[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 107 (Monday, June 3, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27978-27982]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-13678]
[[Page 27977]]
_______________________________________________________________________
Part III
Department of the Interior
Fish and Wildlife Service
Department of Commerce
National Marine Fisheries Service
_______________________________________________________________________
Notice of Policy for Conserving Species Listed or Proposed for Listing
Under the Endangered Species Act While Providing and Enhancing
Recreational Fisheries Opportunities; Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 61, No. 107 / Monday, June 3, 1996 /
Notices
[[Page 27978]]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Marine Fisheries Service
Notice of Policy for Conserving Species Listed or Proposed for
Listing Under the Endangered Species Act While Providing and Enhancing
Recreational Fisheries Opportunities
AGENCIES: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior; National Marine
Fisheries Service, Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of policy.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine
Fisheries Service (Services) have adopted a policy that will address
the conservation needs of species listed, or proposed to be listed,
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (ESA) while
providing for the continuation and enhancement of recreational
fisheries. This policy identifies measures the Services will take to
ensure consistency in the administration of the ESA between and within
the two agencies, promote collaboration with other Federal, State, and
Tribal fisheries managers, and improve and increase efforts to inform
nonfederal entities of the requirements of the ESA while enhancing
recreational fisheries. This policy meets the requirements set forth in
Section 4 of Executive Order 12962, Recreational Fisheries.
EFFECTIVE DATE: July 3, 1996.
ADDRESSES: The complete record pertaining to this action is available
for inspection, by appointment, during normal business hours at the
Division of Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401
North Fairfax Drive, Room 452, Arlington, Virginia 22203 (telephone
703/358-2171).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: E. LaVerne Smith, Chief, Division of
Endangered Species, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (703/358-2171), or
Patricia Montanio, Acting Director, Office of Protected Resources,
National Marine Fisheries Service (301/713-1401).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The ESA specifically charges the Secretaries of the Interior and
Commerce with the responsibility to identify, protect, manage, and
recover species of plants and animals in danger of extinction. The ESA
also specifically identifies the protection and conservation of
ecosystems upon which federally listed species depend as among the
legislation's purposes (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531(1)).
In addition to the ESA, many Federal laws recognize the importance
of aquatic resources (e.g., Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act, Anadromous Fish Conservation Act, Federal
Water Project Recreation Act, Federal Aid in Sport Fish Restoration
Act, National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966,
Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Marine Sanctuaries
Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, National Recreation Act of 1962, and
National Environmental Policy Act). These laws outline the roles of
Federal agencies to protect, restore, and conserve aquatic resources,
and to provide for and enhance fisheries and recreational uses; some
apply only to activities undertaken, permitted, licensed, or funded by
a Federal agency.
Most of North America's aquatic environments and biological
communities have been significantly altered by human impacts. Degraded
habitats have reduced the capacity of aquatic ecosystems to support
former diversity and abundance of native fish and other freshwater
species. Degraded and altered habitats are the most frequently cited
factors contributing to population extirpation and decline among
federally protected endangered and threatened aquatic species.
Likewise, losses of suitable aquatic habitats have resulted in
significant declines among many native recreational and non-game fish
species and other aquatic organisms.
As of May 1, 1996, within the United States, 106 taxa of fish and
57 species of freshwater mussels were on the Federal threatened or
endangered species list (50 CFR 17.11 & 17.12). Approximately 36
percent of the fishes, 64 percent of the crayfishes, and 69 percent of
the freshwater mussels in the United States are considered imperiled or
extinct (data from the National Network of Natural Heritage Programs
and Conservation Data Centers and The Nature Conservancy, Eastern
Regional Office, Boston, Massachusetts).
The Services recognize that fishery resources and aquatic
ecosystems are integral components of our heritage and play an
important role in the Nation's social, cultural, and economic well-
being. Annually, approximately 50 million anglers spend $24 billion
directly on tackle, equipment, food and lodging, and other recreational
fishing-related expenses. The total economic output (wholesale, retail,
manufacturing, and supply of goods and services) stimulated by
recreational angler spending exceeded $69 billion in 1991. Those
expenditures generated over $2.1 billion in Federal tax revenues, and
provided employment for approximately 1.3 million people nation-wide.
