Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 68291 

activities within a predetermined area, 

while jointly conserving the covered 

species and their habitats. 

Implementation of the Douglas County 

MSGCP, rather than a species-by-species 

or plan-by-plan approach, will 

maximize the benefits of conservation 

measures for covered species at a larger 

landscape scale and facilitate future 

review of multiple individual ITPs. 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Compliance 

The development of the draft MSGCP 

for Douglas County and the proposed 

issuance of ITPs under this plan is a 

Federal action that triggers the need for 

compliance with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as 

amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.; 

NEPA). We have prepared a draft EA to 

analyze the environmental impacts of 

three alternatives related to the issuance 

of ITPs and implementation of the 

conservation program under the 

proposed MSGCP. The three alternatives 

include the proposed action, a no-action 

alternative, and an expanded 

conservation lands alternative. 

The proposed action alternative is the 

implementation of the MSGCP and 

issuance of ITPs to participating 

agricultural landowners and operators 

in Douglas County. 

Under the no-action alternative, the 

proposed MSGCP would not be 

implemented and no ITPs would be 

issued to agricultural landowners and 

operators in Douglas County to cover 

the incidental take of covered species 

resulting from farming and ranching 

activities. The no-action alternative 

would not give agricultural landowners 

and operators regulatory certainty, and 

actions that could result in take of listed 

species on non-Federal lands would be 

prohibited under section 9 of the Act. 

The expanded conservation lands 

alternative would include many of the 

same features as described for the 

proposed action alternative, including 

the same covered activities, covered 

species, and monitoring and adaptive 

management. The key difference would 

be in the approach to managing 

conservation lands. In recent years, the 

conservation of all wildlife species in 

Douglas County has been considerably 

improved by implementation of the 

Natural Resources Conservation 

Service’s Conservation Reserve Program 

(CRP). Prior to 2009, about 33 percent of 

the ‘‘eligible lands’’ in Douglas County 

(186,144 acres) were enrolled in the 

CRP. This expanded conservation lands 

alternative involves an increase in the 

extent of lands enrolled in the CRP or 

similar protected lands by 100,000 acres 

above the 2009 benchmark of 186,144 

acres over the next 10 years, to a level 

of about 50 percent of the eligible lands 

in Douglas County. This would be a 

voluntary commitment on the part of 

landowners. 

Public Comments 

You may submit your comments and 

materials by one of the methods listed 

in the ADDRESSES section. We 

specifically request information, views, 

and opinions from the public on our 

proposed Federal action, including 

identification of any other aspects of the 

human environment not already 

identified in the draft EA pursuant to 

NEPA regulations in the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) at 40 CFR 1506.6. 

Further, we specifically solicit 

information regarding the adequacy of 

the MSGCP pursuant to the 

requirements for ITPs at 50 CFR parts 13 

and 17. 

Public Availability of Comments 

All comments and materials we 

receive become part of the public record 

associated with this action. Before 

including your address, phone number, 

email address, or other personally 

identifiable information (PII) in your 

comments, you should be aware that 

your entire comment—including your 

PII—may be made publicly available at 

any time. While you can ask us in your 

comment to withhold your PII from 

public review, we cannot guarantee that 

we will be able to do so. Comments and 

materials we receive, as well as 

supporting documentation we use in 

preparing the EA, will be available for 

public inspection by appointment, 

during normal business hours, at our 

Eastern Washington Field Office (see 

ADDRESSES). 

Next Steps 

After completion of the EA, we will 

determine whether adoption of the 

Douglas County MSGCP warrants a 

finding of no significant impact or 

whether an environmental impact 

statement should be prepared. We will 

evaluate the Douglas County MSGCP 

and its potential use by future ITP 

applicants, as well as any comments we 

receive, to determine whether the 

MSGCP, when used by ITP applicants, 

would meet the requirements for 

issuance of ITPs under section 

10(a)(1)(B) of the Act. We will also 

evaluate whether issuance of section 

10(a)(1)(B) ITPs under the MSGCP 

would comply with section 7 of the Act 

by conducting an intra-Service section 7 

consultation on anticipated ITP actions. 

Authority 

We provide this notice in accordance 

with the requirements of section 10 of 

the Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) and 

NEPA regulations (40 CFR 1501.7, 

1506.6, and 1508.22). 

Dated: October 21, 2014. 

Richard Hannan, 

Deputy Regional Director, Pacific Region, U.S. 

Fish and Wildlife Service, Portland, Oregon. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27021 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–55–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Bureau of Indian Affairs 

[DR.5B711.IA000815] 

Indian Gaming 

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, 

Interior. 

ACTION: Notice of extension of TribalState Class III Gaming Compact. 

SUMMARY: This publishes notice of the 

extension of the Class III gaming 

compact between the Yankton Sioux 

Tribe and the State of South Dakota. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 14, 

2014. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Paula L. Hart, Director, Office of Indian 

Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant 

Secretary—Policy and Economic 

Development, Washington, DC 20240, 

(202) 219–4066. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant 

to 25 CFR 293.5, an extension to an 

existing tribal-state Class III gaming 

compact does not require approval by 

the Secretary if the extension does not 

include any amendment to the terms of 

the compact. The Yankton Sioux Tribe 

and the State of South Dakota have 

reached an agreement to extend the 

expiration of their existing Tribal-State 

Class III gaming compact to April 23, 

2015. This publishes notice of the new 

expiration date of the compact. 

Dated: November 4, 2014. 

Kevin K. Washburn, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27004 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–4N–P 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES