Migratory Bird Permits; Management of Double-Crested Cormorants (Phalacrocorax auritus) Throughout the United States, 3601-3603 [2020-00616]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
removal for conservation purposes
means any action with the primary or
secondary purpose of mechanically
removing nonnative fishes that compete
with, predate, or degrade the habitat of
humpback chub.
(1) Methods of allowable take under
this paragraph (cc)(2)(iv)(D) include, but
are not limited to:
(i) Mechanical removal of nonnative
fish within occupied humpback chub
habitats, including, but not limited to,
electrofishing, seining, netting, and
angling; and
(ii) The use of other ecosystem
modifications, such as altered flow
regimes or habitat modifications.
(2) The Service and all applicable
landowners must approve, in advance
and in writing, any nonnative fish
removal activities under this paragraph.
(E) Catch-and-release angling of
humpback chub. States and tribes may
enact Federal, State, and tribal fishing
regulations that address catch-andrelease angling.
(1) In the six core populations,
angling activities may include nontargeted (incidental) catch and release of
humpback chub when targeting other
species in accordance with Federal,
State, and tribal fishing regulations.
(2) In areas outside of the six core
populations, angling activities may
include targeted catch and release of
humpback chub in accordance with
Federal, State, and tribal fishing
regulations.
(3) Angling activities may cause take
via:
(i) Handling of humpback chub
caught via angling;
(ii) Injury to humpback chub caught
via angling; and
(iii) Unintentional death to humpback
chub caught via angling.
(4) Reasonable consideration by the
Federal, State, and tribal agencies for
incidental catch and release of
humpback chub in the six core
populations include:
(i) Regulating tactics to minimize
potential injury and death to humpback
chub if caught;
(ii) Communicating the potential for
catching humpback chub in these areas;
and
(iii) Promoting the importance of the
six core populations.
(5) Reasonable consideration for
establishing new recreational angling
locations for humpback chub include,
but are not limited to:
(i) Evaluating each water body’s
ability to support humpback chub and
sustain angling;
(ii) Ensuring the recreational fishing
population does not detrimentally
impact the six core populations of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
humpback chub through such factors as
disease or genetic drift; and
(iii) Monitoring to ensure there are no
detrimental effects to the humpback
chub population from angling.
(6) The Service and all applicable
State, Federal, and tribal landowners
must approve, in advance and in
writing, any new recreational fishery for
humpback chub.
(F) Chemical treatments to support
humpback chub. A qualified person
may take humpback chub by performing
a chemical treatment in accordance with
Federal, State, and tribal regulations
that would support the conservation
and recovery of humpback chub,
provided that reasonable care is
practiced to minimize the effects of such
taking.
(1) For treatments upstream of
occupied humpback chub habitat:
(i) Service approval is not required;
and
(ii) Care should be taken to limit the
potential for fish toxicants and
piscicides travelling beyond treatment
boundaries and impacting humpback
chub.
(2) For treatments in known or
potentially occupied humpback chub
habitat:
(i) The Service must approve, in
advance and in writing, any treatment;
and
(ii) Care should be taken to perform
robust salvage efforts to remove any
humpback chub that may occur in the
treatment area before the treatment is
conducted.
(3) Whenever possible, humpback
chub that are salvaged should be moved
to a location that supports recovery of
the species.
(G) Reporting and disposal
requirements. Any mortality of
humpback chub associated with the
actions authorized under this special
rule must be reported to the Service
within 72 hours, and specimens may be
disposed of only in accordance with
directions from the Service. Reports in
the upper basin (upstream of Glen
Canyon Dam) must be made to the
Service’s Mountain-Prairie Region Law
Enforcement Office, or the Service’s
Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish
Recovery Office. Reports in the lower
basin (downstream Glen Canyon Dam)
must be made to the Service’s
Southwest Region Law Enforcement
Office, or the Service’s Arizona Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Office. Contact
information for the Service’s regional
offices is set forth at 50 CFR 2.2. The
Service may allow additional reasonable
time for reporting if access to these
offices is limited due to office closure or
if the activity was conducted in area
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
3601
without sufficient communication
access.
*
*
*
*
*
Dated: December 10, 2019.
Margaret E. Everson,
Principle Deputy Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Exercising the Authority of
the Director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service.
