Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment; Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Conservation Program, 32701-32702 [2019-14538]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Notices
prevention of any appreciable spread of
raccoon rabies in the eastern United
States. While the prevention of any
appreciable spread of raccoon rabies in
the eastern United States represents a
major accomplishment in rabies
management, the V–RG vaccine has not
been effective in eliminating raccoon
rabies from high-risk spread corridors.
This fact prompted WS to evaluate
rabies vaccines capable of producing
higher levels of population immunity
against raccoon rabies to better control
the spread of this disease.
Since 2011, WS has been conducting
field trials to study the immunogenicity
and safety of an experimental oral rabies
vaccine, a human adenovirus type 5
rabies glycoprotein recombinant vaccine
called ONRAB (produced by Artemis
Technologies Inc., Guelph, Ontario,
Canada). The field trials began in
portions of West Virginia, including
U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest
Service National Forest System lands.
Beginning in 2012, WS expanded
field trials into portions of New
Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Vermont,
and new areas of West Virginia,
including National Forest System lands,
in order to further assess the
immunogenicity of ONRAB in raccoons
and skunks for raccoon rabies virus
variant.
WS is now proposing to further
expand ONRAB vaccine distribution to
enhance rabies management in the
United States to protect human and
animal health and reduce social costs.
The proposed expanded use of ONRAB
is necessary as a higher level of
population immunity in raccoons is
desired in order to maximize the
effectiveness of ORV programs, and the
RABORAL V–RG vaccine has not
produced sufficient levels of population
immunity in skunks (primarily striped
skunks) in the wild at the current dose.
WS has prepared an environmental
assessment (EA) in which we analyze
the proposed expanded use of ONRAB
vaccine-baits throughout the ORV
distribution zone in Maine, New
Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Tennessee,
Texas, Vermont, Virginia, and West
Virginia in cooperation with the U.S.
Forest Service. This EA will supersede
the 2012 EA ‘‘Field Trial of an
Experimental Rabies Vaccine, Human
Adenovirus Type 5 Vector in New
Hampshire, New York, Ohio, Vermont,
and West Virginia’’ and the subsequent
supplemental EAs issued in 2013, 2015,
2017, and 2018.
We are making the EA available to the
public for review and comment. We will
consider all comments that we receive
on or before the date listed under the
heading DATES at the beginning of this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:47 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
notice. The EA may be viewed on the
Regulations.gov website or in our
reading room (see ADDRESSES above for
instructions for accessing
Regulations.gov and information on the
location and hours of the reading room).
In addition, paper copies may be
obtained by calling or writing to the
individual listed under FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT.
The EA has been prepared in
accordance with: (1) The National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA), as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), (2) regulations of the Council on
Environmental Quality for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500–1508), (3)
USDA regulations implementing NEPA
(7 CFR part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ NEPA
Implementing Procedures (7 CFR part
372).
Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of
July 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–14536 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2018–0064]
Notice of Availability of an
Environmental Assessment;
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher
Conservation Program
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of availability and
request for comments.
AGENCY:
We are advising the public
that the U.S. Department of Agriculture
(USDA) and its sub-agency, the Animal
and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS), are making available a draft
environmental assessment for a
conservation program pursuant to the
Endangered Species Act to benefit the
southwestern willow flycatcher, a small,
neotropical migrant bird found in
Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada,
New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. The draft
environmental assessment examines the
environmental effects associated with
the selection of the program alternatives
and conservation measures that USDA
and APHIS propose to implement. We
are making the draft environmental
assessment available to the public for
review and comment.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
32701
We will consider all comments
that we receive on or before August 8,
2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
by either of the following methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to
https://www.regulations.gov/#!docket
Detail;D=APHIS-2018-0064.
• Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery:
Send your comment to Docket No.
APHIS–2018–0064, Regulatory Analysis
and Development, PPD, APHIS, Station
3A–03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1238.
Supporting documents and any
comments we receive on this docket
may be viewed at https://
www.regulations.gov/
#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0064 or
in our reading room, which is located in
room 1141 of the USDA South Building,
14th Street and Independence Avenue
SW, Washington, DC. Normal reading
room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.,
Monday through Friday, except
holidays. To be sure someone is there to
help you, please call (202) 799–7039
before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Kai Caraher, Biological Scientist, PHP,
PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150,
Riverdale, MD 20737–1231; (301) 851–
2345; Kai.Caraher@usda.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Saltcedar,
also known as tamarisk (Tamarix
species), is an invasive plant widely
established in riparian areas in the
western United States. This non-native
weed, which can take the form of a
shrub or small tree, was introduced into
the United States in the latter 19th
century. Although saltcedar is an
invasive plant, native animals have
adapted to its presence.
