National Wildlife Refuge System; Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health, 7345-7352 [2024-02076]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(4) Establish and maintain a database
of all third-party skills testers and
examiners, which at a minimum tracks
the dates and results of audits and
monitoring actions by the State, the
dates third-party skills testers were
certified by the State, and name and
identification number of each thirdparty CDL skills test examiner;
(5) Establish and maintain a database
of all State CDL skills examiners, which
at a minimum tracks the dates and
results of monitoring action by the State,
and the name and identification number
of each State CDL skills examiner; and
(6) Establish and maintain a database
that tracks skills tests administered by
each State and third-party CDL skills
test examiner’s name and identification
number.
(b) To ensure the integrity of the CDL
knowledge testing program, the State
must:
(1) At least once every 2 years,
conduct unannounced, on-site
inspections of third-party knowledge
testers’ and examiners’ records;
(2) At least once every 2 years,
conduct covert and overt monitoring of
examinations performed by third-party
CDL knowledge test examiners;
(3) Establish and maintain a database
to track pass/fail rates of applicants
tested by each third-party CDL
knowledge test examiner, in order to
focus covert and overt monitoring on
examiners who have unusually high
pass or failure rates;
(4) Establish and maintain a database
of all third-party knowledge testers and
examiners, which at a minimum tracks
the dates and results of audits and
monitoring actions by the State, the
dates third-party knowledge testers were
certified by the State, and name and
identification number of each thirdparty CDL knowledge test examiner; and
(5) Establish and maintain a database
that tracks knowledge tests
administered by each State and the
name and identification number of each
third-party CDL knowledge test
examiner.
Issued under authority delegated in 49 CFR
1.87.
Robin Hutcheson,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2024–01710 Filed 2–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–EX–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 29
[Docket No. FWS–HQ–NWRS–2022–0106;
FXRS12610900000–212–FF09R20000]
RIN 1018–BG78
National Wildlife Refuge System;
Biological Integrity, Diversity, and
Environmental Health
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; proposed policy
updates.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), propose new
regulations to ensure that the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health (BIDEH) of the National Wildlife
Refuge System (Refuge System) are
maintained, and where appropriate,
restored and enhanced, in accordance
with the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997. In
addition, the Service is proposing
updates to the existing BIDEH policy,
which will be available for public
comment concurrently with the
proposed regulations in this docket.
These proposed regulatory and policy
revisions would support conservation
throughout the Refuge System in
response to both longstanding and
contemporary conservation challenges,
including the universal and profound
effects of climate change on refuge
species and ecosystems. Together, these
proposals would uphold BIDEH across
the Refuge System by providing refuge
managers with a consistent approach for
evaluating and implementing
management actions to protect
vulnerable species, restore and connect
habitats, promote natural processes,
sustain vital ecological functions,
increase resilience, and adapt to climate
change.
DATES: We will accept comments on the
proposed rule and proposed revisions to
the Service Manual chapter at 601 FW
3 that are received or postmarked on or
before March 4, 2024.
ADDRESSES:
Document availability: This proposed
rule and the draft Service Manual
chapter 601 FW 3 are available at the
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–HQ–NWRS–2022–0106,
which is the docket number for this
rulemaking. Then, click on the Search
button. To access the Service Manual
chapter, go to the tab for Supporting &
Related Material.
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7345
Comment submission: You may
submit comments on this proposed rule
or the proposed revisions to 601 FW 3
by one of the following methods:
• Electronically: Go to the Federal
eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. In the Search box,
enter FWS–HQ–NWRS–2022–0106,
which is the docket number for this
rulemaking. Then, click on the Search
button. On the resulting screen, find the
correct document and submit a
comment by clicking on ‘‘Comment.’’
• By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail
or hand delivery to: Public Comments
Processing, Attn: FWS–HQ–NWRS–
2022–0106; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: PRB
(JAO/3W); Falls Church, VA 22041–
3803.
We will not accept email or faxes. We
will post all comments on https://
www.regulations.gov. This generally
means that we will post any personal
information you provide us (see Request
for Comments, below, for more
information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Katherine Harrigan, (703) 358–2440,
katherine_harrigan@fws.gov.
Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have
a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY,
TDD, or TeleBraille) to access
telecommunications relay services.
Individuals outside the United States
should use the relay services offered
within their country to make
international calls to the point-ofcontact in the United States.
In compliance with the Providing
Accountability Through Transparency
Act of 2023, please see docket FWS–
HQ–NWRS–2022–0106 on https://
www.regulations.gov for a document
that summarizes this proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Wildlife Refuge System
is the only network of Federal lands and
waters in the United States dedicated to
fish and wildlife conservation and, at
more than 850 million acres, the largest
system of its kind in the world. The
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966
(Administration Act; 16 U.S.C. 668dd–
668ee), as amended by the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997 (Improvement Act; Pub. L.
105–57), is the primary statutory
authority under which the Secretary of
the Interior, acting through the Service,
administers the Refuge System. The
Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C.
3111–3126), the Wilderness Act of 1964
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
7346
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(16 U.S.C. 1131–1136), and various
other mandates also provide direction
and authority for refuge management.
The implementing regulations for
Refuge System mandates are found in
title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) at subchapter C.
The Improvement Act established the
mission of the Refuge System to
administer a national network of lands
and waters for the conservation,
management, and where appropriate,
restoration of fish, wildlife, and plant
resources and their habitats within the
United States for the benefit of present
and future generations of Americans.
(16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(2)). It set forth
policy direction, management
standards, and stewardship
requirements for administering the more
than 560 national wildlife refuges in the
Refuge System, prioritizing conservation
while ensuring public access to
compatible, wildlife-dependent
recreational opportunities and ensuring
effective coordination with adjacent
landowners and State fish and wildlife
agencies. The law states that each refuge
must be managed to fulfill both the
Refuge System mission and the specific
purposes for which that refuge was
established. It additionally requires that,
in administering the Refuge System, the
Secretary shall ensure that the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health of the Refuge System are
maintained for the benefit of present
and future generations of Americans.
(16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)(B)).
The Improvement Act is recognized as
a visionary legislative charter for
managing a system of wildlife reserves
in part due to its mandate to ensure
BIDEH. The terms comprising the
BIDEH mandate are grounded in
conservation biology and demonstrate
congressional intent to conserve Refuge
System fish, wildlife, plants, and
habitats in accordance with the latest
scientific understanding. This directive
for a comprehensive, science-based
approach to refuge management is
critical to ensuring that imperiled
species and diverse wildlife populations
in North America are secure and
thriving, sustained by a network of
healthy lands and waters.
Need for New Regulations and Updated
Policy
In 1998, the Service announced our
intent to issue policy and regulations to
administer the Improvement Act (63 FR
3583, January 23, 1998). In 2000, we
published a draft policy on maintaining
the ecological integrity of the Refuge
System (65 FR 61356, October 17, 2000).
After considering the comments
received on the draft policy, the Service
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
issued its BIDEH policy in 2001 (66 FR
3810, January 16, 2001). Included in the
Service Manual at 601 FW 3, the policy
provides internal guidance for agency
implementation of the statutory
requirements.
At the time the Service adopted the
BIDEH policy, we did not promulgate
BIDEH regulations as authorized in the
Improvement Act. (See 16 U.S.C.
668dd(b)(5)). The Service did not
anticipate the extent of climate change
impacts on refuge species and habitats
or the need to clarify in regulations our
interpretation of and authority to
implement the BIDEH mandate.
However, in the nearly 25 years since
enactment of the Improvement Act,
refuges have begun to experience the
effects of climate change while
continuing to contend with the myriad
of other anthropogenic stressors
affecting fish, wildlife, plants, and their
habitats. Climate change is transforming
historical species composition and
ecological function of habitats, creating
new challenges to traditional wildlife
management strategies that were based
on stable, stationary baseline
conditions. As the Refuge System
becomes increasingly vital to addressing
the dual threats of biodiversity loss and
climate change, the Service recognizes
the need to codify both existing and
new practices for maintaining BIDEH to
assist refuges in responding to these
contemporary conservation challenges.
Therefore, the Service has identified the
need to propose new BIDEH regulations
and updates to the existing BIDEH
policy to accomplish these goals.
The purpose of this proposed rule and
policy revision is to clarify the Service’s
authority to maintain the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health of the Refuge System; ensure
consistency in evaluating refuge
management activities that affect
BIDEH; and provide transparency in
how we implement one of the most
fundamental mandates in the laws
governing the Refuge System. The
proposed rule would codify
longstanding refuge management
principles and further empower refuge
managers to uphold the Refuge System’s
conservation mission and achieve refuge
purposes in the face of complex threats
to wildlife and their habitat. The
proposed policy revision would
modernize the BIDEH policy and
support the new regulations by
providing further guidance for refuge
managers to ensure the BIDEH of the
Refuge System.
The Service currently operates and
has always operated in accordance with
the same Refuge System-wide principles
for maintaining BIDEH represented in
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
these proposed regulations and policy
updates. However, the Service has
determined that this proposed rule and
policy revision is warranted to clarify
Refuge System policies and practices;
better prepare refuges to confront future
impacts from climate change and other
anthropogenic change; and provide the
opportunity for public input on the
Service’s interpretation of the
Improvement Act’s BIDEH mandate,
including its application in the context
of predator control, conservation
translocations, genetically engineered
organisms, invasive species, pesticide
use, agricultural practices, and mosquito
control.