[FR Doc. 2020–00512 Filed 1–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0103;
FF09M29000–190–FXMB1232090000]
RIN 1018–BE67
Migratory Bird Permits; Management
of Double-Crested Cormorants
(Phalacrocorax auritus) Throughout
the United States
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed
rulemaking; intent to prepare a National
Environmental Policy Act document.
AGENCY:
This document advises the
public that we, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, intends to gather
information necessary to develop a
proposed rule to expand management of
double-crested cormorants
(Phalacrocorax auritus) throughout the
United States, and prepare a draft
environmental review pursuant to the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended. We are furnishing
this advance notice of proposed
rulemaking to advise other agencies and
the public of our intentions; obtain
suggestions and information on the
scope of issues to include in the
environmental review; and announce
public scoping webinars to occur in
2020.
DATES:
Comment submission: Public scoping
will begin with the publication of this
document in the Federal Register and
will continue through March 9, 2020.
We will consider all comments on the
scope of the draft environmental review
that are received or postmarked by that
date. Comments received or postmarked
after that date will be considered to the
extent practicable.
Scoping meetings: We will hold
public scoping meetings in the form of
multiple webinars that will occur in
February 2020. We will announce exact
webinar dates, times, and registration
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\22JAP1.SGM
22JAP1
3602
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
details on the internet at https://
www.fws.gov/birds/management/
managed-species/double-crestedcormorants.php.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments by one of the following
methods. Please do not submit
comments by both.
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS–HQ–MB–2019–0103.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand-delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–MB–2019–
0103; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Headquarters, MS: JAO/1N, 5275
Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We do not accept email or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information you provide.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jerome Ford, Assistant Director,
Migratory Birds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, at 202–208–1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) is the Federal agency delegated
with the primary responsibility for
managing migratory birds. Our authority
derives from the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act of 1918, as amended (MBTA),
which implements conventions with
Great Britain (for Canada), Mexico,
Japan, and the Russia Federation. The
MBTA protects certain migratory birds
from take, except as permitted under the
MBTA. We implement the provisions of
the MBTA through regulations in parts
10, 13, 20, 21, and 22 of title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR).
Regulations pertaining to migratory bird
permits are at 50 CFR part 21.
The double-crested cormorant
(Phalacrocorax auritus, [cormorants]) is
a fish-eating migratory bird that is
distributed across a large portion of
North America. There are five different
breeding populations of cormorants,
variously described by different authors
as the Alaska, Pacific Coast, Interior,
Atlantic, and Southern populations.
Cormorant populations have exhibited
increasing abundance over the last few
decades. In response to ongoing damage
at aquaculture facilities and other
damage and conflicts associated with
increasing cormorant populations, the
Service administered regulations that
included an Aquaculture Depredation
Order (which was located at 50 CFR
21.47) and a Public Resource
Depredation Order (which was located
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
at 50 CFR 21.48) from October 2003
until May of 2016.
The Aquaculture Depredation Order
eliminated individual permit
requirements in 13 States for private
individuals, corporations, State
agencies, and Federal agencies taking
cormorants at aquaculture facilities. The
Public Resource Depredation Order
enabled States, Tribes, and the U.S.
Department of Agriculture’s Wildlife
Services in 24 States, without
individual depredation permits, to take
cormorants found committing or about
to commit, and to prevent, depredations
on the public resources of fish
(including hatchery stock at Federal,
State, and Tribal facilities), wildlife,
plants, and their habitats. In May of
2016, the depredation orders were
vacated by the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia. The
Court concluded that the Service did
not sufficiently consider the effects of
the depredation orders on cormorant
populations and other affected resources
and failed to consider a reasonable
range of alternatives in the review
within the environmental assessment
issued under the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (NEPA), in 2014. The
authority for authorizing lethal take of
depredating cormorants reverted back to
the issuance of individual depredation
permits pursuant to 50 CFR 21.41.
Conflicts in aquatic systems continue
to exist between cormorants and fish
stocks managed by Federal, State, and
Tribal agencies as recreational and/or
commercial fisheries, or for speciesconservation purposes. Cormorant
predation of fish also occurs at
aquaculture facilities and private
recreational lakes and ponds. Birders
and other interested parties value
cormorants for their aesthetic and
existential values.
