35184 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Proposed Rules

goshawks remain widely distributed

throughout their historic range in the

western United States.

The habitat information gathered and

reviewed by the Service indicates that

changes have occurred in the

distribution, amount and structural

characteristics of mature forests

throughout much of the western United

States. In general, the primary change

has been reduction of mature forest

cover by logging, although other factors

such as fire suppression and

catastrophic fire have also been

implicated. However, the extent to

which goshawk populations are

correlated with amounts of mature

forest cover is unknown. Recent survey

efforts continue to result in discovery of

goshawks, even in areas of historic

logging activity, which indicates that

the species may not be uncommon, but

rather is difficult to locate and

adequately survey. The Service found

no evidence that goshawk habitat is

limiting the population, or that a

significant curtailment of the species’

habitat or range is occurring. The information presented in the

petition relies largely on the contention

that the northern goshawk is dependent

on large, unbroken tracts of ‘‘oldgrowth’’ and mature forest. However,

the Service has found no evidence to

support this claim. The Service found

that while the goshawk typically does

use mature forest or larger trees for

nesting habitat, it appears to be a forest

habitat generalist in terms of the types

and ages of forests it will use to meet its

life history requirements. Goshawks can

use small patches of mature habitat to

meet their nesting requirements within

a mosaic of habitats of different age

classes; a key factor appears to be

availability of prey. While timber management has been

demonstrated to affect goshawks at least

at local levels (Reynolds 1989, CrockerBedford 1990, Bright-Smith and

Mannon 1994, Woodbridge and Detrich

1994, Beier and Drennan 1997,

Desimone 1997), forest management

practices, such as the use of controlled

fire and selective thinning, also may

make habitats more suitable to

goshawks by opening up dense

understory vegetation, creating snags,

down logs, and woody debris, and

creating other conditions conducive to

goshawks and their prey (Reynolds et al.

1992, Graham et al. 1997).

Throughout much of the western

United States, the nature and rate of

decline in mature forest habitats on

Federal lands has slowed significantly

during the past decade. The Service

estimates that 80 percent of goshawk

habitat occurs on Federal forest lands.

Public debate over management of

Federal forest resources has resulted in

regional forest management strategies,

many of which focus on retention and

restoration of mature forest habitats.

These changes are reflected in declines

of timber volume sold from National

Forest lands in many western states.

Although mature forest habitat

continues to be harvested, the Service

finds that, in general, habitat conditions

on Federal lands are no longer declining

as in previous decades, and are

improving in many areas throughout the

west.

In conclusion, the Service finds that

while forest management (e.g., timber

harvest and fire exclusion) has changed

the vegetation characteristics

throughout much of the western United

States, the goshawk continues to be

well-distributed throughout its historic

range. The Service finds no evidence

that the goshawk population is

declining in the western United States,

that habitat is limiting the overall

population, that there are any

significant areas of extirpation, or that a

significant curtailment of the species’

habitat or range is occurring. The

petition relies largely on the contention

that the goshawk is dependent on large,

unbroken tracts of old-growth and

mature forest in its assertion that the

species is in danger of extinction.

However, neither the petition nor other

information available to the Service

supports this claim. The Service found

that while goshawks frequently use

stands of old-growth and mature forest

for nesting, overall the species appears

to be a forest habitat generalist in terms

of the variety and age-classes of forest

types it uses to meet its life history

requirements. Therefore, the Service

finds that listing the northern goshawk

in the contiguous United States west of

the 100th meridian as threatened or

endangered is not warranted because

the best available information does not

indicate that it is in danger of extinction

or likely to become so in the foreseeable

future.

References

A complete list of references used in

preparation of this finding is available

upon request from the U.S. Fish and

Wildlife Service, Office of Technical

Support (see ADDRESSES section).

Author

The primary author of this document

is Catrina Martin, U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Service, Office of Technical Support

(see ADDRESSES section).

Authority

16 U.S.C. 1381–1487l; 16 U.S.C.

4201–4245; Pub L. 99–625, 100 Stat.

3500; unless otherwise noted.

Dated: June 22, 1998.

Jamie Rappaport Clark,

Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

[FR Doc. 98–17151 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration

50 CFR Part 660

[I.D. 061898B]

RIN 0648–AK60

Fisheries Off West Coast States and in

the Western Pacific; Western Pacific

Precious Corals Fisheries; Amendment

3

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries

Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),

Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of availability of a fishery

management plan amendment; request

for comments.

SUMMARY: NMFS announces that the

Western Pacific Fishery Management

Council (Council) has submitted

Amendment 3 to the Fishery

Management Plan for the Precious

Corals Fisheries of the Western Pacific

Region (FMP) for Secretarial review.

Amendment 3 would establish

framework procedures for regulatory

changes under the FMP.

DATES: Comments on Amendment 3

must be received on or before August

28, 1998.

ADDRESSES: Comments on Amendment

3 should be sent to, and copies of

Amendment 3 are available from, Kitty

Simonds, Executive Director, Western

Pacific Fishery Management Council,

1164 Bishop St., Suite 1400, Honolulu,

HI 96813.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Kitty Simonds at (808) 522–8220 or

Alvin Katekaru, Fishery Management

Specialist, Pacific Islands Area Office,

NMFS at (808) 973–2985.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery

Conservation and Management Act

(Magnuson-Stevens Act) requires that

each Regional Fishery Management

Council submit any fishery management

plan or plan amendment it prepares to

NMFS for review and approval,

disapproval, or partial approval. The

Magnuson-Stevens Act also requires
Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 124 / Monday, June 29, 1998 / Proposed Rules 35185

that NMFS, upon receiving a fishery

management plan or amendment,

immediately publish a notice that the

fishery management plan or amendment

is available for public review and

comment. NMFS will consider the

public comments received during the

comment period in determining

whether to approve the fishery

management plan or amendment.

Amendment 3 to the FMP would

establish framework procedures for

regulatory changes under the FMP.

Under the proposed framework

procedures, new management measures

may be added through rulemaking if

new information demonstrates that

there are biological, social, or economic

concerns in the precious coral permit

areas. The framework procedures would

authorize the implementation of

measures that may affect the fishing

season, classification of coral beds,

harvest quotas for all management unit

species, size restrictions, incidental

catches and permit conditions. Each

action taken under the framework

process would entail documentation of

the analysis of impacts of that action. To

the extent appropriate, the Council

would prepare regulations, regulatory

analyses, environmental assessments, or

other documents depending on the

scope of the action, which framework

process is being used, and the types and

magnitude of impacts involved.

Advance public notice, public

discussion, and consideration of public

comment would be required.

NMFS invites comments on proposed

Amendment 3 through the end of the

comment period. NMFS will consider

the public comments received during

the comment period in determining

whether to approve the proposed

amendment. A proposed rule to

implement Amendment 3 has been

submitted for Secretarial review and

approval. NMFS expects to publish the

proposed rule and request public

comment on the proposed regulations in

the near future. Public comments on the

proposed rule must be received by

August 28, 1998 to be considered in the

approval/disapproval decision on

Amendment 3.

Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

Dated: June 23, 1998.

Gary C. Matlock,

Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries,

National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 98–17167 Filed 6–26–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510–22–F