Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision to the Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf (Canis lupus baileyi, 20967-20970 [2020-07715]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules
G. Regulatory Reform Analysis Under
E.O. 13771
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
Executive Order 13771, entitled
‘‘Reducing Regulation and Controlling
Regulatory Costs,’’ was issued on
January 30, 2017 (82 FR 9339, February
3, 2017) and requires that the costs
associated with significant new
regulations ‘‘shall, to the extent
permitted by law, be offset by the
elimination of existing costs associated
with at least two prior regulations.’’ It
has been determined that this proposed
rule is an action that primarily results
in transfers and does not impose more
than de minimis costs as described
above and thus is not a regulatory or
deregulatory action for the purposes of
Executive Order 13771.
47 CFR Parts 1, 2, 18
H. Conclusion
We estimate that aggregate payments
to hospices in FY 2021 will increase by
$580 million, or 2.6 percent, compared
to payments in FY 2020. We estimate
that in FY 2021, hospices in urban areas
will experience, on average, 2.6 percent
increase in estimated payments
compared to FY 2020. While hospices in
rural areas will experience, on average,
2.8 percent increase in estimated
payments compared to FY 2020.
Hospices providing services in the
Middle Atlantic region would
experience the largest estimated
increases in payments of 3.0 percent.
Hospices serving patients in areas in the
New England and Outlying regions
would experience, on average, the
lowest estimated increase of 1.7 percent
and 1.8 percent, respectively in FY 2021
payments.
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this regulation
was reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget.
Dated: March 24, 2020.
Seema Verma,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
Dated: April 9, 2020.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
[FR Doc. 2020–07959 Filed 4–10–20; 4:15 pm]
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
BILLING CODE 4120–01–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Apr 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
[ET Docket No. 19–226; FCC 19–126; FRS
16643]
Human Exposure to Radiofrequency
Electromagnetic Fields; Correction
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Proposed rule; correction.
AGENCY:
The Federal Communications
Commission (Commission) is correcting
a date that appeared in the Federal
Register on April 6, 2020. In this
document, the Commission seeks
comment on expanding the range of
frequencies for which its radiofrequency
(RF) exposure limits apply; on applying
localized exposure limits above 6 GHz
in parallel to the localized exposure
limits already established below 6 GHz;
on specifying the conditions and
methods for averaging the RF exposure,
in both time and area, during evaluation
for compliance with the RF exposure
limits in the rules; on addressing new
RF exposure issues raised by wireless
power transfer (WPT) devices; and on
the definition of a WPT device.
DATES: Comments are due on or before
May 15, 2020, and reply comments are
due on or before June 15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: Interested parties may
submit comments and replies, identified
by ET Docket No. 19–226, by any of the
following methods:
• Federal Communications
Commission’s website: https://
fja_llfoss.fcc.gov/ecfs2/. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Filings can be sent by hand or
messenger delivery, by commercial
overnight courier, or by first-class or
overnight U.S. Postal Service mail. All
filings must be addressed to the
Commission’s Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, Federal Communications
Commission.
• People with Disabilities: Contact the
Commission to request reasonable
accommodations (accessible format
documents, sign language interpreters,
CART, etc.) by email: FCC504@fcc.gov
or phone: 202–418–0530 or TTY: 202–
418–0432.
For detailed instructions on submitting
comments and additional information
on the rulemaking process, see the
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of
this document.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Martin Doczkat, email: martin.doczkat@
fcc.gov of the Office of Engineering and
Technology Electromagnetic
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20967
Compatibility Division; the
Commission’s RF Safety Program,
rfsafety@fcc.gov; or call the Office of
Engineering and Technology at (202)
418–2470. For information regarding the
Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA)
information collection requirements
contained in this document, contact
Nicole Ongele, Office of Managing
Director, at (202) 418–2991 or
Nicole.Ongele@fcc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc.
20–06966, appearing on page 19117 in
the Federal Register on April 6, 2020,
the following correction is made:
■ 1. On page 19117, in the first column,
in DATES, the instruction ‘‘reply
comments are due on or before June 1,
2020.’’ is corrected to read ‘‘reply
comments are due on or before June 15,
2020.’’
Dated: April 6, 2020.
Federal Communications Commission.
Cecilia Sigmund,
Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 2020–07866 Filed 4–14–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712–01–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2020–0007;
FXES111302WOLF0–201–FF02ENEH00]
RIN 1018–BE52
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
and Plants; Revision to the
Nonessential Experimental Population
of the Mexican Wolf (Canis lupus
baileyi); Environmental Impact
Statement
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a
supplement to an environmental impact
statement.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, will prepare a draft
environmental impact statement
supplement pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as
amended (NEPA), in conjunction with a
proposed rule to revise the existing
nonessential experimental population
designation of the Mexican wolf (Canis
lupus baileyi) under section 10(j) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended. The revised rule and
environmental impact statement
supplement are being developed in
response to a court-ordered remand by
the District Court of Arizona of our 2015
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\15APP1.SGM
15APP1
20968
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
final rule to revise the nonessential
experimental population designation
and management of Mexican wolves in
the Mexican Wolf Experimental
Population Area in Arizona and New
Mexico.
