WSP09638 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

., Ul1l113J Federal Register / Vol. 67, No, 235/ Friday, December 6, 2002/ Proposed Rules 72785 promote the recOI.'ery of federally listed threatened and endangered species. provide for implementing conservation agreements, and address requirements and recommendations from biological opinions. These requirements are not included under either Option 1 or Option 2 or the proposed rule. The agency reaffirms its commitment to comply with provisions of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), includmg conducting programs for the conservation of endangered and threatened species consistent with the multiple use objectives of plans. but sees no reason to specify this in the rule itself. The ESA is among the relevant statutes listed under 219.2(c)(1). Following adoplion of a final new planning rule, and contingent on which diversity option is selected, the agency fully intends to develop detailed operational guidance on the means to implement the procedural requirements of the new planning rule, particularly with reference to procedures for meeting the NFr...1A diversity requirement. This will include detailed guidance in the agency Directive System, as well as "white papers" and other documents. Option 7-'i219,13(b) Ecological Component of Sustainability Option 1 of the proposed rule is most similar to corresponding sections on ecological sustainability in the 2000 rule. In fact. Option 1 was developed from the 2000 rule by significantly streamlining the rule and eliminating significant amounts of procedural detail, as discussed earlier in this preamble. In this option, plan decisions would be developed to provide a high likelihood of supporting, over time, the viability of native and desired non-native vertebrates and vascular plants well distributed within their ranges in the plan area. This viability standard serves as the primary basis for judging achievement of the NFMA diversity requirement in Option 1. This option also contains an ecosystem diversity standard, so that plan decisions would be developed to provide measurable progress toward maintenance or restoration of ecological conditions that support the desired characteristics of ecosystem diversity. However. it is the species viability standard that will provide the clearest measure of achievement of the NFMA diversity requirement under Option 1. Under this option of the proposed rule, analysis of the ecological component of sustainability follows a hierarchical. sequential approach. This option requires ecosystem diversity to be evaluated first, with the goal of ensuring that plan decisions provide measurable progress toward maintaining or restoring ecological conditions that support the diversity of plant and animal communities and tree species. and other characteristics of ecosystem diversity. Species diversity wouid be evaluated only after consideration of ecosystem diversity. This hierarchical, sequential approach is based on the assumption that conditions capable of supporting viability for most species are likely to be met through provisions for ecosystem diversity. Where this LS not the case, species at risk would be identified and separate analyses of species diversity performed. This approach provides the Responsible Official flexible options for meeting the analytical requirements of Option 1 as the Responsible Official determines the scope and scale of the analysis. There are some required characteristics of ecosystem and species diversity and accompanying evaluation factors, although far fewer than in the 2000 rule. The Responsible Official is not limited to only those characteristics or analytical processes if other information or techniques are available or appropriate. The desired conditions, objectives. standards, identification of suitable and unsuitable land uses, and any special designations and other management areas of fl plfln should provide the framework for management that would maintain or restore ecological conditions that the Responsible Official determines will provide a high likelihood of supporting, over time, the viability of native and desired non- native vertebrates and vascular plants well distributed within their ranges in the plan area. Note that "high likelihood" is not necessarily a statistical or mathematical determination. Rather, it is an application of expert agency judgment based on a reasonable review and consideration of available information. Option 2-fi279, 13(b) Ecological Component of Sustainability The second option for addressing the ecological component of sustainability was developed initially by agency research scientists to provide a clear and distinct alternative to Option 1. Several specific objectives or perspectives inOucnced development of Option 2. including: (1) Focus required ecological analyses. as well as the final management standard against which plan decisions are to be judged, at both ecosystem and species levels of ecological organization: (2) require analyses of diversity across multiple geographic areas and timeframes, and especially stress the importance of analyses conducted over large geographic areas or long timeframes; (3) emphasize the inl1uence of the ecological condition. structure, and land use history of the surrounding landscape, as well as of natural and human-induced disturbance regimes, on the ability to manage NFS lands to achieve biological diversity objectives: and (4) require a more rigorous and structured set of analyses of diversity than contained in Option 1. Option 2 focuses attention on the general objective of maintaining and restoring ecological conditions that provide for biological diversity in the plan area and on the more specific objective of maintaining and restoring ecosystem diversity within landscapes, and within the framework of larger-scale ecosystem analyses, of maintaining and restoring species diversity within ecosystems. In this sense. Option 2 adopts an explicitly hierarchical approach to analyses of biological diversity. as does Option 1. Option 2 focuses allention directly 011 evaluating and maintaining biological diversity in the planning or assessment area. Biological diversity is an inclusive concept employed in the scientific and conservation literature to refer to the variety of living things together with their interactions and processes. It is defined at various levels of ecological organization, but especially three- genes. species, and ecosystems. The general concept of biological diversity incorporates the concept of the diversity of plant and animal communities and tree species as originally used in the language of the NFMA diversity requirement. However, the term "biological diversity" also reflects significant progress in the sciences of ecology and conservation biology over the past 20-25 years. Scientific progress in these fields has revealed substantial new information such as factors that regulate biological diversity and the relationship between biological diversity and ecosystem function and resilience. As a consequence, and consistent with progress in scientific knowledge and conservation practice, the overriding objective ofthEl approach in Option 2 is to focus planning analyses on factors that foster the maintenance and restoration of biological diversity in the planning or assessment area, at both ecosystem and species levels of ecological organization, Option 2 directs the Responsible Official. in the planning process. to follow and fully disclose results of a structured approach to considering and assessing biological diversity at two levels of ecological organization: ecosystem and species. Analyses of