In 1986, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) began research
into the potential for biological control
of saltcedar. From 1998 to 2000, ARS
conducted open field release trials of
tamarisk leaf beetles (Diorhabda
species) to determine the conditions
under which releases could succeed.
These field trials took place after ARS
consulted with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure
compliance with the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). USDA’s Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)
permitted the releases after it completed
additional environmental risk analyses
and provided the public an opportunity
to comment on the documents.
In 2005, APHIS initiated a biological
control program for saltcedar defoliation
in the northern United States using the
tamarisk leaf beetle as the biological
control agent in limited locations
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\09JYN1.SGM
09JYN1
khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with NOTICES
32702
Federal Register / Vol. 84, No. 131 / Tuesday, July 9, 2019 / Notices
outside of the habitat of the
southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL,
Empidonax traillii extimus). Greater
than anticipated natural dispersion and
intentional human-assisted movement
of the beetle into SWFL habitat caused
defoliation of saltcedar trees, hampering
the flycatcher’s nesting success.
After tamarisk leaf beetles were
discovered in SWFL habitat, APHIS
terminated its saltcedar biological
control program in 2010 and canceled
release permits because of concern
about the potential adverse effects to
SWFL. APHIS reinitiated consultation
with USFWS on these actions, in
compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the
ESA and 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2), and
USFWS concurred with APHIS’
determination that these actions were
not likely to adversely affect the SWFL.
On September 30, 2013, the Center for
Biological Diversity filed a lawsuit
against USDA, APHIS, ARS, the
Department of the Interior (DOI), and
USFWS alleging that the APHIS
saltcedar biological control program
violated the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as amended
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the ESA. On
May 3, 2016, the Court granted the
plaintiff’s second of five claims, finding
that APHIS did not comply with the
ESA section 7(a)(1), which requires
Federal agencies to consult with DOI
and ‘‘utilize their authorities in
furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA]
by carrying out programs for the
conservation of endangered species and
threatened species listed pursuant to [16
U.S.C. 1533]’’ 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1). On
June 19, 2018, the Court ordered USDA
and APHIS to publish proposed
conservation program alternatives in
compliance with ESA section 7(a)(1),
solicit public comments on the
proposed alternatives, then publish a
draft environmental assessment for
public comment, and complete review
of all public comments, and issue final
decision and final environmental
assessment, or an environmental impact
statement (EIS) should it be appropriate.
On October 26, 2018, APHIS
published in the Federal Register (83
FR 54080–54082, Docket No. APHIS–
2018–0064) a notice 1 informing the
public of APHIS’ intent to conduct a
scoping process and prepare an
environmental assessment (EA). We
solicited comments for 30 days ending
on November 26, 2018. We received 23
comments by that date. After reviewing
the comments, APHIS prepared the draft
EA to examine the environmental effects
1 To view the notice and the comments we
received, go to https://www.regulations.gov/docket
?D=APHIS-2018-0064.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:47 Jul 08, 2019
Jkt 247001
of possible program alternatives,
including conservation measures
available to USDA and APHIS as well as
a ‘‘no action’’ alternative. The EA will
be used for planning and
decisionmaking and to inform the
public about the environmental effects
of the various conservation actions.
We are announcing the availability of
the draft EA that considers the potential
environmental effects of the proposed
conservation measures. We are
requesting public comments on the
listed conservation program alternatives
to ensure that additional potential
alternatives and environmental issues
overlooked by USDA and APHIS in the
draft EA can be identified and examined
before it is finalized. Based on the
comments that we receive, we may
determine that we should prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS)
instead of an EA. In that case, we would
notify the public of our intent to prepare
an EIS in a notice published in the
Federal Register.
Proposed Programmatic Alternatives
The Council on Environmental
Quality’s (CEQ’s) regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions
of NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1508.25)
require the scope of analysis to include
a no action alternative in comparison to
other reasonable courses of action.
Under the no action alternative, APHIS
would evaluate the current USDA
programs benefitting the SWFL and
would not develop any new
conservation programs for the species.
