[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2024)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 103761-103763]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-29236]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 29
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0106; FXRS12610900000-256-FF09R20000]
RIN 1018-BG78
National Wildlife Refuge System; Biological Integrity, Diversity,
and Environmental Health
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), withdraw the
proposed rule (proposal) published on February 2, 2024, that proposed
new regulations addressing the biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health (BIDEH) of the National Wildlife Refuge System
(Refuge System) and updates to the existing BIDEH policy. The Service
has determined that withdrawing the proposal is justified based on the
significant number of public comments received, the complexity of the
substantive comments received and the issues involved, as well as the
requests from the public for further opportunities to review and engage
with the Service on the substance of this proposal. With this action,
the existing BIDEH policy remains in effect.
DATES: The proposed rule that published on February 2, 2024 (89 FR
7345), is withdrawn on December 19, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The February 2, 2024, proposed rule, proposed updates to the
existing BIDEH policy, and the comments received are available at
https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-NWRS-2022-0106.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Katherine Harrigan, (703) 358-2440,
[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:
Background
On February 2, 2024, the Service published in the Federal Register
(89 FR 7345) a proposed rule to adopt new regulations to ensure that
the biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health (BIDEH)
of the Refuge System are maintained, and where appropriate, restored
and enhanced, in accordance with the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act; Pub. L. 105-57). In addition,
the Service proposed updates to the existing BIDEH policy, which was
available for public comment in the proposed rule's docket on https://www.regulations.gov. These proposed regulations and policy revisions
were intended to support conservation throughout the Refuge System in
response to both longstanding and contemporary conservation challenges,
including the universal and profound effects of climate change on
refuge species and ecosystems.
The National Wildlife Refuge System is the only network of Federal
lands and waters in the United States dedicated to fish and wildlife
conservation and, at more than 850 million acres, the largest system of
its kind in the world. The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (Administration Act; 16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee),
as amended by the Improvement Act, is the primary statutory authority
under which the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Service,
administers the Refuge System. The Alaska National Interest Lands
Conservation Act of 1980 (16 U.S.C. 3111-3126), the Wilderness Act of
1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136), and various other statutes also provide
direction and authority for refuge management. The implementing
regulations for the Administration Act are found in title 50 of the
Code of Federal Regulations at subchapter C.
The Improvement Act established the mission of the Refuge System to
administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation,
management, and where appropriate, restoration of fish, wildlife, and
plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the
benefit of present and future generations of Americans (16 U.S.C.
668dd(a)(2)). The Improvement Act sets forth policy direction,
management standards, and stewardship requirements for administering
the more than 570 national wildlife refuges in the Refuge System;
prioritizing conservation while ensuring public access to compatible,
wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities; and ensuring effective
coordination with adjacent landowners and State fish and wildlife
agencies. The Improvement Act states that each refuge must be managed
to fulfill both the Refuge System mission and the specific
[[Page 103762]]
purposes for which that refuge was established (16 U.S.C.
668dd(a)(3)(A)). It additionally requires that, in administering the
Refuge System, the Secretary shall ensure that the biological
integrity, diversity, and environmental health of the Refuge System are
maintained for the benefit of present and future generations of
Americans (16 U.S.C. 668dd(a)(4)(B)).
The Improvement Act is recognized as a visionary legislative
charter for managing a system of wildlife reserves in part due to its
mandate to ensure BIDEH. The terms comprising the BIDEH mandate are
grounded in conservation biology and demonstrate congressional intent
to conserve Refuge System fish, wildlife, plants, and habitats in
accordance with the latest scientific understanding. This directive for
a comprehensive, science-based approach to refuge management is
critical to ensuring that imperiled species and diverse wildlife
populations in North America are secure and thriving and are sustained
by a network of healthy lands and waters. Therefore, as the Refuge
System becomes increasingly vital to addressing the dual threats of
biodiversity loss and climate change, the Service recognized the need
to codify, clarify, and update its interpretation of the BIDEH mandate
to better equip refuges in responding to these and other anthropogenic
stressors.
Reasons for Withdrawal of the Proposal
On February 2, 2024, the Service published in the Federal Register
(89 FR 7345) proposed new regulations and proposed revisions to the
policy to ensure that the BIDEH of the Refuge System are maintained,
and where appropriate, restored and enhanced, in accordance with the
Improvement Act. The public comment period on the proposed rule and
proposed policy revisions was extended from 30 days to a total of 90
days (see 89 FR 7345, February 2, 2024; 89 FR 15806, March 5, 2024) due
to significant public interest and requests for an extension to the
original comment period.