In the past, resource managers may not have understood many of the
effects of some management actions on ecosystems to the extent they do
today. Habitat alteration and degradation, heavy fishing pressure, and
introduction of non-native species often resulted in unexpected
negative impacts to other ecosystem components. As today's managers
realize more fully the impacts of their actions, they also realize that
they must be more cautious in the activities they prescribe in natural
ecosystems. The benefits gained by some actions may result in losses to
non-target species or habitats. This has led to conflicts between some
efforts to conserve native species and their communities, and
obligations to maintain and enhance recreational fishing opportunities.
These issues have been of particular concern in those instances where
the Services' responsibilities for both recreational fisheries and
recovery of federally protected species have been in conflict.
The altered condition of many aquatic ecosystems limits their
ability to support fish and other aquatic organisms. Successful future
management of the Nation's aquatic resources must become more focused
on an ecosystem approach to management that recognizes multiple uses of
aquatic systems. Management of biological resources must be based on a
sound scientific understanding of species' life histories, habitat
requirements, and ecosystem processes. Resource managers and
administrators must recognize the intrinsic, aesthetic, recreational,
and economic importance of these same resources and assess their
ability to meet the needs and desires of a variety of interests.
Successful future management of aquatic resources requires substantive
cooperative partnerships and a willingness to resolve differences among
the Services and other Federal agencies, States, Native American
governments, and private stakeholders. Such cooperation and problem
solving must be based on a framework of mutually recognized concerns
and common goals developed by all the stakeholders in a given area.
On June 7, 1995, President Clinton issued Executive Order 12962,
Recreational Fisheries. That order requires Federal agencies, to the
extent permitted by law and where practical and in cooperation with
States and
[[Page 27979]]
Tribes, to improve the quantity, function, sustainable productivity,
and distribution of U.S. aquatic resources for increased recreational
fishing opportunities. Among other actions, the order requires all
Federal agencies to aggressively work to promote compatibility and
reduce conflict between administration of the ESA and recreational
fisheries.
Summary of Comments and Recommendations
The Services' draft policy on this subject was published on
December 13, 1995 (60 FR 64070) and public comment was invited. The
Services reviewed all comments received, and suggestions and
clarifications have been incorporated into this final policy text. The
following describes the comments received and the Services' responses.
The Services received 28 letters of comment from individuals and
organizations on the draft policy. Twenty three letters of comment were
supportive. Four letters were critical of aspects of the policy. One
letter stated no position on the draft policy. The major issues raised
and the Services' responses are identified and discussed below.
Issue: The draft policy does not explicitly assert the authority of
the ESA and the specific obligations of Federal agencies, including the
Services, to conserve and recover Federally listed species. The primary
emphasis of the draft policy appears to be on moderating ESA
conservation mandates.
Services' Response: Appropriate clarifications of the Services' ESA
responsibilities were made in the text of the policy.
The Services do not intend that this policy diminish or abrogate
Federal agency responsibilities under the ESA. This has been stated at
the beginning of the Policy. The Services recognize that the primary
goal of the ESA is ``conservation,'' defined as: ``the use of all
methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered
species or threatened species to the point at which the measures
provided pursuant to this Act are no longer necessary.'' The Services
and other Federal agencies are aware of their responsibilities ``[to]
utilize their authorities in furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA]
by carrying out programs for the conservation of endangered species and
threatened species [.]''
Section 4 of the Executive Order 12962 directed the Services to
develop this policy. Section 4 of E.O. 12962 also instructs all Federal
agencies to ``aggressively work to identify and minimize conflicts
between recreational fisheries and their respective responsibilities
under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.'' The Services will meet,
within the requirements of the ESA, such challenges with the intent to
resolve conflicts without disadvantage to either conservation of listed
species or recreational fisheries interests.
Issue: By developing this policy the Services have singled out
recreational fishing interests for favorable treatment relative to
administration and implementation of the ESA. Other interests affected
by implementation of the ESA should be offered similar opportunities
for development of formal policy.
