[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 238 (Thursday, December 11, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65237-65240]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32440]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 17
RIN 1018-AE45
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposed Revision
of Special Regulations for the Gray Wolf
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
[[Page 65238]]
ACTION: Proposed rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On November 22, 1994, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
published special rules to establish nonessential experimental
populations of gray wolves (Canis lupus) in Yellowstone National Park
and central Idaho. The nonessential experimental population areas
include all of Wyoming, most of Idaho, and much of central and southern
Montana. A close reading of the special regulations indicates that,
unintentionally, the language reads as though wolf control measures
apply only outside of the experimental population area. This proposed
revision is intended to amend language in the special regulations so
that it clearly applies within the Yellowstone nonessential
experimental population area and the central Idaho nonessential
experimental population area. This proposed change will not affect any
of the assumptions and earlier analysis made in the environmental
impact statement or other portions of the special rules.
DATES: Comments must be received by January 12, 1998.
ADDRESSES: Comments and materials concerning this proposal should be
sent to the Gray Wolf Recovery Program, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
100 North Park, Suite 320, Helena, Montana 59601. Comments and
materials received will be available for public inspection, by
appointment, during normal business hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Edward E. Bangs, Wolf Recovery
Coordinator, at the above address, or telephone (406) 449-5202,
extension 204.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
1. Legal: The Endangered Species Act Amendments of 1982, Public Law
97-304, made significant changes to the Endangered Species Act (Act) of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), including the creation of
section 10(j) which provides for the designation of populations as
``experimental.'' It was under this provision of the Act that on
November 22, 1994, the Service by special rule established two areas
for nonessential experimental populations of gray wolves (59 FR 60252
and 60266; 50 CFR 17.84(i)). One area was the Yellowstone National Park
experimental population area which included all of Wyoming, and parts
of Montana, and Idaho. The other area, called the central Idaho
experimental population area, included much of Idaho and parts of
southwestern Montana. These rules allowed the Service and other
cooperating agencies to manage wolf recovery so that conflicts with
people were minimized. Under certain circumstances the rules allowed
for wolves to be captured, relocated, held in captivity, or killed.
Subparts A, B, and C 50 CFR 17.84 (i)(7)(iii) addressed the management
of reintroduced wolves that traveled outside the experimental areas or
wolves of unknown status outside the experimental population. Subpart D
in 50 CFR 17.84 (i)(7)(iii) D, addressed the management of wolves and
wolf-like canids of unknown but questionable status. Examples given
under 50 CFR 17.84 (I)(7)(iii) D include wolves or wolf-like canids
that exhibited behavioral or physical evidence of hybridization with
other canids, or wolf-like canids that may have been raised or held in
captivity other than as part of a Service approved wolf recovery
program. The rule in 50 CFR 17.84 (i)(7)(iii) is currently worded as
follows:
All wolves found in the wild within the boundaries of this
paragraph (50 CFR 17.84 (i)(7)) after the first releases will be
considered nonessential experimental animals. In the conterminous
United States, a wolf that is outside an experimental area (as defined
in 50 CFR 17.84 (i)(7) of this section) would be considered as
endangered (or threatened if in Minnesota) unless it is marked or
otherwise known to be an experimental animal; such a wolf may be
captured for examination and genetic testing by the Service or Service-
designated agency. Disposition of the captured animal may take any of
the following courses:
(A) If the animal was not involved in conflicts with humans and is
determined to be an experimental wolf, it will be returned to the
reintroduction area.
(B) If the animal is determined likely to be an experimental wolf
and was involved in conflicts with humans as identified in the
management plan for the closest experimental area, it may be relocated,
placed in captivity, or killed.
(C) If the animal is determined not likely to be an experimental
animal, it will be managed according to any Service-approved plans for
that area or will be marked and released near its point of capture.
(D) If the animal is determined not likely to be a wild gray wolf
or if the Service or agencies designated by the Service determine the
animal shows physical or behavioral evidence of hybridization with
other canids, such as domestic dogs or coyotes, or of being an animal
raised in captivity, it will be returned to captivity or killed.