Proposed Additions to Existing
Regulations
This proposed rule would amend the
Refuge System regulations at 50 CFR
subchapter C, part 29 (Land Use
Management), subpart A (General
Rules). The proposed regulatory changes
would not modify any existing
regulations but would add regulations
regarding BIDEH at a new § 29.3.
Consistent with the Administration
Act as amended by the Improvement
Act, the Service is proposing regulations
to ensure that the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of
the Refuge System are maintained and,
where necessary and appropriate,
restored and enhanced. As shown in the
rule portion of this document, the
proposed regulations set forth an
overarching statement in paragraph (a)
describing what it means for the Service
to ensure BIDEH; definitions for
biological integrity, diversity,
environmental health, and other key
regulatory terms in paragraph (b); and
overall directives for ensuring BIDEH on
refuges in paragraph (c). Together these
proposed regulations would provide a
consistent framework within which
refuge managers would consider
potential management actions that may
affect BIDEH. In addition, in paragraph
(d), the proposed regulations also
provide more specific direction for
certain management activities that the
Service has identified as having a
particular propensity to affect BIDEH.
Notably, the proposed regulatory
standard repeated throughout the
regulations—requiring refuge managers
to consider how management actions
are necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure BIDEH—flows directly from
the Improvement Act. In the statute’s
requirements for administering the
Refuge System, Congress elevated
ensuring the maintenance of BIDEH to
a similar level of importance as ensuring
that the Refuge System mission and
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
refuge purposes are carried out,
challenging the Service to implement
these integral directives together to
provide the greatest conservation
benefits for fish and wildlife. (See 16
U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)). The content of the
proposed regulations and policy
revision is further described below.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Proposed BIDEH Regulations and
Accompanying Policy Updates
The Service is concurrently proposing
updates to the BIDEH policy, 601 FW 3,
which accord with and provide
additional internal guidance for
implementing the proposed regulations.
We have decided to provide these
documents for public comment
concurrently because the proposed
policy revision supplies further
explanation for the application of the
proposed regulations and therefore
provides additional context for
reviewing the proposed regulations.
Ensure Biological Integrity, Diversity,
and Environmental Health
In § 29.3(a), the Service is proposing
an overarching statement in support of
the Refuge System’s conservation
mission defining what it means to
ensure BIDEH on refuges, which is a
concept integrated throughout the
proposed BIDEH policy revision. The
regulatory statement would promote
management of the Refuge System as an
interconnected network of lands and
waters with functioning ecological
processes to maintain the composition,
activity, and resilience of the Refuge
System over time. This concept means
recognizing the Refuge System as an
expansive complex of plant
communities, habitats, and ecosystems
representative of variable conditions
and supporting a diversity of fish and
wildlife, including viable populations of
rare and imperiled species. This
proposed regulation would codify the
Service’s continued commitment to
managing refuge ecosystems holistically
as components of larger landscapes and
seascapes and supporting natural
processes to meet our conservation
goals, while also acknowledging that
climate change and other anthropogenic
change can require intervention to carry
out the Refuge System mission and
achieve refuge purposes. This
commitment and acknowledgement are
further distilled in the proposed policy
updates.
The proposed regulatory statement
includes a legal standard for managing
refuges that would apply to each of the
subsequent management directives and
activities in the proposed rule when the
Service refers to an action as being
necessary to ensure BIDEH. This
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
proposed legal standard would instruct
refuge managers to use their sound
professional judgment, informed by the
best available scientific information, to
ensure that management actions benefit
wildlife conservation by contributing to,
and not diminishing, BIDEH. The
Service uses the term ‘‘sound
professional judgment’’ as defined in
the Improvement Act and existing
Refuge System regulations, directing
refuge managers to make their finding,
determination, or decision to conduct
an activity consistent with principles of
sound fish and wildlife management
and available science and resources, as
well as their field experience and
knowledge of the particular refuge’s
resources. This proposed requirement
would foster defensible science-based
management decisions, strengthen
management actions that support
ecological integrity, bolster decision
making that avoids putting BIDEH at
risk, and help prevent further
degradation of environmental
conditions on refuges. The proposed
updates to the BIDEH policy would
incorporate this legal standard
throughout the policy revision as well.
Definitions
In both the new regulations and
policy revision, the Service is proposing
updated definitions for biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health based on definitions used in the
Service’s existing BIDEH policy, 601 FW
3, that were vetted through public
notice and comment in 2000 and 2001
(66 FR 3810, January 16, 2001). The
Service is proposing to revise these
definitions to acknowledge that
historical conditions may need to serve
as a reference point, rather than an end
goal, for managing refuges where
climate change and other anthropogenic
change are significantly altering
ecosystems. This proposed language
would untether current and future
management actions from sustaining
historical conditions that may no longer
be possible on many refuges, while
continuing to recognize the value of a
contextual historical baseline for
developing management goals. The
Service also proposes to update the
definitions by explicitly recognizing the
impacts of climate change and other
anthropogenic change on refuge
ecosystems, which is critical to
understanding the three BIDEH terms in
their proper context, both now and in
the future.
The Service is also including
proposed definitions for other terms
helpful to understanding the proposed
regulations and policy. These terms all
have established meanings either in
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7347
wildlife biology, in existing Service
policy, in other Federal law and policy,
or in some combination of these. The
Service has not departed from the
accepted meanings in crafting these
regulatory definitions, but we did find
it necessary in the interest of greater
clarity to tailor them to the BIDEH
context. The proposed updates to the
BIDEH policy also include some
additional proposed definitions that
would provide further context for the
content expanding on the proposed
regulations in the policy itself.
Management Directives for Ensuring
Biological Integrity, Diversity, and
Environmental Health
Proposed § 29.3(c) would include
Refuge System-wide directives for
maintaining BIDEH in refuge
management. These directives—
concerning universal concepts of
climate, habitat, species, water, soil, and
air—would create a framework within
which refuge managers can determine
and implement management activities.
These fundamental directives are
common to all refuges and would
provide basic sideboards to guide
management decisions consistent with
other applicable law, regulation, and
policy. They are central to the Service’s
ability to meet our statutory obligations
and policy goals under the Improvement
Act and are specifically relevant to
fulfilling refuge purposes and ensuring
BIDEH. The Service proposes further
guidance for these management
directives in section 3.10 of the
proposed BIDEH policy accompanying
these proposed regulations.
In the proposed regulation at
paragraph (c)(1) and associated policy
updates, the Service acknowledges that
climate change and other anthropogenic
change are affecting refuge fish, wildlife,
plants, and habitats. The proposed
language would direct refuge managers
to address these threats through
adaptation and mitigation strategies as
necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure BIDEH. This proposed
regulation and accompanying policy
revision recognize that climate change is
a major driver in species decline and
biodiversity loss, while ecosystem
conservation can serve an essential role
in both climate change mitigation and
adaptation, as well as species survival
and recovery. They would therefore
allow refuge managers flexibility to
implement a combination of responses
to address climate change impacts and
other anthropogenic stressors, providing
discretion for managers to choose the
most appropriate mitigation and
adaptation strategies on a particular
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
7348
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
refuge, so long as they meet the
proposed regulatory standard.
The proposed regulation at paragraph
(c)(2) and associated policy updates
would prioritize deference to natural
processes and support ecological
connectivity as a means of achieving
refuge habitat objectives and landscape
planning goals. However, when natural
processes are insufficient to meet refuge
habitat objectives, the proposed
language would direct managers to
intervene with science-based
management techniques that mimic
natural processes in accordance with
the proposed regulatory standard.
Examples of such management
techniques are provided in the
accompanying policy. The proposed
regulation and associated policy
updates would also instruct managers to
use such techniques and encourage
establishment of wildlife corridors to
facilitate adaptation to climate change
and other stressors.
The proposed regulation at paragraph
(c)(3) and associated policy updates
would similarly codify the Service’s
ability to supplement natural processes
to meet fish and wildlife population
objectives, sustain ecosystems, and
restore or recover imperiled species on
refuges when habitat conditions and
natural processes are insufficient. It
would work in tandem with the
regulation under proposed paragraph
(c)(2) to prioritize deference to natural
processes as the default for determining
sustainable populations, while also
providing flexibility to take actions to
conserve and manage species when
necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure BIDEH. The associated
policy updates provide examples of
such supplemental management actions
and guidance for maintaining native
populations.
The regulation regarding refuge water
rights at proposed paragraph (c)(4)
stems directly from Improvement Act
mandates, as reiterated in the associated
policy updates. The proposed regulation
and policy would incorporate these
legal requirements, directing the Service
to maintain and exercise refuge water
rights in accordance with local, State,
and Federal laws and to acquire,
transfer, or lease water rights in
accordance with the proposed
regulatory standard. The proposed
policy updates would provide
substantive guidance for refuge
managers to follow to uphold refuge
water rights and would further empower
them to pursue and secure critical water
assets to support the myriad of
migratory birds, fish, and other wildlife
that rely on refuge habitats.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
Finally, the proposed regulation at
paragraph (c)(5) and associated policy
updates would direct refuge managers to
promote and maintain soil health and
air quality as other abiotic components
vital for sustaining and restoring refuge
habitats in addition to water quantity
and quality. The regulation would
instruct the Service to conserve and
manage these essential resources within
our jurisdiction in accordance with the
regulatory standard and address threats
to them through appropriate
management actions. The proposed
policy updates provide additional
guidance to explain how refuge
managers would maintain these
foundational resources to support
healthy ecosystems and ensure the
BIDEH of the Refuge System.
