81 FR 86000 - Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permits; Draft Supplement to Environmental Impact Statement and Amendment to Habitat Conservation Plan for Forest Management in Montana
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 229 (November 29, 2016)
Fish and Wildlife Service
Federal Register Volume 81, Issue 229 (November 29, 2016)
| Page Range | 86000-86001 | |
| FR Document | 2016-28736 |
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 29, 2016)] [Notices] [Pages 86000-86001] From the Federal Register Online [www.thefederalregister.org] [FR Doc No: 2016-28736] [[Page 86000]] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR Fish and Wildlife Service [FWS-R6-ES-2016-N151; FF06E11000-167-FXES11120600000] Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Permits; Draft Supplement to Environmental Impact Statement and Amendment to Habitat Conservation Plan for Forest Management in Montana AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior. ACTION: Notice of intent. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, intend to prepare a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (DSEIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act to consider potential impacts on the human environment from proposed amendments to an incidental take permit and associated habitat conservation plan. Under the Endangered Species Act, we issued the original permit to the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) in December 2011, authorizing take of the grizzly bear, Canada lynx, bull trout, and two other fish species incidental to the DNRC's forest management activities. The purpose of this notice is to describe the proposed action and advise other Federal and State agencies, potentially affected tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare a DSEIS. The DNRC intends to jointly prepare the DSEIS to comply with its responsibilities under the Montana Environmental Policy Act. We are not soliciting comments at this time. The public will have opportunity to comment on the published DSEIS when we announce its availability in the Federal Register and local and regional news sources. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben Conard, Assistant Field Supervisor, at (406) 758-6882 or [email protected]; or Gary Frank, Deputy Chief, Forest Management Bureau, Montana DNRC, at (406) 542-4328 or [email protected]. Individuals who are hearing or speech impaired may call the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8337 for TTY assistance. Information on this proposed action is also available at the DNRC's Web site, at http://dnrc.mt.gov/divisions/trust/forest-management/hcp. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Introduction Under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) issued an original permit to the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) in December 2011, authorizing take of the grizzly bear, Canada lynx, bull trout, and two other fish species incidental to their forest management activities. The DNRC now is proposing to amend the HCP to incorporate terms of a settlement agreement and is requesting that we amend the permit to cover additional lands. We intend to prepare a DSEIS under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to consider potential impacts on the human environment from the proposed amendment to a habitat conservation plan (HCP) and associated incidental take permit issued under section 10(A)(1)(B) of the ESA. The DNRC intends to jointly prepare the DSEIS to comply with the Montana Environmental Policy Act, Mont. Code Ann. 75-1-101-75-1-324 and the DNRC implementing regulations, Administrative Rules of Montana 36.2.501-36.2.611. The DNRC is requesting that the permit be amended to authorize potential take from forest management activities on an additional 81,416 acres. The DNRC is also proposing to amend the HCP to incorporate the terms of a settlement agreement to add conservation measures and remove others that are no longer relevant. The DNRC is preparing an amendment to the HCP detailing how the proposed action would be adopted to comply with the HCP's required measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate the effects of incidental take of the covered species to the maximum extent practicable. We provide this notice to (1) describe the proposed action and (2) advise other Federal and State agencies, potentially affected tribes, and the public of our intent to prepare a DSEIS. In the DSEIS, we will analyze potential effects to the covered species and other factors of the human environment from the proposed action and alternatives to the action. Background In April 2009, the DNRC applied for a permit for take incidental to forest management activities for the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus), westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi), and interior redband trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri). The grizzly bear, lynx, and bull trout are federally listed, while the westslope and redband trout species are not. Before deciding whether to issue the permit, we analyzed the potential effects of implementation of the HCP and alternatives in a draft EIS (DEIS). In an announcement in the Federal Register on June 26, 2009 (74 FR 30617), we provided the DEIS and DNRC's permit application package, which included the draft HCP, for public review for a total of 105 days. After considering the public comments, the Service finalized the EIS and issued the permit to DNRC on December 14, 2011. The permit area covers approximately 548,500 acres of forested State trust lands in western Montana. However, because DNRC expected to transfer, exchange, or add lands for their forest management activities in the future, the HCP addressed the process