Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 68289 

record and available for public review at 

the BIA address shown in the 

ADDRESSES section, during business 

hours, 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday 

through Friday, except holidays. Before 

including your address, telephone 

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. 

Text of Proposed Addition to 516 DM 

10 

10.5 Categorical Exclusions 

H. Forestry. 

(11) Harvesting live trees not to 

exceed 70 acres, requiring no more than 

0.5 mile of temporary road construction. 

Such activities: 

(a) Shall not include even-aged 

regeneration harvests or vegetation type 

conversions. 

(b) May include incidental removal of 

trees for landings, skid trails, and road 

clearing. 

(c) May include temporary roads 

which are defined as roads authorized 

by contract, permit, lease, other written 

authorization, or emergency operation 

not intended to be part of the BIA or 

Tribal transportation systems and not 

necessary for long-term resource 

management. Temporary roads shall be 

designed to standards appropriate for 

the intended uses, considering safety, 

cost of transportation, and impacts on 

land and resources and 

(d) Shall require the treatment of 

temporary roads constructed or used so 

as to permit the reestablishment by 

artificial or natural means, of vegetative 

cover on the roadway and areas where 

the vegetative cover was disturbed by 

the construction or use of the road, as 

necessary to minimize erosion from the 

disturbed area. Such treatment shall be 

designed to reestablish vegetative cover 

as soon as practicable, but at least 

within 10 years after the termination of 

the contract. 

Examples include, but are not limited 

to: 

(a) Removing individual trees for 

sawlogs, specialty products, or 

fuelwood. 

(b) Commercial thinning of 

overstocked stands to achieve the 

desired stocking level to increase health 

and vigor. 

(12) Salvaging dead or dying trees not 

to exceed 250 acres, requiring no more 

than 0.5 mile of temporary road 

construction. Such activities: 

(a) May include incidental removal of 

live or dead trees for landings, skid 

trails, and road clearing. 

(b) May include temporary roads 

which are defined as roads authorized 

by contract, permit, lease, other written 

authorization, or emergency operation 

not intended to be part of the BIA or 

Tribal transportation systems and not 

necessary for long-term resource 

management. Temporary roads shall be 

designed to standards appropriate for 

the intended uses, considering safety, 

cost of transportation, and impacts on 

land and resources and 

(c) Shall require the treatment of 

temporary roads constructed or used so 

as to permit the reestablishment, by 

artificial or natural means, of vegetative 

cover on the roadway and areas where 

the vegetative cover was disturbed by 

the construction or use of the road, as 

necessary to minimize erosion from the 

disturbed area. Such treatment shall be 

designed to reestablish vegetative cover 

as soon as practicable, but at least 

within 10 years after the termination of 

the contract. 

(d) For this CE, a dying tree is defined 

as a standing tree that has been severely 

damaged by forces such as fire, wind, 

ice, insects, or disease, such that in the 

judgment of an experienced forest 

professional or someone technically 

trained for the work, the tree is likely to 

die within a few years. 

Examples include, but are not limited 

to: 

(a) Harvesting a portion of a stand 

damaged by a wind or ice event. 

(b) Harvesting fire damaged trees. 

(13) Commercial and non-commercial 

sanitation harvest of trees to control 

insects or disease not to exceed 250 

acres, requiring no more than 0.5 miles 

of temporary road construction. Such 

activities: 

(a) May include removal of infested/ 

infected trees and adjacent live 

uninfested/uninfected trees as 

determined necessary to control the 

spread of insects or disease and 

(b) May include incidental removal of 

live or dead trees for landings, skid 

trails, and road clearing. 

(c) May include temporary roads 

which are defined as roads authorized 

by contract, permit, lease, other written 

authorization, or emergency operation 

not intended to be part of the BIA or 

tribal transportation systems and not 

necessary for long-term resource 

management. Temporary roads shall be 

designed to standards appropriate for 

the intended uses, considering safety, 

cost of transportation, and impacts on 

land and resources and 

(d) Shall require the treatment of 

temporary roads constructed or used so 

as to permit the reestablishment, by 

artificial or natural means, of vegetative 

cover on the roadway and areas where 

the vegetative cover was disturbed by 

the construction or use of the road, as 

necessary to minimize erosion from the 

disturbed area. Such treatment shall be 

designed to reestablish vegetative cover 

as soon as practicable, but at least 

within 10 years after the termination of 

the contract. 

