Voglio sapere a riguardo di…

khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with RULES2

48832

Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 166 / Tuesday, August 31, 2021 / Rules and Regulations
the Service to manage refuges for biological integrity, diversity, and environmental health. Predators play a critical role in the integrity, diversity, and overall health of ecosystems, so before allowing predators to be hunted, a refuge manager must ensure that these actions do not threaten the integrity, diversity, or health of the refuge ecosystem. The manager must also determine that the action is compatible with refuge purposes and the mission of the Refuge System, and in keeping with the refuges CCP and other step-down plans. In addition, the refuge manager analyzes the impacts of the actions on the environment through the NEPA
process and section 7 of the ESA.
Therefore, a refuge manager must take many steps to ensure that any opportunity for hunting predators on a refuge meets the Services applicable laws and policies.
For example, we received one comment advocating for the hunting of predator species during established State seasons at Sherburne NWR in Minnesota. The refuge manager at Sherburne NWR had already considered adding such hunts, but determined that the seasons and hours of predator hunting in Minnesota would conflict with the months of the year and hours of the day in which the refuge is open to the public. Sherburne NWR observes a sanctuary period from March 1
through August 31, and is only open during daylight hours. Predator hunting in Minnesota is primarily at night and primarily during the summer months.
We will not be able to grant the request of this commenter because it is not compatible with the conservation purposes and practices of Sherburne NWR.
The Administration Act, as amended, also mandates that regulations allowing hunting or fishing of fish and resident wildlife within the Refuge System shall be, to the extent practicable, consistent with State fish and wildlife laws, regulations, and management plans 16
U.S.C. 668ddm. Therefore, all the opportunities for hunting predators in this rule that are intended to bring greater consistency with State fish and wildlife laws, regulations, and management plans are part of realizing the Services mission. Moreover, these, as with all predator hunting determinations and all hunting and fishing determinations, were only made after careful consideration by the refuge manager to ensure that such actions would not threaten the integrity, diversity, and overall health of the ecosystem and were compatible with both the purpose of the refuge and the mission of the Refuge System. For
VerDate Sep<11>2014

20:40 Aug 30, 2021

Jkt 253001

NFHs, the hatchery manager made the decision that such opportunities were not detrimental to the propagation of fish, wildlife, or aquatic species 50 CFR
70.1. Finally, both the NEPA process and the rulemaking process provide opportunities for the public to provide comments and any additional information on impacts of our actions.
We considered the additional information provided from the public on this issue during these public comment periods and determined that they did not affect our initial determinations that these small and minor opportunities for hunting predators on specific refuges or hatcheries will have no more than minor impacts on the population health of these species or other wildlife at the local, regional, or national level.
Lastly, one commenter noted that for a particular predator coyote the cumulative impacts report omitted proposed hunts from the narrative descriptions of the openings and expansions for three stations: Bogue Chitto NWR, Loess Bluffs NWR, and Malheur NWR. Those typographical errors have been corrected for Bogue Chitto NWR and Malheur NWR. In the case of Loess Bluffs NWR, all hunting openings and expansions described in the May 4, 2021, proposed rule are not included in this final rule, in recognition of concerns expressed by the Iowa Tribe of Kansas and Nebraska.
We have changed the cumulative impacts report as described, but did not make any changes to the rule as a result of these comments.
Comment 16: One commenter stated that the Service did not properly consider the impacts of allowing beaver hunting because beaver dams can alter water flow in ways that provide habitats for other species.
Our Response: This rule includes the opening or expansion of beaver hunting on multiple refuges, both as a target species and as incidental take during hunts for other species. For each of these refuges individually, the NEPA
analysis and ESA section 7 analysis consider the potential impacts of allowing hunters to take beaver. As with all target species, the refuge manager must ensure that authorizing hunting does not threaten the integrity, diversity, or health of the refuge ecosystem. This includes effects on other species from the loss of individuals from the given target species, which encompasses effects from the absence of beaver dams that change water flows just as it encompasses effects from reduced predation, reduced foraging pressure, and other mechanisms that can impact
PO 00000

Frm 00012

Fmt 4701

Sfmt 4700

non-target species. The manager must also determine that the action is compatible with refuge purposes and the mission of the Refuge System, and in keeping with the refuges CCP and other step-down plans. As a result, the beaver hunts in this rule do not present a threat to ecosystem health or other species either directly from the take of individual beavers or indirectly through the effect of beaver hunting on the number and strength of beaver dams. In fact, on many refuges beavers are already managed by refuge staff to prevent habitat damage caused by beaver dams, which can have negative impacts on vegetation, moist soil units, and other refuge resources. Finally, the Service does not anticipate substantial take of beavers on any particular refuge or cumulatively.
We did not make any changes to the rule as a result of this comment.
Comment 17: We received several comments that expressed concern over some aspect of public safety.
Commenters raised concerns about openings or expansions of hunting at certain stations based on the conflicts with other visitors to the refuge or the need for adequate funding and/or staffing. In particular, the most common specific concern was that the increase in openings and expansions of hunting and sport fishing would overwhelm existing law enforcement capacity. These concerns were expressed for multiple specific stations and as a nationwide issue.
Our Response: The Service considers public safety to be a top priority. In order to open or expand hunting or sport fishing on a refuge, we must find the activity compatible. In order to find an activity compatible, the activity must not materially interfere with or detract from public safety, wildlife resources, or the purpose of the refuge see the Service Manual at 603 FW 2.6.B., available online at https www.fws.gov/
policy/603fw2.html. For this rulemaking, we specifically analyzed the possible impacts of the changes to hunting programs at each refuge and hatchery on visitor use and experience, including public safety concerns and possible conflicts between user groups.
Hunting of resident wildlife on refuges generally occurs consistent with State regulations, which are designed to protect public safety. Refuges may also develop refuge-specific hunting regulations that are more restrictive than State regulations in order to help meet specific refuge objectives, including protecting public safety. Refuges use many techniques to ensure the safety of hunters and visitors, such as requiring hunters to wear blaze orange,
E:FRFM31AUR2.SGM

31AUR2