[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