The Service is responsible for
determining the maximum amount of
lethal take of cormorants to allow in
order to minimize conflicts in aquatic
systems, while maintaining sustainable
populations of cormorants and
minimizing the regulatory burden on
Federal and State agencies and
individual citizens. In the process of
making this decision, the Service wants
to use an effective and transparent
decision-making process that ensures
collaboration among migratory bird and
fisheries management programs, fulfills
Tribal trust and subsistence
responsibilities, adheres to legal and
regulatory requirements under NEPA,
and addresses key biological
uncertainties. When determining total
allowable take, the Service must
consider uncertainty related to
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
cormorant population dynamics,
estimated maximum sustainable
harvest, and risk of over-exploitation.
Furthermore, the Service and
stakeholders must identify appropriate
monitoring requirements that ensure
progress toward stated objectives and
inform future decisions regarding total
allowable take.
Public Scoping
A primary purpose of the NEPA
scoping process is to receive suggestions
and information on the scope of issues
and alternatives to consider when
drafting the environmental documents
and to identify significant issues and
reasonable alternatives related to the
Service’s proposed action. In order to
ensure that we identify a range of issues
and alternatives related to the proposed
action, we invite comments and
suggestions from all interested parties.
We will conduct a review of this
proposed action according to the
requirements of NEPA and its
regulations, other relevant Federal laws,
regulations, policies, and guidance, and
our procedures for compliance with
applicable regulations. Once the
environmental documents are
completed, we will offer further
opportunities for public comment.
Proposed Action and Possible
Alternatives
The Service has collaborated with
State fish and wildlife agencies, Tribes,
and Federal partners in further
addressing cormorant conflicts
including aquaculture and wild and
stocked fisheries. In this rulemaking
action, we propose these long-term
solutions to cormorant conflicts:
(1) Establish a new permit for State
wildlife agencies for authorizing certain
cormorant management and control
activities that are normally prohibited
and are intended to relieve or prevent
impacts from cormorants on wild and
stocked fisheries, aquaculture facilities,
human health and safety, property, and
threatened and endangered species (as
listed under the Endangered Species Act
of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.)). States would have the delegated
authority to determine whether, when,
where, and for what purposes to control
cormorants within limits set by the
Service.
(2) Establish an aquaculture
depredation order, which would allow
take of cormorants under prescribed
conditions at aquaculture facilities
without the need to acquire an
individual permit.
(3) Both (1) and (2) in combination.
The proposed action presented in the
environmental analysis will be
E:\FR\FM\22JAP1.SGM
22JAP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 14 / Wednesday, January 22, 2020 / Proposed Rules
compared to the no-action alternative.
The no-action alternative will compare
estimated future conditions without
implementation of the alternatives listed
here to the estimated future conditions
with those alternative actions in place
(i.e., issuance of individual depredation
permits pursuant to 50 CFR 21.41).
g. Disproportionately high and
adverse impacts on minority and lowincome populations;
h. Any other potential or
socioeconomic effects; and
i. Any potential conflicts with other
Federal, State, local, or Tribal
environmental laws or requirements.
Information Requested
Public Availability of Comments
Issues Related to the Scope of the NEPA
Review
Written comments 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 the 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. Comments and materials we
receive, as well as supporting
documentation we use in preparing the
environmental analysis, will be
available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business
hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters (see ADDRESSES,
above).
We seek comments or suggestions
from the public, governmental agencies,
Tribes, the scientific community,
industry, or any other interested parties.
To promulgate a proposed rule and
prepare a draft environmental review
pursuant to NEPA, we will take into
consideration all comments and any
additional information received. To
ensure that any proposed rulemaking
effectively evaluates all potential issues
and impacts, we are seeking comments
and suggestions on the following for
consideration in preparation of
additional management for doublecrested cormorants:
a. Assessment of interest in use of a
new special permit by States and Tribes;
b. Appropriate limitations to
cormorant management and control
activities, such as season, scope, and
magnitude of expected lethal take; and
c. Potential reporting and monitoring
strategies of cormorants by States and
participating Tribes.