More than 200,000 individuals commented on the BIDEH proposed rule
and revised policy in a total of more than 50,500 public comment
submissions. Of these comments, approximately 150 lengthy, substantive
comment letters were received from State and Tribal partners,
environmental organizations, sporting groups, agricultural and animal
welfare interests, and other stakeholders. We received approximately
150,000 combined signatures from comment campaigns, many of which also
included unique substantive comments, organized by various
organizations regarding specific topics in the proposed rule.
The substantive comments received addressed a broad scope of issues
in the BIDEH proposal and demonstrated the complexity of the topics
addressed in the proposal. The commenters highlighted a myriad of
multifaceted subjects and suggested modifications to a variety of
provisions. Based on the extensive public comments we received on the
proposed rule, the complexity of the topics they covered, and new
information not previously considered, it is the Service's sound
professional judgment that any final rule would require revisions that
go beyond the logical outgrowth of the original proposal. Therefore,
the Service has determined that the best course of action is to
withdraw the entirety of the February 2, 2024, proposed rule and policy
revision as discussed further below.
While the majority of the comments were generally supportive of
many fundamental concepts contained in the proposed BIDEH rule, they
expressed various views on the proposal's framing and approach. For
example, overall, the commenters conveyed an understanding and
appreciation of the need to address climate change and use best
available science, although they provided a variety of opinions on the
specifics and how science should be applied. The concept of improving
habitat connectivity also tended to garner support, along with
suggestions for bolstering such provisions, although this concept
generated some concerns from economic and industry interests. Other
concepts, such as deference to natural processes, appeared to generate
some confusion, indicating the need for additional explanation or
revisions to the proposal for clarity.
Many of the comment letters contained complicated implementation
questions or concerns with refuge management capacity and perceived
administrative and financial burdens, which were raised across the
spectrum of stakeholders. Some of these commenters interpreted the
BIDEH proposal as requiring a separate BIDEH determination process for
all refuge management decisions alongside existing processes. Many
commenters expressed concerns that implementation of the BIDEH proposal
would place unnecessary administrative burdens on managers of national
wildlife refuges that would require time and resources the Service does
not have, especially if the proposal required the completion of new
documentation. The Service received requests from commenters for
further coordination with States, partners, and other stakeholders
regarding the content and application of the proposal.
The intent of the BIDEH proposal has been to rely on the use of
existing processes (comprehensive conservation planning, compatibility
determinations, and actions to comply with the National Environmental
Policy Act) to implement the proposed policy and regulations. In
reviewing these comments, the Service understands the concern raised by
commenters about a lack of clarity within the proposal regarding the
specific implementation process for ensuring BIDEH. However, because
refuge management decisions and actions are not one-size-fits-all, the
Service did not intend to be overly prescriptive about implementation
processes through the revised BIDEH policy or proposed regulations.
Therefore, the Service acknowledges the need to provide guidance both
internally and externally explaining how BIDEH will be considered
through existing processes. While this level of detail regarding
implementation would not be prudent to include in a final rule for this
proposal, it warrants further consideration to ensure an appropriate
approach that promotes public support and facilitates on-the-ground
application.
The provisions of the proposal that garnered the most complex and
disparate views from commenters were those addressing specific
management activities (such as agricultural use and predator control)
on refuge lands. The differing viewpoints included many calls either to
further restrict or alternatively to liberalize the application of
these management practices. The controversy raised by these comments
stemmed primarily from differing views on how rigid or flexible refuge
management tools ought to be: Some favor more flexibility, while others
seek stricter control of actions on refuges. The range of comments the
Service received on these topics relied on a variety of sources,
including peer-reviewed science, best practices, industry standards,
and field experience. These comments demonstrate some of the issues
that require further communication and coordination with partners and
stakeholders to ensure greater understanding of the Service's intent
before the finalization of any BIDEH proposal.
For the reasons provided above, we are withdrawing the proposed
rule that published on February 2, 2024 (89 FR 7345). The existing
policy in part 601 of
[[Page 103763]]
the Service Manual at 601 FW 3 remains in effect.
Authority
The authority for this action is the National Wildlife Refuge
System Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), as amended
by the National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (Pub. L.
105-57).
Shannon Estenoz,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 2024-29236 Filed 12-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P