and contingencies for doing so. Thus, the Service considered in the EIS the potential effects of amending the HCP and incidental take permit to cover such actions. In April 2013, two environmental organizations challenged the issuance of the permit in a Federal District Court in Montana. The Court ruled in the Service's favor on all but one count. DNRC and the plaintiffs subsequently entered a settlement agreement for that count in September 2015. The future addition of lands to the HCP and permit were not part of the complaint or the settlement agreement. Proposed Action The Service plans to prepare a supplement to the EIS to assess the effects of the proposed amendment to the HCP and permit and incorporation of the terms of the settlement agreement. The terms of the settlement agreement focus primarily on adjusting management of DNRC's Class A lands under the Stillwater Block Transportation Plan in the HCP, which entailed a strategy of a cycle of 4 years of active forest management followed by 8 years of rest. The settlement agreement identifies seven distinct grizzly bear security zones totaling 22,007 acres. These security zones include the entirety of the original 19,400 acres of Class A lands in the Stillwater Block in the HCP, but also add 2,300 acres in a new area in Coal Creek State Forest. The amended HCP would replace the 4-year active/8-year rest management cycle on Stillwater Block Lands with specific measures for restricting forest management activities to the denning season in these grizzly bear security zones. All motorized activities below 6,300 feet in elevation within the grizzly security zones would be allowed during the grizzly denning season and prohibited all year round above that elevation. The same seasonal and elevation restrictions would apply [[Page 86001]] to commercial forest management activities within the grizzly security zones. The current HCP prohibits new permanent road construction on the original 19,400 acres of Class A lands. This measure would remain essentially the same under an amendment, but would be specifically applied to the seven grizzly security zones, including the additional 2,300 acres in the Coal Creek State Forest. Several other measures in the HCP for Class A lands would remain the same but be extended to the grizzly security zones with amendments. Other amendments would specifically spell out measures that DNRC had committed to implement in the original HCP but were previously incorporated by reference from DNRC's Forest Management Administrative Rules of Montana. Since we issued the permit, DNRC has acquired an appreciable amount of forested lands within the original HCP area, and they are now requesting to amend the HCP and permit to cover an additional 81,416 acres. DNRC proposes to implement the HCP's existing conservation commitments on the additional lands. The six acquisition areas and their acreages are the Swan, which contains 16,446 acres; Chamberlain, which contains 14,537 acres; Potomac, which contains 32,266 acres; Lolo Land Exchange, which contains 11,066 acres; Upper Blackfoot, which contains 5,458 acres; and Southern Bitterroot, which contains 1,643 acres. The HCP would be amended to reflect inclusion of (1) the Swan acquisition lands in the Swan Transportation Plan, (2) the Swan acquisition area in the Swan Lynx Management Area (LMA), (3) a portion of the Chamberlain acquisition area in the Garnet LMA, and (4) increasing the acres of lynx critical habitat addressed in the HCP. The original HCP requires the DNRC to complete corrective actions at sites identified with high risk of sediment delivery in bull trout watersheds in the HCP area by 2027. As directed by the settlement agreement, the HCP would be amended to prioritize and complete such corrective actions in federally designated bull trout critical habitat by 2024. Lastly, over the past 5 years of HCP implementation, the Service and DNRC identified some commitment and procedural clarifications that would be incorporated into the HCP. These amendments would serve to help DNRC understand how to implement certain measures and would not entail any changes to the nature of the measures or how they affect the covered species. Statutory Requirements Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1538) and implementing regulations in title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) prohibit the taking of animal species listed as endangered or threatened. The term ``take'' is defined under the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)) to mean ``harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.'' ``Harm'' is defined by the Service to include significant habitat modification or degradation where it actually kills or injures listed species by significantly impairing essential behavioral patterns, including breeding, feeding, and sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). ``Harass'' is defined by the Service as actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly disrupt normal behavior patterns, which include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). Section 10 of the ESA and implementing regulations specify requirements for the issuance of incidental take permits to non-Federal landowners for the incidental take of endangered and threatened species. Such take must be incidental to otherwise lawful activities and not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild, and the impacts of the take on the listed species must be minimized and mitigated by the permittee to the maximum extent practicable. An applicant for an incidental take permit must prepare an HCP describing the impacts that will likely result from such taking, the conservation program for minimizing and mitigating those take impacts, the funding available to implement the conservation program, the