Examples include, but are not limited 

to: 

(a) Felling and harvesting trees 

infested with mountain pine beetles and 

immediately adjacent uninfested trees to 

control expanding spot infestations (a 

buffer) and 

(b) Removing or destroying trees 

infested or infected with a new exotic 

insect or disease, such as emerald ash 

borer, Asian longhorned beetle, or 

sudden oak death pathogen. 

Dated: October 29, 2014. 

Willie R. Taylor, 

Director, Office of Environmental Policy and 

Compliance. 

[FR Doc. 2014–27015 Filed 11–13–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310–W7–P 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

Fish and Wildlife Service 

[FWS–R1–ES–2014–N131; 

FXES11120100000–145–FF01E00000] 

Draft Multi-Species General 

Conservation Plan and Draft 

Environmental Assessment; Douglas 

County, Washington 

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 multi-species 

general conservation plan (MSGCP) for 

Douglas County, Washington. The 

Service and the Foster Creek 

Conservation District (FCCD) developed 

the draft MSGCP as a programmatic 

approach to streamline the development 

of individual farm plans by non-Federal 

agricultural landowners and operators 

to facilitate their applying for incidental 

take permits (ITPs) under the 

Endangered Species Act of 1973, as 

amended (Act). The ITPs would 

authorize take of the federally 

endangered Columbia Basin pygmy 

rabbit and three other nonlisted species, 

should they become listed, resulting 

from otherwise lawful activities on nonmstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

68290 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 220 / Friday, November 14, 2014 / Notices 

Federal agricultural lands within 

Douglas County. The Service also 

announces the availability of a draft 

environmental assessment (EA) for 

public review and comment. 

DATES: To ensure consideration, please 

send your written comments by January 

13, 2015. 

ADDRESSES: To request further 

information or submit written 

comments, please use one of the 

following methods, and note that your 

information request or comments are in 

reference to the Douglas County 

MSGCP: 

• Internet: Documents may be viewed 

on the Internet at http://www.fws.gov/

wafwo/. 

• In-Person Viewing or Pickup: 

Documents will be available for public 

inspection by appointment during 

normal business hours at the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service’s Eastern 

Washington Field Office, 11103 E. 

Montgomery Dr., Spokane Valley, WA 

99206; and at the Foster Creek 

Conservation District Office, Douglas 

County Courthouse–3rd Floor, 203 

Rainier, Waterville, WA 98858. 

• Email: FW1DouglasCountyGCP@

fws.gov. Include ‘‘Douglas County 

MSGCP’’ in the subject line of the 

message. 

• U.S. Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, Eastern Washington Field 

Office, 11103 E. Montgomery Dr., 

Spokane Valley, WA 99206. 

• Fax: Eastern Washington Field 

Office, 509–891–6748, Attn.: Douglas 

County MSGCP. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Michelle Eames, Project Manager, 

Eastern Washington Field Office (see 

ADDRESSES), telephone: 509–893–8010. 

If you use a telecommunications device 

for the deaf, please call the Federal 

Information Relay Service at 800–877– 

8339. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Section 9 of the Endangered Species 

Act of 1973, as amended (Act; 16 U.S.C. 

1531 et seq.) prohibits take of fish and 

wildlife species listed as endangered or 

threatened under section 4 of the Act. 

Under the Act, the term ‘‘take’’ means 

to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, 

wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or 

to attempt to engage in any such 

conduct (16 U.S.C. 1532(19)). The term 

‘‘harm,’’ as defined in our regulations, 

includes significant habitat modification 

or degradation that results in death or 

injury to listed species by significantly 

impairing essential behavioral patterns, 

including breeding, feeding, or 

sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). The term 

‘‘harass’’ is defined in our regulations as 

to carry out actions that create the 

likelihood of injury to listed species to 

such an extent as to significantly disrupt 

normal behavioral patterns, which 

include, but are not limited to, breeding, 

feeding, or sheltering (50 CFR 17.3). 

