[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 142 (Wednesday, July 24, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 44588-44589]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17620]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R1-ES-2013-N137; FXES11130100000D2-134-FF01E00000]


Experimental Removal of Barred Owls To Benefit Threatened 
Northern Spotted Owls; Final Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, announce the 
availability of the final environmental impact statement (Final EIS) 
for experimental removal of barred owls to benefit threatened northern 
spotted owls. The barred owl, a species recently established in western 
North America, is displacing the northern spotted owl and threatening 
its viability. The Final EIS analyzes a no-action alternative and eight 
action alternatives to experimentally determine if removing barred owls 
will benefit northern spotted owl populations and to test the 
feasibility and efficiency of barred owl removal as a management tool. 
The action alternatives vary by the number and location of study areas, 
the type of experimental design, duration of study, and method of 
barred owl removal.

ADDRESSES: The Final EIS is available at:
     U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Oregon Fish and Wildlife 
Office, 2600 SE 98th Ave., Suite 100, Portland, OR 97266; telephone 
503-231-6179.
     Internet: http://www.fws.gov/oregonfwo.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Paul Henson, State Supervisor, Oregon 
Fish and Wildlife Office, at 503-231-6179. If you use a 
telecommunications device for the deaf, please call the Federal 
Information Relay Service at 800-877-8339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of the Final EIS for experimental removal of barred owls 
to benefit threatened northern spotted owls. We are publishing this 
notice in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 
1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; NEPA) and its implementing 
regulations at 40 CFR 1506.6. The Final EIS evaluates the impacts of 
eight action alternatives and a no-action alternative related to: (1) 
Federal involvement in barred owl removal experiments, and (2) the 
possible issuance of one or more scientific collecting permits under 
the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712; MBTA) for lethal and 
nonlethal take of barred owls.
    The northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) is listed as 
threatened under the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.; 
Act). Competition from barred owls (Strix varia) is identified as one 
of the main threats to the northern spotted owl in the 2011 Revised 
Northern Spotted Owl Recovery Plan (Recovery Plan) (USFWS 2011, p. III-
62). To address this threat, the Recovery Plan recommends designing and 
implementing large-scale controlled experiments to assess the effects 
of barred owl removal on spotted owl site occupancy, reproduction, and 
survival (USFWS 2011, p. III-65). The study would be conducted on from 
one to several study areas in western Washington, western Oregon, and 
northwestern California. The action alternatives vary by the number and 
location of study areas, the type of experimental design, duration of 
the study, and the method of barred owl removal.

Background

    The Service listed the northern spotted owl as a threatened species 
under the Act in 1990, based primarily on habitat loss and degradation 
(55 FR 26114). As a result, conservation efforts for the northern 
spotted owl have been largely focused on habitat protection. While our 
listing rule noted that the long-term impact of barred owls on the 
spotted owl was of considerable concern, the scope and severity of this 
threat was largely unknown at that time (55 FR 26114, p. 26190). The 
Recovery Plan summarized information available since our listing rule 
and found that competition from barred owls now poses a significant and 
immediate threat to the northern spotted owl throughout its range 
(USFWS 2011, pp. B-10 through B-12).
    Historically, the barred owl and northern spotted owl did not co-
occur. In the past century, barred owls have expanded their range 
westward, reaching the range of the northern spotted owl in British 
Columbia by about 1959. Barred owl populations continue to expand 
southward within the range of the northern spotted owl, the population 
of barred owls behind the expansion-front continues to increase, and 
barred owls now outnumber spotted owls in many portions of the northern 
spotted owl's range (Pearson and Livezey 2003, p. 272).
    There is strong evidence to indicate that barred owls are 
negatively affecting northern spotted owl populations. Barred owls 
displace spotted owls from high-quality habitat (Kelley et al. 2003, p. 
51; Pearson and Livezey 2003, p. 274; Courtney et al., pp. 7-27 through 
7-31; Gremel 2005, pp. 9, 11, 17; Hamer et al. 2007, p. 764; Dugger et 
al. 2011, pp. 2464-1466), reducing their survival and reproduction 
(Olson et al. 2004, p. 1048; Anthony et al. 2006, p. 32; Forsman et al. 
2011, pp. 41-43, 69-70). In addition, barred owls may physically attack 
spotted owls (Gutierrez et al. 2007, p. 187). These effects may help 
explain declines in northern spotted owl territory occupancy associated 
with barred owls in Oregon, and reduced northern spotted owl 
survivorship and sharp population declines in Washington (e.g., in 
northern Washington, spotted owl populations declined by as much as 55 
percent between 1996 and 2006) (Anthony et al. 2006, pp. 21, 30, 32; 
Forsman et al. 2011, pp. 43-47, 65-66)). Without management 
intervention, it is reasonable to expect that competition from barred 
owls may cause extirpation of the northern spotted owl from all or

[[Page 44589]]

a substantial portion of its historical range, reducing its potential 
for survival and recovery.