Services' Response: The Services have developed guidance, position
statements, and policies, and are developing rulemakings to reduce
conflicts associated with administration of the ESA among a broad range
of interests. These include the Administration's ``Ten Principles for
Federal Endangered Species Act Policy,'' a series of guiding tenets
within the Departments of the Interior and Commerce to provide a fair,
cooperative, and scientifically sound approach to the management of
Federally listed species recovery. They include such policies as the
Services' joint policies on peer review (59 FR 34270); information
standards (59 FR 34271); recovery plan participation (59 FR 34272); the
Services' ecosystem approach (59 FR 34273); and effectively enhancing
the role of State agencies in ESA activities (59 FR 34274). Additional
policies and handbooks, addressing such issues as habitat conservation
planning and incentives for private landowners to become involved in
conserving listed species are being developed. The Services, singularly
or jointly, also have developed numerous Memoranda of Understanding or
Agreement, and other instruments with other Federal agencies, States,
local governments, and private entities to cooperatively conserve and
recover listed species. These provide flexibility to a number of
interests and enhance opportunities for affected interests to
participate in administration and implementation of the ESA.
This policy comes at the direction of Section 4 of Executive Order
12962. Development of this policy is appropriate because issues that
involve Federally listed aquatic species and conservation of aquatic
habitats, including recreational fisheries issues, are national in
scope. In some instances these issues are international. This policy
does not alter any ESA obligations, but does minimize administrative
problems and maximizes management communications.
Issue: The draft policy would extend fishery goals beyond recovery
of threatened and endangered fish stocks and seek higher population
levels to support sustainable recreational fisheries.
Services' Response: This policy would not extend fishery goals
under the ESA beyond recovery criteria as identified in recovery plans.
However, fisheries managers will continue to seek sustainable
recreational fisheries, with or without this policy.
Issue: The draft policy focuses too much on habitat issues, thereby
failing to present a balanced and accurate account of the various
factors that have contributed to the decline of our Nation's fisheries
resources. Natural environmental factors also have played a role in
fish population declines.
Services' Response: The Services intend to continue to address all
factors contributing to the decline of listed species, rather than
focusing on one particular factor, such as habitat degradation. For
example, NMFS recommends in its draft Snake River Salmon Recovery Plan
that mortality due to harvest, hydropower operations, habitat
degradation, hatchery practices, and other sources be reduced. Both
Services recognize that typically, no one sector is responsible for the
recovery of a species. The Services also acknowledge that factors
beyond human control, such as El Nino events, have contributed to the
decline of various species or stocks. Since these latter factors are
beyond human control, the Services must act to reduce mortalities
caused by factors which can be controlled.
Issue: The draft policy could be used to allow, or even promote,
the direct or indirect taking of listed or proposed species of fish.
Services' Response: The policy would not change the ESA in any way.
The Services still intend to evaluate actions that may adversely affect
listed or proposed species and recommend actions to avoid the risks of
jeopardy to the continued existence and recovery of these species.
Where ESA requirements conflict with recreational fisheries, the
Services will try to identify measures to resolve these conflicts
within the requirements of the ESA. Incidental take permits, if issued,
would be granted only when the actions considered would not be likely
to jeopardize an affected species' continued existence or its recovery.
For proposed species, Federal agencies will still be required to confer
on federal actions that would be likely to jeopardize them. Direct
takes
[[Page 27980]]
are only authorized for research and enhancement purposes, and, for
threatened species, in a conservation plan under section 4(d) of the
ESA.
Issue: The policy is vague or lacks specific focus.
Services' Response: The purpose of this policy is to provide
guidance and direction for the resolution of existing or potential
conflicts between the ESA and recreational fishing interests. Conflicts
or potential conflicts may touch on a variety of constituents, societal
and economic interests, geographic and biological issues, as well as
political considerations. As discussed above, the issues associated
with this policy are quite variable. In order to provide the intended
guidance in these matters, while allowing adaptive solution-finding
approaches to evolve, the policy framework must be broad thus retaining
opportunities for innovation and flexibility. The policy objectives are
to develop workable goals and objectives understood by Federal
agencies, States, Tribes, recreational anglers, and any other
interested parties. The Services' believe that this document meets
those needs.
Issue: Use of the terms ``stakeholders'' and ``partner'' does not
clearly define the intended parties.