DATES: We will accept public comments
received or postmarked on or before
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on June 15,
2020. We may not consider any
comments we receive after the closing
date in the final decision.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal
rulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2020–0007,
which is the docket number for this
notice of intent.
(2) By hard copy: Submit comments
by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to: Public
Comments Processing, Attn: FWS–R2–
ES–2020–0007; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, MS: PRB/PERMA (JAO/1N),
5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA
22041–3803.
We request that you send comments
only by the methods described above.
We will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see the
Information Requested section below for
more information.). To increase our
efficiency in downloading comments,
groups providing mass submissions
should submit their comments in an
Excel file.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Marty Tuegel, 505–248–6651; or the
Mexican Wolf Recovery Program, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, New Mexico
Ecological Services Field Office, 2105
Osuna Road NE, Albuquerque, NM
87113 or by telephone 505–761–4704; or
by facsimile 505–761–2542. If you use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at
800–877–8339. Additional information
can be found on the Mexican Wolf
Recovery Program’s website at https://
www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
mexicanwolf/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Previous Federal Actions
We established a nonessential
experimental population of Mexican
wolves in Arizona and New Mexico in
1998 (63 FR 1752, January 12, 1998)
pursuant to section 10(j) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act).
We published a final rule to revise the
designation and management of the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Apr 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
nonessential experimental population in
2015 (80 FR 2512, January 16, 2015)
(2015 final rule). We analyzed the
effects of our proposed revision in the
Environmental Impact Statement for the
Proposed Revision to the Regulations for
the Nonessential Experimental
Population of the Mexican Wolf (Canis
lupus baileyi) (EIS). We opened a public
comment period and announced public
meetings for the draft environmental
impact statement on July 25, 2014 (79
FR 43358), and announced the
availability of our EIS and draft Record
of Decision in the Federal Register on
November 25, 2014 (79 FR 70154). The
EIS and other documents are available
at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket
No. FWS–R2–ES–2013–0056 under
Supporting Documents.
Background
The Service previously opened a
public scoping period on August 5,
2013, to seek public input on the scope,
issues, and alternatives under
consideration in the Service’s revision
of the 1998 Mexican wolf nonessential
experimental population designation
(78 FR 47268). At that time, the Service
was seeking to improve the conservation
and management of the experimental
population as designated in 1998, and
requested input from the public on
potential changes to the geographic
boundaries of the Mexican Wolf
Experimental Population Area
(MWEPA) in Arizona and New Mexico,
as well as the management provisions
associated with it. In the 2015 final rule,
the Service revised the designation and
management of the MWEPA from its
original 1998 designation by:
(1) Establishing a population objective
for the experimental population of 300
to 325 wolves within the MWEPA;
(2) Expanding the area in which
initial releases of Mexican wolves from
captivity and translocations could
occur;
(3) Extending the southern boundary
of the MWEPA in Arizona and New
Mexico to the United States–Mexico
international border;
(4) Discontinuing the use of the ‘‘Blue
Range Wolf Recovery Area’’ designation
within the MWEPA, including its
divisions of primary and secondary
recovery zones;
(5) Establishing three management
zones within the MWEPA defined as
‘‘Zone 1,’’ ‘‘Zone 2,’’ and ‘‘Zone 3,’’ each
with specific provisions for Mexican
wolf occupancy, initial releases, and
translocations;
(6) Adopting a phased management
approach for up to 12 years to minimize
or avoid impacts to wild ungulate
populations in western Arizona;
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
(7) Authorizing removal of Mexican
wolves identified as coming from the
experimental population that disperse
to establish territories outside of the
MWEPA in a revised section 10(a)(1)(A)
research and recovery permit;
(8) Providing revised and additional
provisions for take of Mexican wolves
under certain circumstances to protect
livestock and non-feral dogs, or as
needed to manage wild ungulate
populations (particularly elk and deer);
and
(9) Providing for the development of
management actions on tribal trust land
or on private land in management Zones
1 and 2.
On March 31, 2018, the District Court
of Arizona remanded the 2015 final rule
to the Service based on the Court’s
finding that the 2015 final rule failed to
further the long-term conservation and
recovery of the Mexican wolf and that
the essentiality determination was
arbitrary and capricious (Center for
Biological Diversity v. Jewell, No. 4:15–
cv–00019–JGZ (D. Ariz.) (March 31,
2018, Order)). The Service is under a
court-ordered deadline to address the
remanded issues in a new revised rule
by May 1, 2021. The 2015 final rule
remains in place until we finalize the
new revised rule.
In the interim between the 2015 final
rule and the March 31, 2018, Order, the
Service finalized the Mexican Wolf
Recovery Plan, First Revision (2017).
The revised recovery plan, which
updates the original 1982 Mexican Wolf
Recovery Plan, provides objective and
measurable recovery criteria for the
Mexican wolf, as well as management
actions and time and cost estimates to
achieve recovery, pursuant to section
4(f) of the Act. The recovery criteria
focus on achieving specific population
sizes, growth rate trends, and genetic
diversity in the MWEPA and a second
population in Mexico, as well as
ensuring regulatory mechanisms are in
place for both populations to address
human-caused mortality of Mexican
wolves. The recovery plan serves as our
roadmap for the long-term conservation
and recovery of the Mexican wolf. It is
available at https://www.regulations.gov
in Docket No. FWS–R2–ES–2017–0036
under Supporting Documents.
Information Requested
We are currently seeking comments or
suggestions from the public,
governmental agencies, Tribes, the
scientific community, industry, or any
other interested parties concerning
specific provisions of the 2015 final rule
identified by the District Court of
Arizona in the March 31, 2018, Order.
We will revise the 2015 final rule only
E:\FR\FM\15APP1.SGM
15APP1
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules
to the extent necessary to address the
Court’s ruling; no additional provisions
of the rule are subject to revision. To the
extent possible, and as described below,
we will address the remanded issues by
aligning the new revised rule with the
revised recovery plan, which provides
an overarching strategy for the long-term
conservation and recovery of the
Mexican wolf. We will analyze any new
proposed rule revisions in a
supplemental EIS to the 2014 EIS.
Due to the focus of the remand, we are
seeking input from the public only on
a narrow range of topics, as follows:
(1) We will make a new essentiality
determination for the experimental
population of Mexican wolves in the
MWEPA under section 10(j) of the Act.
We are interested in feedback from the
public and our partners on the benefits
or potential impacts to the Mexican wolf
or the public and our partners of an
‘‘essential’’ versus ‘‘nonessential’’
designation.
(2) We intend to align the population
objective and release recommendations
in the new revised rule with the
recovery criteria in the revised recovery
plan for the MWEPA to ensure the new
revised rule supports the long-term
conservation and recovery of the
Mexican wolf. We are interested in
feedback from the public and our
partners on any information or data
available since we finalized the revised
recovery plan in 2017 pertinent to
establishing a population objective or
release recommendations for the
MWEPA. We are also interested in any
other considerations related to the
relationship between the population
objective and release recommendations
for the MWEPA and the long-term
conservation and recovery of the
Mexican wolf.
(3) We intend to ensure the new
revised rule supports population-level
genetic health for the Mexican wolf in
the MWEPA as a key component of the
long-term conservation and recovery of
the Mexican wolf. We will ensure our
management provisions facilitate our
ability to achieve the genetic recovery
criterion for the MWEPA, which serves
as our long-term conservation and
recovery target. The genetic criterion in
the revised recovery plan for the
MWEPA states that we will release a
sufficient number of captive Mexican
wolves to result in 22 released Mexican
wolves surviving to breeding age in the
MWEPA (USFWS 2017a, pp. 18–19). As
explained in the revised recovery plan
(USFWS 2017a, pp. 9, 13) and the
supporting Biological Report for the
Mexican Wolf (USFWS 2017b, pp. 27–
29, 33–34, and 36–38), the genetic
criterion ensures that the threat of
VerDate Sep<11>2014
16:50 Apr 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
continuing or accelerated loss of genetic
diversity of Mexican wolves in the wild
is adequately alleviated. Both of these
documents are available online at https://
www.regulations.gov in Docket No.
FWS–R2–ES–2017–0036 under
Supporting Documents.
In the 2015 final rule, we expanded
several allowable forms of take of
Mexican wolves from the 1998 rule after
analyzing their effects in the 2014 EIS
and determining a significant beneficial
effect for the Mexican wolf (USFWS
2014, pg. ES–18). In the District Court
of Arizona’s March 31, 2018, Order, the
judge stated that, after the Service
identified loss of genetic diversity as a
primary threat to the Mexican wolf,
‘‘. . . the expanded take provisions lack
protections for the loss of genetic
diversity (Center for Biological Diversity
v. Jewell, No. 4:15–cv–00019–JGZ (D.
