Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Notices 80329 

II. Background 

To help us carry out our conservation 

responsibilities for affected species, and 

in consideration of section 112(4) of the 

Wild Bird Conservation Act of 1992 

(WBCA; 16 U.S.C. 4901–4916), we 

invite public comments on permit 

applications before final action is taken. 

With some exceptions, the WBCA 

prohibits certain activities with listed 

species unless Federal authorization is 

issued that allows such activities. 

Service regulations regarding permits 

for any activity otherwise prohibited by 

the WBCA with respect to any wild 

birds are available in title 50 of the Code 

of Federal Regulations in part 15. 

III. Permit Applications 

We invite comments on the following 

applications. 

Applicant: Masashige Yoshida c/o 

David Garcia, Homestead, FL; Permit 

No. PER0028206 

The applicant, along with member 

Scott Golden, and the Organization of 

Professional Aviculturists (OPA) as their 

oversight committee, wishes to establish 

a Cooperative Breeding Program 

covering White-crested turacos (Tauraco 

leucolophus), Fischer’s turacos (Tauraco 

fischeri), Livingstone’s turacos (Tauraco 

livingstonii), Schalow’s turacos 

(Tauraco schalowi), Hartlaub’s turacos 

(Tauraco hartlaubi), Purple-crested 

turacos (Gallirex porphyreolophus), 

White-cheeked turacos (Tauraco 

leucotis), Red-crested turacos (Tauraco 

erythrolophus), and Persa turacos 

(Tauraco persa). 

Applicant: Bethany McMartin, Port 

Angeles, WA; Permit No. PER1648672 

The applicant, along with members 

Brian Sullivan, Thomas Coulson, 

Jennifer Coulson, Jeff Rossey, William 

Keith Hix, Danny Ertsgaard, Troy 

Morris, Justin Rondeau, Bethany 

McMartin, and the Washington 

Falconers Association as their oversight 

committee, wishes to re-issue the 

Cooperative Breeding Program CBP–004 

covering Eurasian (European) 

sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus), Rednaped shaheen (Falco peregrinus 

babylonicus), Northern goshawk 

(Accipiter gentilis), aplomado falcon 

(Falco femoralis femoralis) and 

Aplomando flacon (Falco femoralis 

pichinchae), Barbary falcon (Falco 

pelegrinoides), and ornate hawk-eagle 

(Spizaetus ornatus). 

IV. Next Steps 

After the comment period closes, we 

will make decisions regarding permit 

issuance. If we issue permits to any of 

the applicants listed in this notice, we 

will publish a notice in the Federal 

Register. You may locate the notice 

announcing the permit issuance by 

searching https://www.regulations.gov 

for the permit number listed above in 

this document. For example, to find 

information about the potential issuance 

of Permit No. 12345A, you would go to 

https://www.regulations.gov and search 

for ‘‘12345A’’. 

V. Authority 

We issue this notice under the 

authority of the Wild Bird Conservation 

Act of 1992 (16 U.S.C. 4901–4916). This 

notice is provided pursuant to section 

112(4) of the Wild Bird Conservation 

Act of 1992, 50 CFR 15.26(c). 

Brenda Tapia, 

Supervisory Program Analyst/Data 

Administrator, Branch of Permits, Division 

of Management Authority. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25436 Filed 11–16–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–R1–ES–2022–0074; 

ES11140100000–245–FF01E0000] 

Draft Environmental Impact Statement 

for the Barred Owl Management 

Strategy; Washington, Oregon, and 

California 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; notice of 

virtual public meetings; request for 

comments. 

SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service) developed a proposed 

barred owl management strategy 

(management strategy) to address the 

threat of the nonnative, invasive barred 

owl (Strix varia) to the native northern 

spotted owl (Strix occidentalis caurina) 

and California spotted owl (Strix 

occidentalis occidentalis). In accordance 

with the National Environmental Policy 

Act, this notice announces the 

availability of a draft environmental 

impact statement (DEIS) evaluating the 

impacts on the human environment 

related to the proposed management 

strategy and associated take of barred 

owls, which is prohibited under the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act unless 

authorized by the Service by permit or 

regulation. We invite public comments 

on the proposed management strategy 

and DEIS from the public and Federal, 

Tribal, State, and local governments. 

DATES: Submitting Comments: Hardcopy 

comments must be received or 

postmarked on or before January 16, 

2024. (See ADDRESSES.) Comments 

submitted online at https:// 

www.regulations.gov/ must be received 

by 11:59 p.m. eastern time on January 

16, 2024. 

Virtual Public Meetings: We will hold 

two virtual public meetings, on 

December 4, 2023, and December 14, 

2023, from 6 to 8 p.m. Pacific time. For 

more information, see Virtual Public 

Meetings under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

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. 

We will post all comments on https:// 

www.regulations.gov. This generally 

means that we will post online any 

personal information that you provide. 

We request that you submit comments 

by only the methods above. For 

additional information about submitting 

comments, see Public Comments under 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION. 

Public Meeting: A registration link 

and access instructions for the virtual 

meetings will be posted to https://

www.fws.gov/office/oregon-fish-andwildlife at least 1 week prior to the 

public meeting dates. Reviewing U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Comments on the DEIS: See EPA’s Role 

in the EIS Process under SUPPLEMENTARY

INFORMATION. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Robin Bown, by telephone at 503–231– 

6923, or by email at robin_bown@

fws.gov. 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-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 

developed a proposed barred owl 

management strategy (management 

strategy) to address the threat of 

nonnative invasive barred owl on two 

native owl subspecies in the West, the 

northern spotted owl (Strix occidentalis 

caurina) and California spotted owl 

(Strix occidentalis occidentalis). 

Implementation of the management 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
80330 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Notices 

strategy would involve the reduction of 

barred owl populations in targeted 

management areas in Washington, 

Oregon, and California. On July 22, 

2022, the Service published a notice of 

intent (87 FR 43886) to develop a draft 

environmental impact statement (DEIS) 

evaluating the impacts on the human 

environment from implementation of 

the proposed management strategy and 

a reasonable range of alternatives, 

consistent with the purpose and goals of 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). The 

Service, with input from several 

Federal, State, and Tribal cooperating 

agencies, has prepared this DEIS 

pursuant to the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s (CEQ’s) 

implementing NEPA regulations at 40 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 

1500–1508, which became effective on 

May 20, 2022 (April 20, 2022, 87 FR 

23453). We invite public comments on 

the proposed management strategy and 

DEIS from the public and Federal, 

Tribal, State, and local governments. 

Background 

Spotted owls are native to western 

North America. Competition from the 

nonnative invasive barred owls has been 

identified as a primary threat to the 

northern spotted owl, listed as 

threatened under the Endangered 

Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et 

seq.), as well as a threat to the 

persistence of California spotted owl, 

which the Service has proposed to list 

as endangered in some areas and 

threatened in others (88 FR 11600, 

February 23, 2023). Additional primary 

threats include the loss of habitat to 

timber harvest on non-Federal lands and 

to wildfires on Federal lands. 

Barred owls, native to eastern North 

America, 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. These slightly larger and more 

aggressive owls quickly displaced 

spotted owls from their historic 

territories. Without management of 

barred owls, extirpation of northern 

spotted owls from major portions of 

their historic range is likely in the near 

future. While barred owls have not 

substantially impacted California 

spotted owl populations to date, the 

establishment of a small barred owl 

population in the northern Sierra 

Nevada, and the history of the invasion 

and impacts on northern spotted owls 

following such expansion, indicates that 

barred owls are also a significant threat 

to the persistence of California spotted 

owls. 

The barred owl is protected under the 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA; 16 

U.S.C. 703–712), which prohibits take of 

protected migratory bird species unless 

authorized by the Service through 

permit or regulation (50 CFR 21.10). 

Purpose and Need for the Proposed 

Action 

Using information from a recently 

completed barred owl removal 

experiment and other applicable studies 

and research findings, the Service 

determined that barred owl removal can 

be an effective method for the 

conservation of spotted owls. 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 reduce 

barred owl populations within selected 

treatment areas in the short term and 

increase northern spotted owl 

populations in those treatment areas. 

Relative to the California spotted owl, 

the purpose is to limit the invasion of 

barred owls into the range of the 

subspecies and provide for a rapid 

response to reduce barred owl 

populations that may become 

established. 

This action is needed because 

invasive barred owls compete with 

northern and California spotted owls. 

Competition from the invasive barred 

owl is a 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 before 

northern spotted owls are extirpated 

from large portions of their native range. 

There is also a need to focus on limiting 

the invasion of barred owls into the 

California spotted owl range, as we 

expect additional impacts to California 

spotted owl populations would be 

inevitable without barred owl 

management, and invasive species are 

very difficult to remove once 

established. 

Proposed Action and Alternatives 

The proposed action is the issuance of 

a Migratory Bird Special Purpose permit 

under the MBTA (50 CFR 21.95) and 

implementation of the management 

strategy. The DEIS analyzes the 

proposed action, a no action alternative, 

and a reasonable range of alternatives to 

the proposed action, including the 

environmental consequences of each 

alternative. All action alternatives 

include issuance of an MBTA permit for 

management to reduce barred owl 

populations in areas within the northern 

spotted owl’s range and to prevent 

establishment of barred owl populations 

within the California spotted owl’s 

range. The locations and relative 

priorities for removal would vary by 

action alternative. None of the 

alternatives would require any entity to 

implement barred owl management; 

rather, they outline various 

combinations of management 

approaches, geographic areas, and other 

components that would allow for and 

guide management actions and the 

ability to prioritize areas of greatest 

need. 

Six alternatives are analyzed in detail 

in the DEIS: 

Alternative 1—No Action: under the 

no action alternative, a comprehensive 

management strategy would not be 

finalized or implemented, and the 

Service would not issue an MBTA 

permit for systematic management of 

barred owls. Ongoing barred owl 

removal as part of research efforts in 

California, and future research efforts 

that may be proposed anywhere in the 

range of the spotted owl, would still 

occur. 

Alternative 2—Management Strategy 

Implementation (Proposed Action): 

Under the proposed action, we would 

apply three approaches to barred owl 

management within the northern 

spotted owl range: spotted owl site 

management, General Management 

Areas with associated Focal 

Management Areas, and Special 

Designated Areas. Site management 

involves removing barred owls from 

within and around spotted owl sites, 

with priority given to recently occupied 

sites. General Management Areas are 

large areas within which barred owl 

management would occur on smaller 

Focal Management Areas. Focal 

Management Areas would be 

established at the time of removal by the 

implementing entity, based on general 

direction and prioritization provided in 

the management strategy. Special 

Designated Areas are areas mapped to 

support specific identified needs, such 

as connectivity between populations, 

buffer zones to provide a barrier to 

invasion, special emphasis areas, or 

management of early invasions. In the 

California spotted owl range, where we 

are focused on early detection and rapid 

response at the invasion front, the 

proposed action focuses on surveys, 

inventory, and monitoring to detect 

invading barred owls and rapid removal 

of any barred owls detected. 

Alternative 3—Management Across 

the Range: Under this alternative, barred 

owl management could be implemented 

anywhere within the range of the 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Notices 80331 

northern or California spotted owls or 

within 15 miles of the range of the 

subspecies on up to 50 percent of the 

area. There would be no specific 

requirements for size or location of 

management areas. 

Alternative 4—Limited Management 

by Province/Population: Within the 

northern spotted owl range, this 

alternative would focus barred owl 

management on a single large General 

Management Area within each province. 

This approach supports a single, but 

larger, spotted owl population in each 

province. In the California spotted owl 

range, barred owl management would be 

delayed until detections reached 10 

percent of surveys in areas within the 

Sierra Nevada portion of the population, 

or 5 percent within the CoastalSouthern California portion of the 

province. This would allow barred owl 

populations to be established, but 

removed before they can substantially 

impact spotted owls. 

Alternative 5—Management Focused 

on Highest Risk Areas: In the northern 

spotted owl range, this alternative 

would focus barred owl management in 

the northern provinces, where the 

subspecies is at greatest risk of 

extirpation from barred owl competition 

in the Washington East Cascades, 

Washington West Cascades, Oregon East 

Cascades, Oregon West Cascades, 

Oregon Coast Ranges, and Olympic 

Peninsula Physiographic Provinces. In 

the California spotted owl range, barred 

owl management would be limited to 

the northern Sierra Nevada portion of 

the subspecies range, where the barred 

owl invasion initially occurred and 

represents the most likely pathway for 

larger numbers of barred owls to invade 

the California spotted owl range. 

Alternative 6—Management Focused 

on Best Conditions: This alternative 

would focus barred owl management in 

the southern portion of the northern 

spotted owl range, where spotted owl 

populations have not decreased to the 

degree they have in the north, including 

the Oregon Klamath, California Coast, 

California Klamath, and California 

Cascades Physiographic Provinces. In 

the California spotted owl range, barred 

owl management would be focused on 

areas with the best remaining habitat 

and areas with higher fire resiliency, 

including the Sierra Nevada portion of 

the range with the best remaining 

habitat, and the Coastal-Southern 

California portion of the range. 