Services' response: Both Services intend that the use of the terms
``stakeholders'' and ``partners'' is not reserved for recreational
fishing interests. As used in this policy, these terms are intended to
include conservation groups, local government organizations, land and
water users, power consumers, and others affected by the ESA and
recreational fisheries issues or having interest in these issues. The
Services will pursue a policy of participatory inclusion rather than of
limitation or exclusion.
Issue: Policy point 2.C calls for management practices ``that are
consistent with recovery objectives and compatible with existing
recreational fisheries.'' Existing recreational fisheries in this
region [Pacific Northwest] often rely heavily upon releases of hatchery
fish, a known impediment to wild fish recovery, and may need to be
extremely curtailed or even closed in order to prevent further declines
in wild fish populations.
Services' Response: Both Services recognize that efforts to restore
or save a native species or particular population necessary to recovery
may involve decisions which may be biologically sound but which may be
unpopular among constituents. This policy does not preclude such
decisions. However, it is the purpose of this Policy to seek ways to
resolve issues in such a way as to reduce conflicts between
administration of the ESA and recreational fisheries by avoiding
conflicts when possible and attenuating the unpopularity of decisions
that cannot be avoided.
Issue: Point 2.D calls on Federal agencies to ``identify priorities
for the restoration of aquatic habitats needed to conserve and
recover'' imperiled fish while working ``concurrently to support
increased recreational fishing opportunities to the maximum extent
possible.'' Such a statement presupposes that increasing ``recreational
fishing opportunities to the maximum extent possible'' would not be an
issue in recovery efforts. We believe the opposite to be true.
Services' Response: The Services have made changes to the policy
text to clarify the Services' intent. The qualifier in the draft
policy, ``to the maximum extent possible'' acknowledged that there
could very well be conflicts with recovery, but that the Services will
do the best they can to accommodate recreational fishing.
Issue: Point 2.F calls for ``coordinating the reintroduction of
listed species into former habitats with recreational fisheries
interests.''
Recovery of wild salmonids is going to happen because of habitat
availability, rather than on an experimental basis at the whim of user
groups whose interest is in avoiding the presence of a listed species.
Services' Response: Part 2.F identifies the Services' intention to
involve all affected or interested parties in the recovery process.
This is consistent with the Services' policy on recovery planning.
Issue: Point 2.G calls for evaluating proposed introductions of
non-indigenous species or hybrids based upon, among other things,
``recreational fisheries and other socio-economic objectives.'' These
potential ``concerns'' are not a logical, appropriate or legal basis
for such proposed introductions.
Services' Response: The purpose of this section is to acknowledge
that there are additional principles of sound fisheries management that
also will be considered, as well as other guidance, policies and legal
responsibilities, when considering introduction of non-native aquatic
species to aquatic systems.
Issue: Point 2.H calls for adjusting recovery strategies to
``minimize adverse effects on recreational fisheries.'' Recovery
strategies need not consider impacts to recreational fisheries by law.
Services' Response: This section addresses a need for the
appropriate entities to evaluate recovery activities and recreational
fishing activities to assess their status and effects upon recovery. If
issues are identified which are unnecessary impediments to the
restoration or enhancement of recreational fisheries, they should be
corrected to the extent that this is possible. The Services however, do
not intend that necessary recovery strategies or tasks be modified to
minimize impacts on recreational fisheries. The shared and cooperative
evaluation of recovery needs and concurrent examination of recreational
fishing activities are vital elements for avoiding and resolving
conflicts and establishing mutually agreed strategies and goals.
Issue: Point 2.I calls for coordinating reintroductions of
Federally listed species with activities needed to enhance recreational
fisheries, specifically as they relate to using historical ranges
(watersheds) of wild species for the benefit of recreational fishing.
Such a policy contradicts the ESA.
Services' Response: The text in the final policy has been modified.
However, the policy does not contradict the ESA. This policy section
addresses the need for assessments regarding potential habitat use by
both listed species and recreational fisheries species. Recreational
fishing is not always the cause of decline, nor are recreational
fishing activities necessarily an inherent threat to listed aquatic
species.
Issue: Point 3. The Services * * * will provide the public with a
better understanding of recreational fisheries by * * *'' This point
illustrates our concern over this policy's treatment of the ESA and
species recovery.
