[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 140 (Friday, July 22, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43886-43889]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-15739]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2022-0074; FXES11140100000-223-FF01E0000]


Barred Owl Management Strategy; Intent To Prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement; Washington, Oregon, and California

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an environmental impact statement.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), are developing 
a proposed barred owl management strategy (management strategy) to 
address the threat of the nonnative, invasive barred owl (Strix varia) 
to the native northern and California spotted owls (Strix 
occidentalis). Implementation of the management strategy would require 
the take of barred owls, which is prohibited under the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act (MBTA) unless authorized by a permit or regulation. We 
provide this notice to announce our intent to prepare an environmental 
impact statement to evaluate the impacts on the human environment 
related to the proposed management strategy and associated MBTA take 
authorization. In accordance with the National Environmental Policy 
Act, we are opening a public scoping comment period to help determine 
the scope of issues for analysis and announcing a virtual public 
scoping meeting.

DATES: We will accept online or hardcopy comments. Comments submitted 
online at https://www.regulations.gov/ must be received by 11:59 p.m. 
Eastern Time on August 22, 2022. Hardcopy comments must be received or 
postmarked on or before August 22, 2022 (see ADDRESSES).

Virtual Public Scoping Meeting

    We will hold a virtual public meeting during the scoping period. To 
provide for the attendance of interested parties across the three-State 
area without requiring travel to an in-person meeting, and to protect 
the public from potential spread of the COVID-19 virus, the public 
meeting will be held virtually on July 28, 2022, from 6 to 8 p.m. 
Pacific time.

ADDRESSES: 
    Submitting Comments: You may submit comments by one of the 
following methods:
     Internet: https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 
instructions for submitting comments on Docket No. FWS-R1-ES-2022-0074.
     U.S. mail: Public Comments Processing; Attn: Docket No. 
FWS-R1-ES-2022-0074; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Headquarters, MS: 
PRB/3W; 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
    For additional information about submitting comments, see Public 
Scoping Process under SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION.
    Virtual Public Scoping Meeting: A link and access instructions for 
the

[[Page 43887]]

virtual scoping meeting will be posted to https://www.fws.gov/office/oregon-fish-and-wildlife at least 1 week prior to the public meeting 
date. Advance registration is not required.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robin Bown, by telephone at 503-231-
6923, or by email at [email protected]. Individuals in the United 
States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of hearing, or have a speech 
disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or TeleBraille) to access 
telecommunications relay services. Individuals outside the United 
States should use the relay services offered within their country to 
make international calls to the point-of-contact in the United States.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
(USFWS), are developing a proposed barred owl management strategy 
(management strategy) to address the threat the nonnative invasive 
barred owl poses to two native owl subspecies in the West, the northern 
spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) and California spotted owl 
(Strix occidentalis occidentalis). The management strategy would 
involve the reduction of barred owl populations in targeted management 
areas in Washington, Oregon, and California. We will prepare an 
environmental impact statement (EIS) to evaluate the effects on the 
human environment related to the proposed action, due to the large 
scale of the action area across three States and the high level of 
public interest in this action.

