Migratory Bird Permits
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and National Management Plan for the Double-Crested Cormorant

Migratory Bird Permits; Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and National Management Plan for the Double-Crested Cormorant

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent.
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is issuing this notice to advise the public that we are initiating efforts to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) and accompanying national management plan aimed at addressing impacts caused by population and range expansion of the double-crested cormorant in the contiguous United States. This notice describes a range of possible alternatives, invites public participation in the scoping process for preparing the EIS, and identifies the Service official to whom you may direct questions and comments. Locations, dates, and times of public scoping meetings have yet to be determined. DATES: We will publish the formal closing date for receiving scoping comments when the noticeof public scoping meetings is published in the Federal Register. We anticipate Federal Register publication of the locations, dates, and times of public scoping meetings to occur within two months of this notice of intent.
ADDRESSES: If you wish to comment, you may submit your comments by any one of several methods. You may mail comments to: Chief, Office of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 634, Arlington, VA 22203. You may also comment viathe internet to: cormorant__eis@fws.gov. Pleasesubmit internetcomments as an ASCII file avoiding the use of special characters and any form of encryption. Please also include your name and return address in your internet message. If you do not receive a confirmation that we have received your message, contact us directly at (703) 358- 2334. Finally, you may hand-deliver comments to: Room 634--Arlington Square Building, 4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Arlington, Virginia. Ourpractice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home address from the rulemaking record, which we willhonor to the extent allowable by law. If you wish us to withhold your name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. However, we will not consider anonymous comments. We will make all submissions from organizations or businesses, and from individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety. We have yet to determine potential sites of public scoping meetings. We will publish a notice of public meetings with the locations, dates, and times in the Federal Register.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jon Andrew, Chief, Office ofMigratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 358- 1714; or John L. Trapp, Office of Migratory Bird Management, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, (703) 358-1965. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The double-crested cormorant (Phalacrocorax auritus) has been protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act since 1972. Populations of this large fish-eating waterbird, which is native to all 48 of the contiguous United States, have increased dramatically during the past three decades. In many parts of the United States, this has culminated in conflicts with resources of value to humans. Cormorants and Their Impacts The size of the North American breeding population of the double- crested cormorant has been estimated at about 372,000 pairs, or 852 colonies (Tyson et al. 1997). Using values of one to four non-breeding birds per breeding pair yields an estimated total population of 1-2 million birds (Hatch 1995). The double-crested cormorant breeds widely throughout much of the coastal and interior portions of the United States. It has been found breeding in 46 of the 48 contiguous United States. However, it is not uniformly distributed across this broad area. Sixty-one percent of the breeding birds belong to the Interior population and it is the fastest growing of the six major North American breeding populations (Hatch 1995). From 1970-1991, in the Great Lakes region (American and Canadian), which lies within the range of the Interior population, the number of double-crested cormorant nests increased from 89 to 38,000, an average annual increase of 29 percent (Weseloh et al. 1995). For the contiguous United States as a whole, the breeding population increased at an average rate of 6.1 percent per year from 1966-1994 (Sauer et al. 1996). Cormorant wintering populations are concentrated in coastal States, from North Carolina to Texas in the east and from California to Washington in the west. In the south, there also are appreciable concentrations inland from the coast (e.g., east Texas, eastern Oklahoma, southeastern Arkansas, west-central Mississippi, and northeastern Alabama). Cormorants nesting in Canada and the northern United States from Alberta to the Gulf of St. Lawrence (i.e., the Atlantic and Interior populations) migrate in winter primarily to the southern United States between Texas and Florida. Cormorants have been implicated as being responsible for:
(1) Economic losses at commercial aquaculture facilities;
(2) damage to trees and other vegetation associated with breeding colonies and roosting sites;
(3) impacts to other species of migratory birds in the vicinity of cormorant breeding colonies;
(4) declines in economic revenues associated with outdoor (primarily fishing-related) recreational activities;
(5) declines in populations of sport fish; and
(6) lowering of private property values. Past

Management Actions
Formal efforts by the Service and others to control double-crested cormorant populations date to the 1940s. Since 1972, we have issued depredation permits to persons who can document injury to ``crops or other interests'' by migratory birds, including cormorants (50 CFR 21.41). In the last decade, requests for depredation permits to control damages caused by double-crested cormorants have increased dramatically. In response to published evidence of significant economic losses at commercial aquaculture facilities due to predation by double-crested cormorants, we implemented a depredation order on March 4, 1998 (63 FR 10560). The depredation order allows commercial aquaculturists in 13 States to take unlimited numbers of double-crested cormorants ``* * * when found committing or about to commit depredations to aquaculture stocks * * *'' (50 CFR 21.47). In early spring 1999, we received applications for permits to conduct cormorant control activities at Little Galloo Island, Lake Ontario, New York (oiling of eggs in up to 7,500 nests); and Young Island, Lake Champlain, Vermont (oiling of eggs in up to 3,000 nests). Environmental Assessments of the proposed actions concluded that they would have no significant environmental effects, and permits were subsequently issued (USFWS 1999a and b). The Atlantic States Legal Foundation (ASLF) challenged the issuance of a permit to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation in United States District Court in a complaint filed August 16, 1999. The ASLF argued that our decision to issue a permit in this instance was a violation of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the National Environmental Policy Act and was arbitrary and capricious. Although the District Court has taken no action on the ASLF complaint, the action highlights the need for scientific inquiry into the nature of the problems caused by double-crested cormorants and an assessment of the utility of management actions most likely to resolve resulting conflicts. Alternatives After the scoping process, we will develop alternatives to be included in the EIS, basing them on our mission and the comments received during scoping. Examples of alternatives that we might consider range from ``No Action'' to ``Large-scale Population Control on Breeding Grounds, Wintering Grounds, and Migration Areas in the United States.'' As a precursor to the national management plan, the Service has contracted for the development of a cormorant status assessment. A draft is currently under review. Availability of this document for public review will be announced at a later date. We are soliciting your comments on issues, alternatives, and impacts we might address in the EIS. Of particular value will be comments that:
(1) Identify and, where possible, quantify impacts caused by increasing cormorant populations;
(2) suggest management strategies to resolve such conflicts; and
(3) identify determining factors in justifying the need for control, if any.

Issue Resolution and Environmental Review
The primary issue that we will  address during the scoping and planning process for the EIS is to determine which alternatives for managing double-crested cormorant populations we will analyze. We will prepare a discussion of the potential effects, by alternative, which will include the following areas:
(1) Double-crested cormorant populations and their habitats;
(2) Other bird populations and their habitats;
(3) Effects on other species of flora and fauna; and
(4) Socioeconomic effects.

We will conduct an environmental review of the management actions
in accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as appropriate. We are furnishing this notice in accordance with 40 CFR 1501.7 to obtain suggestions and information from other agencies, tribes, and the public on the scope of issues to be addressed in the EIS. A draft EIS should be available to the public in the spring of 2000.

Public Scoping Meetings
A schedule of public scoping meetings is not available at this time. We encourage suggestions of potential dates, times, and locations for the meetings. We will then publish notice of the meetings in the Federal Register.

References Cited
A complete list of all references cited herein is available from the Office of Migratory Bird Management (see ADDRESSES section).