Services' Response: The Services continue to support educational
outreach toward recreational anglers on issues of endangered and
threatened species recovery.
Issue: Point 3.A ``Involving the public in identifying
opportunities to enhance recreational fisheries.'' This point does not
reflect the importance of the scientific knowledge contained in
recovery plans.
Service Response: The intent of section 3.A is to acknowledge the
significant role that non-governmental organizations and individuals
can play in achieving the goals of listed species recovery and this
policy.
Issue: 3.C ``Assisting to identify and provide * * * comparable
alternative recreational opportunities when existing recreational
fishing opportunities are altered or curtailed to meet objectives for
conservation of Federally listed or proposed species.'' Comparable
recreational opportunities as some sort of mitigation for species
recovery is not
[[Page 27981]]
a requirement of the ESA, and in specific instances could be quite
counterproductive.
Service Response: This policy statement addresses a situation where
a species' continued existence could be in danger due to a recreational
fishery or associated activity. It may be possible that a different
fishery could be established which would not threaten the existing
fishery. Possibly a new fishery could be established elsewhere, or a
degraded fishery improved as a replacement.
The statement of one respondent that recovery cannot be made
compatible with recreational fishing in every instance and location may
well be true. However, the purpose of the Policy is to affirm that the
Services will approach each instance with an open-minded approach to
resolve such conflicts in a manner acceptable to all parties, using
innovative methods where necessary, and within the requirements of the
ESA.
Issue: The policy should direct the Services to develop a framework
plan or action plan for implementation that would address such items as
how the Services will specifically ``encourage management actions * * *
or support management practices * * * ''
Services' Response: The Services agree that the Policy will be
effective only when they take action to implement it. The Services have
identified implementation mechanisms and will pursue those that are
expeditious and appropriate.
Policy
The Services recognize the primary responsibility of State and
Tribal governments for the protection and management of fish, wildlife,
and plant resources within their jurisdictions. The Federal government,
however, has public trust responsibilities and statutory
responsibilities to conserve endangered and threatened species listed
under the ESA and, to that extent, this policy does not diminish or
abrogate that responsibility particularly as it applies to section 6
(Cooperation With the States), section 7 (Interagency Cooperation),
section 9 (Prohibited Acts), and section 10 (Exceptions). This policy
is to affirm the Services' intent to minimize and resolve conflicts
between implementation of the ESA and activities to enhance
recreational fishery resources and recreational fishing opportunities.
This will be accomplished through cooperative partnerships with other
Federal agencies, State and local governments, Tribal governments,
recreational fisheries interests, conservation organizations, industry,
and other interested stakeholders. Activities to be undertaken by the
Services with respect to implementation of the ESA include the
following:
1. The Services will increase efforts to develop mutually accepted
goals and objectives among the involved Federal agencies, States,
Tribal governments, conservation organizations, recreational fisheries
communities, and other interested entities for the conservation of
listed species by:
A. Ensuring consistency in ESA implementation between and within
the Services;
B. Promoting cooperative interaction with other Federal
agencies, States, Tribal governments, conservation organizations,
and recreational fisheries stakeholders at appropriate
organizational levels in implementing the ESA;
C. Promoting collaboration and information sharing among Federal
agencies, States, Tribal governments, conservation organizations and
recreational fisheries stakeholders;
D. Coordinating with all affected stakeholders, partners, and
interested parties throughout the decision-making processes on
federally listed species issues that may affect recreational
fisheries; and
E. Improving and increasing efforts to inform both Federal and
non-Federal entities of the requirements of the ESA with particular
reference to sections 6, 7, 9, and 10 of the ESA.
