[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 129 (Friday, July 5, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55647-55649]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-14724]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2022-0074; ES11140100000-245-FF01E0000]
Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Barred Owl
Management Strategy; Washington, Oregon, and California
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; final environmental impact statement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) developed a
proposed barred owl management strategy (strategy) to address the
threat that the nonnative and invasive barred owl (Strix varia) poses
to two native western owl subspecies--the northern spotted owl (Strix
occidentalis caurina) and the California spotted owl (Strix
occidentalis occidentalis). In accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act, this notice announces the availability of a
final environmental impact statement (FEIS) evaluating the impacts on
the human environment related to the proposed management strategy and
associated take of barred owls, which is prohibited under the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act unless authorized by the Service by permit or
regulation. With this notice, we also make available the revised
proposed management strategy.
DATES: The Service's decision on the proposed management strategy will
occur no sooner than 30 days after publication of the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's notice of availability of the FEIS in
the Federal Register, and will be documented in a record of decision.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain copies of the strategy and FEIS documents by
any of the following methods:
Internet: https://www.regulations.gov (search for Docket
No. FWS-R1-ES-2022-0074) or at https://www.fws.gov/project/barred-owl-management.
Phone: You may call Robin Bown at 503-231-6923, to request
alternative formats of the documents.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Bown, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Office, Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see ADDRESSES), by telephone
at 503-231-6923, or by email at [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.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
announces the availability of a final environmental impact statement
(FEIS) addressing the proposed barred owl management strategy
(strategy) developed to address the threat that the nonnative and
invasive barred owl poses to two native western owl subspecies, the
northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) and the California
spotted owl (Strix occidentalis occidentalis). Implementation of the
proposed management strategy would involve the reduction of barred owl
populations in designated management areas in Washington, Oregon, and
northern California. Where barred owls are in the early stages of
invasion in the California spotted owl's range, the proposed strategy
would allow for removal of all barred owls in order to prevent
establishment of barred owl populations.
This FEIS provides updates and clarifications to information
presented in the draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), including
revisions in response to issues raised in comments received during the
public review period for that document, and identifies a preferred
alternative. The Service, with input from 11 Federal and State
cooperating agencies, has prepared this FEIS pursuant to the Council on
Environmental Quality's (CEQ's) implementing NEPA regulations at 40 CFR
parts 1500-1508, which became effective on May 20, 2022 (87 FR 23453;
April 20, 2022).
[[Page 55648]]
Background
Spotted owls are native to western North America. Competition from
nonnative and invasive barred owls has been identified as a primary
threat to the northern spotted owl, which is listed as threatened under
the Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), as well as a
threat to the persistence of California spotted owl, which the Service
has proposed for listing (88 FR 11600; February 23, 2023). Additional
primary threats include the loss of habitat to timber harvest on non-
Federal lands and to wildfires on Federal and non-Federal lands.
Barred owls, native to eastern North America, began to expand their
range around 1900. Barred owls are larger and more aggressive than the
northern spotted owl and the California spotted owl. Upon reaching the
Pacific Northwest, barred owls quickly displaced spotted owls from
their historic territories. Without management of barred owls,
extirpation of northern spotted owls from major portions of their
historic range is likely in the near future. While barred owls have not
substantially impacted California spotted owl populations to date, the
establishment of a small barred owl population in the northern Sierra
Nevada mountains, and the history of the invasion and impacts on
northern spotted owls following such expansion, demonstrates that
barred owls are also a significant threat to the persistence of
California spotted owls.
The barred owl is protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
(MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 703-712), which prohibits take of protected migratory
bird species unless authorized by the Service through permit or
regulation (50 CFR 21.10).
Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action
The purpose of this proposed action is to reduce barred owl
populations to improve the survival and recovery of northern spotted
owls and to prevent declines in California spotted owls from barred owl
competition. Relative to northern spotted owls, the purpose is to
reduce barred owl populations within selected treatment areas in the
short term and to increase northern spotted owl populations in those
treatment areas. Relative to the California spotted owl, the purpose is
to limit the invasion of barred owls into the range of the subspecies
and to provide for a rapid response to reduce barred owl populations
that may become established.
As described in the FEIS, these actions are needed because barred
owls compete with northern and California spotted owls. Competition
from the barred owl is a primary cause of the rapid and ongoing decline
of northern spotted owl populations. Due to the rapidity of the
decline, it is critical that we manage barred owl populations to reduce
their negative effects before northern spotted owls are extirpated from
large portions of their native range. There is also a need to focus on
limiting the invasion of barred owls into the California spotted owl
range, as we expect that additional impacts to California spotted owl
populations would be inevitable without barred owl management, and
invasive species are very difficult to remove once established.
Proposed Action and Alternatives
The proposed action, identified as the preferred alternative in the
FEIS, is the issuance of a Migratory Bird Special Purpose permit under
the MBTA (50 CFR 21.95) and implementation of the management strategy.
The FEIS analyzed the proposed action, a no action alternative, and
four alternatives to the proposed action, including the environmental
consequences of each alternative. All action alternatives include
issuance of an MBTA permit for management to reduce barred owl
populations in areas within the northern spotted owl's range, and
prevent establishment of barred owl populations within the California
spotted owl's range. The locations and relative priorities for removal
would vary by action alternative. None of the alternatives would
require any entity to implement barred owl management; rather, they
outline various combinations of management approaches, geographic
areas, and other components that would allow for and guide management
actions and the ability to prioritize areas of greatest need.