The rule in 50 CFR 17.84(i)(7)(iii) was intended to allow the
Service, or agencies designated by the Service, management flexibility
should experimental wolves travel outside the experimental population
areas, and the ability to (1) manage wolves of unknown origin, (2)
manage wolves that exhibit abnormal behavior or physical
characteristics (indicative of hybridization with other canids), and
(3) manage canids suspected of being raised in captivity and released
to the wild independently of the Service wolf recovery program.
Furthermore, subpart D was intended to allow for management of those
rare instances where an individual wild wolf may exhibit abnormal
behavior that is not conducive to the recovery and conservation of wild
gray wolf populations in the northern Rocky Mountains of Montana,
Idaho, and Wyoming. The section was intended to enhance the survival
and reproductive potential of wild wolves and to remove canids that
could have a negative impact on the survival and reproductive potential
of wild wolves.
Through an unintentional oversight in the wording in 50 CFR 17.84
(i)(7)(iii) subpart D appears to apply only to activities conducted
outside the experimental population area. This revision is being
proposed to correct that oversight and clarify that management of wild
wolves and wolf-like canids that exhibit abnormal behavior, wolf
hybrids, or wolves that may have been raised in captivity, also applies
within each experimental area.
2. Biological: This proposed revision of the special regulations is
intended to clarify that the management flexibility addressed by 50 CFR
17.84 (i)(7)(iii) subpart D applies to wolves of questionable status or
wolf-like canids within the nonessential experimental population areas.
As currently written the special regulations could be interpreted to
imply that wolf hybrids or captive wolves that were not part of a
Service-approved recovery program but that escaped or were released to
the wild within the experimental area, would be managed in a manner
identical to wild wolves within the experimental population area.
Wolves or wolf-like canids that are raised in captivity and released in
the wild do not behave like wild wolves. They often associate with
people or domestic livestock, raising concerns about human safety and
depredations on domestic animals. These types of canids also often
cause problems by attacking domestic animals because they usually are
not able to survive entirely in the wild. While they have some of the
[[Page 65239]]
predatory instincts of wild canids, they are most comfortable around
people. They are likely to be dependent on humans for food and this
increases the probability that they may attack domestic animals since
domestic animals are the most common types of animals near people. The
tolerance of captive raised and released canids for people also
contributes to the perception that human safety may be in danger from
wild wolves. There are numerous documented instances of domesticated
wolves and wolf hybrids attacking and killing people. Although
unlikely, captive wolves or wolf hybrids associating with wild wolves
could teach young wolves or any hybrid offspring these undesirable
traits. For these reasons wolves exhibiting the characteristics
described above do not contribute to the recovery of wild gray wolf
populations in the northern Rocky Mountains.
When local residents believe wild wolves behave like captive wolves
or wolf hybrids, public tolerance for wild wolves is likely reduced.
This can lead to illegal killing of wolves. It was not the intent of
the wolf recovery program to protect or manage captive wolves or wolf
hybrids that were not part of a Service approved recovery program.
Those types of canids will not contribute to the conservation and
recovery of wild gray wolves. The Service intends to manage such canids
when necessary, to resolve potential conflicts with humans and to
minimize the likelihood that undesirable genetic or behavioral
characteristics could be passed on by such animals to wild wolves
within the experimental population areas.
Captive wolves that have not been specifically raised for release
into the wild, or wolf hybrids, can also carry diseases or parasites
that are common in domestic dogs. If released into the wild, such
animals can transmit those diseases or parasites to wild gray wolves as
well as other wildlife species. Current DNA and other types of testing
can not reliably distinguish wild wolves from wolves raised in
captivity or from wolf hybrids. Because captive wolves and wolf hybrids
may look identical to wild wolves, they can often only be reliably
distinguished from wild wolves by their behavior in the wild. Their
presence can often confuse the public about what behavior to expect
from wild wolves, reduce local human tolerance of wild wolves and lead
to an increase in human related wolf mortality. Local tolerance of
wolves is important for wolf recovery and conservation since a majority
of wolf mortality in Montana is caused by humans.
