaningful manner. Since the 2015 finding, the Service has received
information regarding the Tourism Receipts Accounting System (TRAS) and
its web-based system (TRAS2) under which the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe,
in collaboration with relevant stakeholders, can now track all revenue
generated through hunting activities. Under this system, all authorized
hunts are now being registered, allowing for the capture of hunting
data, such as the origin of clients, value of trophies and hunts, and
area hunted, so that officials can monitor hunting quota utilization
and track hunted trophies. This system will provide data that was not
previously easily obtained and greatly improve the ability to track
hunting revenue.
One concern expressed by the Service in its previous findings was
whether ZPWMA was responding to the apparent poaching crisis facing
Zimbabwe. Based on communication from ZPWMA, as well as information
received from other sources, ZPWMA has stepped up its anti-poaching
efforts nationally by adopting a number of ``Urgent Measures.'' As
shown in their July 2015 response to Service questions, most of ZPWMA's
budget (77 percent) is allocated to staff costs and patrol provisions.
These expenditures reportedly fund anti-poaching efforts throughout the
elephant range. ZPWMA reportedly has a staff of 1,504 active field
rangers and has stated that there is intent to increase this number.
According to ``The Zimbabwe National Elephant Supplementary Management
Plan (2015-2020)'', provided to the Service in late 2016, over 80
percent of spending under the new EMP has been on law enforcement
(anti-poaching) and training, with law enforcement identified as the
top priority going forward.
With the adoption of the EMP on January 21, 2016, it appears that
ZPWMA has the means to successfully implement these laws and
regulations. Moreover, ZPWMA has a mechanism in place to monitor the
effects of the EMP and adapt to changing environmental and social
factors that would adversely affect elephant populations within
Zimbabwe.
According to the information provided to the Service in late 2014
and 2015, Zimbabwe had established hunting quotas for all areas of the
country. However, it was not until late 2015 and early 2016 that the
Service received more specific information on how these quotas are
established, including how other forms of take, such as poaching and
problem animal control, were taken into account. Further, it was not
until the EMP was signed into effect on January 21, 2016, that the
Service had confidence that ZWPMA had in place effective mechanisms to
ensure long-term sustainability of its elephant population.
According to ZPWMA, quotas that were established before the EMP
were set to maximize the sustainable production of high-quality
trophies without detriment to the population. With the establishment of
the EMP, there is a more systematic, scientific approach to establish
national quotas. While ZPWMA still currently starts with an annual
quota of 500 elephants, the quota is not immediately divided among all
of the hunting areas. Instead, ZPWMA takes into consideration the
results of the 2014 survey and subsequent surveys, results from
research efforts, the size of the hunting area in relation to elephant
habitat requirements, illegal harvest and other forms of take, how the
hunting areas are managed in relation to land use or fencing, human-
wildlife conflicts that have occurred previously, and recommended
sustainable harvest levels developed based on ecological assessments of
the hunting area. This information is then further evaluated in
consideration of other species within the hunting area, past elephant
trophy quality, and community benefits of proposed harvests.
Since our findings in 2014 and 2015, CAMPFIRE has provided more
information on how their programs support the conservation of elephants
and provide benefits to and promote greater tolerance of wildlife in
rural communities, including new efforts to improve the effectiveness
of CAMPFIRE and new revenue-sharing guidelines. An overarching analysis
of CAMPFIRE, supported by a grant of 12 million Euros from the European
Union, is currently being conducted and is scheduled to be completed by
the end of 2017. Although this review is still under way, more
information has been provided to the Service regarding how funds are
utilized and the basis for hunting quotas.
Since our 2014 and 2015 findings, there are strong indications that
the efforts of private landowners and consortiums to manage elephants
within their areas of control have received greater support from ZPWMA
and the Zimbabwean Government. ZPWMA has devolved authority to manage
and benefit from wildlife on communal and private lands to the
landholders. There now appears to be a greater effort on the part of
ZPWMA to work with NGOs, landowners, and safari area concessionaires to
improve elephant management and anti-poaching efforts. According to
their July 2015 response to the Service, and supported by the report on
the implementation of the EMP, ZPWMA is engaging private players in co-
management in some areas and entering into long-term lease agreements
(10-25 years) to manage some protected areas. In certain areas, ZPWMA
is reportedly collaborating with safari operators; in others, they
collaborate with NGOs, such as the Tashinga Initiative in the Zambezi
Valley and World Wildlife Fund in the Hwange-Sanyati Biological
Corridor. There is increased support from the Central Government and
Rural District Councils to expand and support local conservation
efforts, and there is evidence that local conservation efforts are
meeting management deficiencies that the Service identified previously.
Current Finding
Therefore, in accordance with the regulatory requirements, the
Service is able to make a determination that the killing of trophy
animals in Zimbabwe, on or after January 21, 2016, and on or before
December 31, 2018, will enhance the survival of the African elephant.
With the information currently available, applications to import
trophies hunted during this time period will be considered to have met
this requirement unless we issue a new finding based on available
information. In accordance with the section 4(d) rule for the African
elephant at 50 CFR 17.40(e), the Service will review each application
received for import of such specimens on a case-by-case basis and each
application also needs to meet all other applicable permitting
requirements before it may be authorized. On an ongoing basis and as it
evaluates each application, the Service will continue to monitor the
status of the elephant population, the management program for elephants
in the country to ensure that the program is promoting the conservation
of the species, and whether the participation
[[Page 54408]]
of U.S. hunters in the program provides a clear benefit to the species.
Accordingly, the Service may modify its determination based on
available information consistent with the regulatory requirements. In
addition, the Service will reevaluate the status of African elephants
in Zimbabwe before the end of 2018 and make a new finding in the
beginning of 2019 for, at least, the 2019 hunting season.
Today's enhancement finding has been posted at https://www.fws.gov/international/pdf/enhancement-finding-2017-elephant-Zimbabwe.PDF. In
addition, a list of frequently asked questions regarding the
importation of sport-hunted elephant trophies from Zimbabwe is
available on the Service's web page at https://www.fws.gov/international/permits/by-activity/sport-hunted-trophies-elephants.html.
Brenda Tapia,
Program Analyst/Data Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division of
Management Authority.
[FR Doc. 2017-24974 Filed 11-16-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