Ariz.), pg. 29).’’ In response to the
ruling, we will assess the effects of three
of the expanded take provisions on the
long-term conservation and recovery of
the Mexican wolf, in particular as they
relate to our ability to achieve the
genetic criterion in the revised recovery
plan. The take provisions we will
evaluate include: Take on non-Federal
lands in conjunction with a removal
action (50 CFR 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(C)); take
on Federal land (§ 17.84(k)(7)(v)(A));
and take in response to unacceptable
impacts to a wild ungulate herd
(§ 17.84(k)(7)(vi)). Lethal control will
remain an allowable form of take under
these three provisions.
For clarity, we are not assessing or
considering modification to the
allowable take of Mexican wolves by
livestock guarding dogs on Federal or
non-Federal land as specified in the
2015 final rule (§ 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(B) and
§ 17.84(k)(7)(v)(B), respectively), or take,
including killing, on non-Federal land
by a domestic animal owner or that
person’s agent of any Mexican wolf that
is in the act of biting, killing, or
wounding a domestic animal
(§ 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(A)). Finally, take in
defense of human life as specified in the
2015 final rule (§ 17.84(k)(7)(i)) would
remain an allowable form of take,
including the potential for lethal take of
a Mexican wolf.
We are interested in feedback from
the public and our partners on the
impact of take on non-Federal lands in
conjunction with a removal action (50
CFR 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(C)), take on Federal
land (§ 17.84(k)(7)(v)(A)), and take in
response to unacceptable impacts to a
wild ungulate herd on the genetic health
of the experimental population in the
MWEPA in the context of long-term
conservation and recovery of the
Mexican wolf. We are also interested in
PO 00000
Frm 00084
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
20969
feedback on the social or economic
benefits or impacts of modifying any of
these three allowable forms of take of
Mexican wolves to the public or our
partners, as well as other
recommendations to protect the genetic
health of the experimental population in
the MWEPA and achieve the genetic
recovery criterion.
(4) We intend to produce a draft and
final supplemental EIS to the 2014 EIS
that includes updated data, information,
and analyses pertinent to any of the
revisions under consideration in the
new revised rule. Specifically, we
intend to modify the Purpose and Need
of the 2014 EIS only as necessary to
explain the role of the MWEPA in the
recovery of the Mexican wolf, based on
the revised recovery plan. We intend to
evaluate and revise specific features of
two alternatives from the 2014 EIS, as
follows: In Alternative One (Proposed
Action and Preferred Alternative), we
will revise the population objective and
release recommendations, and may
revise any of the three forms of
allowable take discussed above. In
Alternative Two, we may revise any of
the three forms of allowable take
discussed above, consistent with
revisions made in Alternative One. We
do not intend to revise any of the
components of Alternatives Three or
Four from the 2014 EIS, and we do not
intend to consider any new alternatives
in the supplemental EIS that were not
included in the 2014 EIS.
As necessary and based on
information availability, we will
provide updated data in the
supplemental EIS at the relevant State
or county level for Arizona and New
Mexico to analyze the environmental
consequences (i.e., effects or impacts) of
our revisions on the land use, biological
resources, economic activity, health and
human safety, and environmental
justice in the project area. Updated data
may include:
• Changes in land use such as
significant shifts in land ownership,
management, or special use;
• Human population census data,
including information on low-income
populations, racial minorities, and
Indian tribes;
• The number of permitted and
authorized Animal Unit Months in
National Forests (An Animal Unit
Month, or AUM, is a measure of the
amount of forage required to sustain one
cow, either dry or with calf at side up
to 6 months of age, for 1 month);
• An inventory of cattle and calves,
including the number of cattle and calf
operations, cattle sales (including
calves), and herd sizes;
• Sheep and lamb inventory;
E:\FR\FM\15APP1.SGM
15APP1
20970
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 73 / Wednesday, April 15, 2020 / Proposed Rules
• Big game hunting data, including
the number of license holders and
applicants, days spent hunting and
average hunter financial expenditures,
and total number of hunters, harvest,
and success ratio for elk and deer;
• Incidences of human–wolf
encounters; and
• Parasite or disease events related to
Mexican wolves.
Therefore, we are requesting any new
information from the public or our
partners available since the publication
of the 2014 EIS and 2015 final rule (80
FR 2487, January 16, 2015) related to
these topics that is not readily available
on Federal, State, tribal, or county
websites.
Please note that submissions merely
stating support for or opposition to the
items under consideration, without
providing supporting information,
although noted, will not be considered.
Similarly, issues raised that are outside
of the scope of items under
consideration will not be considered in
making a determination. Please consider
the following when preparing your
comments:
• Be as succinct as possible.
• Organize comments beginning with
general comments and then move on to
specific issues.
• Be specific. Comments supported
by logic, rationale, and citations are
more useful than opinions.