The presence and management of wolves or wolf-like canids that are
not part of an approved recovery program may result in substantial
expense and thereby compete for limited gray wolf recovery program
resources, particularly if their management requires the same level of
effort as that afforded to wild wolves. Because wolf hybrids and
captive wolves released into the wild can demand considerable
management time and attention at the expense of wild wolf conservation,
prompt control of these animals is essential. The selective removal
from the wild of captive raised and released wolves, wolf hybrids, and/
or wolf-like canids exhibiting behavior considered abnormal for wild
gray wolves furthers the conservation and recovery of the gray wolf by
minimizing the probability of unresolved conflicts with humans.
Wild wolves were taken from the wild in remote areas of Canada and
reintroduced in January of 1995 and 1996 to the Yellowstone and central
Idaho experimental population areas and have adapted much better than
predicted. As expected, they continue to behave like wild wolves. If
current trends continue, it is unlikely that further reintroductions in
the experimental population areas will be required. All the wolves that
were reintroduced were radio-collared and monitored by means of radio-
telemetry, and a number these wolves have successfully reproduced in
the wild. Current plans do not call for all of the pups to be
individually captured and radio-collared. As the population grows,
there will be an increasing number of wolves that have not been marked
and it will not be possible to determine where most of these wolves
originated. It is also estimated that there may be up to 300,000
captive wolves and wolf/dog hybrids (which in many cases are physically
and genetically indistinguishable from wild wolves) in North America.
Therefore, the special regulations for establishment of nonessential
experimental populations of gray wolves need to clearly address the
manner in which wolves, whose origin is unknown or wolves that exhibit
abnormal behavior will be managed in the wild when conflicts develop.
In several areas of the northern Rocky Mountains, wolf-like canids
have been identified through their behavior or physical characteristics
as released or escaped wolves that were not part of Service approved
programs or wolf hybrids of captive origin. Such animals usually do not
survive in the wild long enough to successfully reproduce and raise
young. In several instances these animals have been removed from the
wild because they have become a nuisance or potential human or domestic
animal safety concerns arose.
All wolves, including wild ones, are individuals, and some wild
wolves may exhibit abnormal or other behavior that is inconsistent with
the continued survival, reproduction, and recovery of wild gray wolf
populations. For example, some individual wolves may attack livestock
or domestic pets. The Service recognizes that such individuals must be
managed (through removal to another location or placement in captivity,
or lethal means) to minimize chronic conflicts with domestic animals if
local people are expected to continue to tolerate the presence of a
resident wolf population. The Service has determined that removal of
such individuals furthers the conservation and recovery of the wild
gray wolf population. In a similar although extremely rare situation,
individual wolves may on occasion exhibit behaviors that are
uncharacteristic of those normally observed in wild wolves. Although
highly unlikely, it is possible that a wild wolf may demonstrate
physical or behavioral evidence of hybridization with other canids,
such as domestic dogs or coyotes. It also is possible that an
individual wolf may become a nuisance, or pose a potential risk to
people or livestock because of habituation to food sources, human and
domestic animal companionship, or other factors. The Service intended
that 50 CFR 17.84(i)(7)(iii) subpart D allow for the management and/or
removal of all such individuals within the nonessential experimental
population areas for the benefit and conservation of the wild gray wolf
populations.
Location of the Experimental Population
The Yellowstone experimental population area includes the State of
Wyoming, that portion of Idaho east of Interstate Highway 15, and the
State of Montana east of Interstate Highway 15 and south of the
Missouri River east of Great Falls, Montana, to the Montana/North
Dakota border.
The central Idaho experimental population area includes that
portion of Idaho west of Interstate 15 and south of Interstate 90, and
that portion of Montana south of Interstate 90, Highway 93 and 12 near
Missoula, Montana, and west of Interstate 15.