Background

    Barred owls are native to eastern North America. They began to 
expand their range around 1900, concurrent with European settlement and 
facilitated by the subsequent human-caused changes to the Great Plains 
and northern boreal forest. Barred owls arrived in the Pacific 
Northwest in the early 1970s, establishing populations in northern 
Washington in the early 1980s. They continue to spread southward in the 
Cascades and coastal mountains, building dense populations behind the 
invasion front.
    The barred owl is slightly larger in size than the native spotted 
owl of the western forests. While barred owls prefer the same older, 
structurally diverse forest type selected by spotted owls, barred owls 
will utilize a wider range of forested habitat types than spotted owls, 
including wooded urban areas and large tracts of second-growth forests. 
In addition, barred owls are generalist predators, eating a much wider 
variety of prey items than the specialist spotted owls. Barred owls 
consume the same nocturnal arboreal rodents that are the focus of the 
spotted owls' diet, and also consume numerous other species, including 
other mammals, amphibians, insects, crayfish, and mollusks. Because of 
their larger size, adaptability to a wide variety of forested habitats, 
and ability to eat a wide variety of prey, barred owls occur in denser 
populations, outcompeting and excluding spotted owls from the latter's 
preferred habitats.
    By 2004, we identified competition from the invasive barred owl as 
a primary threat to northern spotted owl populations (USFWS 2004). The 
2011 Revised Recovery Plan for the Northern Spotted Owl (USFWS 2011) 
recommended that we manage to reduce the negative effects of barred 
owls on northern spotted owls (Recovery Action 30) (USFWS 2011). Based 
on the recent demographic analysis, northern spotted owl populations in 
the northern half of the species' range have dropped by over 75 percent 
in two decades and continue to decline at greater than 5 percent per 
year (Franklin et al. 2021). Without management of barred owls, 
extirpation of northern spotted owls from major portions of their 
historic range is likely in the near future.
    In recent years, barred owls have penetrated into the range of the 
California spotted owl in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, although their 
population remains low and scattered at this time (Wood et al. 2020). 
While barred owls have not substantially impacted California spotted 
owls to date, the history of the invasion and impacts on northern 
spotted owls supports the assumption that, unless the barred owl 
populations can be managed, barred owls will continue to invade 
southward until barred owls threaten the California spotted owl.
    In 2013, we initiated the Barred Owl Removal Experiment (Removal 
Experiment), implementing Recovery Action 29 for the northern spotted 
owl (USFWS 2011) to investigate the effect of barred owl removal on 
spotted owl population dynamics. The Removal Experiment, conducted in 
four study areas in Washington, Oregon, and California, used paired 
treatment areas (barred owl removal) and control areas (no barred owl 
removal), in order to test whether barred owl removal could reverse 
declining spotted owl population trends in study areas with differing 
environmental conditions. The removal of barred owls had a strong, 
positive effect on survival of spotted owls and a weaker, though still 
positive, effect on spotted owl dispersal and recruitment (Wiens et al. 
2021). In the treatment areas where barred owls were removed, spotted 
owl populations stabilized. In paired control areas without barred owl 
removal, spotted owl populations continued to decline at 12 percent per 
year after 3 to 6 years of removal. The Removal Experiment demonstrated 
that barred owl removal can be an effective method for the conservation 
of spotted owls.
    Using information from the recently completed Removal Experiment 
and other applicable studies and research findings, the USFWS is 
developing a proposed management strategy designed to reduce barred owl 
populations to improve the survival and recovery of northern spotted 
owls and to prevent declines in California spotted owls resulting from 
barred owl competition.
    Implementation of a management strategy would involve take of 
barred owls. The barred owl is protected under the Migratory Bird 
Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 U.S.C. 793 et seq.), which prohibits take (as 
defined at 50 CFR 10.12) of protected migratory bird species unless 
authorized by the USFWS in accordance with the MBTA and implementing 
regulations. We propose to obtain authorization under the MBTA to allow 
the USFWS and other interested governmental agencies (Federal, State, 
or Tribal) to take barred owls as part of implementing the management 
strategy. Nongovernmental take may be authorized under an agency's 
authorization. Our EIS will evaluate the environmental impacts of the 
management strategy and the associated MBTA take authorization, as well 
as alternatives to the management strategy, including a no-action 
alternative.

Purpose and Need for the Proposed Action

    The purpose of this action is to reduce barred owl populations to 
improve the survival and recovery of northern spotted owls and to 
prevent declines in California spotted owls from barred owl 
competition. Relative to northern spotted owls, the purpose is to stop 
or slow spotted owl population declines from barred owls within 
selected treatment areas in the short term and increase spotted owl 
populations in the intermediate term. Relative to the California 
spotted owl, the purpose is to limit the invasion of barred owls into 
the range of the subspecies and respond quickly to reduce barred owl 
populations that may become established.
    The need for this action is to reduce the population of invasive 
barred owls within the range of northern and California spotted owls. 
Competition from the invasive barred owl is a

[[Page 43888]]

primary cause of the rapid and ongoing decline of northern spotted owl 
populations. Due to the rapidity of the decline, it is critical that we 
manage invasive barred owl populations to reduce their negative effect 
on spotted owls before northern spotted owls are extirpated from large 
portions of their native range. In the recent northern spotted owl 
demographic analyses, the authors stated, ``Our analyses indicated that 
northern spotted owl populations potentially face extirpation if the 
negative effects of barred owls are not ameliorated while maintaining 
northern spotted owl habitat across their range'' (Franklin et al. 
2021). The Recovery Plan also emphasized the need for action in 
Recovery Action 30: ``Manage to reduce the negative effects of barred 
owls on northern spotted owls so that Recovery Criterion 1 can be 
met.'' Recovery Criterion 1 is to provide for a stable or increasing 
population trend of spotted owls throughout the range over 10 years. 
Therefore, the management strategy needs to provide for rapid 
implementation and result in swift reduction in barred owl competition.
    California spotted owls face a similar risk from barred owl 
competition as barred owl populations continue to expand southward. 
While California spotted owls have not yet experienced substantial 
declines as a result of barred owl competition, the southward invasion 
of the barred owl has reached their range, and future impacts to 
California spotted owl populations are expected to be inevitable 
without barred owl management. Invasive species are very difficult to 
remove once established. Therefore, the management strategy needs to 
focus on limiting the invasion of barred owls into the California 
spotted owl range. If barred owl populations do become established, the 
management strategy needs to provide for early intervention to prevent 
adverse effects of barred owls on California spotted owl populations.