Under the proposed conservation
program alternative, APHIS would assist
existing conservation programs,
contribute funding, monitor beetle
impacts, and evaluate participation in
additional current or future projects
with the potential to benefit the
flycatcher. APHIS received conservation
program suggestions during the notice
of intent comment period. These
measures include:
• Expanding the educational
campaign to include discouraging
human-aided distribution of the
tamarisk leaf beetle near known
flycatcher nesting sites;
• Funding the construction,
installation, and maintenance of
cowbird traps in flycatcher-occupied
riparian habitat to reduce nest
parasitism; and
• Funding additional development
and testing of a tamarisk leaf beetle
repellent by Montana State University.
The EA will be prepared in
accordance with: (1) NEPA, (2) CEQ’s
regulations for implementing the
procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500–1508), (3) USDA’s
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR
part 1b), and (4) APHIS’ regulations
implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 372).
In addition to publishing this notice in
the Federal Register, APHIS will send
the draft EA to 15 Tribal governments,
the USDA’s Natural Resource
Conservation Service and Forest
Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, the
Bureau of Land Management, the
USFWS–Ecological Services and the
National Wildlife Refuge System, the
U.S. Geological Survey, the National
Park Service, 7 States, and dozens of
individuals from non-governmental
groups (conservation and academic
researchers). APHIS requests that
Federal, State, Tribal, or local
government entities who manage areas,
or have jurisdictional control over sites
or actions under consideration as part of
this conservation program, contribute to
this environmental risk analysis and
development of the final NEPA
documents.
Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of
July 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019–14538 Filed 7–8–19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410–34–P
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection
Service
[Docket No. APHIS–2016–0031]
Environmental Impact Statement; Fruit
Fly Cooperative Control Program:
Record of Decision
Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice advises the public
of the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service’s record of decision
for the final programmatic
environmental impact statement titled
‘‘Fruit Fly Cooperative Control
Program.’’
DATES: An official of the Animal and
Plant Health Inspection Service-Plant
Protection and Quarantine signed the
record of decision on April 22, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may read the final
environmental impact statement and
record of decision in our reading room.
The reading room is located in room
1141 of the USDA South Building, 14th
Street and Independence Avenue SW,
Washington, DC. Normal reading room
hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday
through Friday, except holidays. To be
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\09JYN1.SGM
09JYN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 9, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32701-32702]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-14538]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
[Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064]
Notice of Availability of an Environmental Assessment;
Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Conservation Program
AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.
ACTION: Notice of availability and request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) and its sub-agency, the Animal and Plant Health
Inspection Service (APHIS), are making available a draft environmental
assessment for a conservation program pursuant to the Endangered
Species Act to benefit the southwestern willow flycatcher, a small,
neotropical migrant bird found in Arizona, California, Colorado,
Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. The draft environmental assessment
examines the environmental effects associated with the selection of the
program alternatives and conservation measures that USDA and APHIS
propose to implement. We are making the draft environmental assessment
available to the public for review and comment.
DATES: We will consider all comments that we receive on or before
August 8, 2019.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments by either of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0064.
Postal Mail/Commercial Delivery: Send your comment to
Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064, Regulatory Analysis and Development, PPD,
APHIS, Station 3A-03.8, 4700 River Road, Unit 118, Riverdale, MD 20737-
1238.
Supporting documents and any comments we receive on this docket may
be viewed at https://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-
0064 or in our reading room, which is located in room 1141 of the USDA
South Building, 14th Street and Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC.
Normal reading room hours are 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through
Friday, except holidays. To be sure someone is there to help you,
please call (202) 799-7039 before coming.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kai Caraher, Biological Scientist,
PHP, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231;
(301) 851-2345; [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Saltcedar, also known as tamarisk (Tamarix
species), is an invasive plant widely established in riparian areas in
the western United States. This non-native weed, which can take the
form of a shrub or small tree, was introduced into the United States in
the latter 19th century. Although saltcedar is an invasive plant,
native animals have adapted to its presence.
In 1986, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Agricultural
Research Service (ARS) began research into the potential for biological
control of saltcedar. From 1998 to 2000, ARS conducted open field
release trials of tamarisk leaf beetles (Diorhabda species) to
determine the conditions under which releases could succeed. These
field trials took place after ARS consulted with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure compliance with the Endangered
Species Act (ESA). USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
(APHIS) permitted the releases after it completed additional
environmental risk analyses and provided the public an opportunity to
comment on the documents.
In 2005, APHIS initiated a biological control program for saltcedar
defoliation in the northern United States using the tamarisk leaf
beetle as the biological control agent in limited locations
[[Page 32702]]
outside of the habitat of the southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL,
Empidonax traillii extimus). Greater than anticipated natural
dispersion and intentional human-assisted movement of the beetle into
SWFL habitat caused defoliation of saltcedar trees, hampering the
flycatcher's nesting success.
After tamarisk leaf beetles were discovered in SWFL habitat, APHIS
terminated its saltcedar biological control program in 2010 and
canceled release permits because of concern about the potential adverse
effects to SWFL. APHIS reinitiated consultation with USFWS on these
actions, in compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and 16 U.S.C.
1536(a)(2), and USFWS concurred with APHIS' determination that these
actions were not likely to adversely affect the SWFL.
On September 30, 2013, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a
lawsuit against USDA, APHIS, ARS, the Department of the Interior (DOI),
and USFWS alleging that the APHIS saltcedar biological control program
violated the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the ESA. On May 3, 2016, the Court
granted the plaintiff's second of five claims, finding that APHIS did
not comply with the ESA section 7(a)(1), which requires Federal
agencies to consult with DOI and ``utilize their authorities in
furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA] by carrying out programs for
the conservation of endangered species and threatened species listed
pursuant to [16 U.S.C. 1533]'' 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1). On June 19, 2018,
the Court ordered USDA and APHIS to publish proposed conservation
program alternatives in compliance with ESA section 7(a)(1), solicit
public comments on the proposed alternatives, then publish a draft
environmental assessment for public comment, and complete review of all
public comments, and issue final decision and final environmental
assessment, or an environmental impact statement (EIS) should it be
appropriate.
On October 26, 2018, APHIS published in the Federal Register (83 FR
54080-54082, Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064) a notice \1\ informing the
public of APHIS' intent to conduct a scoping process and prepare an
environmental assessment (EA). We solicited comments for 30 days ending
on November 26, 2018. We received 23 comments by that date. After
reviewing the comments, APHIS prepared the draft EA to examine the
environmental effects of possible program alternatives, including
conservation measures available to USDA and APHIS as well as a ``no
action'' alternative. The EA will be used for planning and
decisionmaking and to inform the public about the environmental effects
of the various conservation actions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ To view the notice and the comments we received, go to
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=APHIS-2018-0064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We are announcing the availability of the draft EA that considers
the potential environmental effects of the proposed conservation
measures. We are requesting public comments on the listed conservation
program alternatives to ensure that additional potential alternatives
and environmental issues overlooked by USDA and APHIS in the draft EA
can be identified and examined before it is finalized. Based on the
comments that we receive, we may determine that we should prepare an
environmental impact statement (EIS) instead of an EA. In that case, we
would notify the public of our intent to prepare an EIS in a notice
published in the Federal Register.
Proposed Programmatic Alternatives
The Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) regulations for
implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA regulations (40 CFR
1508.25) require the scope of analysis to include a no action
alternative in comparison to other reasonable courses of action. Under
the no action alternative, APHIS would evaluate the current USDA
programs benefitting the SWFL and would not develop any new
conservation programs for the species.
Under the proposed conservation program alternative, APHIS would
assist existing conservation programs, contribute funding, monitor
beetle impacts, and evaluate participation in additional current or
future projects with the potential to benefit the flycatcher. APHIS
received conservation program suggestions during the notice of intent
comment period. These measures include:
Expanding the educational campaign to include discouraging
human-aided distribution of the tamarisk leaf beetle near known
flycatcher nesting sites;
Funding the construction, installation, and maintenance of
cowbird traps in flycatcher-occupied riparian habitat to reduce nest
parasitism; and
Funding additional development and testing of a tamarisk
leaf beetle repellent by Montana State University.
The EA will be prepared in accordance with: (1) NEPA, (2) CEQ's
regulations for implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA (40 CFR
parts 1500-1508), (3) USDA's regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part
1b), and (4) APHIS' regulations implementing NEPA (7 CFR part 372). In
addition to publishing this notice in the Federal Register, APHIS will
send the draft EA to 15 Tribal governments, the USDA's Natural Resource
Conservation Service and Forest Service, the Bureau of Reclamation, the
Bureau of Land Management, the USFWS-Ecological Services and the
National Wildlife Refuge System, the U.S. Geological Survey, the
National Park Service, 7 States, and dozens of individuals from non-
governmental groups (conservation and academic researchers). APHIS
requests that Federal, State, Tribal, or local government entities who
manage areas, or have jurisdictional control over sites or actions
under consideration as part of this conservation program, contribute to
this environmental risk analysis and development of the final NEPA
documents.
Done in Washington, DC, this 2nd day of July 2019.
Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-14538 Filed 7-8-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-34-P
