Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19309 

proposed renewal. We received one 

comment expressing general criticism of 

DOI management. Because the comment 

provided no specifics, we have not 

modified the proposed renewal. The 

public now has a second opportunity to 

comment on this renewal. We invite 

comments concerning this IC 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, email 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 us or OMB in your 

comment to withhold your personal 

identifying information from public 

review, we cannot guarantee that we 

will be able to do so. 

Dated: March 26, 2012. 

Benjamin Simon, 

Assistant Director, Office of Policy Analysis, 

U.S. Department of the Interior. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7665 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–RK–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R6–R–2012–N024; FF06R06000– 

FXRS1265066CCP0S2–123] 

Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge 

Complex, Great Falls, MT; 

Comprehensive Conservation Plan and 

Environmental Assessment 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of availability; request 

for comments. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 

availability of a draft comprehensive 

conservation plan and environmental 

assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Benton 

Lake National Wildlife Refuge Complex 

for public review and comment. The 

Draft CCP/EA describes our proposal for 

managing the refuge complex for the 

next 15 years. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments by May 18, 

2012. 

We will announce upcoming public 

meetings in local news media. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

or requests for copies or more 

information by any of the following 

methods. You may request hard copies 

or a CD–ROM of the documents. 

Email: toni_griffin@fws.gov. Include 

‘‘Benton Lake Refuge Complex Draft 

CCP/EA’’ in the subject line of the 

message. 

U.S. Mail: Toni Griffin, Planning 

Team Leader, Suite 300, 134 Union 

Boulevard, Lakewood, CO 80228. 

Information Request: A copy of the 

Draft CCP/EA may be obtained by 

writing to U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Division of Refuge Planning, 

134 Union Boulevard, Suite 300, 

Lakewood, Colorado 80228; or by 

download from http://mountainprairie.fws.gov/planning. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Toni 

Griffin, 303–236–4378 (phone); 303– 

236–4792 (fax); or toni_griffin@fws.gov 

(email) or David C. Lucas, 303–236– 

4366 (phone): 303–236–4792 (fax): or 

david_c_lucas@fws.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction 

The 163,304-acre Benton Lake 

National Wildlife Refuge Complex 

(refuge complex) is part of the National 

Wildlife Refuge System and is located in 

northwest and north-central Montana. 

Spanning both sides of the Continental 

Divide, the refuge complex is a 

collection of diverse landscapes, from 

wetlands and mixed-grass prairie in the 

east to forests, intermountain 

grasslands, rivers, and lakes in the west. 

The refuge complex oversees 

management of 2 refuges, 1 wetland 

management district containing 22 

waterfowl production areas, 3 

conservation areas, and administers 216 

easements within the Refuge System: 

D Benton Lake National Wildlife Refuge 

was established in 1929 and consists 

of 12,383 fee-title acres and 76.88 

acres of right-of-way easement. It is 

located on the northern Great Plains, 

50 miles east of the Rocky Mountains 

and 12 miles north of Great Falls, 

Montana. 

D Benton Lake Wetland Management 

District was established in 1975. It 

includes 10 counties (Cascade, 

Chouteau, Glacier, Hill, Lewis and 

Clark, Liberty, Pondera, Powell, 

Teton, Toole), 22 waterfowl 

production areas, and 4 distinct 

easement programs. 

D Blackfoot Valley Conservation Area 

(CA) was established in 1995 and 

expanded in 2011. This conservation 

easement program has the potential to 

protect up to 103,500 acres in the 

Blackfoot Valley by buying 

conservation easements on private 

land within the 824,024-acre project 

area. 

D Rocky Mountain Front CA was 

established in 2005 and expanded in 

2011. This conservation easement 

program has the potential to protect 

up to 295,000 acres in the Rocky 

Mountain Front (Front) by buying 

conservation easements on private 

land within the 918,000-acre project 

area. 

D Swan River National Wildlife Refuge 

was established in 1973 and consists 

of 1,568.81 acres. It is located in the 

Swan Valley, 38 miles southeast of 

Creston, Montana. 

D Swan Valley CA was authorized in 

2011. This conservation area has the 

potential to protect up to 10,000 acres 

in the Swan Valley by buying 

conservation easements on private 

land, and up to 1,000 acres in fee-title 

land next to the Swan River Refuge 

within the 187,400-acre project area. 

