[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 94 (Tuesday, May 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 26045-26048]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-12013]



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



DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Interagency Memorandum of Understanding Concerning Animal Damage 
Control and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Compliance

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management; Interior.

ACTION: Notice of final memorandum of understanding.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management 
(BLM) and the Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service--Animal Damage Control (APHIS-ADC) have signed a 
Master Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that recognizes APHIS-ADC as 
the lead federal agency for the conduct of animal damage management on 
lands administered by the BLM. Specifically, the MOU assigns 
responsibility to APHIS-ADC for carrying out animal damage management, 
primarily for protection of livestock, including compliance with the 
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the issuance of records of 
decision. The MOU also recognizes the State's responsibilities for 
management of resident wildlife populations and the need for 
communication among the parties, the States, and other affected 
agencies such as the USDA Forest Service.

EFFECTIVE DATE: This MOU becomes effective May 16, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cal McCluskey, Bureau of Land 
Management, Wildlife, Fisheries, Rangeland and Forestland Group, 1849 C 
St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240; telephone (202) 452-7765.

Background Information

    On August 5, 1994 the BLM published for a 60-day public comment 
period, a draft MOU between BLM and APHIS-ADC outlining the proposed 
shift of responsibility for compliance with NEPA, ESA, and 
authorization of animal damage management actions on BLM administered 
lands to APHIS-ADC. The BLM received a total of 66 written comments 
from various sources. Approximately half (36) of the comments came from 
individuals, 20 from non-profit, nongovernment organizations and 10 
were received from either State or Federal agencies.
    A summary of the comments received, responses to the comments and a 
copy of the final MOU is provided in the following section.
Denise Meridith,
Acting Director.
    Comment: APHIS-ADC does not have any administrative appeals process 
thereby forcing individual citizens or organizations to resort to 
litigation in order to challenge a decision issued by APHIS-ADC on 
their control program.
    Response: The transfer of NEPA compliance and decision-making 
responsibility to APHIS-ADC does not eliminate the responsibility to 
obtain adequate public input into the decision-making process. APHIS-
ADC must consider issues presented to them during the NEPA process and 
comment period. APHIS recently published its new NEPA implementation 
procedures (60CFR 6000-05, February 1, 1995) which contain specific 
commitments to public involvement and notification during the NEPA 
process.
    Comment: The BLM should complete NEPA analysis using either an 
Environmental Assessment or Environmental Impact Statement before it 
makes a decision to transfer NEPA responsibilities and decision-making 
authority for animal damage control to APHIS-ADC as proposed by the 
MOU.
    Response: The development of policies, directives, regulations and 
guidelines of an administrative, financial, legal, technical or 
procedural nature, or environmental effects which are too broad, 
speculative or conjectural to lend themselves to meaningful analysis 
and that will be subject to the NEPA process, either collectively or 
case by case are categorically excluded from the NEPA process under 
[[Page 26046]] Department of the Interior Manual Section 516, Chapter 
2. The transfer of responsibilities to complete NEPA for animal damage 
management activities from the BLM to APHIS-ADC via the MOU is a 
decision that meets several of the above-listed criteria. The 
implementation of the MOU will result in the action-agency, in this 
case APHIS-ADC, being responsible for completing NEPA analysis on its 
program. In addition, site-specific NEPA analysis on individual ADC 
Plans will occur at the local level with involvement from the BLM, 
other appropriate agencies or organizations and individual citizens.
    Comment: The missions of APHIS-ADC and the BLM conflict. APHIS-ADC 
is responsible for carrying out animal damage management under the 
authority of the Animal Damage Control Act, as amended, while the BLM 
is responsible for multiple use management.
    Response: While it is true that the BLM and APHIS-ADC have 
different missions, the MOU provides a framework for coordinating 
activities and communicating information that needs to be considered in 
the NEPA process. The MOU states that APHIS-ADC will coordinate their 
activities annually with the BLM and other appropriate State and 
federal agencies and cooperate with the BLM in identification of human 
safety zones and other areas where mitigation or restriction may be 
required to comply with BLM Resource or Management Framework Plans 
(ie., land use plans).
    Comment: The MOU fails to state how often coordination between the 
two agencies will occur.
    Response: The draft MOU stated in section III (A), that the BLM 
shall cooperate with APHIS-ADC in the development and annual review of 
animal damage management plans affecting BLM lands and resources on 
those lands and ensure they are consistent with the Federal Land Policy 
and Management Act. In addition, Section IV (B) of the draft MOU stated 
the APHIS-ADC shall develop and update animal damage management annual 
plans in cooperation with BLM, appropriate State and federal agencies, 
permittees, and others. Section III (A) of the final MOU is essentially 
unchanged. Section IV (B) has been modified to more clearly state that 
APHIS-ADC shall annually review and update as needed, ADC plans in 
cooperation with the BLM, appropriate State and federal agencies, 
permittees and others.
    Comment: APHIS-ADC will conduct animal damage control programs 
without public input.
    Response: As a federal agency, APHIS-ADC is subject to the same 
public involvement requirements under the National Environmental Policy 
Act as any other agency. We have no reason to believe that APHIS-ADC 
will not provide adequate opportunities for public involvement and 
comment. In addition, section IV (B) of the MOU clearly states the 
APHIS-ADC agrees to ensure that coordination between all appropriate 