Preliminary Proposed Action and Alternatives

    The proposed action is to finalize and implement a management 
strategy, including any necessary MBTA take authorization, to reduce 
barred owl populations to improve the survival and recovery of northern 
spotted owls and prevent declines in California spotted owls from 
barred owl competition. The management strategy will identify high-
priority areas for barred owl management at both regional and local 
scales and for both the short and intermediate term. The scope and 
scale of barred owl management in each region or physiographic province 
would vary based on the current condition of the barred and spotted owl 
populations, availability of access, ownership patterns, and risk 
factors such as wildfire. The USFWS will evaluate all methods for 
removing barred owls from management areas, including lethal removal, 
which has been shown to be effective in situations where a rapid 
response is crucial.
    The USFWS will prepare a draft EIS (DEIS) that will include a 
reasonable range of alternatives, which may include, but are not 
limited to, variations in the identification of high priority 
management sites, areas of concern, and specific mapped areas; 
protocols for the selection of management areas; and methods for 
managing barred owls in selected areas. All action alternatives will 
include monitoring of spotted and barred owls on management areas, and 
an adaptive management component to provide for minor modifications as 
new information becomes available.
    Additionally, a No Action Alternative will be evaluated. Under the 
No Action Alternative, a management strategy would not be selected, and 
no MBTA take authorization would be provided to implement the 
management strategy. The No Action Alternative, if selected, would not 
preclude the USFWS or other entities from seeking to undertake barred 
owl management, including lethal removal. Any such management, if it 
required take of barred owls, would also require MBTA take 
authorization. The USFWS would evaluate such proposals on a case-by-
case basis, including evaluation under NEPA as appropriate to the 
circumstances.

Summary of Expected Impacts

    The DEIS will identify and describe the effects of the proposed 
Federal action on the human environment that are reasonably 
foreseeable, including direct, indirect, and cumulative effects. This 
includes effects that occur at the same time and place as the proposed 
action or alternatives and effects that are later in time or farther 
removed in distance from the proposed action or alternatives. Based on 
previous analyses related to the Barred Owl Removal Experiment (USFWS 
2013), the anticipated impacts may include, but are not limited to, 
beneficial and adverse impacts to spotted owls, barred owls, other 
biological resources, land use, recreation and visitor use, historical 
and cultural resources, and socioeconomics. Beneficial impacts to 
spotted owls and localized adverse impacts to barred owls are expected, 
as these are the focus of the management strategy. Beneficial impacts 
to other biological resources, specifically to species that are prey 
for, or competitors with, barred owls may occur in localized areas 
where barred owl populations are reduced. Minimal localized, 
beneficial, and/or adverse impacts to recreation and visitor use, and 
to historical and cultural resources, may occur in areas where barred 
owl populations are reduced. Impacts to land use and socioeconomics may 
occur through application of applicable law, including local and State 
regulations. These and other impacts of the proposed action and 
alternatives will be analyzed in the DEIS (see 40 U.S.C. 4332; 40 CFR 
1508.1(g) and 1502.16). The analysis will consider the adequacy of each 
alternative to meet the purpose and need, in light of the expected 
effects and other best available information.

Anticipated Permits and Authorizations

    Anticipated permits, consultations, or other authorizations related 
to implementation of the management strategy and issuance of MBTA take 
authorization may include, but may not be limited to:
     ESA Section 7 consultation;
     State take permits;
     Government-to-government consultations with Tribes; and
     Consultation regarding effects of the action pursuant to 
the National Historic Preservation Act.

Schedule for the Decision-Making Process

    Following scoping, the USFWS will prepare the DEIS and publish a 
notice of availability and request for public comments on the DEIS in 
the Federal Register. The USFWS expects to make the DEIS available to 
the public for comment by the fall of 2022. After public review and 
comment, the USFWS will evaluate comments received and complete a final 
EIS (FEIS). After preparation of the FEIS, the USFWS will prepare a 
record of decision pursuant to 40 CFR 1505.2 within the applicable 
timeframes described at 40 CFR 1506.11.

Public Scoping Process

    This notice of intent initiates the scoping process, which guides 
the development of the EIS.

Virtual Public Meeting

    A public scoping meeting will be conducted online. See DATES and 
ADDRESSES for the date, time, and connection information for the 
virtual public scoping meeting. During the meeting, the USFWS will 
present information about the management strategy and MBTA take 
authorization

[[Page 43889]]

and provide an opportunity for the public to ask questions about the 
proposed action to inform written scoping comments. No opportunity for 
oral scoping comments will be provided. Written comments may be 
submitted by either one of the methods listed in ADDRESSES.