Refuge complex lands and waters are 

important corridors for birds, fish, and 

other wildlife. Across the refuge 

complex, there exists a very high level 

of diversity. Wildlife ranges from 

migratory waterfowl to grassland birds, 

to native trout, to ‘‘charismatic mega 

fauna’’ such as elk, gray wolf, and 

grizzly bear. Refuge complex lands 

harbor Federal and State species of 

concern. Threatened and endangered 

species include bull trout, grizzly bear, 

Canada lynx, and water howellia. 

Candidate species include Sprague’s 

pipit and wolverine. The refuge 

complex is of great value to waterfowl 

and shorebirds, as well as other 

migrating water-dependent bird species, 

because of the diversity of wetland and 

upland habitats that provide for the 

diverse life cycle needs of these species. 

The refuge complex has large, intact 

areas of native prairie that provide 

habitat for grassland birds that are one 

of the most imperiled groups of 

migratory birds nationwide. 

Background 

The CCP Process 

The National Wildlife Refuge System 

Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 

668dd–668ee) (Refuge Administration 

Act), as amended by the National 

Wildlife Refuge System Improvement 

Act of 1997, requires us to develop a 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

19310 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 

CCP for each national wildlife refuge. 

The purpose for developing a CCP is to 

provide refuge managers with a 15-year 

plan for achieving refuge purposes and 

contributing toward the mission of the 

National Wildlife Refuge System, 

consistent with sound principles of fish 

and wildlife management, conservation, 

legal mandates, and our policies. In 

addition to outlining broad management 

direction on conserving wildlife and 

their habitats, CCPs identify wildlifedependent recreational opportunities 

available to the public, including 

opportunities for hunting, fishing, 

wildlife observation and photography, 

and environmental education and 

interpretation. We will review and 

update the CCP at least every 15 years 

in accordance with the Refuge 

Administration Act. 

Public Outreach 

A Notice of Intent to prepare a CCP 

was published in the Federal Register 

August 18, 2008 (73, FR 48237). During 

scoping and throughout the process, we 

requested public comments and 

considered and incorporated them in 

numerous ways. Public outreach has 

included local news media 

announcements, a planning update, and 

several public scoping meetings. In 

addition, a biological workshop to 

discuss management issues and options 

related to water management, selenium 

contamination, and public use at the 

Benton Lake Refuge took place in Great 

Falls, Montana June 2011. Comments 

we received cover topics such as land 

protection, climate change, wetland 

health, water quality, hunting, wildlife 

observation, and environmental 

education. We have considered and 

evaluated all of these comments, with 

many incorporated into the various 

alternatives addressed in the Draft CCP 

and the EA. 

CCP Alternatives We Are Considering 

During the scoping process with 

which we started work on this Draft 

CCP, we, other governmental partners, 

and the public raised several issues. Our 

Draft CCP addresses these issues. The 

Draft CCP/EA includes the analyses of 

two different sets of alternatives. The 

first analysis includes three alternatives 

for managing the refuge complex. The 

second analysis includes five 

alternatives for addressing the declining 

condition of the Benton Lake Refuge 

wetlands. A full description of each 

analysis and the associated alternatives 

is in the EA. The alternatives are 

summarized below. 

Alternatives for the Refuge Complex 

Alternative A, Current Management 

(No Action). Management activity being 

conducted by the Service would remain 

the same. The Service would not 

develop any new management, 

restoration, or education programs at the 

refuge complex. Current habitat and 

wildlife practices benefiting migratory 

species and other wildlife would not be 

expanded or changed. Habitat 

management within the refuge complex 

has been focused on benefitting 

migratory birds, primarily waterfowl. 

Other species are considered through 

land protection programs and 

partnerships (for example, grizzly bear 

and bull trout). Staff would continue 

monitoring, inventory, and research 

activities at their current levels. Money 

and staff levels would remain the same 

with little change in overall trends. 

Programs would follow the same 

direction, emphasis, and intensity as 

they do at present. 