• State suggestions and
recommendations clearly with an
expectation of what you would like the
Service to do.
• If you provide alternate
interpretations of science from the
revised recovery plan or other cited
Service document, please support your
analysis with appropriate citations.
• If possible, coordinate your
comments with other like-minded
individuals and organizations. This can
strengthen the comment and help us
understand the depth of concern.
jbell on DSKJLSW7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
We will post information pertinent to
NEPA planning on our Mexican Wolf
Recovery Program website, https://
www.fws.gov/southwest/es/
mexicanwolf/NEPA. The references
cited in this notice are also available at
that website.
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are
the staff members of the Mexican Wolf
Recovery Program, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Interior Regions 7 and
8.
17:48 Apr 14, 2020
Jkt 250001
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 your entire
comment—including your personal
identifying information—may be made
publicly available at any time. While
you can request in your comment that
we withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we
cannot guarantee that we will be able to
do so. All submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from
individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of
organizations or businesses, will be
made available for public disclosure in
their entirety.
Authority
The authority for this action is the
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16
U.S.C. 1531 et. seq.) and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Amy Lueders,
Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2020–07715 Filed 4–14–20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
50 CFR Part 622
[Docket No. 200409–0107]
RIN 0648–BJ67
Fisheries of the Caribbean, Gulf of
Mexico, and South Atlantic; SnapperGrouper Fishery of the South Atlantic
Region; Abbreviated Framework
Amendment 3
National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Commerce.
ACTION: Proposed rule; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
References and Availability of
Documents for Review
VerDate Sep<11>2014
Public Availability of Comments
NMFS proposes to implement
management measures described in
Abbreviated Framework Amendment 3
(Abbreviated Framework 3) to the
Fishery Management Plan (FMP) for the
Snapper-Grouper Fishery of the South
Atlantic Region, as prepared and
submitted by the South Atlantic Fishery
Management Council (South Atlantic
Council). If implemented, Abbreviated
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00085
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Framework 3 and this proposed rule
would revise the commercial and
recreational annual catch limits (ACLs)
and recreational annual catch target
(ACT) for blueline tilefish in the
exclusive economic zone (EEZ) of the
South Atlantic. The purpose of this
proposed rule is to ensure that ACLs for
South Atlantic blueline tilefish are
based on the best scientific information
available, to achieve and maintain
optimum yield (OY), and to prevent
overfishing while minimizing to the
extent practicable, adverse social and
economic effects.
DATES: Written comments must be
received by May 15, 2020.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
on the proposed rule, identified by
‘‘NOAA–NMFS–2020–0039’’ by any of
the following methods:
• Electronic Submission: Submit all
electronic comments via the Federal
Rulemaking Portal. Go to https://
www.regulations.gov/docket?D=NOAANMFS-2020-0039, click the ‘‘Comment
Now!’’ icon, complete the required
fields, and enter or attach your
comments.
• Mail: Submit all written comments
to Mary Vara, NMFS Southeast Regional
Office (SERO), 263 13th Avenue South,
St. Petersburg, FL 33701.
• Instructions: Comments sent by any
other method, to any other address or
individual, or received after the end of
the comment period, may not be
considered by NMFS. All comments
received are a part of the public record
and will generally be posted for public
viewing on www.regulations.gov
without change. All personal identifying
information (e.g., name, address),
confidential business information, or
otherwise sensitive information
submitted voluntarily by the sender will
be publicly accessible. NMFS will
accept anonymous comments (enter ‘‘N/
A’’ in required fields if you wish to
remain anonymous).
Electronic copies of Abbreviated
Framework 3, which includes a
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA)
analysis and a regulatory impact review,
may be obtained from
www.regulations.gov or the Southeast
Regional Office website at https://
www.fisheries.noaa.gov/action/
abbreviated-framework-amendment-3blueline-tilefish.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mary Vara, NMFS SERO, telephone:
727–824–5305, email: mary.vara@
noaa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
snapper-grouper fishery in the South
Atlantic region is managed under the
FMP and includes blueline tilefish,
E:\FR\FM\15APP1.SGM
15APP1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 73 (Wednesday, April 15, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 20967-20970]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-07715]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
[Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0007; FXES111302WOLF0-201-FF02ENEH00]
RIN 1018-BE52
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Revision to the
Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf (Canis lupus
baileyi); Environmental Impact Statement
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare a supplement to an environmental
impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, will prepare a draft
environmental impact statement supplement pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA), in conjunction
with a proposed rule to revise the existing nonessential experimental
population designation of the Mexican wolf (Canis lupus baileyi) under
section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended. The
revised rule and environmental impact statement supplement are being
developed in response to a court-ordered remand by the District Court
of Arizona of our 2015
[[Page 20968]]
final rule to revise the nonessential experimental population
designation and management of Mexican wolves in the Mexican Wolf
Experimental Population Area in Arizona and New Mexico.
DATES: We will accept public comments received or postmarked on or
before 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on June 15, 2020. We may not consider
any comments we receive after the closing date in the final decision.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written comments by one of the following
methods:
(1) Electronically: Go to the Federal rulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for submitting comments to
Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2020-0007, which is the docket number for this
notice of intent.
(2) By hard copy: Submit comments by U.S. mail or hand-delivery to:
Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-R2-ES-2020-0007; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, MS: PRB/PERMA (JAO/1N), 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls
Church, VA 22041-3803.
We request that you send comments only by the methods described
above. We will post all comments on https://www.regulations.gov. This
generally means that we will post any personal information you provide
us (see the Information Requested section below for more information.).
To increase our efficiency in downloading comments, groups providing
mass submissions should submit their comments in an Excel file.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Marty Tuegel, 505-248-6651; or the
Mexican Wolf Recovery Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, New
Mexico Ecological Services Field Office, 2105 Osuna Road NE,
Albuquerque, NM 87113 or by telephone 505-761-4704; or by facsimile
505-761-2542. If you use a telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD), call the Federal Relay Service at 800-877-8339. Additional
information can be found on the Mexican Wolf Recovery Program's website
at https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Previous Federal Actions
We established a nonessential experimental population of Mexican
wolves in Arizona and New Mexico in 1998 (63 FR 1752, January 12, 1998)
pursuant to section 10(j) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as
amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (Act). We published a final rule to
revise the designation and management of the nonessential experimental
population in 2015 (80 FR 2512, January 16, 2015) (2015 final rule). We
analyzed the effects of our proposed revision in the Environmental
Impact Statement for the Proposed Revision to the Regulations for the
Nonessential Experimental Population of the Mexican Wolf (Canis lupus
baileyi) (EIS). We opened a public comment period and announced public
meetings for the draft environmental impact statement on July 25, 2014
(79 FR 43358), and announced the availability of our EIS and draft
Record of Decision in the Federal Register on November 25, 2014 (79 FR
70154). The EIS and other documents are available at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2013-0056 under Supporting
Documents.
Background
The Service previously opened a public scoping period on August 5,
2013, to seek public input on the scope, issues, and alternatives under
consideration in the Service's revision of the 1998 Mexican wolf
nonessential experimental population designation (78 FR 47268). At that
time, the Service was seeking to improve the conservation and
management of the experimental population as designated in 1998, and
requested input from the public on potential changes to the geographic
boundaries of the Mexican Wolf Experimental Population Area (MWEPA) in
Arizona and New Mexico, as well as the management provisions associated
with it. In the 2015 final rule, the Service revised the designation
and management of the MWEPA from its original 1998 designation by:
(1) Establishing a population objective for the experimental
population of 300 to 325 wolves within the MWEPA;
(2) Expanding the area in which initial releases of Mexican wolves
from captivity and translocations could occur;
(3) Extending the southern boundary of the MWEPA in Arizona and New
Mexico to the United States-Mexico international border;
(4) Discontinuing the use of the ``Blue Range Wolf Recovery Area''
designation within the MWEPA, including its divisions of primary and
secondary recovery zones;
(5) Establishing three management zones within the MWEPA defined as
``Zone 1,'' ``Zone 2,'' and ``Zone 3,'' each with specific provisions
for Mexican wolf occupancy, initial releases, and translocations;
(6) Adopting a phased management approach for up to 12 years to
minimize or avoid impacts to wild ungulate populations in western
Arizona;
(7) Authorizing removal of Mexican wolves identified as coming from
the experimental population that disperse to establish territories
outside of the MWEPA in a revised section 10(a)(1)(A) research and
recovery permit;
(8) Providing revised and additional provisions for take of Mexican
wolves under certain circumstances to protect livestock and non-feral
dogs, or as needed to manage wild ungulate populations (particularly
elk and deer); and
(9) Providing for the development of management actions on tribal
trust land or on private land in management Zones 1 and 2.
On March 31, 2018, the District Court of Arizona remanded the 2015
final rule to the Service based on the Court's finding that the 2015
final rule failed to further the long-term conservation and recovery of
the Mexican wolf and that the essentiality determination was arbitrary
and capricious (Center for Biological Diversity v. Jewell, No. 4:15-cv-
00019-JGZ (D. Ariz.) (March 31, 2018, Order)). The Service is under a
court-ordered deadline to address the remanded issues in a new revised
rule by May 1, 2021. The 2015 final rule remains in place until we
finalize the new revised rule.