Management Activities and Uses for
Ensuring Biological Integrity, Diversity,
and Environmental Health
The regulations in proposed § 29.3(d)
would guide specific management
activities and uses that can especially
influence BIDEH, including predator
control, conservation translocations, use
of genetically engineered organisms,
invasive species management, pesticide
use, agricultural uses, and mosquito
control. These proposed regulations are
not intended to cover the range of
management practices conducted on
refuges that may affect BIDEH. Rather,
the Service carefully selected these
topics to codify and clarify our existing
policies regarding these management
activities and uses, improve our ability
to respond to climate change and other
anthropogenic factors, and empower
refuge managers to consistently analyze
and apply these tools—or refrain from
applying them—as appropriate, to better
support BIDEH. The Service proposes
further guidance for these management
activities and uses in section 3.13 of the
proposed BIDEH policy accompanying
these proposed regulations.
The management activities and uses
included in these proposed regulations
and associated policy updates would be
implemented on Refuge System habitats
in conformance with the overall
management directives in proposed
§ 29.3(c) and section 3.10 of the policy.
This would mean that these activities
and uses are all subject to the
underlying conservation principle that
defers to natural processes and favors
management that mimics natural
processes. When natural processes alone
are insufficient to support ecological
functions, refuge managers would be
required to evaluate the necessity for
and potential environmental effects of a
proposed management activity or use in
accordance with the National
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
before authorizing it, including
considering reasonable alternatives,
scientific support, and potential risk of
unintended consequences. This
approach is consistent with current
Service policies.
Additionally, while each of the
regulations in proposed paragraphs
(d)(1)–(7) would direct a default
position regarding use of a particular
management practice, they
simultaneously would provide
flexibility to implement them as
conservation tools when determined,
based on comprehensive analysis, that
they are necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure BIDEH. Notably, NEPA
analysis of management activities and
uses could occur as part of development
of a refuge’s comprehensive
conservation plan (CCP) or other
approved management plan or could be
conducted as a standalone analysis.
Regardless, such activities and uses
must be consistent with the CCP. Refuge
managers must also fulfill other policy
and legal requirements prior to
implementing a management activity or
use when applicable. This could
include conducting scientific peer
review (see section 3.14(C) of the
proposed policy for more information
on peer review requirements) or
conducting a compatibility
determination for refuge management
economic activities or activities that
involve use of a refuge by the public or
other non-Refuge System entity (see the
Service’s Compatibility policy at 603
FW 2 and regulations at 50 CFR parts
25, 26, and 29 for more information).
See the proposed regulations and
associated policy updates for further
substantive details and instruction for
the management activities and uses
contained in this proposed rule and
policy revision.
Coordination With Adjacent
Landowners, State and Tribal Partners
The Service recognizes that ensuring
the BIDEH of the Refuge System
necessitates a landscape-level
perspective for managing an
interconnected network of lands and
waters involving collaboration with our
State and Tribal partners, adjacent
landowners, and other stakeholders.
These proposed regulations and policy
updates comply with and incorporate
the Service’s commitment to cooperate
and coordinate with State partners, as
appropriate, in accordance with 43 CFR
24.4(e) and 601 FW 7. They also
encourage effective interaction and
coordination with other owners of land
adjoining refuges. The proposed
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
regulations and policy updates
additionally comply with and uphold
the Service’s continued commitment to
cooperate and coordinate with federally
recognized Tribes and other Indigenous
Peoples, consistent with the Service’s
Native American Policy at 510 FW 1, to
protect treaty, religious, subsistence,
and cultural interests in the Refuge
System. Further, the Service proposes to
identify and define Indigenous
Knowledge in the policy updates as an
appropriate source of historical
information that would support best
available scientific information about
historical conditions as a reference
point for management decisions.
Request for Comments
You may submit comments and
materials on this proposed rule by either
one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES.
We will not accept comments sent by
email or fax or to an address not listed
in ADDRESSES. We will not consider
comments that are not postmarked by
the date specified in DATES.
We will post your entire comment on
https://www.regulations.gov. Before
including personal identifying
information in your comment, you
should be aware that we may make your
entire comment—including your
personal identifying information—
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. We will post all hardcopy
comments on https://
www.regulations.gov.
Required Determinations
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Clarity of This Proposed Rule
Executive Orders 12866 and 12988
and the Presidential Memorandum of
June 1, 1998, require us to write all rules
in plain language. This means that each
rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address
readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than
jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and
sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever
possible.
If you feel that we have not met these
requirements, send us comments by one
of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To
better help us revise the rule, your
comments should be as specific as
possible. For example, you should tell
us the numbers of the sections or
paragraphs that are unclearly written,
which sections or sentences are too
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
long, the sections where you feel lists or
tables would be useful, etc.
Regulatory Planning and Review
(Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094)
Executive Order 12866 provides that
the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant
rules. OIRA has determined that this
proposed rulemaking action is not
significant. The proposed rule would
simply serve to codify longstanding
refuge management principles and
further empower refuge managers to
uphold the Refuge System’s
conservation mission and achieve refuge
purposes in the face of complex threats
to wildlife and their habitat.
Executive Order 14094 reaffirms the
principles of E.O. 12866 and E.O 13563
and states that regulatory analysis
should facilitate agency efforts to
develop regulations that serve the
public interest, advance statutory
objectives, and are consistent with E.O.
12866, E.O. 13563, and the Presidential
Memorandum of January 20, 2021
(Modernizing Regulatory Review).
Regulatory analysis, as practicable and
appropriate, shall recognize distributive
impacts and equity, to the extent
permitted by law. E.O. 13563
emphasizes further that regulations
must be based on the best available
science and that the rulemaking process
must allow for public participation and
an open exchange of ideas. We have
developed this proposed rule in a
manner consistent with these
requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(as amended by the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
[SBREFA] of 1996) (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.),
whenever a Federal agency is required
to publish a notice of rulemaking for
any proposed or final rule, it must
prepare and make available for public
comment a regulatory flexibility
analysis that describes the effect of the
rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and
small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility
analysis is required if the head of an
agency certifies that the rule will not
have a significant economic impact on
a substantial number of small entities.
Thus, for a regulatory flexibility analysis
to be required, impacts must exceed a
threshold for ‘‘significant impact’’ and a
threshold for a ‘‘substantial number of
small entities.’’ See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The
SBREFA amended the Regulatory
Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7349
factual basis for certifying that a rule
will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
This proposed rule would govern the
actions taken by the Service but would
not create any requirements for or place
any regulatory compliance burden on
private entities. The Service also does
not anticipate the requirements to
promote BIDEH to alter the current
practices of the Service’s cooperative
agriculture and water rights programs.
The Service currently operates and has
always operated in accordance with the
same Refuge System-wide principles for
maintaining BIDEH represented in these
proposed regulations. The Service has
determined that this proposed
rulemaking is warranted to clarify our
policies and practices, better prepare
refuges to confront future impacts from
climate change and other anthropogenic
change, and provide the opportunity for
public input on our interpretation of the
Improvement Act’s BIDEH mandate,
including its application in the context
of predator control, species
introductions, genetically engineered
organisms, invasive species, pesticide
use, agricultural practices, and mosquito
control. As a result of the internal
nature of these proposed regulations,
this rulemaking action would have no
impact on small entities.
Therefore, the Service certifies that
this rule, as proposed, would not have
a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities as
defined under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). A regulatory
flexibility analysis is not required.
Accordingly, a small entity compliance
guide is not required.
Congressional Review Act
The proposed rule is not a major rule
under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The Service
anticipates no significant employment
or small business effects. This proposed
rule:
a. Would not have an annual effect on
the economy of $100 million or more.
b. Would not cause a major increase
in costs or prices for consumers;
individual industries; Federal, State, or
local government agencies; or
geographic regions.
c. Would not have significant adverse
effects on competition, employment,
investment, productivity, innovation, or
the ability of U.S.-based enterprises to
compete with foreign-based enterprises
in domestic and export markets.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Since this proposed rule would apply
to management of refuges by the
Service, it would not impose an
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
7350
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
unfunded mandate on State, local, or
Tribal governments or the private sector
of more than $100 million per year. The
proposed rule would not have a
significant or unique effect on State,
local, or Tribal governments or the
private sector. A statement containing
the information required by the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is not required.
and a submission to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not required.
The Service may not conduct or sponsor
and you are not required to respond to
a collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number.
Takings (E.O. 12630)
The Service is required under the
National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to assess
the impact of any Federal action
significantly affecting the quality of the
human environment, health, and safety.
The Service has determined that this
proposed rule falls under the class of
actions covered by the following
Department of the Interior categorical
exclusion: Policies, directives,
regulations, and guidelines: that are of
an administrative, financial, legal,
technical, or procedural nature; or
whose environmental effects are too
broad, speculative, or conjectural to
lend themselves to meaningful analysis
and will later be subject to the NEPA
process, either collectively or case-bycase (43 CFR 46.210(i)). Under the
proposed rule, the Service would take
future actions guided by the
requirements to support BIDEH, but
these future actions would be
determined and taken at the individual
refuge level and their environmental
impacts assessed on a case-by-case
basis. Therefore, the environmental
impacts of the proposed rule are too
speculative to lead to meaningful
analysis at this time. The Service would
assess the environmental impact of any
potential management action mentioned
in these regulations prior to taking that
action on Service lands or waters.
