

7644 



\ . 



^^edSit^^ I Vol- 46. No. 15 / Friday; January 23. 1981 / Notices 



i 



v 



ii 





r • 



DEPARTMENT OF THE iflTERIOR '^^S 

 Fish and Wildlife Service 'S^^ISS'Zffj 



U^ Fish and WUdlife s^iSS'^^^?^^ 

 Mitigation Policy; Notice of Final Policy' 



agency: U.S. Fish and virddliJFe Service. 

 Department of the Interior. ;:■ ■>:-rI^r- 1 . 

 action: Notice of Final Ppli gr. ^-3i^ 



summary: This Notice'establishes final 

 policy guidance for U^S. Fishand J- .-: :. 

 Wildlife Service persotmel involveid in i 

 making recommendatioiis'to protect or" 

 conserve Ssh and vlHldlifeiesoarces. 7:5; 

 The policy is needed t^(i)'enspre ; •" 

 consistent and effective ServiceT Js^l^TT: 

 recommendations; (siVaBowFe^ei^ and 

 private developers to anticipate Service 

 recommendations ani^plan' ioT~^'j^£~i]. ., :, 

 mitigation needs early; m3 (3) reduce ~ 

 Service and developer conflicts as well 

 as project delays. "nieliitenHed effect of 

 the policy is to protectluid conserve the 

 most important and valuable'fish and 

 vnldlife resources while facilitating 

 balanced development of the Nation's 

 natural resoiuxes. ::fii~rr^-i''i^'T!^ ■ 



EFFECTIVE DATE: January 23. 1981. 

 address: Comments submitted on the 

 proposed policy may be'inspected in 

 Room 738. 1375 K Street. N.W, - 

 Washington. D.C 20005. between 9 a jn. 

 and 3 pjn. on business days. 

 FOR FintTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

 John Christian. Policy Group Leader — 

 Environment. VS. Fish and Wildlife 

 Service. Department of the Interior, 

 Washington, D.C 20240. (202) 343-7151. 

 StJPPtEllENTARY INFORMATION: 



BACKGROUND " v'^?' " 



The development aincl use of the 

 Nation's natur^ resources continues in 

 an effort to provide people with their 

 basic needs and to improve their lives. 

 Fish and wildlife and Ae'intricate fabric 

 of natural resources* upon which they 

 depend provide benefits Jo people in 

 many ways. Fishing, hunting, and bird 

 watching are basic benefits that come to 

 mind-immediately. These activities 

 involve the direct use of these 

 renevrable "natural resources." Perhaps 

 a greater benefit although more difficult 

 for some to understand, is the .< 

 maintenance of the structure and j 

 function of the ecosystem that comprises 

 all living species, including people. The 

 presence of diverse, healthy fish and 

 wildlife populations generally signals a 

 healthy ecosystem which contains those 

 elements necessary for human survival, 

 including unpolluted air and productive 

 land. 



That fabric of natural resources caDed 

 habitat is the supply for fish and wildlife 

 renewal The life requirements for plant 



't'aad animal species are varied and 

 ^-complex. Each species requires a 

 « different set of environmental condibons 

 ^for survival and vigorous growth. These 

 3: conditions form the habitat of the 

 -various species. The development and 

 — use of natural resources leads to 

 .; changes in environmental conditions 

 -that can redefine habitat and thus 

 change the mix and abundance of plant 

 ~- and animal species. 

 11. A given change in habitat might 

 •-^increase or decrease overall habitat 

 -3 productivity or result in gains or losses 

 ^.'of species that are valuable to people or 

 "l^ecosystems. In some cases, habitat 

 vv modifications can also increase the 

 [ numbers of species considered 

 "^undesirable, and create a nuisance to 

 -^people or crowd out more valuable 

 ••-:^species. Therefore, development actions 

 ■^can cause habitat changes that are 

 considered either beneficial or adverse 

 depending on the intended wildlife 

 management objectives. 



When professional biologists 

 determine that a given development 

 action will cause a change that is 

 considered adverse, it is appropriate to 

 consider ways to avoid or minimize and 

 compensate for such adverse change or 

 loss of public resources. This is 

 commonly referred to as mitigation. 



Fish and wildlife resources are public 

 in nature. The Service has provided 

 Federal leadership for over 40 years to 

 protect and conserve fish and wildlife 

 and their habitat for the benefit of the 

 people of the United States. Under its 

 legal authorities, the Service conducts 

 fish and wildlife impact investigations 

 and provides mitigation 

 recommendations on development 

 projects of all kinds. These efforts have 

 been conducted through a full 

 partnership with State agencies 

 responsible for fish and wildlife 

 resources, and since 1970, with the 

 National Marine Fisheries Service of the 

 U.S. Department of Commerce. The 

 recommendations of the Service are 

 considered by the Federal development 

 and regulatory agencies for their 

 adoption as permitted by law. 



Over the years, the Service has 

 reviewed innumerable project and 

 program plans with the potential to 

 adversely affect fish and wildlife 

 resources. The mitigation recommended 

 in recent years by Service personnel to 

 . prevent or ameliorate adverse impacts 

 has been governed primarily by a broad 

 policy statement on mitigation 

 promulgated in 1974 and by specific 

 guidelines issued as needed. Recent 

 events have prompted the Service to 

 make known its mitigation objectives 

 and policies. Specific management 

 needs include: 



(1) Recent legislative, executive and 

 regulatory developments concerning the 

 environment which have led to a need to 

 update and. expand the advice within 

 the 1974 Service policy statement: 



(2) Increasing Service review 

 responsibilities which require issuance of 

 comprehensive guidance on mitigation 



to maintain the quality and consistency 

 of Service mitigation recommendations; 



(3) An explicit summary of Service 

 mitigation planning goals and policies to 

 be disclosed to developers and action 

 agencies to aid their earliest planning 

 efforts; and 



(4) Finally, the current national need 

 to accelerate development of energy 

 resources which requires that early 

 planning decisions be made that can 

 minimize conflict between important 

 environmental values and energy 

 development 



For these reasons, it was determined 

 to be necessary to fully outline the 

 overall mitigation policy of the VS. Fish 

 and Wildlife Service. The final Service 

 policy statement integrates and outlines 

 the major aspects of current Service 

 mitigation efforts. Intended as an 

 overview document its guidance is 

 based on an analysis of current Service 

 field recommendations and on the 

 guidance contained in recent Service 

 management docoments. 



This policy conditions only the 

 actions of Service employees involved 

 in providing mitigation 

 recommendations. It does not dictate 

 actions or positions that Federal action 

 agencies or individuals must accept 

 However, it is hoped that the policy will 

 provide a common basis for mitigation 

 decisionmaking and facilitate eariier 

 consideration of fish and wildlife values 

 in project planning activities. 



Finally, it should be stressed that this 

 Service policy outlines mitigation needs 

 for fish and wildlife, their habitat and 

 uses thereof. Others interested in 

 mitigation of project impacts on other 

 aspects of the environment such as 

 human health or heritage conservation 

 may find the Service policy does not 

 fully cover their needs. There was no 

 intent to develop a mitigation poUcy that 

 covers all possible public impacts 

 except those stated. However, the 

 Service strongly believes that 

 preservation and conservation of 

 natural resources is a necessary 

 prerequisite to human existence. 



DISCUSSION 



The foUowing items are included to 

 provide a better understanding of the 

 policy's relationship to other guidance 

 and to improve the understanding of its 

 technical basis. 