However, under specified 

circumstances, the Service may issue 

permits that allow take of federally 

listed species, provided that the take 

that occurs is incidental to, but not the 

purpose of, an otherwise lawful activity. 

Regulations governing permits for 

endangered and threatened species are 

at 50 CFR 17.22 and 17.32, respectively. 

Section 10(a)(1)(B) of the Act contains 

provisions for issuing such incidental 

take permits to non-Federal entities for 

the take of endangered and threatened 

species, provided the following criteria 

are met: 

(1) The taking will be incidental; 

(2) The applicant will, to the 

maximum extent practicable, minimize 

and mitigate the impact of such taking; 

(3) The applicant will ensure that 

adequate funding for the plan will be 

provided; 

(4) The taking will not appreciably 

reduce the likelihood of the survival 

and recovery of the species in the wild; 

and 

(5) The applicant will carry out any 

other measures that the Service may 

require as being necessary or 

appropriate for the purposes of the plan. 

Proposed Action 

The Service and the FCCD developed 

the proposed MSGCP for Douglas 

County, Washington, as a programmatic 

approach to streamline the development 

of individual farm plans to support ITP 

applications under section 10(a)(1)(B) of 

the Act. The MSGCP would expedite 

Service review of such permit 

applications. The MSGCP is a type of 

programmatic conservation plan, under 

which multiple section 10 permits can 

be issued. The proposed MSGCP 

provides land management guidance for 

protecting the federally endangered 

Columbia Basin pygmy rabbit 

(Brachylagus idahoensis) and three 

nonlisted wildlife species, over 

approximately 879,000 acres of private 

agricultural lands in Douglas County, 

Washington, for the next 50 years. The 

three nonlisted species include the 

greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus 

urophasianus), Washington ground 

squirrel (Urocitellus washingtoni), and 

the sharp-tailed grouse (Tympanuchus 

phasianellus). Collectively these four 

species are hereafter referred to as the 

‘‘covered species.’’ The MSGCP does not 

cover private, nonagricultural land uses 

within Douglas County, and it does not 

cover activities on Federal land. It also 

does not cover State-owned land, unless 

those lands are leased for agricultural 

production to private operators, as can 

occur with lands managed by the 

Washington Department of Natural 

Resources. 

The Douglas County MSGCP will 

streamline the development of future 

ITP applications, which, if approved, 

would authorize the incidental take of 

federally endangered or threatened 

species resulting from otherwise lawful 

activities on non-Federal agricultural 

lands within Douglas County. Should 

any of the nonlisted covered species 

become federally listed as endangered 

or threatened under the Act during the 

term of an ITP, take authorization for 

those species would become effective 

upon listing, as long as the permittee is 

in compliance with the terms of the 

MSGCP and ITP. Agricultural 

landowners and operators participating 

in the Douglas County MSGCP under an 

ITP would be provided with legal 

authority to conduct covered 

agricultural activities that cause 

incidental take of listed species. The 

MSGCP covers numerous activities 

associated with dryland farming, 

ranching, and some irrigated farming in 

Douglas County. Farmers and ranchers 

in Douglas County may voluntarily 

apply for ITPs under the MSGCP. The 

Service will publish notice of the 

receipt of applications in the Federal 

Register and request public comments. 

If an application is consistent with 

expectations of the MSGCP, the EA and 

related documents and all other 

applicable Federal laws and regulations, 

the USFWS will issue the ITP. An ITP 

is needed to authorize the incidental 

take of federally endangered and 

threatened species that may occur as a 

result of covered agricultural activities. 

The proposed Douglas County 

MSGCP includes measures to minimize 

and mitigate, to the maximum extent 

practicable, the impacts of farming and 

ranching activities that may incidentally 

take the covered species. Avoidance, 

minimization, and mitigation measures 

in the MSGCP include development of 

farm plans, implementation of best 

management practices, and an adaptive 

management and monitoring plan. The 

draft MSGCP and draft EA address and 

analyze the impacts of incidental take of 

the covered species resulting from 

agricultural activities. 

The purpose of developing a MSGCP 

is to allow potential applicants for an 

ITP to use the provisions in the MSGCP 

instead of developing their own 

individual habitat conservation plans. 

Under this scenario, the MSGCP allows 

multiple applicants to conduct similar 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES

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