Six alternatives are analyzed in detail in the FEIS:
Alternative 1--No Action: Under the no action alternative, a
comprehensive management strategy would not be finalized or
implemented, and the Service would not issue an MBTA permit for
systematic management of barred owls. Ongoing barred owl removal as
part of research efforts in California would still occur, and future
efforts that may be proposed anywhere in the range of the spotted owl
could still occur.
Alternative 2--Management Strategy Implementation (Preferred
Alternative): Under the preferred alternative, the proposed strategy
would include three approaches to barred owl management within the
northern spotted owl's range: spotted owl site management, General
Management Areas with associated Focal Management Areas, and Special
Designated Areas. In the California spotted owl's range, where we are
focused on early detection and rapid response at the invasion front,
the proposed action focuses on surveys, inventory, and monitoring to
detect invading barred owls, and rapid removal of any barred owls
detected.
Alternative 3--Management Across the Range: Under this alternative,
barred owl management could be implemented anywhere within the range of
the northern or California spotted owls or within 15 miles of the range
of the subspecies on up to 50 percent of the area.
Alternative 4--Limited Management by Province/Population: Within
the northern spotted owl's range, this alternative would focus barred
owl management on a single large General Management Area within each
physiographic province. In the California spotted owl's range, barred
owl management would be delayed until detections reached 10 percent of
surveys in areas within the Sierra Nevada portion of the population, or
5 percent within the Coastal-Southern California portion of the
province.
Alternative 5--Management Focused on Highest Risk Areas: In the
northern spotted owl's range, this alternative would focus barred owl
management in the northern provinces, where the subspecies is at
greatest risk of extirpation from barred owl competition. In the
California spotted owl's range, barred owl management would be limited
to the northern Sierra Nevada portion of the subspecies' range.
Alternative 6--Management Focused on Best Conditions: This
alternative would focus barred owl management in the southern portion
of the northern spotted owl's range. In the California spotted owl's
range, barred owl management would be focused on areas with the best
remaining habitat and areas with higher fire resiliency.
Lead and Cooperating Agencies
The Service is the lead agency for the NEPA process, including
development of the FEIS. The following agencies were cooperating
agencies in the NEPA process and provided input and assistance with the
development of the FEIS: U.S. Forest Service (Regions 5 and 6), Bureau
of Land Management (Oregon), Bureau of Land Management (California),
National Park Service (Interior Regions 8, 9, 10, 12), Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service-Wildlife Services (U.S. Department of
[[Page 55649]]
Agriculture), Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife,
Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Oregon Department of
Forestry, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife, California Department
of Fish and Wildlife, and California Department of Forestry and Fire
Protection.
Anticipated Permits and Authorizations
As described above, if an action alternative is selected, the
Service expects to obtain a Migratory Bird Special Purpose permit under
the MBTA to implement the selected management strategy. Depending on
the location and landowners involved in implementation of the
management strategy, barred owl management could require additional
Federal and State permits. We anticipate the potential need for
implementors to acquire permits from the States of Washington, Oregon,
and California to carry out the proposed barred owl removal actions
under the proposed management strategy.
Public Involvement
The Service published a notice of intent to prepare an EIS, opening
a public scoping period on July 22, 2022 (87 FR 43886), which closed on
August 22, 2022. A virtual public scoping meeting was held July 28,
2022. The Service prepared a DEIS and opened a 60-day public comment
period on the DEIS and draft management strategy on November 17, 2023
(88 FR 80329). Two virtual public meetings were held, on December 4,
2023, and December 14, 2023, during the comment period, which ended on
January 16, 2024. A total of 8,613 public comments were received during
the DEIS comment period, including duplicates.
In preparing the FEIS, the Service considered all of the public
comments on the DEIS and draft strategy in accordance with the
requirements of NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and pursuant to the CEQ's
implementing NEPA regulations at 40 CFR parts 1500-1508.
Environmental Protection Agency's Role in the EIS Process
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged under section
309 of the Clean Air Act with reviewing all Federal agencies' EISs and
commenting on the adequacy and acceptability of the environmental
impacts of proposed actions. Under the CEQ NEPA regulations, EPA is
also responsible for administering the EIS filing process. EPA is
publishing a notice in the Federal Register announcing this FEIS. EPA
serves as the repository (EIS database) for EISs prepared by Federal
agencies. You may search for EPA comments on EISs, along with EISs
themselves, at https://cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/action/eis/search.
Next Steps and Decision To Be Made
The Service will evaluate the associated documents and public
comments received during the public comment periods in reaching a final
decision on the proposed management strategy and issuance of an MBTA
permit. At least 30 days after the FEIS is published, the Service
expects to complete a record of decision pursuant to 40 CFR 1505.2, in
accordance with applicable timeframes established in 40 CFR 1506.11.
The Service expects to issue a record of decision in August 2024.
Authority
We provide this notice in accordance with the requirements of NEPA
and its implementing regulations (40 CFR 1503.1 and 1506.6).
Hugh Morrison,
Regional Director, Pacific Region.
[FR Doc. 2024-14724 Filed 7-3-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P