alternatives considered by the applicant to avoid such taking, and the reason(s) such alternatives are not being implemented. NEPA requires that Federal agencies conduct an environmental analysis of their proposed actions to determine if the actions may significantly affect the human environment. The Service determined that the final DNRC HCP EIS (September 17, 2010) requires a supplement since the changes in the proposed action may materially or substantially affect the analysis of impacts (40 CFR 1502.9 and 516 DM 4.5). Public Comments The DSEIS will be developed using the same process as the original DNRC HCP EIS. We are not soliciting comments at this time. The public will have opportunity to comment on the published DSEIS, which will be announced in the Federal Register and local and regional news sources. For general inquiries or questions about the DSEIS process, see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. Authority The environmental review of this proposed action will be conducted in accordance with the requirements of NEPA, the Council on Environmental Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508), the Department of the Interior NEPA regulations (43 CFR part 46), other applicable Federal laws and regulations, and policies and procedures of the Service. This notice is being furnished in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.7 to notify the public of the Service's intent to prepare a DSEIS. Michael Thabault, Assistant Regional Director, Mountain-Prairie Region. [FR Doc. 2016-28736 Filed 11-28-16; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4333-15-P
![86000 Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2016 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR permit to the Montana Department of implementation of the HCP and
Natural Resources and Conservation alternatives in a draft EIS (DEIS). In an
Fish and Wildlife Service (DNRC) in December 2011, authorizing announcement in the Federal Register
[FWS–R6–ES–2016–N151; FF06E11000– take of the grizzly bear, Canada lynx, on June 26, 2009 (74 FR 30617), we
167–FXES11120600000] bull trout, and two other fish species provided the DEIS and DNRC’s permit
incidental to their forest management application package, which included
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife activities. The DNRC now is proposing the draft HCP, for public review for a
and Plants; Permits; Draft Supplement to amend the HCP to incorporate terms total of 105 days. After considering the
to Environmental Impact Statement of a settlement agreement and is public comments, the Service finalized
and Amendment to Habitat requesting that we amend the permit to the EIS and issued the permit to DNRC
Conservation Plan for Forest cover additional lands. on December 14, 2011.
Management in Montana We intend to prepare a DSEIS under The permit area covers approximately
the National Environmental Policy Act 548,500 acres of forested State trust
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, (NEPA, 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) to lands in western Montana. However,
Interior. consider potential impacts on the because DNRC expected to transfer,
ACTION: Notice of intent. human environment from the proposed exchange, or add lands for their forest
amendment to a habitat conservation management activities in the future, the
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
plan (HCP) and associated incidental HCP addressed the process and
Wildlife Service, intend to prepare a
take permit issued under section contingencies for doing so. Thus, the
draft Supplemental Environmental
10(A)(1)(B) of the ESA. The DNRC Service considered in the EIS the
Impact Statement (DSEIS) under the
intends to jointly prepare the DSEIS to potential effects of amending the HCP
National Environmental Policy Act to
comply with the Montana and incidental take permit to cover such
consider potential impacts on the
Environmental Policy Act, Mont. Code actions.
human environment from proposed In April 2013, two environmental
Ann. 75–1–101–75–1–324 and the
amendments to an incidental take DNRC implementing regulations, organizations challenged the issuance of
permit and associated habitat Administrative Rules of Montana the permit in a Federal District Court in
conservation plan. Under the 36.2.501–36.2.611. The DNRC is Montana. The Court ruled in the
Endangered Species Act, we issued the requesting that the permit be amended Service’s favor on all but one count.
original permit to the Montana to authorize potential take from forest DNRC and the plaintiffs subsequently
Department of Natural Resources and management activities on an additional entered a settlement agreement for that
Conservation (DNRC) in December 2011, 81,416 acres. The DNRC is also count in September 2015. The future
authorizing take of the grizzly bear, proposing to amend the HCP to addition of lands to the HCP and permit
Canada lynx, bull trout, and two other incorporate the terms of a settlement were not part of the complaint or the
fish species incidental to the DNRC’s agreement to add conservation measures settlement agreement.
forest management activities. The and remove others that are no longer
purpose of this notice is to describe the Proposed Action
relevant.
proposed action and advise other The DNRC is preparing an The Service plans to prepare a
Federal and State agencies, potentially amendment to the HCP detailing how supplement to the EIS to assess the
affected tribes, and the public of our the proposed action would be adopted effects of the proposed amendment to
intent to prepare a DSEIS. The DNRC to comply with the HCP’s required the HCP and permit and incorporation
intends to jointly prepare the DSEIS to measures to avoid, minimize, and of the terms of the settlement agreement.