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this
proposed rule would not have
significant takings implications. This
proposed rule would affect only
management of refuges by the Service.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
As discussed under Regulatory
Planning and Review and Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, above, this
proposed rule would not have sufficient
federalism implications to warrant the
preparation of a federalism summary
impact statement under E.O. 13132.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the
Department of the Interior has
determined that this proposed rule
would not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the
requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the E.O.
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (E.O.
13211)
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to
prepare statements of energy effects for
regulations that significantly affect
energy supply, distribution, and use.
Because this proposed rule would
uphold and enforce existing
management principles and practices by
the Service on refuges, it is not a
significant regulatory action under E.O.
12866, and we do not expect it to
significantly affect energy supplies,
distribution, or use. Therefore, this
action is not a significant energy action,
and no statement of energy effects is
required.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Consultation and Coordination With
Indian Tribal Governments (E.O. 13175)
In accordance with E.O. 13175, the
Service has evaluated possible effects on
federally recognized Indian Tribes and
has determined that there are no effects.
Before taking actions, the Service
coordinates our activities on Service
lands and waters with Tribal
governments having adjoining or
overlapping jurisdiction.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
This rule does not contain
information collection requirements,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
National Environmental Policy Act
Primary Author
Katherine Harrigan, Division of
Natural Resources and Conservation
Planning, National Wildlife Refuge
System, is the primary author of this
proposed rulemaking document.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 29
Public lands mineral resources, Public
lands rights-of-way, Wildlife refuges.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons set forth in the
preamble, we propose to amend part 29,
subchapter C of chapter I, title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations as set forth
below:
PART 29—LAND USE MANAGEMENT
1. The authority citation for part 29
continues to read as follows:
■
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k,
664, 668dd, 685, 690d, 715i, 725, 3161; 30
U.S.C. 185; 31 U.S.C. 3711, 9701; 40 U.S.C.
319; 43 U.S.C. 315a; 113 Stat. 1501A–140.
■
2. Add § 29.3 to read as follows:
§ 29.3 Biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health.
We will maintain and, where
necessary and appropriate, restore and
enhance the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of
national wildlife refuges, both
individually and as a network of intact,
functioning, and resilient habitats for
fish, wildlife, and plants, for the benefit
of present and future generations of
Americans.
(a) Ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health. To
ensure biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health means to
holistically conserve refuge ecosystems
and all their components and processes
across multiple spatial scales; promote
natural processes; and address
ecological transformation caused by
climate change and other anthropogenic
change to accomplish the mission of the
National Wildlife Refuge System
(Refuge System). We will seek to
achieve the highest measure of
biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health on refuges, which
is represented by diverse, functioning,
and self-sustaining ecosystems that are
resilient to emerging or future
conditions. We will use sound
professional judgment, informed by the
best available scientific information, to
ensure that refuge management
contributes to and does not diminish the
biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health of refuges and the
Refuge System for the benefit of fish and
wildlife conservation.
(b) Definitions. In addition to relevant
definitions in § 25.12 of this subchapter
C, the following definitions apply to this
section:
Adaptation means an adjustment in
natural or human systems to a new or
changing environment that uses
beneficial opportunities or moderates
negative effects.
Anthropogenic change means
environmental change that humans
cause or influence, either directly or
indirectly.
Biological integrity means the
capacity of an ecological system to
support and maintain a full range of
biotic composition, structure, function,
and processes over time that exhibit
diversity, connectivity, and resilience at
genetic, organism, population, and
community levels. We evaluate
biological integrity by referencing
historical conditions, recognizing that
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
climate change and other anthropogenic
change are influencing refuge
ecosystems.
Climate change mitigation means
measures taken to reduce the amount
and speed of future climate change by
reducing emissions of heat-trapping
gases or removing carbon dioxide from
the atmosphere, including by improving
ecosystem capacity for biological carbon
sequestration.
Connectivity means the degree to
which landscapes, waterscapes, and
seascapes allow species to move freely
and ecological processes to function
unimpeded.
Conservation translocation means
deliberately moving organisms from one
site to another for release, with the
intention of yielding a measurable
conservation benefit at the levels of a
population, species, or ecosystem.
Diversity means the variety of life and
its processes, including the richness and
abundance of living organisms, the
genetic differences among them, and
communities and ecosystems in which
they occur. We evaluate diversity by
referencing historical conditions,
recognizing that climate change and
other anthropogenic change are
influencing refuge ecosystems.
Ecological transformation means the
shift in an ecosystem, resulting in a new
system that deviates from prior
ecosystem structure and function or
species composition.
Ecosystem means systems comprised
of biota (living organisms), the abiotic
environment (e.g., air, light, soils,
water), the interactions within and
between them, and the physical space in
which they operate.
Environmental change means an
alteration or disturbance of the
environment caused by humans or
natural processes that generates
differences in the function or
characteristics of an ecosystem.
Environmental health means
composition, structure, and functioning
of soil, water, air, and other abiotic
features, including the abiotic processes
that shape the environment. We
evaluate environmental health by
referencing historical conditions,
recognizing that climate change and
other anthropogenic change are
influencing refuge ecosystems.
Historical conditions means
composition, structure, and function of
ecosystems that existed prior to
ecological degradation caused by
anthropogenic change, based on best
available scientific and historical
information.
Invasive species means with respect
to a particular ecosystem a non-native
organism, including its seeds, eggs,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
spores, or other biological material
capable of propagating that species,
whose introduction causes or is likely to
cause economic or environmental harm,
or harm to human, animal, or plant
health.
Native means with respect to a
particular ecosystem, a species that,
other than as a result of an introduction,
historically occurred or currently occurs
in that ecosystem, including when such
a species expands or shifts its range as
a result of natural processes in response
to environmental change.
Natural processes mean interactions
among plants, animals, and the
environment that occur without
substantial human influence.
Predator control means actions or
programs with the intent or potential to
alter predator-prey population dynamics
on a refuge by reducing a population of
native predators through lethal or
nonlethal methods, except for actions
necessary to protect public health and
safety and those enumerated under
paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(c) Management directives for
ensuring biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health. The
following regulations serve as a
framework for determining and
implementing refuge management
actions to meet our statutory obligations
and policy goals:
(1) Address climate change. Within
the Refuge System, we will manage
species and habitats affected by climate
change and other anthropogenic change
by using climate change mitigation and
adaptation strategies when necessary to
meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(2) Conserve and connect habitat. We
allow for and defer to natural processes
on habitats within the Refuge System
and promote conservation, restoration,
and connectivity to meet refuge habitat
objectives and landscape planning
goals. We will avoid and minimize
habitat fragmentation to sustain
biological integrity and diversity. When
natural processes cannot meet habitat
objectives or facilitate adaptation to
anthropogenic change, we will use
science-based management techniques
or acquire lands when necessary to meet
statutory requirements, fulfill refuge
purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(3) Manage fish and wildlife
populations. We conserve fish and
wildlife populations within the Refuge
System to meet refuge population
objectives, sustain functioning
ecosystems, and, where appropriate,
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 4702
7351
restore or recover imperiled species.
When habitat conditions and natural
processes are insufficient to meet these
goals or facilitate adaptation to
anthropogenic change, we may pursue
actions to supplement natural processes
when necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health.
(4) Uphold water rights. We will
maintain and exercise our water rights
on habitats within the Refuge System in
accordance with local, State, and
Federal laws. Where necessary, we will
acquire, transfer, or lease water rights to
meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(5) Promote and maintain healthy
soil, water, and air. We promote and
maintain soil health, water quality and
quantity, and air quality as vital to
sustaining and restoring habitats within
the Refuge System through conservation
and management to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health. We
will address threats to these abiotic
components by pursuing appropriate
actions, including when such threats to
refuge resources arise outside refuge
boundaries.
(d) Management activities and uses
with potential to ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health. The regulations in this
paragraph (d) provide guidance for
certain management activities and uses
that may support the maintenance of
biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health. These activities
and uses will be implemented within
the Refuge System only as consistent
with the management directives set
forth in paragraph (c) of this section.
Proposed activities and uses will be
evaluated in compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and other legal
requirements, as applicable.
(1) Native predator control. We
prohibit predator control unless it is
determined necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health. We
may implement lethal predator control
only when all other feasible methods
have been fully evaluated and such
control is considered the only practical
means of addressing a specific,
significant conservation concern and
ensuring biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health. We do not
consider the following actions to be
predator control:
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
7352
Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 23 / Friday, February 2, 2024 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS
(i) Agency removal of native
predator(s) solely to protect public
health and safety;
(ii) Use of barriers or nonlethal
deterrents to protect the public,
property, or vulnerable species, but that
are not intended to reduce native
predator populations;
(iii) Compatible, refuge-approved
taking of fish and wildlife for
subsistence uses under Federal or State
subsistence regulations that do not
compromise maintaining biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health on the refuge;
(iv) Compatible, refuge-approved
recreational hunting and fishing
opportunities that do not compromise
maintaining biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health on
the refuge; and
(v) Removal of invasive species.
