Jump to main content.

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Revision of Special Regulation for the Central Idaho and Yellowstone Area Nonessential Experimental Populations of Gray Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains

Note: EPA no longer updates this information, but it may be useful as a reference or resource.


[Federal Register: September 11, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 175)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 51770-51771]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr11se07-25]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AV39

Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Revision of
Special Regulation for the Central Idaho and Yellowstone Area Nonessential
Experimental Populations of Gray Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of draft environmental assessment;
reopening of comment period on proposed revision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) have prepared
a draft environmental assessment (EA) of our proposal to revise the
2005 special rule for the central Idaho and Yellowstone area
nonessential experimental populations of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) in
the northern Rocky Mountains.
    The Service is reopening the comment period for the proposed
revisions to the 2005 special rule to allow all interested parties to
comment simultaneously on the proposed revisions and the draft EA. If
you have previously submitted comments on the proposed revisions, you
do not need to resubmit them because those comments have been
incorporated into the public record and will be fully considered in our
final decision.

DATES: We will accept public comments on the draft EA and the proposal
to revise the special regulation through October 11, 2007. Comments
received after the closing date will not be considered in our final
decision.

ADDRESSES:

Draft EA

    You may obtain a copy of the draft EA by writing us at: U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator, 585
Shepard Way, Helena, MT 59601 or by visiting our Web site at: 
http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/wolf/. If you wish
to comment on the draft EA, you may submit comments and materials,
identified by ``RIN 1018-AV39,'' by any of the following methods:
    1. You may mail or hand-deliver comments to the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator, 585 Shepard
Way, Helena, MT 59601.
    2. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) directly to
the Service at EA-WolfRuleChange@fws.gov. Include ``RIN 1018-AV39'' in
the subject line of the message.

Proposal To Revise 10(j) Special Rule

    You may also obtain a copy of the proposal to revise the 2005
special regulation by writing us at: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator, 585 Shepard Way, Helena, MT 59601
or by visiting our Web site at: http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/
species/mammals/wolf/ or http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/
proposal to revise the special regulation, you may submit comments and
materials, identified by ``RIN 1018-AV39,'' by any of the following
methods:
    1. You may mail or hand deliver written comments to the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service, Western Gray Wolf Recovery Coordinator, 585
Shepard Way, Helena, MT 59601.
    2. You may send comments by electronic mail (e-mail) directly to
the Service at WolfRuleChange@fws.gov. Include ``RIN 1018-AV39'' in the
subject line of the message.
    3. You may submit your comments through the Federal e-Rulemaking
Portal--http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the instructions for
submitting comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Edward E. Bangs, Western Gray Wolf
Recovery Coordinator, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, at our Helena
office (see ADDRESSES) or telephone (406) 449-5225, extension 204.
Persons who use a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf may call the
Federal Information Relay Service at (800) 877-8339, 24 hours a day, 7
days a week.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Public Comments Solicited

    We intend that any final action resulting from the proposal to
revise the 2005 special rule (see 72 FR 36942, July 6, 2007) for the
central Idaho and Yellowstone area populations of gray wolves in the
northern Rocky Mountains will be as accurate and as effective as
possible. Therefore, we are requesting data, comments, new information,
or suggestions from the public, other concerned governmental agencies,
Tribes, the scientific community, industry, or any other interested
party concerning the draft EA and proposed rule. We particularly seek
comments concerning (1) our draft EA as it analyzes effects of the
proposed rule; (2) our proposed modifications to the 2005 experimental
population rule to allow private citizens in States with approved post-
delisting wolf management plans to take wolves in the act of attacking
their stock animals or dogs; and (3) our proposal to establish a
reasonable process for States and Tribes with approved post-delisting
wolf management plans to allow removal of wolves that are scientifically
demonstrated to be impacting ungulate populations to the degree that they
are not meeting respective State and Tribal management goals.
    We specifically ask for comments regarding whether our draft EA
accurately analyzes impacts and alternatives. We are also specifically
requesting comments addressing whether the proposed rule modifications
would: (1) Reasonably address conflicts between wolves and domestic
animals or wild ungulate populations; (2) provide sufficient safeguards
to prevent misuse of the modified rule; (3) provide an appropriate and
transparent public process that ensures decisions are science-based; and
(4) provide adequate guarantees that wolf recovery will not be compromised.
    The draft EA has been prepared under the requirements of the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA). The
purpose of the EA is to analyze potential effects to physical and
biological resources and social and economic conditions that may result
from revisions to the special regulation for the management of gray
wolves introduced as nonessential experimental populations in the
northern Rocky Mountains. Furthermore, the EA serves to assist in
deciding whether the proposed action has a significant impact on the
human environment. If we determine that the proposed action results in
a significant impact, we will prepare an

[[Page 51771]]

environmental impact statement (EIS). Additionally, the EA describes
the alternatives to the proposed revisions, affected environment, and
environmental consequences of each of the alternatives.

Background

    On November 22, 1994, the Service designated unoccupied portions of
Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming as two nonessential experimental population
areas for the gray wolf (59 FR 60252) under section 10(j) of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act) (16 U.S.C. 1531 et
seq.). These special rules also provided management flexibility to
address potential negative impacts and concerns regarding wolf
reintroduction. In 1995 and 1996, the Service reintroduced gray wolves
into the two experimental population areas.
    This reintroduction and accompanying management programs greatly
expanded the numbers and distribution of wolves in the northern Rocky
Mountains. By the end of 2000, the northern Rocky Mountain population
met its numerical and distributional recovery goals and continued to
exceed it through 2006.
    On January 6, 2005, the Service published a revised nonessential
experimental population special rule increasing management flexibility
for these populations (70 FR 1286; 50 CFR 17.84(i) and (n)). The 2005
special rule included a mechanism for States and Tribes to resolve
conflicts when wolves were the primary cause of ``unacceptable
impacts'' to wild ungulate populations. Our definition of
``Unacceptable impact'' set a threshold that has not provided the
intended flexibility to allow States and Tribes to resolve conflicts
between wolves and ungulate populations.
    In order to set a more reasonable standard, the Service is
proposing to redefine the term ``Unacceptable impact'' to achieve the
intended management flexibility (72 FR 36942). Under the proposed
definition, lethal control of wolves would be allowed if wolves are
among the major causes of unacceptable impacts to ungulate populations,
rather than wolf predation being the primary cause as in the 2005
special rule.
    A State or Tribe must have a Service-approved post-delisting wolf
management plan in place before proposing to lethally control wolves
that are among the major causes of unacceptable impacts to ungulate
populations. The State or Tribe then must prepare a science-based
document that describes: (1) What data indicate that the ungulate herd
is below management objectives, (2) what data indicate the impact of
wolf predation on the ungulate population, (3) why wolf removal is a
warranted solution to help restore the ungulate herd to State or Tribal
management objectives, (4) the level and duration of wolf removal being
proposed, and (5) how the State or Tribe will measure ungulate
population response to wolf removal . The document also must identify
possible remedies or conservation measures in addition to wolf removal.
The State or Tribe must provide the opportunity for peer review and
public comment on its proposal before submitting it to the Service. The
Service then would determine whether such actions are scientifically
based and would not reduce the wolf population below 20 breeding pair
and 200 wolves in the state before authorizing lethal wolf removal.
    The Service also proposes to allow legally present private citizens
to take wolves that are in the act of attacking their ``stock animals''
(including horses, mules, donkeys, and llamas used to carry people or
possessions) or dogs on private and public land (72 FR 36942, July 6,
2007).

National Environmental Policy Act

    The draft EA describes the purpose of, and need for, the proposed
modifications to the 2005 10(j) special regulation, the Proposed Action
and alternatives, and an evaluation of the direct, indirect, and
cumulative effects of the alternatives under the requirements of NEPA.
The scope of the draft EA includes issues and resources within areas of
the two nonessential experimental populations of the gray wolf in the
northern Rocky Mountains.
    The Service will use the EA to decide whether or not the 2005 10(j)
special regulation will be modified as proposed, if the Proposed Action
requires refinement, or if further analyses are needed through
preparation of an EIS. If the Proposed Action as described, or with
minimal changes, is selected and no further environmental analyses are
needed, we will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact for the EA.
The Service's analyses in the draft EA indicate that no significant
impacts are likely to occur to wolf populations, ungulate populations,
associated ecosystems, or socio-economic factors as a result of the
proposed action.
    The alternatives that the Service has considered include the
following: (1) Alternative A (No Action Alternative); (2) Alternative B
(Proposed Action and Preferred Alternative), which modifies the 2005
special regulation, establishing a more flexible definition of
``Unacceptable impact'' on ungulate populations resulting from wolf
activity. Further modification is proposed to allow private citizens to
take wolves that are in the act of attacking their stock animals or
dogs; and (3) Alternative C, which modifies the definition of
``Unacceptable impact'' as in Alternative B, but not to include the
modification regarding wolves in conflict with stock animals and dogs.

    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 83 Stat. 852; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.

    Dated: August 31, 2007.
Jim Mosher,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. E7-17823 Filed 9-10-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P

 
 

Local Navigation

Jump to main content.