Public Involvement

    On December 10, 2009, the Service published a notice of intent to 
prepare an environmental impact statement related to experimental 
removal of barred owls for the conservation benefit of threatened 
northern spotted owls (notice of intent) in the Federal Register (74 FR 
65546), to solicit participation of: Federal, State, and local 
agencies; Tribes; and the public to determine the scope of the EIS and 
provide input on issues associated with the proposed experiment. In 
addition to the publication of the notice of intent, the scoping 
process included informal stakeholder and agency consultations, and 
electronic or mailed notification to over 1,000 interested parties. 
Public scoping lasted until January 11, 2010. A scoping report is 
appended to the Final EIS.
    In accordance with the NEPA, the Draft EIS was circulated for 
public review and comment. The public review period was initiated with 
the publication of the notice of availability (NOA) in the Federal 
Register on March 8, 2012 (77 FR 14036). We conducted one public 
meeting in Seattle on May 3, 2012, and five informational webinars for 
the public. Comments were due June 6, 2012. A summary of the comments 
and written responses are appended to the Final EIS.

Alternatives

    The alternatives vary by the number and location of study areas, 
the method of barred owl removal (lethal, or a combination of lethal 
and nonlethal), and the type of experimental design (demography vs. 
occupancy). All action alternatives are based on a simple treatment and 
control study approach. Under this approach, study areas are divided 
into two comparable segments. Barred owls are removed from the 
treatment area but not from the control area. Spotted owl populations 
are measured using the same methodology on both areas, and the 
population measures (occupancy, survival, reproduction, and population 
trend) are compared between the control and treatment areas.
    The removal of barred owls under the experiment would occur over a 
period of 3 to 10 years, depending on the alternative. The action 
alternatives include from 1 to 11 study areas, including from 0.31 to 
6.55 percent of the northern spotted owl's habitat. A brief description 
of each alternative follows.
    Under the No-action Alternative, the Service would not conduct 
experimental removal of barred owls, thus not implementing one of the 
recovery actions set forth in the Recovery Plan (USFWS 2001, p. III-
65). Data that would inform future barred owl management strategies 
would not be gathered.
    Alternative 1 consists of a demography study in a single study area 
with existing pre-treatment spotted owl demography data. The study area 
would be located within an existing spotted owl demography study area 
where long-term monitoring of northern spotted owl populations has 
occurred (Lint et al. 1999, p. 17; Lint 2005, p. 7). Only lethal 
removal methods would be used in this alternative.
    Alternative 2 consists of a demography study in three study areas, 
which would be located within existing spotted owl demography study 
areas and distributed across the range of the northern spotted owl. A 
combination of lethal and nonlethal removal methods would be used.
    Alternative 3 consists of a demography study in two study areas. 
Barred owl removal would occur outside of existing spotted owl 
demography study areas, but within areas that have adequate data to 
conduct pre-removal demography analyses. A combination of lethal and 
nonlethal removal methods would be used.
    Alternative 4 includes two subalternatives, 4a and 4b. Each 
subalternative consists of a demography study in two study areas 
outside existing spotted owl demography study areas. Each 
subalternative uses a combination of lethal and nonlethal removal 
methods. Subalternatives 4a and 4b differ in that 4a delays barred owl 
removal to collect pre-treatment data for comparison with treatment 
data, whereas 4b starts removal immediately and foregoes pre-treatment 
data collection.
    Alternative 5 consists of an occupancy study approach in three 
study areas. Barred owl removal would occur on areas outside of 
existing spotted owl demography study areas. Only lethal removal 
methods would be applied in this alternative.
    Alternative 6 includes two subalternatives, 6a and 6b. Each 
subalternative consists of an occupancy study in three study areas. 
Barred owl removal would occur on areas outside of existing spotted owl 
demography study areas. Each subalternative uses a combination of 
lethal and nonlethal removal methods. Subalternatives 6a and 6b differ 
in that 6a delays removal to collect pre-treatment data for comparison 
with treatment data, whereas 6b starts removal immediately and foregoes 
pre-treatment data collection.
    Alternative 7 consists of a combination of demography and occupancy 
analyses across 11 study areas, some of which have current data. Three 
existing spotted owl demographic study areas would be included within 
these study areas. A combination of lethal and nonlethal removal 
methods would be used.
    Following public review of the Draft EIS, the Service developed a 
Preferred Alternative based on a combination of the features of 
Alternatives 2 and 3. The Preferred Alternative consists of a 
demography study in four study areas as in both draft alternatives. 
Barred owl removal would occur on the Cle Elum Study Area in Washington 
and the Hoopa (Willow Creek) Study Area in California from Alternative 
2, the Union/Myrtle (Klamath) Study Area in southern Oregon from 
Alternative 3, and one half of the combined Oregon Coast Ranges and 
Veneta Study Areas in northern Oregon. This last study area is a 
combination of study areas from Alternative 2 and 3. A combination of 
lethal and non-lethal removal methods would be used from Alternative 3.

References Cited

    A complete list of references cited in this notice is available 
upon request from our Oregon Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT).

National Environmental Policy Act Compliance

    We will make a decision no sooner than 30 days after the 
publication of the Final EIS. We anticipate issuing a Record of 
Decision in the summer of 2013.
    We provide this notice under the National Environmental Policy Act 
of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and its implementing 
regulations in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 1506.6. 
We also publish this notice under authority of the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 703-712) and its specific implementing 
regulations at 50 CFR 10.13 and 50 CFR 21.23.

    Dated: July 17, 2013.
Robyn Thorson,
Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 
Portland, Oregon.
[FR Doc. 2013-17620 Filed 7-23-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P