State and federal agencies, permittees, and others will occur.
    Comment: APHIS-ADC lacks sufficient staff to complete NEPA analysis 
for its program at a site-specific level.
    Response: The BLM is not in a position to evaluate the capabilities 
of APHIS-ADC staff. We are generally aware that APHIS-ADC has 
accelerated training on NEPA for their field personnel over the past 
two years and that additional funds have been allocated to 
implementation of NEPA. In addition, in accordance with the MOU, the 
BLM has agreed to provide information and assistance to APHIS-ADC for 
the NEPA process, when requested.
    Comment: The transfer of NEPA compliance for animal damage 
management on BLM lands from the BLM to APHIS-ADC is a violation of the 
Federal Land Policy and Management Act.
    Response: The Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 
(FLPMA), 43 U.S.C. section 1701 et seq., authorizes the Secretary of 
the Interior to manage the public lands under principles of multiple 
use and sustained yield. The Secretary, in managing the public lands, 
is subject to other applicable law, such as the Animal Damage Control 
Act as amended (7 U.S.C. 426-426(c)). FLPMA also allows the Secretary 
to permit other Federal agencies to use public lands through 
cooperative agreements. 43 U.S.C. 1732.
    The Animal Damage Control Act, as amended, gives the Secretary of 
Agriculture, among other things, the authority to conduct campaigns for 
the destruction or control of predatory animals on public and private 
lands. It also provides that the Secretary may cooperate with public 
agencies, States and others.
    Both APHIS-ADC and the BLM must comply with a variety of federal 
environmental laws such as the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act, 
and the National Environmental Policy Act or NEPA. NEPA directs all 
Federal agencies to use systematic interdisciplinary approach in 
planning and authorizing activities that affect the human environment. 
The transfer of NEPA compliance for animal damage management activities 
performed by APHIS-ADC will not diminish or eliminate compliance 
requirements for these important environmental statutes. It will only 
place responsibility for compliance with the action-agency, in this 
case APHIS-ADC, with full cooperation and coordination with the land 
management agency, in this case the BLM.
    Comment: APHIS-ADC is not required to consider biological needs of 
ecosystems on BLM lands.
    Response: APHIS-ADC, like the BLM, is required to comply with the 
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. This statute 
established a national policy for the protection and enhancement of the 
environment. NEPA directs all Federal agencies to use a systematic 
interdisciplinary approach, which ensures integration of natural and 
social sciences and environmental design arts in planning and decisions 
that affect the human environment. In addition, Executive Order 11514, 
Protection and Enhancement of Environmental Quality, directed heads of 
Federal agencies to monitor, evaluate, and control their activities to 
protect and enhance the quality of the environment.
    Comment: APHIS-ADC activities should conform to State laws.
    Response: We are not aware of any APHIS-ADC activities that do not 
conform to State laws. However, the BLM is not in a position to dictate 
to another Federal agency what its statutory obligations or commitments 
are under existing State law.
    Comment: The BLM should retain the decision-making authority for 
animal damage management activities carried out on public lands.
    Response: APHIS-ADC is the Federal agency with the expertise and 
authority under the Animal Damage Control Act of March 2, 1931, as 
amended, for providing wildlife damage management services. This 
includes maintaining technical expertise in the science of wildlife 
damage management, control tools and techniques, conducting research, 
management programs, and NEPA compliance for APHIS-ADC activities 
related to predator control protection on public lands. Both the BLM 
and APHIS-ADC recognize that without proper management, damage in the 
form of livestock predation, big game predation, range, watershed and 
forest resource destruction, and negative impacts to human health and 
safety can occur. Both agencies have an interest in limiting this 
damage caused by, and to wildlife, so as to protect other multiple-use 
objectives. They also agree that in [[Page 26047]] evaluating the need 
for, and in conducting wildlife damage management programs, multiple-
use objectives must be considered.
    In addition, both agencies recognize that the States are 
responsible for managing the resident wildlife within their respective 
borders on land owned by the United States under control and 
jurisdiction of the BLM. The State responsibilities include regulation 
of wildlife populations so the habitat on public lands will remain 
productive for future wildlife populations. The BLM is responsible for 
managing wildlife habitat, not wildlife populations. The MOU 
establishes a framework for close coordination and cooperation between 
APHIS-ADC, the BLM and the State agencies with legal authorities for 
managing resident wildlife species.
    Comment: The transfer of NEPA responsibility and authorization to 
APHIS-ADC for animal damage management activities by it on BLM lands 
will result in increased impacts to nontarget or threatened and 
endangered species.
    Response: APHIS-ADC is responsible for compliance with applicable 
State and Federal environmental laws including the Endangered Species 
Act for animal damage management activities it conducts. APHIS-ADC will 
be responsible for evaluating and disclosing the impacts of their 
program through the NEPA process. In addition, through annual 
coordination with the BLM and other appropriate State and Federal 
agencies, data on livestock losses, harvest of target and nontarget 
animals and sensitive habitats will be reviewed and evaluated, and if 
needed, adjustments to animal damage control activities will be 
implemented by APHIS-ADC. In those areas where federally listed 
threatened or endangered species occur, site-specific activities will 
be evaluated and reviewed by the Fish and Wildlife Service in 
compliance with the Section 7 process of the Endangered Species Act. 
Through annual coordination, the BLM will provide any information on 
sensitive species and habitats that should be considered in the 
decision-making process, including any land use restrictions that are 
needed to comply with applicable Resource or Management Framework 
Plans.
    The following is the final MOU which reflects several changes that 
resulted from the comments received on the draft.