Summary of Impacts 

The DEIS describes the potential 

direct and indirect effects of each 

alternative on the human environment, 

focusing on impacts to barred owls, 

spotted owls, other wildlife species, 

recreation and visitor use, wilderness, 

socioeconomics, and climate change, as 

well as cumulative effects of the action 

when added to the effects of other past, 

present, and reasonably foreseeable 

actions. Effects to other resources were 

considered but dismissed from detailed 

analysis because significant effects on 

public health and safety, cultural 

resources, Tribes, ethical 

considerations, environmental justice, 

or geology, soils, water, vegetation, or 

air quality are not expected. 

Lead and Cooperating Agencies 

The Service is the lead agency for the 

NEPA process, including development 

of the DEIS. The following agencies are 

cooperating agencies in the NEPA 

process and provided input and 

assistance with the development of the 

EIS: U.S. Forest Service (Regions 5 and 

6), Bureau of Land Management 

(Oregon), Bureau of Land Management 

(California), National Park Service 

(Interior Regions 8, 9, 10, 12), 

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. 

Anticipated Permits and Authorizations 

In addition to compliance with the 

ESA and MBTA discussed above, 

compliance with section 106 of the 

National Historic Preservation Act is 

required by law for all Federal 

undertakings. The proposed action of 

issuing an MBTA permit is a Federal 

undertaking. In this case, our 

preliminary analysis is that the 

proposed action has no potential to 

cause effects, because the proposed 

action, along with all action 

alternatives, does not involve any 

ground disturbing or other activities that 

might result in direct or indirect effects 

to known or potential cultural 

resources. 

Depending on the location and 

landowners involved in implementation 

of the management strategy, barred owl 

management could require additional 

Federal and State permits. We anticipate 

the potential need to acquire permits 

from the States of Washington, Oregon, 

and California to carry out the proposed 

barred owl removal actions under the 

proposed management strategy. 

EPA’s Role in the EIS Process 

The EPA is charged under section 309 

of the Clean Air Act with reviewing all 

Federal agencies’ EISs and commenting 

on the adequacy and acceptability of the 

environmental impacts of proposed 

actions. Under the CEQ NEPA 

regulations, EPA is also responsible for 

administering the EIS filing process. 

EPA is publishing a notice in the 

Federal Register announcing this DEIS. 

The publication date of EPA’s notice of 

availability is the official beginning of 

the public comment period. EPA serves 

as the repository (EIS database) for EISs 

prepared by Federal agencies. You may 

search for EPA comments on EISs, along 

with EISs themselves, at https://

cdxapps.epa.gov/cdx-enepa-II/public/ 

action/eis/search. 

Public Comments 

You may submit your comments and 

materials on the proposed management 

strategy and the DEIS by one of the 

methods in ADDRESSES. We specifically 

request information on the following: 

1. Biological information, analysis, 

and relevant data concerning the barred 

owl, spotted owl, and their interactions. 

2. Components of the barred owl 

strategy, including but not limited to: 

a. Locations where barred owl 

management should be focused or 

where management should be avoided; 

b. Specific techniques for removal of 

barred owls or reduction in barred owl 

populations; and 

c. Criteria and approaches for 

selecting management areas. 

3. The alternatives analysis conducted 

by the Service, including the 

alternatives analyzed, the range of 

alternatives analyzed, and the 

alternatives considered but not analyzed 

in detail. 

4. Potential effects of the proposed 

action and alternatives on other aspects 

of the human environment, including 

other wildlife species and habitats as 

well as aesthetic, historic, cultural, 

economic, social, environmental justice, 

or health resources. 

5. Cumulative effects, which are 

effects on the environment that result 

from the incremental effects of the 

action when added to the effects of 

other past, present, and reasonably 

foreseeable actions, as well as any 

connected actions that are closely 

related and should be discussed in the 

same DEIS. 

6. The alternatives, information, and 

analyses submitted during the public 

scoping period and the summary 

thereof. 

7. Other information relevant to the 

proposed management strategy and 

MBTA take authorization, and its 

impacts on the human environment. 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES
80332 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 221 / Friday, November 17, 2023 / Notices 

Virtual Public Meeting 

To provide for the wide attendance of 

interested parties, two virtual public 

meetings will be conducted. See DATES

and ADDRESSES for the dates and times 

of the virtual public meetings. During 

the meetings, the Service will present 

information about the management 

strategy and MBTA take authorization 

and provide an opportunity for the 

public to ask questions about the 

proposed management strategy and the 

DEIS. The first meeting will provide 

additional focus on barred owl 

management within the northern 

spotted owl’s range. The second meeting 

will provide additional focus on 

management within the range of 

California spotted owls. No opportunity 

for oral comments will be provided. 