The Service will act as the lead
Federal agency responsible for
completion of the environmental
review. Therefore, we are seeking
comments on the identification of
direct, indirect, beneficial, and adverse
effects that might be caused by
additional management for doublecrested cormorants. You may wish to
consider the following issues when
providing comments:
a. Impacts on floodplains, wetlands,
wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically
sensitive areas;
b. Impacts on park lands and cultural
or historic resources;
c. Impacts on human health and
safety;
d. Impacts on air, soil, and water;
e. Impacts on prime agricultural
lands;
f. Impacts to other species of wildlife,
including endangered or threatened
species;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:12 Jan 21, 2020
Jkt 250001
Scoping Meetings
See DATES for information about
upcoming scoping webinars. The
purpose of scoping webinars is to
provide the public with a general
understanding of the background of the
proposed rule, alternatives and
activities it would cover, alternative
proposals under consideration, and the
Service’s role and steps to be taken to
develop the draft environmental
analysis for the proposed action.
Additionally, the purpose of these
meetings and public comment period is
to solicit suggestions and information
on the scope of issues and alternatives
for the Service to consider when
preparing the draft environmental
documents. Oral comments will be
accepted at the webinars.
Comments can also be submitted by
methods listed in ADDRESSES. Once the
draft environmental documents and
proposed rule are complete and made
available for review, there will be
additional opportunity for public
comment on the content of these
documents through an additional
comment period.
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
3603
Scoping Webinar Accommodations
Please note that the Service will
ensure that the public scoping webinars
will be accessible to members of the
public with disabilities.
Public Comments
To promulgate a proposed rule and
prepare a draft environmental review
pursuant to NEPA, we will take into
consideration all comments and any
additional information received. Please
note that submissions merely stating
support for or opposition to the
proposed action and alternatives under
consideration, without providing
supporting information, will be noted
but not considered by the Service in
making a determination. Please consider
the following when preparing your
comments:
a. Be as succinct as possible.
b. Be specific. Comments supported
by logic, rationale, and citations are
more useful than opinions.
c. State suggestions and
recommendations clearly with an
expectation of what you would like the
Service to do.
d. If you propose an additional
alternative for consideration, please
provide supporting rationale and why
you believe it to be a reasonable
alternative that would meet the purpose
and need for our proposed action.
e. If you provide alternate
interpretations of science, please
support your analysis with appropriate
citations.
The alternatives we develop will be
analyzed in our draft environmental
review pursuant to NEPA. We will give
separate notice of the availability of the
draft environmental review for public
comment when it is completed. We may
hold public hearings and informational
sessions so that interested and affected
people may comment and provide input
into the final decision.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 (16
U.S.C. 703 et seq.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Dated: December 6, 2019.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2020–00616 Filed 1–21–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\22JAP1.SGM
22JAP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 14 (Wednesday, January 22, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 3601-3603]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-00616]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 21
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0103; FF09M29000-190-FXMB1232090000]
RIN 1018-BE67
Migratory Bird Permits; Management of Double-Crested Cormorants
(Phalacrocorax auritus) Throughout the United States
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Advance notice of proposed rulemaking; intent to prepare a
National Environmental Policy Act document.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This document advises the public that we, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, intends to gather information necessary to develop a
proposed rule to expand management of double-crested cormorants
(Phalacrocorax auritus) throughout the United States, and prepare a
draft environmental review pursuant to the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended. We are furnishing this advance notice
of proposed rulemaking to advise other agencies and the public of our
intentions; obtain suggestions and information on the scope of issues
to include in the environmental review; and announce public scoping
webinars to occur in 2020.
DATES:
Comment submission: Public scoping will begin with the publication
of this document in the Federal Register and will continue through
March 9, 2020. We will consider all comments on the scope of the draft
environmental review that are received or postmarked by that date.
Comments received or postmarked after that date will be considered to
the extent practicable.
Scoping meetings: We will hold public scoping meetings in the form
of multiple webinars that will occur in February 2020. We will announce
exact webinar dates, times, and registration
[[Page 3602]]
details on the internet at https://www.fws.gov/birds/management/managed-species/double-crested-cormorants.php.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by one of the following
methods. Please do not submit comments by both.
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0103.
(2) By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-MB-2019-0103; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters, MS: JAO/1N, 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041-3803.
We do not accept email or faxes. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information you
provide.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerome Ford, Assistant Director,
Migratory Birds, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at 202-208-1050.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) is the Federal agency
delegated with the primary responsibility for managing migratory birds.