Alternative B. Management efforts 

would be focused on maintaining the 

resiliency and sustainability of native 

grasslands, forests, shrublands, and 

unaltered wetlands throughout the 

refuge complex by emulating natural 

processes. Prescribed fire, grazing, and 

other management techniques would be 

used to replicate historical disturbance 

factors. Where feasible, restoration of 

native uplands would occur. For 

wetlands where water management 

capability exists, management efforts 

would be focused on achieving 

conditions that are more consistent by 

minimizing the effects of drought 

periods of the northern Great Plains and 

Rocky Mountains. Management would 

be active and intensive to keep these 

conditions in a consistent state for 

wildlife using tools such as artificial 

flooding, drawdowns, fire, rest, and 

grazing. Changes in the refuge 

complex’s research and monitoring, 

staff, operations, and infrastructure 

would likely be required to achieve this 

alternative’s goals and objectives. The 

success of these efforts and programs 

would depend on added staff, research, 

and monitoring programs, operations 

money, infrastructure, and new and 

expanded partnerships. 

Alternative C, the Proposed Action. 

Emphasis would be placed on selfsustaining systems with ecological 

processes functioning for long-term 

productivity. Management efforts would 

focus on maintaining and restoring 

ecological processes including natural 

communities and the dynamics of the 

ecosystems of the northern Great Plains 

and northern Rocky Mountains. 

Conservation of native landscapes 

would be a high priority accomplished 

by protecting habitats from conversion 

using a combination of partnerships, 

easements and fee-title lands, and 

through active management and 

proactive enforcement of easements. 

Management actions such as prescribed 

fire, grazing, and invasive species 

control would be used to maintain the 

resiliency and sustainability of Serviceowned lands throughout the refuge 

complex. Whenever possible, habitat 

conditions would be allowed fluctuate 

with climatically driven wet and dry 

cycles, which are essential for long-term 

productivity. The success of these 

efforts and programs would depend on 

added staff, research, and monitoring 

programs, operations money, 

infrastructure, and new and expanded 

partnerships. 

Alternatives for Benton Lake National 

Wildlife Refuge 

The Service and the public have 

identified declining wetland 

productivity and selenium 

contamination, and its effects on all 

aspects of management at the refuge, as 

one of the most critical situations 

needing to be addressed in the CCP 

planning process. To fully understand 

what is causing this decline, the Service 

met with consultants from Greenbrier 

Wetland Service in 2009 to understand 

what changes had occurred in the 

Benton Lake wetlands over time and 

how this might relate to the observed 

declines in productivity, increases in 

invasive species and increasing 

selenium contamination. In addition, 

the United States Geological Survey 

developed a water budget model based 

on more than 30 years of data and 

selenium model based on research 

conducted by USGS and the University 

of Montana on the refuge. These models, 

coupled with a hydro geomorphic 

assessment, were used to develop and 

analyze the management alternatives 

and to select one as the proposed action 

for the refuge. 

The Service developed and analyzed 

five alternatives representing a full 

range of options to address the declining 

condition of the Benton Lake Refuge 

wetlands. The Service selected ‘‘Selfsustaining Systems through Adaptive 

Resource Management’’ as the Proposed 

Action. Under the Proposed Action, the 

Service will (1) start to address the 

selenium load, and (2) work throughout 

the watershed to reduce incoming 

selenium, and (3) monitor results and 

make necessary changes to pumping 

and water management infrastructure to 

achieve the long-term goal of a more 

natural process. The Service identified 

this alternative as the best option for 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 62 / Friday, March 30, 2012 / Notices 19311 

addressing the declining condition of 

wetlands based on the effectiveness of 

treatment, environmental and social 

consequences, and cost. 

Next Steps 

After this comment period ends, we 

will analyze the comments we may issie 

a finding of no significant impact and 

final CCP, or if significant impacts are 

identified, the Service will prepare an 

environmental impact statement. 

Public Availability of Comments 

Before including your address, phone 

number, email 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 us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

Dated: February 29, 2012. 

Matt Hogan 

Acting Deputy Regional Director, MountainPrairie Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

[FR Doc. 2012–7667 Filed 3–29–12; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R9–IA–2012–N075; 

FXIA16710900000P5–123–FF09A30000] 

Endangered Species; Receipt of 

Applications for Permit 

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of receipt of applications 

for permit. 