(2) Conservation translocations. We
may allow the introduction of a species
outside its current range to avoid
extinction or extirpation; restore a
species; reestablish a specific ecological
function lost to extinction or
extirpation; or, in accordance with
§ 17.81(a) of this chapter, when
necessary to meet statutory
VerDate Sep<11>2014
15:43 Feb 01, 2024
Jkt 262001
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health.
(3) Use of genetically engineered
organisms. We prohibit the use of
genetically engineered organisms unless
their use is determined necessary to
meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(4) Invasive species management. We
pursue actions to control invasive
species as part of an integrated pest
management plan when necessary to
meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(5) Pesticide use. We may allow the
use of pesticides, following review and
approval of their use as part of an
integrated pest management plan, when
necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health.
Such use must not result in adverse
effects on populations of nontarget
species.
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4702
Sfmt 9990
(6) Agricultural uses. We prohibit the
use of agricultural practices unless they
are determined necessary to meet
statutory requirements, fulfill refuge
purposes, and ensure biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental
health, and where we cannot achieve
refuge management objectives through
natural processes.
(7) Mosquito control. We prohibit
control of native mosquitoes unless it is
determined necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes,
and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health or
protect human health and safety. In
these situations, chosen control
methods must be the least injurious to
fish, wildlife, and their habitats. We
may coordinate with public health
agencies or mosquito control
organizations to implement the most
effective control methods that minimize
risk to refuge ecosystems and public
health.
Shannon Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and
Parks.
[FR Doc. 2024–02076 Filed 2–1–24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
E:\FR\FM\02FEP1.SGM
02FEP1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 23 (Friday, February 2, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 7345-7352]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02076]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 29
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0106; FXRS12610900000-212-FF09R20000]
RIN 1018-BG78
National Wildlife Refuge System; Biological Integrity, Diversity,
and Environmental Health
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; proposed policy updates.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), propose new
regulations to ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health (BIDEH) of the National Wildlife Refuge System
(Refuge System) are maintained, and where appropriate, restored and
enhanced, in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997. In addition, the Service is proposing updates
to the existing BIDEH policy, which will be available for public
comment concurrently with the proposed regulations in this docket.
These proposed regulatory and policy revisions would support
conservation throughout the Refuge System in response to both
longstanding and contemporary conservation challenges, including the
universal and profound effects of climate change on refuge species and
ecosystems. Together, these proposals would uphold BIDEH across the
Refuge System by providing refuge managers with a consistent approach
for evaluating and implementing management actions to protect
vulnerable species, restore and connect habitats, promote natural
processes, sustain vital ecological functions, increase resilience, and
adapt to climate change.
DATES: We will accept comments on the proposed rule and proposed
revisions to the Service Manual chapter at 601 FW 3 that are received
or postmarked on or before March 4, 2024.
ADDRESSES:
Document availability: This proposed rule and the draft Service
Manual chapter 601 FW 3 are available at the Federal eRulemaking
Portal: https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-
NWRS-2022-0106, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then,
click on the Search button. To access the Service Manual chapter, go to
the tab for Supporting & Related Material.
Comment submission: You may submit comments on this proposed rule
or the proposed revisions to 601 FW 3 by one of the following methods:
Electronically: Go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal:
https://www.regulations.gov. In the Search box, enter FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-
0106, which is the docket number for this rulemaking. Then, click on
the Search button. On the resulting screen, find the correct document
and submit a comment by clicking on ``Comment.''
By hard copy: Submit by U.S. mail or hand delivery to:
Public Comments Processing, Attn: FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0106; U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: PRB (JAO/3W); Falls Church,
VA 22041-3803.
We will not accept email or faxes. We will post all comments on
https://www.regulations.gov. This generally means that we will post any
personal information you provide us (see Request for Comments, below,
for more information).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Harrigan, (703) 358-2440,
[email protected]. Individuals in the United States who are
deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech disability may dial
711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay
services. Individuals outside the United States should use the relay
services offered within their country to make international calls to
the point-of-contact in the United States.
In compliance with the Providing Accountability Through
Transparency Act of 2023, please see docket FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0106 on
https://www.regulations.gov for a document that summarizes this
proposed rule.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The National Wildlife Refuge System is the only network of Federal
lands and waters in the United States dedicated to fish and wildlife
conservation and, at more than 850 million acres, the largest system of
its kind in the world. The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (Administration Act; 16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee),
as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997 (Improvement Act; Pub. L. 105-57), is the primary statutory
authority under which the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the
Service, administers the Refuge System. The Alaska National Interest
Lands Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 3111-3126), the Wilderness
Act of 1964
[[Page 7346]]
(16 U.S.C. 1131-1136), and various other mandates also provide
direction and authority for refuge management. The implementing
regulations for Refuge System mandates are found in title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at subchapter C.
The Improvement Act established the mission of the Refuge System to
administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation,
management, and where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and
plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the
benefit of present and future generations of Americans. (16 U.S.C.
668dd(a)(2)). It set forth policy direction, management standards, and
stewardship requirements for administering the more than 560 national
wildlife refuges in the Refuge System, prioritizing conservation while
ensuring public access to compatible, wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities and ensuring effective coordination with adjacent
landowners and State fish and wildlife agencies. The law states that
each refuge must be managed to fulfill both the Refuge System mission
and the specific purposes for which that refuge was established. It
additionally requires that, in administering the Refuge System, the
Secretary shall ensure that the biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health of the Refuge System are maintained for the
benefit of present and future generations of Americans. (16 U.S.C.
668dd(a)(4)(B)).
The Improvement Act is recognized as a visionary legislative
charter for managing a system of wildlife reserves in part due to its
mandate to ensure BIDEH. The terms comprising the BIDEH mandate are
grounded in conservation biology and demonstrate congressional intent
to conserve Refuge System fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats in
accordance with the latest scientific understanding. This directive for
a comprehensive, science-based approach to refuge management is
critical to ensuring that imperiled species and diverse wildlife
populations in North America are secure and thriving, sustained by a
network of healthy lands and waters.
Need for New Regulations and Updated Policy
In 1998, the Service announced our intent to issue policy and
regulations to administer the Improvement Act (63 FR 3583, January 23,
1998). In 2000, we published a draft policy on maintaining the
ecological integrity of the Refuge System (65 FR 61356, October 17,
2000). After considering the comments received on the draft policy, the
Service issued its BIDEH policy in 2001 (66 FR 3810, January 16, 2001).
Included in the Service Manual at 601 FW 3, the policy provides
internal guidance for agency implementation of the statutory
requirements.
At the time the Service adopted the BIDEH policy, we did not
promulgate BIDEH regulations as authorized in the Improvement Act. (See
16 U.S.C. 668dd(b)(5)). The Service did not anticipate the extent of
climate change impacts on refuge species and habitats or the need to
clarify in regulations our interpretation of and authority to implement
the BIDEH mandate. However, in the nearly 25 years since enactment of
the Improvement Act, refuges have begun to experience the effects of
climate change while continuing to contend with the myriad of other
anthropogenic stressors affecting fish, wildlife, plants, and their
habitats. Climate change is transforming historical species composition
and ecological function of habitats, creating new challenges to
traditional wildlife management strategies that were based on stable,
stationary baseline conditions. As the Refuge System becomes
increasingly vital to addressing the dual threats of biodiversity loss
and climate change, the Service recognizes the need to codify both
existing and new practices for maintaining BIDEH to assist refuges in
responding to these contemporary conservation challenges. Therefore,
the Service has identified the need to propose new BIDEH regulations
and updates to the existing BIDEH policy to accomplish these goals.
The purpose of this proposed rule and policy revision is to clarify
the Service's authority to maintain the biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System; ensure
consistency in evaluating refuge management activities that affect
BIDEH; and provide transparency in how we implement one of the most
fundamental mandates in the laws governing the Refuge System. The
proposed rule would codify longstanding refuge management principles
and further empower refuge managers to uphold the Refuge System's
conservation mission and achieve refuge purposes in the face of complex
threats to wildlife and their habitat. The proposed policy revision
would modernize the BIDEH policy and support the new regulations by
providing further guidance for refuge managers to ensure the BIDEH of
the Refuge System.
The Service currently operates and has always operated in
accordance with the same Refuge System-wide principles for maintaining
BIDEH represented in these proposed regulations and policy updates.
However, the Service has determined that this proposed rule and policy
revision is warranted to clarify Refuge System policies and practices;
better prepare refuges to confront future impacts from climate change
and other anthropogenic change; and provide the opportunity for public
input on the Service's interpretation of the Improvement Act's BIDEH
mandate, including its application in the context of predator control,
conservation translocations, genetically engineered organisms, invasive
species, pesticide use, agricultural practices, and mosquito control.
Proposed Additions to Existing Regulations
This proposed rule would amend the Refuge System regulations at 50
CFR subchapter C, part 29 (Land Use Management), subpart A (General
Rules). The proposed regulatory changes would not modify any existing
regulations but would add regulations regarding BIDEH at a new Sec.
29.3.
Consistent with the Administration Act as amended by the
Improvement Act, the Service is proposing regulations to ensure that
the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the
Refuge System are maintained and, where necessary and appropriate,
restored and enhanced. As shown in the rule portion of this document,
the proposed regulations set forth an overarching statement in
paragraph (a) describing what it means for the Service to ensure BIDEH;
definitions for biological integrity, diversity, environmental health,
and other key regulatory terms in paragraph (b); and overall directives
for ensuring BIDEH on refuges in paragraph (c). Together these proposed
regulations would provide a consistent framework within which refuge
managers would consider potential management actions that may affect
BIDEH. In addition, in paragraph (d), the proposed regulations also
provide more specific direction for certain management activities that
the Service has identified as having a particular propensity to affect
BIDEH.
Notably, the proposed regulatory standard repeated throughout the
regulations--requiring refuge managers to consider how management
actions are necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge
purposes, and ensure BIDEH--flows directly from the Improvement Act. In
the statute's requirements for administering the Refuge System,
Congress elevated ensuring the maintenance of BIDEH to a similar level
of importance as ensuring that the Refuge System mission and
[[Page 7347]]
refuge purposes are carried out, challenging the Service to implement
these integral directives together to provide the greatest conservation
benefits for fish and wildlife. (See 16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)). The
content of the proposed regulations and policy revision is further
described below.
Proposed BIDEH Regulations and Accompanying Policy Updates
The Service is concurrently proposing updates to the BIDEH policy,
601 FW 3, which accord with and provide additional internal guidance
for implementing the proposed regulations. We have decided to provide
these documents for public comment concurrently because the proposed
policy revision supplies further explanation for the application of the
proposed regulations and therefore provides additional context for
reviewing the proposed regulations.
Ensure Biological Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental Health
In Sec. 29.3(a), the Service is proposing an overarching statement
in support of the Refuge System's conservation mission defining what it
means to ensure BIDEH on refuges, which is a concept integrated
throughout the proposed BIDEH policy revision. The regulatory statement
would promote management of the Refuge System as an interconnected
network of lands and waters with functioning ecological processes to
maintain the composition, activity, and resilience of the Refuge System
over time. This concept means recognizing the Refuge System as an
expansive complex of plant communities, habitats, and ecosystems
representative of variable conditions and supporting a diversity of
fish and wildlife, including viable populations of rare and imperiled
species. This proposed regulation would codify the Service's continued
commitment to managing refuge ecosystems holistically as components of
larger landscapes and seascapes and supporting natural processes to
meet our conservation goals, while also acknowledging that climate
change and other anthropogenic change can require intervention to carry
out the Refuge System mission and achieve refuge purposes. This
commitment and acknowledgement are further distilled in the proposed
policy updates.
The proposed regulatory statement includes a legal standard for
managing refuges that would apply to each of the subsequent management
directives and activities in the proposed rule when the Service refers
to an action as being necessary to ensure BIDEH. This proposed legal
standard would instruct refuge managers to use their sound professional
judgment, informed by the best available scientific information, to
ensure that management actions benefit wildlife conservation by
contributing to, and not diminishing, BIDEH. The Service uses the term
``sound professional judgment'' as defined in the Improvement Act and
existing Refuge System regulations, directing refuge managers to make
their finding, determination, or decision to conduct an activity
consistent with principles of sound fish and wildlife management and
available science and resources, as well as their field experience and
knowledge of the particular refuge's resources. This proposed
requirement would foster defensible science-based management decisions,
strengthen management actions that support ecological integrity,
bolster decision making that avoids putting BIDEH at risk, and help
prevent further degradation of environmental conditions on refuges. The
proposed updates to the BIDEH policy would incorporate this legal
standard throughout the policy revision as well.
Definitions
In both the new regulations and policy revision, the Service is
proposing updated definitions for biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health based on definitions used in the Service's
existing BIDEH policy, 601 FW 3, that were vetted through public notice
and comment in 2000 and 2001 (66 FR 3810, January 16, 2001). The
Service is proposing to revise these definitions to acknowledge that
historical conditions may need to serve as a reference point, rather
than an end goal, for managing refuges where climate change and other
anthropogenic change are significantly altering ecosystems. This
proposed language would untether current and future management actions
from sustaining historical conditions that may no longer be possible on
many refuges, while continuing to recognize the value of a contextual
historical baseline for developing management goals. The Service also
proposes to update the definitions by explicitly recognizing the
impacts of climate change and other anthropogenic change on refuge
ecosystems, which is critical to understanding the three BIDEH terms in
their proper context, both now and in the future.
The Service is also including proposed definitions for other terms
helpful to understanding the proposed regulations and policy. These
terms all have established meanings either in wildlife biology, in
existing Service policy, in other Federal law and policy, or in some
combination of these. The Service has not departed from the accepted
meanings in crafting these regulatory definitions, but we did find it
necessary in the interest of greater clarity to tailor them to the
BIDEH context. The proposed updates to the BIDEH policy also include
some additional proposed definitions that would provide further context
for the content expanding on the proposed regulations in the policy
itself.
Management Directives for Ensuring Biological Integrity, Diversity, and
Environmental Health
Proposed Sec. 29.3(c) would include Refuge System-wide directives
for maintaining BIDEH in refuge management. These directives--
concerning universal concepts of climate, habitat, species, water,
soil, and air--would create a framework within which refuge managers
can determine and implement management activities. These fundamental
directives are common to all refuges and would provide basic sideboards
to guide management decisions consistent with other applicable law,
regulation, and policy. They are central to the Service's ability to
meet our statutory obligations and policy goals under the Improvement
Act and are specifically relevant to fulfilling refuge purposes and
ensuring BIDEH. The Service proposes further guidance for these
management directives in section 3.10 of the proposed BIDEH policy
accompanying these proposed regulations.
In the proposed regulation at paragraph (c)(1) and associated
policy updates, the Service acknowledges that climate change and other
anthropogenic change are affecting refuge fish, wildlife, plants, and
habitats. The proposed language would direct refuge managers to address
these threats through adaptation and mitigation strategies as necessary
to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure
BIDEH. This proposed regulation and accompanying policy revision
recognize that climate change is a major driver in species decline and
biodiversity loss, while ecosystem conservation can serve an essential
role in both climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as
species survival and recovery. They would therefore allow refuge
managers flexibility to implement a combination of responses to address
climate change impacts and other anthropogenic stressors, providing
discretion for managers to choose the most appropriate mitigation and
adaptation strategies on a particular
[[Page 7348]]
refuge, so long as they meet the proposed regulatory standard.
The proposed regulation at paragraph (c)(2) and associated policy
updates would prioritize deference to natural processes and support
ecological connectivity as a means of achieving refuge habitat
objectives and landscape planning goals. However, when natural
processes are insufficient to meet refuge habitat objectives, the
proposed language would direct managers to intervene with science-based
management techniques that mimic natural processes in accordance with
the proposed regulatory standard. Examples of such management
techniques are provided in the accompanying policy. The proposed
regulation and associated policy updates would also instruct managers
to use such techniques and encourage establishment of wildlife
corridors to facilitate adaptation to climate change and other
stressors.
The proposed regulation at paragraph (c)(3) and associated policy
updates would similarly codify the Service's ability to supplement
natural processes to meet fish and wildlife population objectives,
sustain ecosystems, and restore or recover imperiled species on refuges
when habitat conditions and natural processes are insufficient. It
would work in tandem with the regulation under proposed paragraph
(c)(2) to prioritize deference to natural processes as the default for
determining sustainable populations, while also providing flexibility
to take actions to conserve and manage species when necessary to meet
statutory requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure BIDEH. The
associated policy updates provide examples of such supplemental
management actions and guidance for maintaining native populations.
The regulation regarding refuge water rights at proposed paragraph
(c)(4) stems directly from Improvement Act mandates, as reiterated in
the associated policy updates. The proposed regulation and policy would
incorporate these legal requirements, directing the Service to maintain
and exercise refuge water rights in accordance with local, State, and
Federal laws and to acquire, transfer, or lease water rights in
accordance with the proposed regulatory standard. The proposed policy
updates would provide substantive guidance for refuge managers to
follow to uphold refuge water rights and would further empower them to
pursue and secure critical water assets to support the myriad of
migratory birds, fish, and other wildlife that rely on refuge habitats.
Finally, the proposed regulation at paragraph (c)(5) and associated
policy updates would direct refuge managers to promote and maintain
soil health and air quality as other abiotic components vital for
sustaining and restoring refuge habitats in addition to water quantity
and quality. The regulation would instruct the Service to conserve and
manage these essential resources within our jurisdiction in accordance
with the regulatory standard and address threats to them through
appropriate management actions. The proposed policy updates provide
additional guidance to explain how refuge managers would maintain these
foundational resources to support healthy ecosystems and ensure the
BIDEH of the Refuge System.
Management Activities and Uses for Ensuring Biological Integrity,
Diversity, and Environmental Health
The regulations in proposed Sec. 29.3(d) would guide specific
management activities and uses that can especially influence BIDEH,
including predator control, conservation translocations, use of
genetically engineered organisms, invasive species management,
pesticide use, agricultural uses, and mosquito control. These proposed
regulations are not intended to cover the range of management practices
conducted on refuges that may affect BIDEH. Rather, the Service
carefully selected these topics to codify and clarify our existing
policies regarding these management activities and uses, improve our
ability to respond to climate change and other anthropogenic factors,
and empower refuge managers to consistently analyze and apply these
tools--or refrain from applying them--as appropriate, to better support
BIDEH. The Service proposes further guidance for these management
activities and uses in section 3.13 of the proposed BIDEH policy
accompanying these proposed regulations.
The management activities and uses included in these proposed
regulations and associated policy updates would be implemented on
Refuge System habitats in conformance with the overall management
directives in proposed Sec. 29.3(c) and section 3.10 of the policy.