Our authority derives from the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918, as
amended (MBTA), which implements conventions with Great Britain (for
Canada), Mexico, Japan, and the Russia Federation. The MBTA protects
certain migratory birds from take, except as permitted under the MBTA.
We implement the provisions of the MBTA through regulations in parts
10, 13, 20, 21, and 22 of title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). Regulations pertaining to migratory bird permits are at 50 CFR
part 21.
The double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus, [cormorants])
is a fish-eating migratory bird that is distributed across a large
portion of North America. There are five different breeding populations
of cormorants, variously described by different authors as the Alaska,
Pacific Coast, Interior, Atlantic, and Southern populations. Cormorant
populations have exhibited increasing abundance over the last few
decades. In response to ongoing damage at aquaculture facilities and
other damage and conflicts associated with increasing cormorant
populations, the Service administered regulations that included an
Aquaculture Depredation Order (which was located at 50 CFR 21.47) and a
Public Resource Depredation Order (which was located at 50 CFR 21.48)
from October 2003 until May of 2016.
The Aquaculture Depredation Order eliminated individual permit
requirements in 13 States for private individuals, corporations, State
agencies, and Federal agencies taking cormorants at aquaculture
facilities. The Public Resource Depredation Order enabled States,
Tribes, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services in
24 States, without individual depredation permits, to take cormorants
found committing or about to commit, and to prevent, depredations on
the public resources of fish (including hatchery stock at Federal,
State, and Tribal facilities), wildlife, plants, and their habitats. In
May of 2016, the depredation orders were vacated by the United States
District Court for the District of Columbia. The Court concluded that
the Service did not sufficiently consider the effects of the
depredation orders on cormorant populations and other affected
resources and failed to consider a reasonable range of alternatives in
the review within the environmental assessment issued under the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), in 2014.
The authority for authorizing lethal take of depredating cormorants
reverted back to the issuance of individual depredation permits
pursuant to 50 CFR 21.41.
Conflicts in aquatic systems continue to exist between cormorants
and fish stocks managed by Federal, State, and Tribal agencies as
recreational and/or commercial fisheries, or for species-conservation
purposes. Cormorant predation of fish also occurs at aquaculture
facilities and private recreational lakes and ponds. Birders and other
interested parties value cormorants for their aesthetic and existential
values.
The Service is responsible for determining the maximum amount of
lethal take of cormorants to allow in order to minimize conflicts in
aquatic systems, while maintaining sustainable populations of
cormorants and minimizing the regulatory burden on Federal and State
agencies and individual citizens. In the process of making this
decision, the Service wants to use an effective and transparent
decision-making process that ensures collaboration among migratory bird
and fisheries management programs, fulfills Tribal trust and
subsistence responsibilities, adheres to legal and regulatory
requirements under NEPA, and addresses key biological uncertainties.
When determining total allowable take, the Service must consider
uncertainty related to cormorant population dynamics, estimated maximum
sustainable harvest, and risk of over-exploitation. Furthermore, the
Service and stakeholders must identify appropriate monitoring
requirements that ensure progress toward stated objectives and inform
future decisions regarding total allowable take.
Public Scoping
A primary purpose of the NEPA scoping process is to receive
suggestions and information on the scope of issues and alternatives to
consider when drafting the environmental documents and to identify
significant issues and reasonable alternatives related to the Service's
proposed action. In order to ensure that we identify a range of issues
and alternatives related to the proposed action, we invite comments and
suggestions from all interested parties. We will conduct a review of
this proposed action according to the requirements of NEPA and its
regulations, other relevant Federal laws, regulations, policies, and
guidance, and our procedures for compliance with applicable
regulations. Once the environmental documents are completed, we will
offer further opportunities for public comment.
Proposed Action and Possible Alternatives
The Service has collaborated with State fish and wildlife agencies,
Tribes, and Federal partners in further addressing cormorant conflicts
including aquaculture and wild and stocked fisheries. In this
rulemaking action, we propose these long-term solutions to cormorant
conflicts:
(1) Establish a new permit for State wildlife agencies for
authorizing certain cormorant management and control activities that
are normally prohibited and are intended to relieve or prevent impacts
from cormorants on wild and stocked fisheries, aquaculture facilities,
human health and safety, property, and threatened and endangered
species (as listed under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.)). States would have the delegated authority to
determine whether, when, where, and for what purposes to control
cormorants within limits set by the Service.