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, invite the public to 

comment on the following applications 

to conduct certain activities with 

endangered species. With some 

exceptions, the Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) prohibits activities with listed 

species unless Federal authorization is 

acquired that allows such activities. 

DATES: We must receive comments or 

requests for documents on or before 

April 30, 2012. 

ADDRESSES: Brenda Tapia, Division of 

Management Authority, U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax 

Drive, Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203; 

fax (703) 358–2280; or email 

DMAFR@fws.gov. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Brenda Tapia, (703) 358–2104 

(telephone); (703) 358–2280 (fax); 

DMAFR@fws.gov (email). 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

I. Public Comment Procedures 

A. How do I request copies of 

applications or comment on submitted 

applications? 

Send your request for copies of 

applications or comments and materials 

concerning any of the applications to 

the contact listed under ADDRESSES. 

Please include the Federal Register 

notice publication date, the PRTnumber, and the name of the applicant 

in your request or submission. We will 

not consider requests or comments sent 

to an email or address not listed under 

ADDRESSES. If you provide an email 

address in your request for copies of 

applications, we will attempt to respond 

to your request electronically. 

Please make your requests or 

comments as specific as possible. Please 

confine your comments to issues for 

which we seek comments in this notice, 

and explain the basis for your 

comments. Include sufficient 

information with your comments to 

allow us to authenticate any scientific or 

commercial data you include. 

The comments and recommendations 

that will be most useful and likely to 

influence agency decisions are: (1) 

Those supported by quantitative 

information or studies; and (2) Those 

that include citations to, and analyses 

of, the applicable laws and regulations. 

We will not consider or include in our 

administrative record comments we 

receive after the close of the comment 

period (see DATES) or comments 

delivered to an address other than those 

listed above (see ADDRESSES). 

B. May I review comments submitted by 

others? 

Comments, including names and 

street addresses of respondents, will be 

available for public review at the 

address listed under ADDRESSES. The 

public may review documents and other 

information applicants have sent in 

support of the application unless our 

allowing viewing would violate the 

Privacy Act or Freedom of Information 

Act. Before including your address, 

phone number, email 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 us in your comment 

to withhold your personal identifying 

information from public review, we 

cannot guarantee that we will be able to 

do so. 

II. Background 

To help us carry out our conservation 

responsibilities for affected species, and 

in consideration of section 10(a)(1)(A) of 

the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), along 

with Executive Order 13576, 

‘‘Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and 

Accountable Government,’’ and the 

President’s Memorandum for the Heads 

of Executive Departments and Agencies 

of January 21, 2009—Transparency and 

Open Government (74 FR 4685; January 

26, 2009), which call on all Federal 

agencies to promote openness and 

transparency in Government by 

disclosing information to the public, we 

invite public comment on these permit 

applications before final action is taken. 

III. Permit Applications 

A. Endangered Species 

Applicant: Paulina Hechenleitner, Royal 

Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, UK; 

PRT–63796A 

The applicant requests a permit to 

export dried leaf material from 

Hawaiian vetch (Vicia menziessii) to the 

Royal Botanic Garden, Edinburgh, 

United Kingdom, for the purpose of 

enhancement of the species through 

scientific research. This notification 

covers activities to be conducted by the 

applicant over a 5-year period. 

Applicant: North Carolina Zoological 

Park, Asheboro, NC; PRT–679557 

The applicant requests renewal of 

their captive-bred wildlife registration 

under 50 CFR 17.21(g) for the following 

families, genus, and species, to enhance 

their propagation or survival. This 

notification covers activities to be 

conducted by the applicant over a 

5-year period. 

Family: 

Canidae 

Cercopithecidae 

Equidae 

Felidae (does not include jaguar, 

margay or ocelot) 

Hominidae 

Indriidae 

Lemuridae 

Columbidae 

Gruidae 

Sturnidae (does not include Aplonis 

pelzelni) 

Crocodylidae (does not include 

American crocodile) 

Testudinidae 

Varanidae 

Species: 

Parma wallaby (Macropus parma) 

Applicant: The Maryland Zoo, 

Baltimore, MD; PRT–671151 

The applicant requests renewal and 

amendment of their captive-bred 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES