Laserfiche WebLink
Federal Register/Vol. 69, No. 168/Tuesday, August 31, 2004/Rules and Regulations 53221 <br />established for all known owl pairs. <br />Thus, any impacts from management <br />activities to either PACs or owl habitat <br />will trigger section 7 consultation due to <br />the Federal involvement of the BIA, <br />regardless of critical habitat designation, <br />since the areas are presently occupied <br />by the owl. <br />The SCA Tribe participates on the <br />Upper Gila RU workgroup, which <br />ensures the timely sharing of <br />management information. The Tribe <br />also developed a Statement of <br />Relationship with us that was approved <br />by the Tribal Council and formally <br />identifies and fosters our working <br />relationship through government -to- <br />government consultations and activities. <br />The formal signing ceremony between <br />the Service and the Tribe is being <br />planned. <br />During our discussions with the Tribe <br />for the economic analysis, the Tribe <br />advised us that their lands are actively <br />managed for commercial timber harvest <br />to provide materials for their sawmill. <br />Any delays or reductions in timber <br />harvest stemming from a designation of <br />critical habitat could result in fewer jobs <br />and revenue for the SCA. <br />The designation of critical habitat <br />would be expected to adversely impact <br />our working relationship with the SCA <br />Tribe. The Tribe believes that additional <br />Federal regulation through critical <br />habitat designation is unwarranted and <br />an unwanted intrusion into their tribal <br />natural resource programs. Our working <br />relationship with the SCA Tribe has <br />been extremely beneficial in <br />implementing natural resource <br />programs of mutual interest, including <br />programs on other Tribal lands (e.g., <br />Jicarilla Apache, White Mountain <br />Apache, Southern Ute). Because the <br />SCA Tribe is committed to <br />implementing these activities, we find <br />that the SCA Conservation Plan <br />provides significant conservation <br />benefits to the owl. <br />(2) The Navajo Nation Management <br />Plan for the Mexican Spotted Owl <br />(Navajo MSO Management Plan): The <br />Navajo Nation stated in their November <br />9, 2000, letter to the Service conveying <br />the Navajo MSO Management Plan for <br />the owl, that it was developed to meet <br />the Service's desire to "support tribal <br />measures that preclude the need for <br />federal conservation regulations." The <br />Navajo MSO Management Plan was <br />approved by the Navajo Nation Council, <br />which has oversight of the Division of <br />Natural Resources and is empowered to <br />establish Navajo Nation policy with <br />respect to natural resources. The Navajo <br />MSO Management Plan describes the <br />Navajo Nation's management scheme <br />that has been in effect since the listing <br />of the owl: the known and potential <br />habitat for the owl on the Navajo <br />Nation; threats to the species; and future <br />management practices. Except for the <br />few exceptions detailed below, the <br />Navajo MSO Management Plan follows <br />the recommendations of the Recovery <br />Plan. <br />We have received a redacted version <br />of the Navajo MSO Management Plan <br />(Navajo Nation 2000). We reviewed the <br />document in early 2001 and again for <br />this final rule and find that it provides <br />a conservation benefit to the owl and its <br />habitat. The Navajo MSO Management <br />Plan is designed to effectively manage <br />the owl on the Navajo Nation using <br />accepted conservation techniques, <br />especially those recommended in the <br />Recovery Plan. The following practices <br />are used to protect and manage the owl <br />on the Navajo Nation: (1) Mandatory <br />pre - action owl protocol surveys; (2) <br />Federal agency section 7 consultations <br />for proposed projects; (3) establishment <br />of 600 -ac (243 -ha) PACs around all <br />recent and historic owl sites; and (4) the <br />Tribal project approval process, <br />including requiring that all non - Federal <br />activities avoid taking owls (Navajo <br />Nation Moo). To date, very few projects <br />have altered owl habitat on the Navajo <br />Nation and none have occurred without <br />section 7 consultation. <br />The Navajo MSO Management Plan <br />also lists the following threats to the owl <br />and possible management responses to <br />minimize the majority of these impacts: <br />(1) Abandoned mine reclamation; (2) <br />commercial timber harvest; (3) fire <br />management; (4) fuelwood harvest; (5) <br />grazing; (6) homesite development; (7) <br />coal mining; (8) recreation; (9) road <br />building and reconstruction; and (10) <br />other developments and activities. <br />We initiated formal consultation on <br />the Navajo MSO Management Plan in <br />2003, and provided a draft biological <br />opinion to the BIA and the Navajo <br />Nation. The Navajo MSO Management <br />Plan follows nearly all of the <br />recommendations of the Recovery Plan, <br />except for those detailed below. The <br />economic analysis also found that the <br />BIA expects to undergo several large - <br />scale consultations with the Service in <br />the near future for various related <br />management plans, including <br />continuing consultation on the Navajo <br />Forest Management Plan (which is a <br />programmatic plan for timber <br />harvesting) and the Navajo Nation Fire <br />Management Plan. The Navajo Forest <br />Management Plan is still undergoing <br />review by the BIA. The Service will also <br />be completing formal consultation on <br />the plans. <br />The Recovery Plan recommendations <br />that will not be followed include those <br />that address: (1) Grazing within other <br />forest and woodland types; (2) <br />uncontrolled grazing within riparian <br />communities of restricted areas; and (3) <br />small amounts of uncontrolled <br />recreation. In addition, there is no pine - <br />oak forest habitat, as defined in the <br />Recovery Plan, on lands of the Navajo <br />Nation; therefore, there is no need for it <br />to be addressed in the Navajo Nation's <br />MSO Management Plan. We <br />acknowledge that those activities <br />enumerated above do not follow the <br />recommendations of the Recovery Plan, <br />but still find that compliance with the <br />other aspects of the Recovery Plan <br />provides conservation benefits to the <br />owl. We reached this conclusion <br />because we anticipate that when the <br />BIA issues grazing permits and <br />determines that the activities "may <br />affect" the owl, they will consult with <br />us. We do not consult with the Navajo <br />Nation on uncontrolled grazing or <br />recreation because there is no Federal <br />nexus or discretion that would require <br />section 7 consultation. Thus, critical <br />habitat would not affect the outcome of <br />these activities. <br />The recommendations of the Recovery <br />Plan will be followed by the Tribe for <br />nearly all actions that occur within <br />PACs (except unregulated grazing and <br />recreation). Other examples of measures <br />to minimize or avoid impacts include <br />deferred treatments of areas during the <br />owl's breeding season (March 1 through <br />August 31), a 0.25 mi (0.4 km) buffer of <br />nesting or roosting habitat, and the <br />development of a 100 -ac (40.5 -ha) no <br />habitat alteration core area around <br />known nest or roost sites during March <br />1 through August 31. Moreover, the <br />Navajo MSO Management Plan <br />minimizes impacts associated with <br />human activities, and controlled burns <br />would be planned to follow the <br />Recovery Plan recommendations for <br />protected and restricted habitat and <br />other forest and woodland types. <br />The Navajo Nation currently <br />participates on the Colorado Plateau <br />Recovery Unit Working Team. This <br />relationship allows ideas, information, <br />and concerns to be incorporated into <br />management actions for the recovery of <br />the owl. Participation in this working <br />team also facilitates dialogue between <br />other land management agencies, the <br />Service, and the Navajo Nation. <br />Similar to other Tribes (see discussion <br />above), the Navajo Nation officials have <br />indicated that the designation of critical <br />habitat on their lands would be <br />expected to adversely impact the <br />working relationship with the Service, <br />which has been extremely beneficial in <br />implementing natural resource <br />programs of mutual interest. <br />