This would mean that these activities and uses are all subject to the
underlying conservation principle that defers to natural processes and
favors management that mimics natural processes. When natural processes
alone are insufficient to support ecological functions, refuge managers
would be required to evaluate the necessity for and potential
environmental effects of a proposed management activity or use in
accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) before
authorizing it, including considering reasonable alternatives,
scientific support, and potential risk of unintended consequences. This
approach is consistent with current Service policies.
Additionally, while each of the regulations in proposed paragraphs
(d)(1)-(7) would direct a default position regarding use of a
particular management practice, they simultaneously would provide
flexibility to implement them as conservation tools when determined,
based on comprehensive analysis, that they are necessary to meet
statutory requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure BIDEH.
Notably, NEPA analysis of management activities and uses could occur as
part of development of a refuge's comprehensive conservation plan (CCP)
or other approved management plan or could be conducted as a standalone
analysis. Regardless, such activities and uses must be consistent with
the CCP. Refuge managers must also fulfill other policy and legal
requirements prior to implementing a management activity or use when
applicable. This could include conducting scientific peer review (see
section 3.14(C) of the proposed policy for more information on peer
review requirements) or conducting a compatibility determination for
refuge management economic activities or activities that involve use of
a refuge by the public or other non-Refuge System entity (see the
Service's Compatibility policy at 603 FW 2 and regulations at 50 CFR
parts 25, 26, and 29 for more information). See the proposed
regulations and associated policy updates for further substantive
details and instruction for the management activities and uses
contained in this proposed rule and policy revision.
Coordination With Adjacent Landowners, State and Tribal Partners
The Service recognizes that ensuring the BIDEH of the Refuge System
necessitates a landscape-level perspective for managing an
interconnected network of lands and waters involving collaboration with
our State and Tribal partners, adjacent landowners, and other
stakeholders. These proposed regulations and policy updates comply with
and incorporate the Service's commitment to cooperate and coordinate
with State partners, as appropriate, in accordance with 43 CFR 24.4(e)
and 601 FW 7. They also encourage effective interaction and
coordination with other owners of land adjoining refuges. The proposed
[[Page 7349]]
regulations and policy updates additionally comply with and uphold the
Service's continued commitment to cooperate and coordinate with
federally recognized Tribes and other Indigenous Peoples, consistent
with the Service's Native American Policy at 510 FW 1, to protect
treaty, religious, subsistence, and cultural interests in the Refuge
System. Further, the Service proposes to identify and define Indigenous
Knowledge in the policy updates as an appropriate source of historical
information that would support best available scientific information
about historical conditions as a reference point for management
decisions.
Request for Comments
You may submit comments and materials on this proposed rule by
either one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. We will not accept
comments sent by email or fax or to an address not listed in ADDRESSES.
We will not consider comments that are not postmarked by the date
specified in DATES.
We will post your entire comment on https://www.regulations.gov.
Before including personal identifying information in your comment, you
should be aware that we may make your entire comment--including your
personal identifying information--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. We will post all hardcopy comments on https://www.regulations.gov.
Required Determinations
Clarity of This Proposed Rule
Executive Orders 12866 and 12988 and the Presidential Memorandum of
June 1, 1998, require us to write all rules in plain language. This
means that each rule we publish must:
(a) Be logically organized;
(b) Use the active voice to address readers directly;
(c) Use clear language rather than jargon;
(d) Be divided into short sections and sentences; and
(e) Use lists and tables wherever possible.
If you feel that we have not met these requirements, send us
comments by one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES. To better help us
revise the rule, your comments should be as specific as possible. For
example, you should tell us the numbers of the sections or paragraphs
that are unclearly written, which sections or sentences are too long,
the sections where you feel lists or tables would be useful, etc.
Regulatory Planning and Review (Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and
14094)
Executive Order 12866 provides that the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) will review all significant rules. OIRA has
determined that this proposed rulemaking action is not significant. The
proposed rule would simply serve to codify longstanding refuge
management principles and further empower refuge managers to uphold the
Refuge System's conservation mission and achieve refuge purposes in the
face of complex threats to wildlife and their habitat.
Executive Order 14094 reaffirms the principles of E.O. 12866 and
E.O 13563 and states that regulatory analysis should facilitate agency
efforts to develop regulations that serve the public interest, advance
statutory objectives, and are consistent with E.O. 12866, E.O. 13563,
and the Presidential Memorandum of January 20, 2021 (Modernizing
Regulatory Review). Regulatory analysis, as practicable and
appropriate, shall recognize distributive impacts and equity, to the
extent permitted by law. E.O. 13563 emphasizes further that regulations
must be based on the best available science and that the rulemaking
process must allow for public participation and an open exchange of
ideas. We have developed this proposed rule in a manner consistent with
these requirements.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (as amended by the Small
Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act [SBREFA] of 1996) (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.), whenever a Federal agency is required to publish a
notice of rulemaking for any proposed or final rule, it must prepare
and make available for public comment a regulatory flexibility analysis
that describes the effect of the rule on small entities (i.e., small
businesses, small organizations, and small government jurisdictions).
However, no regulatory flexibility analysis is required if the head of
an agency certifies that the rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. Thus, for a
regulatory flexibility analysis to be required, impacts must exceed a
threshold for ``significant impact'' and a threshold for a
``substantial number of small entities.'' See 5 U.S.C. 605(b). The
SBREFA amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require Federal
agencies to provide a statement of the factual basis for certifying
that a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
This proposed rule would govern the actions taken by the Service
but would not create any requirements for or place any regulatory
compliance burden on private entities. The Service also does not
anticipate the requirements to promote BIDEH to alter the current
practices of the Service's cooperative agriculture and water rights
programs. The Service currently operates and has always operated in
accordance with the same Refuge System-wide principles for maintaining
BIDEH represented in these proposed regulations. The Service has
determined that this proposed rulemaking is warranted to clarify our
policies and practices, better prepare refuges to confront future
impacts from climate change and other anthropogenic change, and provide
the opportunity for public input on our interpretation of the
Improvement Act's BIDEH mandate, including its application in the
context of predator control, species introductions, genetically
engineered organisms, invasive species, pesticide use, agricultural
practices, and mosquito control. As a result of the internal nature of
these proposed regulations, this rulemaking action would have no impact
on small entities.
Therefore, the Service certifies that this rule, as proposed, would
not have a significant economic effect on a substantial number of small
entities as defined under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601
et seq.). A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required.
Accordingly, a small entity compliance guide is not required.
Congressional Review Act
The proposed rule is not a major rule under 5 U.S.C. 804(2). The
Service anticipates no significant employment or small business
effects. This proposed rule:
a. Would not have an annual effect on the economy of $100 million
or more.
b. Would not cause a major increase in costs or prices for
consumers; individual industries; Federal, State, or local government
agencies; or geographic regions.
c. Would not have significant adverse effects on competition,
employment, investment, productivity, innovation, or the ability of
U.S.-based enterprises to compete with foreign-based enterprises in
domestic and export markets.
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Since this proposed rule would apply to management of refuges by
the Service, it would not impose an
[[Page 7350]]
unfunded mandate on State, local, or Tribal governments or the private
sector of more than $100 million per year. The proposed rule would not
have a significant or unique effect on State, local, or Tribal
governments or the private sector. A statement containing the
information required by the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (2 U.S.C. 1531
et seq.) is not required.
Takings (E.O. 12630)
In accordance with E.O. 12630, this proposed rule would not have
significant takings implications. This proposed rule would affect only
management of refuges by the Service.
Federalism (E.O. 13132)
As discussed under Regulatory Planning and Review and Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act, above, this proposed rule would not have
sufficient federalism implications to warrant the preparation of a
federalism summary impact statement under E.O. 13132.
Civil Justice Reform (E.O. 12988)
In accordance with E.O. 12988, the Department of the Interior has
determined that this proposed rule would not unduly burden the judicial
system and that it meets the requirements of sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2)
of the E.O.
Energy Supply, Distribution or Use (E.O. 13211)
E.O. 13211 requires agencies to prepare statements of energy
effects for regulations that significantly affect energy supply,
distribution, and use. Because this proposed rule would uphold and
enforce existing management principles and practices by the Service on
refuges, it is not a significant regulatory action under E.O. 12866,
and we do not expect it to significantly affect energy supplies,
distribution, or use. Therefore, this action is not a significant
energy action, and no statement of energy effects is required.
Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal Governments (E.O.
13175)
In accordance with E.O. 13175, the Service has evaluated possible
effects on federally recognized Indian Tribes and has determined that
there are no effects. Before taking actions, the Service coordinates
our activities on Service lands and waters with Tribal governments
having adjoining or overlapping jurisdiction.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA)
This rule does not contain information collection requirements, and
a submission to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under the
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) is not
required. The Service may not conduct or sponsor and you are not
required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a
currently valid OMB control number.
National Environmental Policy Act
The Service is required under the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to assess the impact of any Federal
action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment,
health, and safety. The Service has determined that this proposed rule
falls under the class of actions covered by the following Department of
the Interior categorical exclusion: Policies, directives, regulations,
and guidelines: that are of an administrative, financial, legal,
technical, or procedural nature; or whose environmental effects are too
broad, speculative, or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful
analysis and will later be subject to the NEPA process, either
collectively or case-by-case (43 CFR 46.210(i)). Under the proposed
rule, the Service would take future actions guided by the requirements
to support BIDEH, but these future actions would be determined and
taken at the individual refuge level and their environmental impacts
assessed on a case-by-case basis. Therefore, the environmental impacts
of the proposed rule are too speculative to lead to meaningful analysis
at this time. The Service would assess the environmental impact of any
potential management action mentioned in these regulations prior to
taking that action on Service lands or waters.