(2) Establish an aquaculture depredation order, which would allow
take of cormorants under prescribed conditions at aquaculture
facilities without the need to acquire an individual permit.
(3) Both (1) and (2) in combination.
The proposed action presented in the environmental analysis will be
[[Page 3603]]
compared to the no-action alternative. The no-action alternative will
compare estimated future conditions without implementation of the
alternatives listed here to the estimated future conditions with those
alternative actions in place (i.e., issuance of individual depredation
permits pursuant to 50 CFR 21.41).
Information Requested
Issues Related to the Scope of the NEPA Review
We seek comments or suggestions from the public, governmental
agencies, Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other
interested parties. To promulgate a proposed rule and prepare a draft
environmental review pursuant to NEPA, we will take into consideration
all comments and any additional information received. To ensure that
any proposed rulemaking effectively evaluates all potential issues and
impacts, we are seeking comments and suggestions on the following for
consideration in preparation of additional management for double-
crested cormorants:
a. Assessment of interest in use of a new special permit by States
and Tribes;
b. Appropriate limitations to cormorant management and control
activities, such as season, scope, and magnitude of expected lethal
take; and
c. Potential reporting and monitoring strategies of cormorants by
States and participating Tribes.
The Service will act as the lead Federal agency responsible for
completion of the environmental review. Therefore, we are seeking
comments on the identification of direct, indirect, beneficial, and
adverse effects that might be caused by additional management for
double-crested cormorants. You may wish to consider the following
issues when providing comments:
a. Impacts on floodplains, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or
ecologically sensitive areas;
b. Impacts on park lands and cultural or historic resources;
c. Impacts on human health and safety;
d. Impacts on air, soil, and water;
e. Impacts on prime agricultural lands;
f. Impacts to other species of wildlife, including endangered or
threatened species;
g. Disproportionately high and adverse impacts on minority and low-
income populations;
h. Any other potential or socioeconomic effects; and
i. Any potential conflicts with other Federal, State, local, or
Tribal environmental laws or requirements.
Public Availability of Comments
Written comments 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 the 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. Comments and materials we
receive, as well as supporting documentation we use in preparing the
environmental analysis, will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service Headquarters (see ADDRESSES, above).
Scoping Meetings
See DATES for information about upcoming scoping webinars. The
purpose of scoping webinars is to provide the public with a general
understanding of the background of the proposed rule, alternatives and
activities it would cover, alternative proposals under consideration,
and the Service's role and steps to be taken to develop the draft
environmental analysis for the proposed action. Additionally, the
purpose of these meetings and public comment period is to solicit
suggestions and information on the scope of issues and alternatives for
the Service to consider when preparing the draft environmental
documents. Oral comments will be accepted at the webinars.
Comments can also be submitted by methods listed in ADDRESSES. Once
the draft environmental documents and proposed rule are complete and
made available for review, there will be additional opportunity for
public comment on the content of these documents through an additional
comment period.
Scoping Webinar Accommodations
Please note that the Service will ensure that the public scoping
webinars will be accessible to members of the public with disabilities.
Public Comments
To promulgate a proposed rule and prepare a draft environmental
review pursuant to NEPA, we will take into consideration all comments
and any additional information received. Please note that submissions
merely stating support for or opposition to the proposed action and
alternatives under consideration, without providing supporting
information, will be noted but not considered by the Service in making
a determination. Please consider the following when preparing your
comments:
a. Be as succinct as possible.
b. Be specific. Comments supported by logic, rationale, and
citations are more useful than opinions.
c. State suggestions and recommendations clearly with an
expectation of what you would like the Service to do.
d. If you propose an additional alternative for consideration,
please provide supporting rationale and why you believe it to be a
reasonable alternative that would meet the purpose and need for our
proposed action.
e. If you provide alternate interpretations of science, please
support your analysis with appropriate citations.
The alternatives we develop will be analyzed in our draft
environmental review pursuant to NEPA. We will give separate notice of
the availability of the draft environmental review for public comment
when it is completed. We may hold public hearings and informational
sessions so that interested and affected people may comment and provide
input into the final decision.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of
1918 (16 U.S.C. 703 et seq.) and the National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Dated: December 6, 2019.
Rob Wallace,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2020-00616 Filed 1-21-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