In the interim between the 2015 final rule and the March 31, 2018,
Order, the Service finalized the Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan, First
Revision (2017). The revised recovery plan, which updates the original
1982 Mexican Wolf Recovery Plan, provides objective and measurable
recovery criteria for the Mexican wolf, as well as management actions
and time and cost estimates to achieve recovery, pursuant to section
4(f) of the Act. The recovery criteria focus on achieving specific
population sizes, growth rate trends, and genetic diversity in the
MWEPA and a second population in Mexico, as well as ensuring regulatory
mechanisms are in place for both populations to address human-caused
mortality of Mexican wolves. The recovery plan serves as our roadmap
for the long-term conservation and recovery of the Mexican wolf. It is
available at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2017-
0036 under Supporting Documents.
Information Requested
We are currently seeking comments or suggestions from the public,
governmental agencies, Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or
any other interested parties concerning specific provisions of the 2015
final rule identified by the District Court of Arizona in the March 31,
2018, Order. We will revise the 2015 final rule only
[[Page 20969]]
to the extent necessary to address the Court's ruling; no additional
provisions of the rule are subject to revision. To the extent possible,
and as described below, we will address the remanded issues by aligning
the new revised rule with the revised recovery plan, which provides an
overarching strategy for the long-term conservation and recovery of the
Mexican wolf. We will analyze any new proposed rule revisions in a
supplemental EIS to the 2014 EIS.
Due to the focus of the remand, we are seeking input from the
public only on a narrow range of topics, as follows:
(1) We will make a new essentiality determination for the
experimental population of Mexican wolves in the MWEPA under section
10(j) of the Act. We are interested in feedback from the public and our
partners on the benefits or potential impacts to the Mexican wolf or
the public and our partners of an ``essential'' versus ``nonessential''
designation.
(2) We intend to align the population objective and release
recommendations in the new revised rule with the recovery criteria in
the revised recovery plan for the MWEPA to ensure the new revised rule
supports the long-term conservation and recovery of the Mexican wolf.
We are interested in feedback from the public and our partners on any
information or data available since we finalized the revised recovery
plan in 2017 pertinent to establishing a population objective or
release recommendations for the MWEPA. We are also interested in any
other considerations related to the relationship between the population
objective and release recommendations for the MWEPA and the long-term
conservation and recovery of the Mexican wolf.
(3) We intend to ensure the new revised rule supports population-
level genetic health for the Mexican wolf in the MWEPA as a key
component of the long-term conservation and recovery of the Mexican
wolf. We will ensure our management provisions facilitate our ability
to achieve the genetic recovery criterion for the MWEPA, which serves
as our long-term conservation and recovery target. The genetic
criterion in the revised recovery plan for the MWEPA states that we
will release a sufficient number of captive Mexican wolves to result in
22 released Mexican wolves surviving to breeding age in the MWEPA
(USFWS 2017a, pp. 18-19). As explained in the revised recovery plan
(USFWS 2017a, pp. 9, 13) and the supporting Biological Report for the
Mexican Wolf (USFWS 2017b, pp. 27-29, 33-34, and 36-38), the genetic
criterion ensures that the threat of continuing or accelerated loss of
genetic diversity of Mexican wolves in the wild is adequately
alleviated. Both of these documents are available online at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-R2-ES-2017-0036 under Supporting
Documents.
In the 2015 final rule, we expanded several allowable forms of take
of Mexican wolves from the 1998 rule after analyzing their effects in
the 2014 EIS and determining a significant beneficial effect for the
Mexican wolf (USFWS 2014, pg. ES-18). In the District Court of
Arizona's March 31, 2018, Order, the judge stated that, after the
Service identified loss of genetic diversity as a primary threat to the
Mexican wolf, ``. . . the expanded take provisions lack protections for
the loss of genetic diversity (Center for Biological Diversity v.
Jewell, No. 4:15-cv-00019-JGZ (D. Ariz.), pg. 29).'' In response to the
ruling, we will assess the effects of three of the expanded take
provisions on the long-term conservation and recovery of the Mexican
wolf, in particular as they relate to our ability to achieve the
genetic criterion in the revised recovery plan. The take provisions we
will evaluate include: Take on non-Federal lands in conjunction with a
removal action (50 CFR 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(C)); take on Federal land (Sec.
17.84(k)(7)(v)(A)); and take in response to unacceptable impacts to a
wild ungulate herd (Sec. 17.84(k)(7)(vi)). Lethal control will remain
an allowable form of take under these three provisions.
For clarity, we are not assessing or considering modification to
the allowable take of Mexican wolves by livestock guarding dogs on
Federal or non-Federal land as specified in the 2015 final rule (Sec.