Written comments may be submitted by 

the methods listed in ADDRESSES. 

Reasonable Accommodations 

Persons needing reasonable 

accommodations in order to participate 

in the public meetings should contact 

the Service’s Oregon Fish and Wildlife 

Office as soon as possible, using one of 

the methods listed in ADDRESSES. In 

order to allow sufficient time to process 

requests, please make contact at least 10 

days before the public meeting date. 

Information regarding this proposed 

action is available in alternative formats 

upon request. 

Public Availability of Comments 

You may submit your comments and 

materials by one of the methods listed 

in ADDRESSES. 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—might 

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 available for public disclosure in 

their entirety. 

Comments and materials we receive, 

as well as references for supporting 

documentation we used in preparing the 

DEIS, will be available for public 

inspection online in Docket No. FWS– 

R1–ES–2022–0074 at https://

www.regulations.gov/ (see FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT). 

Next Steps and Decision To Be Made 

After public review and comment, the 

Service will review any comments 

received and prepare a final EIS (FEIS). 

The Service will also complete an ESA 

Section 7 biological opinion before 

making a final decision. At least 30 days 

after the FEIS is published, we expect 

that the Service will complete a record 

of decision pursuant to 40 CFR 1505.2, 

in accordance with applicable 

timeframes established in 40 CFR 

1506.11. The current estimate for the 

issuance of the record of decision is July 

2024. 

Authority 

We provide this notice in accordance 

with the requirements of NEPA and its 

implementing regulations (40 CFR 

1503.1 and 1506.6). 

Bridget Fahey, 

Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25032 Filed 11–16–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4333–15–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0195; 

FXES11140400000–245–FF04EA1000] 

Receipt of Incidental Take Permit 

Application and Proposed Habitat 

Conservation Plan for the Alabama 

Beach Mouse, Baldwin County, AL; 

Categorical Exclusion 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comment. 

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife 

Service (Service), announce receipt of 

an application from Christopher 

Johnson and Gator Wood Properties, 

LLC (applicants) for an incidental take 

permit (ITP) under the Endangered 

Species Act. The applicants request the 

ITP to take the federally listed Alabama 

beach mouse (Peromyscus polionotus 

ammobates) incidental to construction 

of a multi-family development in Gulf 

Shores, Baldwin County, Alabama. We 

request public comment on the 

application, which includes the 

applicants’ proposed habitat 

conservation plan (HCP), and the 

Service’s preliminary determination that 

the proposed permitting action may be 

eligible for a categorical exclusion 

pursuant to the Council on 

Environmental Quality’s National 

Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) 

regulations, the Department of the 

Interior’s (DOI) NEPA regulations, and 

the DOI Departmental Manual. To make 

this preliminary determination, we 

prepared a draft environmental action 

statement and low-effect screening form, 

both of which are also available for 

public review. We invite comment from 

the public and local, State, Tribal, and 

Federal agencies. 

DATES: We must receive your written 

comments on or before December 18, 

2023. 

ADDRESSES:

Obtaining Documents: You may 

obtain copies of the documents online 

in Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0195 

at https://www.regulations.gov. 

Submitting Comments: If you wish to 

submit comments on any of the 

documents, you may do so in writing by 

any of the following methods: 

• Online: https://

www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments 

on Docket No. FWS–R4–ES–2023–0195. 

• U.S. mail: Public Comments 

Processing, Attn: Docket No. FWS–R4– 

ES–2023–0195; U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, MS: PRB/3W, 5275 Leesburg 

Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041–3803. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Erin 

Lentz, Project Manager, by telephone at 

251–298–3853 or via email at erin_

lentz@fws.gov. 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-ofcontact in the United States. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: We, the 

Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), 

announce receipt of an application from 

Christopher Johnson and Gator Wood 

Properties, LLC (applicants) for an 

incidental take permit (ITP) under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). 

The applicants request the ITP to take 

the federally listed Alabama beach 

mouse (Peromyscus polionotus 

ammobates) (ABM) incidental to the 

construction of a 29-unit multi-family 

development (project) in Gulf Shores, 

Baldwin County, Alabama. We request 

public comment on the application, 

which includes the applicants’ 

proposed habitat conservation plan 

(HCP), and the Service’s preliminary 

determination that this proposed ITP 

qualifies as low effect, and may qualify 

for a categorical exclusion pursuant to 

the Council on Environmental Quality’s 

National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) regulations (40 CFR 1501.4), the 

Department of the Interior’s (DOI) NEPA 


khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with NOTICES