Management
Management of wild wolves would not change from that established by
the special rules, except in those rare instances when a wild wolf
exhibits
[[Page 65240]]
abnormal behavior. This proposed revision would apply 50 CFR
17.84(i)(7)(iii) subpart D within the experimental population areas,
which would further the conservation and recovery of wild gray wolves
in the northern Rocky Mountains of the United States. The rule in 50
CFR 17.8e(i)(7)(iii) would apply to all wolves and wolf-like canids
found within and adjacent to the experimental population areas in
Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming.
National Environmental Policy Act
This proposed revision does not significantly change the special
regulations or the effect of the special regulations on the human
environment. An environmental action statement has been prepared that
determined the proposed revision is a categorical exclusion as provided
by 516 DM 2, Appendix 1 and 516 DM 6, Appendix 1. No further NEPA
documentation will therefore be made.
Required Determinations
This is not a significant rule subject to Office of Management and
Budget review under Executive Order 12866. The Department of the
Interior certifies that this document will not have a significant
economic effect on a substantial number of small entities under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.). The proposed
revision is purely technical in nature and intended to correct a
technical oversight in the rule originally adopted in 1994; it will not
increase or alter the effects brought by the original rule. The Service
has determined and certifies pursuant to the Unfunded Mandates Act, 2
U.S.C. 1502 et seq., that this rulemaking will not impose a cost of
$100 million or more in any given year on local or State governments or
private entities. The Department has determined that this proposed
regulation meets the applicable standards provided in sections 3(a) and
3(b)(2) of Executive order 12988.
Author: The principle author of this rule is Edward E. Bangs (see
ADDRESSES section).
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 17
Endangered and threatened species, Exports, Imports, Reporting and
record keeping requirements, Transportation.
Proposed Regulation Promulgation
Accordingly, the Service hereby proposes to amend part 17,
subchapter B of chapter I, title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations,
as set forth below:
PART 17--[AMENDED]
1. The authority citation for Part 17 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1361-1407; 16 U.S.C. 1531-1544; 16 U.S.C.
4201-4245; Public Law No. 99-625, 100 Statute 3500; unless otherwise
noted.
2. Revise Sec. 17.84(i)(7)(iii) to read as follows:
Sec. 17.84 Special rules--vertebrates.
* * * * *
(i) * * *
(7) * * *
(iii) All wolves found in the wild within the boundaries of this
paragraph (i)(7) after the first releases will be considered
nonessential experimental animals. In the conterminous United States, a
wolf that is outside an experimental area (as defined in paragraph
(i)(7) of this section) would be considered as endangered (or
threatened if in Minnesota) unless it is marked or otherwise known to
be an experimental animal. Wolves in the wild may be selectively
captured, removed, or killed for examination and genetic testing by the
Service or Service designated agency. Disposition of such wolves
outside the experimental areas and in the case of subpart D, those both
outside of and within the experimental population areas, may take any
of the following courses:
(A) If the animal was not involved in conflicts with humans and is
determined likely to be a wild experimental wolf, it will be returned
to the reintroduction area.
(B) If the animal is determined likely to be a wild experimental
wolf and was involved in conflicts with humans as identified in the
management plan for the closest experimental area, it may be relocated,
placed in captivity or killed.
(C) If the animal is determined not likely to be a wild
experimental wolf, it will be managed according to any Service-approved
plans for that area or will be marked and released near its point of
capture.
(D) If the animal is determined not likely to be a wild gray wolf
or if the Service or agencies designated by the Service determine that
any wild wolf exhibits abnormal behavior or that any wolf or wolf-like
canid shows physical or behavioral evidence of hybridization with other
canids, such as domestic dogs or coyotes, or of being an animal raised
in captivity other than as part of a Service-approved wolf recovery
program, it will be killed, or placed in captivity.
* * * * *
Dated: November 13, 1997.
Donald J. Barry,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 97-32440 Filed 12-8-97; 3:42 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P