comply with its responsibilities under mitigate the effects of incidental take of The terms of the settlement agreement
the Montana Environmental Policy Act. the covered species to the maximum focus primarily on adjusting
We are not soliciting comments at this extent practicable. We provide this management of DNRC’s Class A lands
time. The public will have opportunity notice to (1) describe the proposed under the Stillwater Block
to comment on the published DSEIS action and (2) advise other Federal and Transportation Plan in the HCP, which
when we announce its availability in State agencies, potentially affected entailed a strategy of a cycle of 4 years
the Federal Register and local and tribes, and the public of our intent to of active forest management followed by
regional news sources. prepare a DSEIS. In the DSEIS, we will 8 years of rest. The settlement
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ben analyze potential effects to the covered agreement identifies seven distinct
Conard, Assistant Field Supervisor, at species and other factors of the human grizzly bear security zones totaling
(406) 758–6882 or Ben_Conard@fws.gov; environment from the proposed action 22,007 acres. These security zones
or Gary Frank, Deputy Chief, Forest and alternatives to the action. include the entirety of the original
Management Bureau, Montana DNRC, at 19,400 acres of Class A lands in the
Background Stillwater Block in the HCP, but also
(406) 542–4328 or gfrank@mt.gov.
Individuals who are hearing or speech In April 2009, the DNRC applied for add 2,300 acres in a new area in Coal
impaired may call the Federal Relay a permit for take incidental to forest Creek State Forest. The amended HCP
Service at (800) 877–8337 for TTY management activities for the grizzly would replace the 4-year active/8-year
assistance. Information on this proposed bear (Ursus arctos horribilis), Canada rest management cycle on Stillwater
action is also available at the DNRC’s lynx (Lynx canadensis), bull trout Block Lands with specific measures for
Web site, at http://dnrc.mt.gov/ (Salvelinus confluentus), westslope restricting forest management activities
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
divisions/trust/forest-management/hcp. cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii to the denning season in these grizzly
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: lewisi), and interior redband trout bear security zones. All motorized
(Oncorhynchus mykiss gairdneri). The activities below 6,300 feet in elevation
Introduction grizzly bear, lynx, and bull trout are within the grizzly security zones would
Under the Endangered Species Act of federally listed, while the westslope and be allowed during the grizzly denning
1973, as amended (ESA, 16 U.S.C. 1531 redband trout species are not. Before season and prohibited all year round
et seq.), we, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife deciding whether to issue the permit, above that elevation. The same seasonal
Service (Service) issued an original we analyzed the potential effects of and elevation restrictions would apply
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 28, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00081 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM 29NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_86229/page/1.svg)
![Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 229 / Tuesday, November 29, 2016 / Notices 86001
to commercial forest management Statutory Requirements have opportunity to comment on the
activities within the grizzly security Section 9 of the ESA (16 U.S.C. 1538) published DSEIS, which will be
zones. The current HCP prohibits new and implementing regulations in title 50 announced in the Federal Register and
permanent road construction on the of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) local and regional news sources. For
original 19,400 acres of Class A lands. prohibit the taking of animal species general inquiries or questions about the
This measure would remain essentially listed as endangered or threatened. The DSEIS process, see FOR FURTHER
the same under an amendment, but INFORMATION CONTACT.
term ‘‘take’’ is defined under the ESA
would be specifically applied to the (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)) to mean ‘‘harass, Authority
seven grizzly security zones, including harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,
the additional 2,300 acres in the Coal The environmental review of this
trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to proposed action will be conducted in
Creek State Forest. Several other engage in any such conduct.’’ ‘‘Harm’’ is
measures in the HCP for Class A lands accordance with the requirements of
defined by the Service to include NEPA, the Council on Environmental
would remain the same but be extended significant habitat modification or
to the grizzly security zones with Quality Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500–
degradation where it actually kills or 1508), the Department of the Interior
amendments. Other amendments would injures listed species by significantly
specifically spell out measures that NEPA regulations (43 CFR part 46),
impairing essential behavioral patterns, other applicable Federal laws and
DNRC had committed to implement in including breeding, feeding, and
the original HCP but were previously regulations, and policies and procedures
sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). ‘‘Harass’’ is of the Service. This notice is being
incorporated by reference from DNRC’s defined by the Service as actions that
Forest Management Administrative furnished in accordance with 40 CFR
create the likelihood of injury to listed 1501.7 to notify the public of the
Rules of Montana. species to such an extent as to
Since we issued the permit, DNRC has Service’s intent to prepare a DSEIS.
significantly disrupt normal behavior
acquired an appreciable amount of patterns, which include, but are not Michael Thabault,
forested lands within the original HCP limited to, breeding, feeding, or Assistant Regional Director, Mountain-Prairie
area, and they are now requesting to sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). Region.
