[Federal Register: July 22, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 139)]
[Notices]
[Page 36247-36248]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr22jy09-101]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R3-MB-2009-N149] [30120-1113-0000-D3]
Information Collection Sent to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for Approval; Bald Eagle Post-delisting Monitoring
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We (Fish and Wildlife Service, Service) have sent an
Information Collection Request (ICR) to OMB for review and approval.
The ICR, which is summarized below, describes the nature of the
collection and the estimated burden and cost. We may not conduct or
sponsor and a person is not required to respond to a collection of
information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
DATES: You must send comments on or before August 21, 2009.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments and suggestions on this information
collection to the Desk Officer for the Department of the Interior at
OMB-OIRA at (202) 395-5806 (fax) or OIRA_DOCKET@OMB.eop.gov (e-mail).
Please provide a copy of your comments to Hope Grey, Information
Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service, MS 222-ARLSQ,
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22203 (mail) or hope_
grey@fws.gov (e-mail).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To request additional information
about this ICR, contact Hope Grey by mail or e-mail (see ADDRESSES) or
by telephone at (703) 358-2482.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
OMB Control Number: None. This is a new collection.
Title: Bald Eagle Post-delisting Monitoring.
Type of Request: New.
Affected Public: States, tribes, and local governments, Federal
land managers, and nongovernmental partners.
Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
Frequency of Collection: Once every 5 years.
Note: For each 5-year survey, we estimate a total of 48 respondents
will provide 48 responses totaling 1,478 burden hours. The burden
estimates below are annualized over the 3-year period of OMB approval.
Estimated Annual Number of Respondents: 16.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 16.
Estimated Time per Response: 30.8 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 493.
Abstract: This information collection implements the requirements
of the Endangered Species Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) (ESA). The bald
eagle in the lower 48 States was removed from the List of Endangered
and Threatened Wildlife on August 8, 2007 (July 9, 2007, 72 FR 37346).
Section 4(g) of the ESA requires that all species that are recovered
and removed from the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(delisted) be monitored in cooperation with the States for a period of
not less than 5 years. The purpose of this requirement is to detect any
failure of a recovered species to sustain itself without the
protections of the ESA.
The bald eagle has a large geographic distribution that includes a
substantial amount of non-Federal land. Although the ESA requires that
monitoring of recovered species be conducted for not less than 5 years,
the life history of bald eagles is such that it is appropriate to
monitor this species for a longer period of time in order to
meaningfully evaluate whether or not the recovered species continues to
maintain its recovered status.
We plan to monitor the status of the bald eagle by collecting data
on occupied nests over a 20-year period with sampling events held once
every 5 years. The Post-delisting Monitoring Plan for the Bald Eagle
(Plan) describes monitoring procedures and methods.
When OMB takes action on this ICR, we will publish a notice in the
Federal Register announcing the availability of the final Plan. If you
would like a copy of the Plan before the notice of availability is
published, contact Hope Grey (see ADDRESSES) or you can obtain a copy
online at http://www.reginfo.gov.
Comments: On July 9, 2007, we published a notice of availability
for the draft Plan in the Federal Register (72 FR 37373). We solicited
comments for a period of 90 days, ending on October 9, 2007. In
addition, in the fall of 2007, we gave two web presentations for State
biologists. These presentations focused on the survey and data
collection methods. We considered all comments from the Federal
Register notice and the web presentations and addressed them in the
Plan.
Comment: Adequate funding for monitoring has not been identified.
Response: The Service will fund the area frame surveys for the
initial baseline survey, including the use of aircraft and pilots to
complete the surveys. We will continue to work with the States, tribes,
and our other partners to secure funding for future surveys.
Comment: Five-year intervals between monitoring are insufficient.
Response: In order to assess several generations of bald eagles
after delisting, this Plan recommends monitoring bald eagle nesting
populations at 5-year intervals (which would follow the development
cycle to maturity for one generation) for four generations or a total
of 20 years. This exceeds the requirements of the ESA. Many States
monitor bald eagle nests on an annual basis because the surveys provide
valuable resource data. Some States have indicated that their future
bald eagle monitoring will be greatly reduced due to its recovery and
the need to allocate funding to other areas. Thus, 5-year survey
intervals will provide more data for States where surveys are not
otherwise planned. It may also provide a cost savings for other States
if they can use these data at 5-year intervals to satisfy their needs.
