[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 232 (Tuesday, December 3, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 66147-66148]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2019-26110]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service

[Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064]


Availability of an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No 
Significant Impact; Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Conservation Program

AGENCY: Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: We are advising the public that the United States Department 
of Agriculture and its sub-agency, the Animal and Plant Health 
Inspection Service, have prepared an environmental assessment and 
finding of no significant impact for a conservation program pursuant to 
the Endangered Species Act to benefit the southwestern willow 
flycatcher, a small, neotropical migrant bird found in Arizona, 
California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, and Utah. Based on our 
finding of no significant impact, we have determined that an 
environmental impact statement need not be prepared.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Kai Caraher, Biological Scientist, 
PHP, PPQ, APHIS, 4700 River Road, Unit 150, Riverdale, MD 20737-1231; 
(301) 851-2345; [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Saltcedar, also known as tamarisk (Tamarix species), is an invasive 
plant widely established in riparian areas in the western United 
States. This non-native weed, which can take the form of a shrub or 
small tree, was introduced into the United States in the latter part of 
the 19th century. Although saltcedar is an invasive plant, native 
animals have adapted to its presence.
    In 1986, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) Agricultural 
Research Service (ARS) began research into the potential for biological 
control of saltcedar. From 1998 to 2000, ARS conducted open field 
release trials of tamarisk leaf beetles (Diorhabda species) to 
determine the conditions under which releases could succeed. These 
field trials took place after ARS consulted with the U.S. Fish and 
Wildlife Service (USFWS) to ensure

[[Page 66148]]

compliance with the Endangered Species Act (ESA). USDA's Animal and 
Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) permitted the releases after it 
completed additional environmental risk analyses and provided the 
public an opportunity to comment on the documents.
    In 2005, APHIS initiated a biological control program for saltcedar 
defoliation in the northern United States using the tamarisk leaf 
beetle as the biological control agent in limited locations outside of 
the habitat of the southwestern willow flycatcher (SWFL, Empidonax 
traillii extimus). Greater than anticipated natural dispersion and 
intentional human-assisted movement of the beetle into SWFL habitat 
caused defoliation of saltcedar trees, hampering the flycatcher's 
nesting success.
    After tamarisk leaf beetles were discovered in SWFL habitat, APHIS 
terminated its saltcedar biological control program in 2010 and 
canceled release permits because of concern about the potential adverse 
effects on SWFL. APHIS reinitiated consultation with USFWS on these 
actions, in compliance with section 7(a)(2) of the ESA and 16 U.S.C. 
1536(a)(2), and USFWS concurred with APHIS' determination that these 
actions were not likely to adversely affect the SWFL.
    On September 30, 2013, the Center for Biological Diversity filed a 
lawsuit against USDA, APHIS, ARS, the Department of the Interior (DOI), 
and USFWS alleging that the APHIS saltcedar biological control program 
violated the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), as 
amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and the ESA. On May 3, 2016, the Court 
granted the plaintiff's second of five claims, finding that APHIS did 
not comply with the ESA section 7(a)(1), which requires Federal 
agencies to consult with DOI and ``utilize their authorities in 
furtherance of the purposes of [the ESA] by carrying out programs for 
the conservation of endangered species and threatened species listed 
pursuant to [16 U.S.C. 1533]'' 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(1). On June 19, 2018, 
the Court ordered USDA and APHIS to publish proposed conservation 
program alternatives in compliance with ESA section 7(a)(1), solicit 
public comments on the proposed alternatives, then publish a draft 
environmental assessment (EA) for public comment, and complete review 
of all public comments, and issue final decision and final EA, or an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) should it be appropriate.
    On October 26, 2018, APHIS published in the Federal Register (83 FR 
54080-54082, Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064) a notice \1\ informing the 
public of APHIS' intent to conduct a scoping process and prepare an EA. 
We solicited comments for 30 days ending on November 26, 2018. We 
received 23 comments by that date.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ To view the notice of intent and the comments that we 
received on that document, or the subsequent notice of availability 
of the environmental assessment, its supporting documents, and the 
comments that we received on that document, go to http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=APHIS-2018-0064.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    After taking into consideration the comments that we received, on 
July 9, 2019, we published in the Federal Register (84 FR 32701-32702, 
Docket No. APHIS-2018-0064) a notice in which we announced the 
availability, for public review and comment, of an EA that examined the 
environmental effects of possible SWFL conservation measures available 
to USDA and APHIS, as well as a ``no action'' alternative.
    We solicited comments on the EA for 30 days ending August 8, 2019. 
We received 22 comments by that date. Four commenters were supportive 
of the preferred alternative in the EA without further comment, and one 
expressed general opposition to all APHIS biocontrol efforts. 
Additionally, several commenters asked for changes in nomenclature or 
phrasing within the draft EA in order to clarify its provisions without 
changing its meaning; we have incorporated the requested changes to the 
extent possible within the final EA. The remaining comments are 
addressed in the final EA itself.
    In this document, we are advising the public of our finding of no 
significant impact (FONSI) regarding our preferred alternative for SWFL 
conservation measures. The finding, which is based on the EA, reflects 
our determination that the preferred alternative will not have 
significant impact on the quality of the human environment.
    The EA and FONSI may be viewed on the Regulations.gov website (see 
footnote 1). Copies of the EA and FONSI are also available for public 
inspection at USDA, Room 1141, South Building, 14th Street and 
Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC, between 8 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., 
Monday through Friday, except holidays. Persons wishing to inspect 
copies are requested to call ahead on (202) 799-7039 to facilitate 
entry into the reading room. In addition, copies may be obtained by 
calling or writing to the individual listed under FOR FURTHER 
INFORMATION CONTACT.
    The EA and FONSI have been prepared in accordance with: (1) NEPA, 
as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); (2) regulations of the Council on 
Environmental Quality for implementing the procedural provisions of 
NEPA (40 CFR parts 1500-1508); (3) USDA regulations implementing NEPA 
(7 CFR part 1b); and (4) APHIS' NEPA Implementing Procedures (7 CFR 
part 372).

    Done in Washington, DC, this 26th day of November 2019.
 Kevin Shea,
Administrator, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service.
[FR Doc. 2019-26110 Filed 12-2-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3410-34-P