2. The Services will encourage participation of other Federal
agencies, States, Tribal governments, conservation organizations,
recreational fisheries stakeholders, and other interested parties in
developing, implementing, and reviewing actions identified in approved
recovery plans for listed species by:
A. Involving other Federal agencies, States, Tribal governments,
conservation organizations, recreational fisheries stakeholders, and
other affected or interested parties in recovery planning and
implementation;
B. Encouraging proactive management and habitat conservation,
restoration, and enhancement projects on public and private lands
and waters to conserve federally listed or proposed aquatic species
and to support similar measures to prevent further decline of
species and loss of habitat to preclude the need to list additional
species under the ESA;
C. Supporting management practices that are consistent with
recovery objectives and compatible with existing recreational
fisheries;
D. Identifying priorities for the restoration of aquatic
habitats needed to conserve and recover federally listed and
proposed species and, concurrently, to support increased
recreational fishing opportunities to the extent possible;
E. Encouraging management actions that protect and conserve
aquatic habitats, ecological processes and the diversity of aquatic
communities;
F. Coordinating the reintroduction of listed species into former
habitats within the species' historical range with other Federal
agencies, States, Tribal governments, and other interested or
affected entities, including recreational fisheries stakeholders;
G. Evaluating the potential impacts of proposed introductions of
non-indigenous species or hybrids in drainages supporting federally
listed or proposed species. Such introductions must be based on
management plans incorporating genetics considerations, disease
control, ecological principles, and listed species recovery
objectives, as well as recreational fisheries and other socio-
economic objectives;
H. Ensuring the effectiveness of actions taken to recover listed
species and manage recreational fisheries by periodically evaluating
conservation and recovery strategies and, where possible, adjusting
those actions to minimize adverse effects on recreational fisheries;
I. Eliminating unnecessary recovery based restrictions affecting
recreational fisheries. Priority will be given to cooperatively
reviewing recovery based restrictions affecting recreational
fisheries in areas currently unoccupied but within known historical
range of listed species.
J. Encouraging States to increase their participation in listed
aquatic endangered, threatened, and proposed species recovery
through section 6 grants; and
K. Assisting the States and Tribal governments in meeting their
recreational fishing goals.
3. The Services, in cooperation with other Federal agencies, State
and local governments, Tribal governments, non-governmental
organizations, and recreational fisheries stakeholders will provide the
public with a better understanding of the relationship between
conservation and recovery of federally listed and proposed species and
recreational fisheries by:
A. Informing the fishing and non-fishing public about the ESA.
Such efforts will include, but not be limited to, addressing topics
such as the incidental take of listed species, the use of ESA 4(d)
rules, habitat conservation planning, and other adaptive
conservation tools;
B. Involving the public in identifying opportunities to enhance
recreational fisheries while providing for the conservation of
federally listed species, and in identifying and implementing
solutions to aquatic systems degradation; and
C. Assisting to identify and provide, contingent on
appropriations and other constraints, comparable alternative
recreational angling opportunities when existing ones are altered or
curtailed to meet objectives for conservation and recovery of
federally listed or proposed species.
4. To meet particular mandates to conserve federally endangered,
threatened, or proposed species while providing and enhancing
recreational fishery resources and fishing opportunities, the Services
will:
[[Page 27982]]
A. Work with the recreational fisheries community in evaluating
accomplishments, including those of the Services, toward meeting the
prescriptions of this policy; and
B. Restore and enhance aquatic habitats to conserve Federal
endangered, threatened, and proposed species and increase
recreational fishing opportunities consistent with agency missions,
authorities, and initiatives.
Scope of Policy
This policy applies to all pertinent organizational elements of the
Services and includes all efforts funded, authorized, or carried out by
the Services relative to recreational fisheries and implementation of
the ESA.
Author/Editor
The editors of this policy are David Harrelson of the Fish and
Wildlife Service's Division of Endangered Species, Bob Batky of the
Fish and Wildlife Service's Division of Fish Hatcheries, and Marta
Nammack of the National Marine Fisheries Service's Endangered Species
Division.
Authorities
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531-
1544), Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742a-742j), Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (16 U.S.C. 661-667e), Federal Water
Project Recreation Act (16 U.S.C. 460 (L)(12)-460(L)(21), Federal
Aid in Sport Fish Restoration Act (16 U.S.C. 777-777k), Anadromous
Fish Conservation Act (16 U.S.C. 757a-757g), Magnuson Fishery
Conservation and Management Act (16 U.S.C. 1801-1862), National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347).
Dated: May 14, 1996.
Mollie H. Beattie,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior.
Dated: May 20, 1996.
Rolland A. Schmitten,
Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce.
[FR Doc. 96-13678 Filed 5-31-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P