[[Page 36248]]
Comment: Twenty-five percent decline is too large of an interval to
serve as a trigger mechanism for review.
Response: The goal of the Plan is to detect a 25-percent or greater
change in occupied bald eagle nests over any period, measured at 5-year
intervals based on an 80 percent chance of detecting such a change. We
believe this is a goal that both ensures continued recovery under the
ESA and is cost-effective. If a 25-percent decline is detected, it
means a reduction to a level still recognized as recovered under the
ESA. If such declines are detected, we, in conjunction with the States,
will investigate causes of those declines. At the end of the 20-year
monitoring program, we will coordinate with States and our other
partners to conduct a final review and provide recommendations to
ensure a properly managed population of the recovered bald eagle.
Comment: Implementation involves potential sampling bias due to
variable observer experience and familiarity with nesting territories.
Response: We have structured training, pre-survey preparation, and
survey protocols to minimize potential sampling bias. Though
experienced bald eagle observers may be familiar with specific nests,
pilot studies showed that the observers were able to change mindsets
from ``searching habitat'' in Area plots to ``determining the status of
specific known list nests'' in List plots, without issue. Using the
dual-observer method to determine individual detection probabilities
for observers will help account for differences in observer experience.
In planning Area plots survey routes, observers will be given maps that
show habitat, but not the location of nests, allowing survey route
planning to be based on habitat characteristics.
Comment: Conducting a large-scale monitoring project every 5 years
could create staffing problems.
Response: Staffing will require open and clear communication among
the States, tribes, and the Service. If State staff are not available
for surveys, we will draw upon local Service offices, tribal
biologists, retired Service and State employees, and experienced
volunteers to fill in as observers.
Comment: There is a lack of a comprehensive monitoring program for
environmental contaminants.
Response: We worked with the U.S. Geological Survey to develop a
searchable database/library dedicated to contaminants investigations of
bald eagle, osprey, and peregrine falcons. The objective was to create
a readily available source of information to consider should the bald
eagle (or peregrine) population decline. This database provides
biologists an overview of the most recent findings of contaminant
effects on these species. If additional studies are needed during post-
delisting monitoring, the database will clarify what has been studied
and what has not.
Comment: The phrase ``broad geographic areas'' in the section on
Habitat implies that the analysis of survey data may be accomplished on
something less than a rangewide scale.
Response: This is correct. If trends in nest occupancy
significantly decline over broad geographic areas, whether rangewide or
more regionally, we will investigate a change in available nesting
habitat as a possible cause and take appropriate actions, as feasible.
Comment: Customized parameters may be required in certain local
situations.
Response: We agree and have modified the Plan accordingly.
Comment: The definition of bald eagle habitat in the Plan,
especially the size of water bodies required, may not be appropriate
for some geographic regions, especially the Southwest.
Response: We modified the Plan to reflect that local conditions may
warrant modifications to the habitat being considered. Input from local
eagle biologists will be necessary in these unique or localized
conditions.
Comment: Surveys based on Bird Conservation Regions (BCRs) will not
work in some States (e.g., eagle distribution is linear and follows
major waterways which cross multiple BCRs).
Response: We recognize some of the limitations of this approach,
but still maintain it is the most appropriate for application across
broad geographic areas. We will work with local biologists to further
refine the stratification on a local level.
Comment: The boundary between the Northern Pacific Rainforest BCR
and the Great Basin BCR, although correctly mapped in the Plan, is an
incorrect depiction of the margin between the two ecoregions. This has
resulted in inappropriate numbers being used in calculations of nests
in the BCR tables in the Plan.
Response: We have modified this portion of the Plan to reflect that
we will work with local biologists and others to further refine the BCR
boundaries to more accurately reflect habitat groupings and, as
appropriate, modify calculations of nests and nest densities per BCR.
We again invite comments concerning this information collection on:
(1) Whether or not the collection of information is necessary,
including whether or not the information will have practical utility;
(2) The accuracy of our estimate of the burden for this collection
of information;
(3) Ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(4) Ways to minimize the burden of the collection of information on
respondents.
Comments that you submit in response to this notice are a matter of
public record. Before including your address, phone number, e-mail
address, 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 OMB in your comment to withhold your personal
identifying information from public review, we cannot guarantee that it
will be done.
Dated: June 23, 2009
Hope Grey,
Information Collection Clearance Officer, Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. E9-17387 Filed 7-21-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-S