Reasonable Accommodations

    Persons needing reasonable accommodations in order to participate 
in the virtual public scoping meeting should contact the USFWS's Oregon 
Fish and Wildlife Office (see FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT) no later 
than 1 week before the meeting. Information regarding this proposed 
action is available in alternative formats upon request.

Request for Identification of Potential Alternatives, Information, and 
Analyses Relevant to the Proposed Action

    We request written comments on the proposed action, including 
comments concerning the appropriate scope of the analysis and 
identification of relevant information, studies, and analyses, from the 
public; affected Federal, State, Tribal, and local governments, 
agencies, and offices; the scientific community; industry; or any other 
interested party. We will consider these comments in developing the 
DEIS. Specifically, we seek comments on:
    1. Biological information, analysis and relevant data concerning 
the spotted owl, barred owl, and their interactions;
    2. Components of the barred owl strategy, including but not limited 
to:
    a. Criteria and approaches for selecting management areas;
    b. Locations where barred owl management should be focused or where 
management should be avoided; and
    c. Specific techniques for removal of barred owls or reduction in 
barred owl populations;
    3. Potential effects that the proposed action could have on 
endangered or threatened species, and their associated ecological 
communities or habitats;
    4. Potential effects that the proposed action could have on other 
species and their habitats;
    5. Potential effects that the proposed action could have on other 
aspects of the human environment, including ecological, aesthetic, 
historic, cultural, economic, social, environmental justice, or health 
effects;
    6. The presence of historic and cultural properties--including 
archaeological sites, buildings, and structures; historic events; 
sacred and traditional areas; and other historic preservation 
concerns--in the proposed permit area, which are required to be 
considered in project planning by the National Historic Preservation 
Act;
    7. Possible reasonable alternatives to meet the purpose and need 
that USFWS should consider,
    8. Information on other current or planned activities in the range 
of the northern and California spotted owls that may interact with, or 
impact, spotted and barred owls, including any connected actions that 
are closely related to the proposed action; and
    9. Other information relevant to the proposed management strategy 
and MBTA take authorization, and its impacts on the human environment.

Public Availability of Comments

    You may submit your comments and materials by one of the methods 
listed in ADDRESSES. Comments received in response to this solicitation 
will be part of the public record for this proposed action. Before 
including your address, phone number, or other personal identifying 
information in your comment, you should be aware that your entire 
comment--including your personal identifying information--may be made 
publicly available at any time. While you can ask us in your comment to 
withhold your personal identifying information from public review, we 
cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. All submissions from 
organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying 
themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or 
businesses, will be made publicly available in their entirety. Comments 
submitted anonymously will be accepted and considered.

Lead and Cooperating Agencies

    The USFWS is the lead agency for the NEPA process. The following 
agencies are cooperating agencies in the NEPA process: U.S. Forest 
Service (Regions 5 and 6), Bureau of Land Management (Oregon), National 
Park Service (Interior Regions 8, 9, 10, 12), the Hoh Tribe, Washington 
Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington Department of Natural 
Resources, Oregon Department of Forestry, Oregon Department of Fish and 
Wildlife, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the 
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The USFWS 
welcomes inquiries from other Federal, State, or Tribal agencies 
potentially interested in being a cooperating agency for the NEPA 
process.

Decision Maker and Nature of Decision To Be Made

    The decision maker is the USFWS Regional Director of the Pacific 
Region. The decision to be made is whether to implement a management 
strategy and authorize the take of barred owls under the MBTA to 
implement the selected management strategy as needed, or to select the 
No Action Alternative and not implement a management strategy and 
associated MBTA take authorization.

Literature Cited

Franklin, A.B., et al. 2021. Range-wide declines of northern spotted 
owl populations in the Pacific Northwest: A meta-analysis. 
Biological Conservation, Vol. 259 (2021) 109168. 21 pp.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2004. Northern spotted owl: 
Five Year Review Summary and Evaluation. U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service, Portland, Oregon.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2011. Revised Recovery Plan 
for the Northern Spotted Owl (Strix occidentalis caurina). U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon.
Wiens, J.D., et al. 2021. Invader removal triggers competitive 
release in a threatened avian predator. PNAS, Vol. 118, No. 31, 
e2102859118 (2021); https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/10.1073/pnas.2102859118.
Wood, C.M., R.J. Guti[eacute]rrez, J.J. Keane, and M.Z. Peery. 2020. 
Early detection of rapid Barred Owl population growth within the 
range of the California Spotted Owl advises the Precautionary 
Principle. The Condor, Volume 122, pp. 1-10.

Authority

    We provide this notice in accordance with the NEPA regulations 
found at 40 CFR 1501.9(d).

Nanette Seto,
Acting Deputy Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-15739 Filed 7-21-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P