amend the HCP and permit to cover an Section 10 of the ESA and [FR Doc. 2016–28736 Filed 11–28–16; 8:45 am]
additional 81,416 acres. DNRC proposes implementing regulations specify BILLING CODE 4333–15–P
to implement the HCP’s existing requirements for the issuance of
conservation commitments on the incidental take permits to non-Federal
additional lands. The six acquisition landowners for the incidental take of DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
areas and their acreages are the Swan, endangered and threatened species.
which contains 16,446 acres; Bureau of Indian Affairs
Such take must be incidental to
Chamberlain, which contains 14,537 otherwise lawful activities and not [178A2100DD/AAKC001030/
acres; Potomac, which contains 32,266 appreciably reduce the likelihood of the A0A501010.999900 253G]
acres; Lolo Land Exchange, which survival and recovery of the species in
contains 11,066 acres; Upper Blackfoot, the wild, and the impacts of the take on Notice of Intent To Prepare an
which contains 5,458 acres; and the listed species must be minimized Environmental Impact Statement for
Southern Bitterroot, which contains and mitigated by the permittee to the the Proposed Redding Rancheria Fee-
1,643 acres. The HCP would be maximum extent practicable. An to-Trust and Casino Project, Shasta
amended to reflect inclusion of (1) the applicant for an incidental take permit County, California
Swan acquisition lands in the Swan must prepare an HCP describing the AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs,
Transportation Plan, (2) the Swan impacts that will likely result from such Interior.
acquisition area in the Swan Lynx taking, the conservation program for ACTION: Notice.
Management Area (LMA), (3) a portion minimizing and mitigating those take
of the Chamberlain acquisition area in impacts, the funding available to SUMMARY: This notice advises the public
the Garnet LMA, and (4) increasing the implement the conservation program, that the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA),
acres of lynx critical habitat addressed the alternatives considered by the as lead agency, intends to gather
in the HCP. applicant to avoid such taking, and the information necessary for preparing an
The original HCP requires the DNRC reason(s) such alternatives are not being environmental impact statement (EIS) in
to complete corrective actions at sites implemented. connection with the Redding
identified with high risk of sediment NEPA requires that Federal agencies Rancheria’s (Tribe) application
delivery in bull trout watersheds in the conduct an environmental analysis of requesting that the United States acquire
HCP area by 2027. As directed by the their proposed actions to determine if approximately 232 acres of land in trust
settlement agreement, the HCP would be the actions may significantly affect the in Shasta County, California, for the
amended to prioritize and complete human environment. The Service construction and operation of a casino
such corrective actions in federally determined that the final DNRC HCP resort.
designated bull trout critical habitat by EIS (September 17, 2010) requires a DATES: To ensure consideration during
2024. supplement since the changes in the the development of the EIS, written
Lastly, over the past 5 years of HCP proposed action may materially or comments on the scope of the EIS
implementation, the Service and DNRC should be sent as soon as possible and
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
substantially affect the analysis of
identified some commitment and impacts (40 CFR 1502.9 and 516 DM no later than December 29, 2016. The
procedural clarifications that would be 4.5). date of the public scoping meeting will
incorporated into the HCP. These be announced at least 15 days in
amendments would serve to help DNRC Public Comments advance through a notice to be
understand how to implement certain The DSEIS will be developed using published in the local newspapers
measures and would not entail any the same process as the original DNRC (Redding Record Searchlight and
changes to the nature of the measures or HCP EIS. We are not soliciting Sacramento Bee) and online at
how they affect the covered species. comments at this time. The public will www.reddingeis.com.
VerDate Sep<11>2014 17:48 Nov 28, 2016 Jkt 241001 PO 00000 Frm 00082 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\29NON1.SGM 29NON1](https://thefederalregister.org/doc/81_FR_86229/page/2.svg)
Document Created: 2016-11-29 00:32:43
Document Modified: 2016-11-29 00:32:43
| Category | Regulatory Information | |
| Collection | Federal Register | |
| sudoc Class | AE 2.7: GS 4.107: AE 2.106: | |
| Publisher | Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration | |
| Section | Notices | |
| Action | Notice of intent. | |
| Contact | Ben Conard, Assistant Field Supervisor, at (406) 758-6882 or [email protected]; or Gary Frank, Deputy Chief, Forest Management Bureau, Montana DNRC, at (406) 542-4328 or [email protected] | |
| FR Citation | 81 FR 86000 |
2025 Federal Register | Disclaimer | Privacy Policy
USC | CFR | eCFR