Primary Author
Katherine Harrigan, Division of Natural Resources and Conservation
Planning, National Wildlife Refuge System, is the primary author of
this proposed rulemaking document.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 29
Public lands mineral resources, Public lands rights-of-way,
Wildlife refuges.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
For the reasons set forth in the preamble, we propose to amend part
29, subchapter C of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal
Regulations as set forth below:
PART 29--LAND USE MANAGEMENT
0
1. The authority citation for part 29 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 5 U.S.C. 301; 16 U.S.C. 460k, 664, 668dd, 685, 690d,
715i, 725, 3161; 30 U.S.C. 185; 31 U.S.C. 3711, 9701; 40 U.S.C. 319;
43 U.S.C. 315a; 113 Stat. 1501A-140.
0
2. Add Sec. 29.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 29.3 Biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
We will maintain and, where necessary and appropriate, restore and
enhance the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health
of national wildlife refuges, both individually and as a network of
intact, functioning, and resilient habitats for fish, wildlife, and
plants, for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.
(a) Ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health. To ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health means to holistically conserve refuge ecosystems and all their
components and processes across multiple spatial scales; promote
natural processes; and address ecological transformation caused by
climate change and other anthropogenic change to accomplish the mission
of the National Wildlife Refuge System (Refuge System). We will seek to
achieve the highest measure of biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health on refuges, which is represented by diverse,
functioning, and self-sustaining ecosystems that are resilient to
emerging or future conditions. We will use sound professional judgment,
informed by the best available scientific information, to ensure that
refuge management contributes to and does not diminish the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental health of refuges and the
Refuge System for the benefit of fish and wildlife conservation.
(b) Definitions. In addition to relevant definitions in Sec. 25.12
of this subchapter C, the following definitions apply to this section:
Adaptation means an adjustment in natural or human systems to a new
or changing environment that uses beneficial opportunities or moderates
negative effects.
Anthropogenic change means environmental change that humans cause
or influence, either directly or indirectly.
Biological integrity means the capacity of an ecological system to
support and maintain a full range of biotic composition, structure,
function, and processes over time that exhibit diversity, connectivity,
and resilience at genetic, organism, population, and community levels.
We evaluate biological integrity by referencing historical conditions,
recognizing that
[[Page 7351]]
climate change and other anthropogenic change are influencing refuge
ecosystems.
Climate change mitigation means measures taken to reduce the amount
and speed of future climate change by reducing emissions of heat-
trapping gases or removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere,
including by improving ecosystem capacity for biological carbon
sequestration.
Connectivity means the degree to which landscapes, waterscapes, and
seascapes allow species to move freely and ecological processes to
function unimpeded.
Conservation translocation means deliberately moving organisms from
one site to another for release, with the intention of yielding a
measurable conservation benefit at the levels of a population, species,
or ecosystem.
Diversity means the variety of life and its processes, including
the richness and abundance of living organisms, the genetic differences
among them, and communities and ecosystems in which they occur. We
evaluate diversity by referencing historical conditions, recognizing
that climate change and other anthropogenic change are influencing
refuge ecosystems.
Ecological transformation means the shift in an ecosystem,
resulting in a new system that deviates from prior ecosystem structure
and function or species composition.
Ecosystem means systems comprised of biota (living organisms), the
abiotic environment (e.g., air, light, soils, water), the interactions
within and between them, and the physical space in which they operate.
Environmental change means an alteration or disturbance of the
environment caused by humans or natural processes that generates
differences in the function or characteristics of an ecosystem.
Environmental health means composition, structure, and functioning
of soil, water, air, and other abiotic features, including the abiotic
processes that shape the environment. We evaluate environmental health
by referencing historical conditions, recognizing that climate change
and other anthropogenic change are influencing refuge ecosystems.
Historical conditions means composition, structure, and function of
ecosystems that existed prior to ecological degradation caused by
anthropogenic change, based on best available scientific and historical
information.
Invasive species means with respect to a particular ecosystem a
non-native organism, including its seeds, eggs, spores, or other
biological material capable of propagating that species, whose
introduction causes or is likely to cause economic or environmental
harm, or harm to human, animal, or plant health.
Native means with respect to a particular ecosystem, a species
that, other than as a result of an introduction, historically occurred
or currently occurs in that ecosystem, including when such a species
expands or shifts its range as a result of natural processes in
response to environmental change.
Natural processes mean interactions among plants, animals, and the
environment that occur without substantial human influence.
Predator control means actions or programs with the intent or
potential to alter predator-prey population dynamics on a refuge by
reducing a population of native predators through lethal or nonlethal
methods, except for actions necessary to protect public health and
safety and those enumerated under paragraph (d)(1) of this section.
(c) Management directives for ensuring biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health. The following regulations serve as
a framework for determining and implementing refuge management actions
to meet our statutory obligations and policy goals:
(1) Address climate change. Within the Refuge System, we will
manage species and habitats affected by climate change and other
anthropogenic change by using climate change mitigation and adaptation
strategies when necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health.
(2) Conserve and connect habitat. We allow for and defer to natural
processes on habitats within the Refuge System and promote
conservation, restoration, and connectivity to meet refuge habitat
objectives and landscape planning goals. We will avoid and minimize
habitat fragmentation to sustain biological integrity and diversity.
When natural processes cannot meet habitat objectives or facilitate
adaptation to anthropogenic change, we will use science-based
management techniques or acquire lands when necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health.
(3) Manage fish and wildlife populations. We conserve fish and
wildlife populations within the Refuge System to meet refuge population
objectives, sustain functioning ecosystems, and, where appropriate,
restore or recover imperiled species. When habitat conditions and
natural processes are insufficient to meet these goals or facilitate
adaptation to anthropogenic change, we may pursue actions to supplement
natural processes when necessary to meet statutory requirements,
fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health.
(4) Uphold water rights. We will maintain and exercise our water
rights on habitats within the Refuge System in accordance with local,
State, and Federal laws. Where necessary, we will acquire, transfer, or
lease water rights to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge
purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health.
(5) Promote and maintain healthy soil, water, and air. We promote
and maintain soil health, water quality and quantity, and air quality
as vital to sustaining and restoring habitats within the Refuge System
through conservation and management to meet statutory requirements,
fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health. We will address threats to these abiotic
components by pursuing appropriate actions, including when such threats
to refuge resources arise outside refuge boundaries.
(d) Management activities and uses with potential to ensure
biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health. The
regulations in this paragraph (d) provide guidance for certain
management activities and uses that may support the maintenance of
biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health. These
activities and uses will be implemented within the Refuge System only
as consistent with the management directives set forth in paragraph (c)
of this section. Proposed activities and uses will be evaluated in
compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321
et seq.) and other legal requirements, as applicable.
(1) Native predator control. We prohibit predator control unless it
is determined necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge
purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental
health. We may implement lethal predator control only when all other
feasible methods have been fully evaluated and such control is
considered the only practical means of addressing a specific,
significant conservation concern and ensuring biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health. We do not consider the following
actions to be predator control:
[[Page 7352]]
(i) Agency removal of native predator(s) solely to protect public
health and safety;
(ii) Use of barriers or nonlethal deterrents to protect the public,
property, or vulnerable species, but that are not intended to reduce
native predator populations;
(iii) Compatible, refuge-approved taking of fish and wildlife for
subsistence uses under Federal or State subsistence regulations that do
not compromise maintaining biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health on the refuge;
(iv) Compatible, refuge-approved recreational hunting and fishing
opportunities that do not compromise maintaining biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health on the refuge; and
(v) Removal of invasive species.
(2) Conservation translocations. We may allow the introduction of a
species outside its current range to avoid extinction or extirpation;
restore a species; reestablish a specific ecological function lost to
extinction or extirpation; or, in accordance with Sec. 17.81(a) of
this chapter, when necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health.
(3) Use of genetically engineered organisms. We prohibit the use of
genetically engineered organisms unless their use is determined
necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and
ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
(4) Invasive species management. We pursue actions to control
invasive species as part of an integrated pest management plan when
necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and
ensure biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health.
(5) Pesticide use. We may allow the use of pesticides, following
review and approval of their use as part of an integrated pest
management plan, when necessary to meet statutory requirements, fulfill
refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health. Such use must not result in adverse effects on
populations of nontarget species.
(6) Agricultural uses. We prohibit the use of agricultural
practices unless they are determined necessary to meet statutory
requirements, fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity,
diversity, and environmental health, and where we cannot achieve refuge
management objectives through natural processes.
(7) Mosquito control. We prohibit control of native mosquitoes
unless it is determined necessary to meet statutory requirements,
fulfill refuge purposes, and ensure biological integrity, diversity,
and environmental health or protect human health and safety. In these
situations, chosen control methods must be the least injurious to fish,
wildlife, and their habitats. We may coordinate with public health
agencies or mosquito control organizations to implement the most
effective control methods that minimize risk to refuge ecosystems and
public health.
Shannon Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2024-02076 Filed 2-1-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P