Master Memorandum of Understanding Between the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, United States Department of Agriculture and the 
Bureau of Land Management, United States Department of the Interior

    This Master Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), is made and entered 
into by and between the United States Department of the Interior, 
Bureau of Land Management, hereinafter referred to as the BLM, and 
United States Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service-Animal Damage Control, hereinafter referred to as 
APHIS-ADC.
I. Purpose

    The purpose of this MOU is: (1) To establish general guidelines to 
assist field personnel in carrying out their wildlife damage management 
responsibilities consistent with the policies of BLM and APHIS-ADC; (2) 
to strengthen the cooperative approach to wildlife damage management on 
BLM lands through exchange of information and mutual program support; 
and (3) to reaffirm working relationships with State governments and 
(4) to identify responsibilities in compliance with the National 
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of the respective agencies and foster a 
partnership in discharging the federal commitment under the Animal 
Damage Control Act of March 2, 1931 (46 Stat. 1468, 7 U.S.C. 426-426b), 
as amended, for the management of wild vertebrates causing damage on 
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands in accordance with the Federal 
Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) 43 U.S.C. Section 1201 et seq.

II. Statement of Mutual Interest and Responsibilities

    The parties recognize the importance of effective animal damage 
control on lands under the administrative jurisdiction of the BLM 
including control of predation by individual animals and/or local 
populations to achieve land and resource management objectives. 
Further, it is mutually recognized that the tools and procedures 
available to APHIS-ADC for managing populations must be used in a 
professional manner according to a wildlife damage management plan 
developed in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA), Endangered Species Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act, 
and the Animal Damage Control Act.
    Both agencies recognize that without proper management, damage in 
the form of livestock predation, big game predation, range, watershed 
and forest resource destruction, and negative impacts to human health 
and safety can occur. Both agencies have an interest in limiting this 
damage caused by, and to wildlife, so as to protect other multiple-use 
objectives. They also agree that in evaluating the need for, and in 
conducting wildlife damage management programs, multiple-use objectives 
must be considered.
    The parties also recognized that:
    A. The BLM administers public lands located primarily in the 
western States and Alaska amounting to about 270 million acres. These 
lands and resources are managed under multiple-use principles providing 
for a variety of uses, including timber harvesting, recreation, 
livestock grazing, mining and mineral development and fish and wildlife 
habitat management under the laws of Congress and regulations of the 
Department of the Interior.
    B. The States are responsible for managing the resident wildlife 
within their respective borders on land owned by the United States 
under control and including jurisdiction of the BLM. The BLM is 
responsible for managing habitat. For purposes of this agreement, the 
term ``wildlife'' shall not include wild horses or burros, as defined 
in Public Law 92-195 dated December 15, 1971.
    C. APHIS-ADC is the agency with the expertise and authority under 
the Animal Damage Control Act of March 2, 1931, as amended, and the 
Rural Development, Agriculture and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 
of 1988 for providing wildlife damage management services. This 
includes maintaining technical expertise in the science of wildlife 
damage management, control tools and techniques, and conducting 
research and management programs.
    To implement the foregoing, the parties agree as follows where BLM 
lands are involved:

III. The BLM Shall

    A. Cooperate with APHIS-ADC in the development and annual review of 
wildlife damage management plans affecting BLM lands and resources on 
those lands and ensure they are consistent with FLPMA.
    B. Cooperate with the APHIS-ADC to identify areas on BLM lands 
where mitigation or restrictions may be needed to comply with BLM's 
Resource or Management Framework Plans.
    C. When requested, provide information and assistance to APHIS-ADC 
during the NEPA processes.
    D. Complete NEPA compliance for nonpredator wildlife damage 
[[Page 26048]] management activities initiated by BLM to protect 
natural resources and facilities.

IV. The APHIS-ADC Shall

    A. Evaluate wildlife damage management needs in cooperation with 
State agencies and permittees.
    B. Annually review and update as needed, wildlife damage management 
plans in cooperation with the BLM, appropriate State and federal 
agencies, permittees, and others. Cooperate with the BLM to identify 
areas where mitigation or restriction may be needed to comply with 
BLM's Resource or Management Framework Plans.
    C. Complete necessary NEPA documents and decision records on 
activities related to predator control primarily for livestock 
protection on BLM lands.
    D. Conduct activities on BLM lands in accordance with APHIS-ADC 
policies, wildlife damage management plans, applicable State and 
Federal laws and regulations, and consistent with BLM Resource or 
Management Framework Plans.
    E. Provide the BLM with technical information on recommended 
wildlife damage management tools and techniques, when requested.

V. It Is Mutually Agreed by the Parties That

    A. The parties will participate, as needed, in State agreements 
relating to wildlife damage management on BLM lands with the 
appropriate State and federal agencies.
    B. The parties will ensure interagency coordination and review of 
the effects of wildlife damage management activities on BLM lands and 
resources before APHIS-ADC makes decisions on management plans that it 
develops.
    C. The parties will meet on a State or regional basis annually or 
more often if needed, to coordinate management operations. 
Representation shall be by the BLM State Director and the APHIS-ADC 
Regional or State Director. The BLM and APHIS-ADC may agree to have 
other parties or agencies with shared or related responsibilities be 
present at these annual meetings such as the State Wildlife Agency 
Director, State Departments of Agriculture and the Forest Service 
Regional Forester or their designated representatives.
    D. The parties will elevate any problems regarding implementation 
of this agreement that cannot be resolved to the next higher level for 
resolution.
    E. This MOU shall supersede all existing MOUs between APHIS-ADC and 
BLM and supplements and amendments thereto, relating to the conduct of 
wildlife damage management programs by the parties on BLM lands.
    F. Nothing in this MOU is intended to modify in any manner the 
present cooperative programs of either agency with States, other public 
agencies, or educational institutions.
    G. This MOU is neither a fiscal nor a funds obligation document. 
Any endeavor involving reimbursement or contribution of funds between 
the parties to this MOU will be handled in accordance with applicable 
laws, regulations, and procedures including those for Government 
procurement and printing. Such endeavors will be outlined in separate 
agreements that shall be made in writing by representatives of the 
parties and shall be independently authorized by appropriate statutory 
authority. This MOU does not provide such authority.
    H. Nothing in this memorandum shall obligate either the BLM or 
APHIS-ADC to expend appropriations or to enter into any contract or 
other obligations.
    I. All wildlife damage management activities on BLM lands will be 
coordinated with appropriate State and Federal agencies.
    J. This MOU may be modified or amended upon written consent of both 
parties or may be terminated by either party with 30-day written notice 
to the other party.
    K. The principal contacts for this agreement are:

Cal McCluskey, Senior Wildlife Biologist, Department of the Interior, 
Bureau of Land Management, Wildlife, Fisheries, Rangeland, and Forestry 
(WO 330), 1849 C N.W. (LSB Rm. 204), Washington, D.C. 20240, Phone #: 
202-452-7765
Donald Hawthorne Associate Deputy Administrator, USDA Animal & Plant 
Health, Inspection Service, P.O. Box 96464, Washington, D.C. 20090, 
Phone #: 202-720-2054.

VI. Effective Date

    In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this MOU as of 
the last written date below.

    Dated: March 21, 1994.

U.S. Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management.
Denise P. Meridith,
Director.
    Dated: March 21, 1995.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Service.
Lonnie J. King,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 95-12013 Filed 5-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-84-P