17.84(k)(7)(iv)(B) and Sec. 17.84(k)(7)(v)(B), respectively), or take,
including killing, on non-Federal land by a domestic animal owner or
that person's agent of any Mexican wolf that is in the act of biting,
killing, or wounding a domestic animal (Sec. 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(A)).
Finally, take in defense of human life as specified in the 2015 final
rule (Sec. 17.84(k)(7)(i)) would remain an allowable form of take,
including the potential for lethal take of a Mexican wolf.
We are interested in feedback from the public and our partners on
the impact of take on non-Federal lands in conjunction with a removal
action (50 CFR 17.84(k)(7)(iv)(C)), take on Federal land (Sec.
17.84(k)(7)(v)(A)), and take in response to unacceptable impacts to a
wild ungulate herd on the genetic health of the experimental population
in the MWEPA in the context of long-term conservation and recovery of
the Mexican wolf. We are also interested in feedback on the social or
economic benefits or impacts of modifying any of these three allowable
forms of take of Mexican wolves to the public or our partners, as well
as other recommendations to protect the genetic health of the
experimental population in the MWEPA and achieve the genetic recovery
criterion.
(4) We intend to produce a draft and final supplemental EIS to the
2014 EIS that includes updated data, information, and analyses
pertinent to any of the revisions under consideration in the new
revised rule. Specifically, we intend to modify the Purpose and Need of
the 2014 EIS only as necessary to explain the role of the MWEPA in the
recovery of the Mexican wolf, based on the revised recovery plan. We
intend to evaluate and revise specific features of two alternatives
from the 2014 EIS, as follows: In Alternative One (Proposed Action and
Preferred Alternative), we will revise the population objective and
release recommendations, and may revise any of the three forms of
allowable take discussed above. In Alternative Two, we may revise any
of the three forms of allowable take discussed above, consistent with
revisions made in Alternative One. We do not intend to revise any of
the components of Alternatives Three or Four from the 2014 EIS, and we
do not intend to consider any new alternatives in the supplemental EIS
that were not included in the 2014 EIS.
As necessary and based on information availability, we will provide
updated data in the supplemental EIS at the relevant State or county
level for Arizona and New Mexico to analyze the environmental
consequences (i.e., effects or impacts) of our revisions on the land
use, biological resources, economic activity, health and human safety,
and environmental justice in the project area. Updated data may
include:
Changes in land use such as significant shifts in land
ownership, management, or special use;
Human population census data, including information on
low-income populations, racial minorities, and Indian tribes;
The number of permitted and authorized Animal Unit Months
in National Forests (An Animal Unit Month, or AUM, is a measure of the
amount of forage required to sustain one cow, either dry or with calf
at side up to 6 months of age, for 1 month);
An inventory of cattle and calves, including the number of
cattle and calf operations, cattle sales (including calves), and herd
sizes;
Sheep and lamb inventory;
[[Page 20970]]
Big game hunting data, including the number of license
holders and applicants, days spent hunting and average hunter financial
expenditures, and total number of hunters, harvest, and success ratio
for elk and deer;
Incidences of human-wolf encounters; and
Parasite or disease events related to Mexican wolves.
Therefore, we are requesting any new information from the public or our
partners available since the publication of the 2014 EIS and 2015 final
rule (80 FR 2487, January 16, 2015) related to these topics that is not
readily available on Federal, State, tribal, or county websites.
Please note that submissions merely stating support for or
opposition to the items under consideration, without providing
supporting information, although noted, will not be considered.
Similarly, issues raised that are outside of the scope of items under
consideration will not be considered in making a determination. Please
consider the following when preparing your comments:
Be as succinct as possible.
Organize comments beginning with general comments and then
move on to specific issues.
Be specific. Comments supported by logic, rationale, and
citations are more useful than opinions.
State suggestions and recommendations clearly with an
expectation of what you would like the Service to do.
If you provide alternate interpretations of science from
the revised recovery plan or other cited Service document, please
support your analysis with appropriate citations.
If possible, coordinate your comments with other like-
minded individuals and organizations. This can strengthen the comment
and help us understand the depth of concern.
References and Availability of Documents for Review
We will post information pertinent to NEPA planning on our Mexican
Wolf Recovery Program website, https://www.fws.gov/southwest/es/mexicanwolf/NEPA. The references cited in this notice are also
available at that website.
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are the staff members of the
Mexican Wolf Recovery Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior
Regions 7 and 8.
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 your entire comment--including
your personal identifying information--may be made publicly available
at any time. While you can request in your comment that we withhold
your personal identifying information from public review, we cannot
guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or
businesses, will be made available for public disclosure in their
entirety.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of 1973
(16 U.S.C. 1531 et. seq.) and the National Environmental Policy Act of
1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.).
Amy Lueders,
Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2020-07715 Filed 4-14-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
