Overview of Proposed Alaska National Wildlife Refuges Regulatory Changes U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

What are the proposed changes (Part 1)? Predator control is not allowed on refuges in Alaska unless it is determined to be necessary to meet refuge purposes, federal laws, or policy and is consistent with our mandates to manage for natural and biological diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health. The need for predator control must be based on sound science in response to a significant conservation concern. Demands for more wildlife to harvest cannot be the sole or primary basis for predator control on refuges in Alaska.

What are the proposed changes (Part 2)? Prohibit the following methods and means for predator harvest: o Take of brown bears over bait o Take of bears using traps or snares o Take of wolves and coyotes during denning season o Same day airborne take of bears o Take of bear cubs or sows with cubs (exceptions apply)

What are the proposed changes (Part 3)? Update Public Participation and Closure Procedures o Include conservation of natural/biological diversity, biological integrity, and environmental health to the list of closure criteria. o Increase the possible duration of an emergency closure from 30 to 60 days. o Temporary closure duration – only as long as is reasonably necessary, with mandatory review every 3 years. o Publish annual list of refuge closures for public review and input. o Require consultation with the State and Tribes/Native Corporations. o Requirement for public hearing prior to implementation of temporary and permanent closures will remain. o Expand the methods used for public notice.

Why is the USFWS proposing these changes? To ensure we are managing refuges in Alaska consistent with our legal mandates to conserve fish, wildlife and their habitats in their natural diversity and to maintain the biological diversity, integrity and environmental health and to increase consistency with other Federal laws, regulations, and policies. In response to recent regulations passed through the Board of Game allowing particular practices for the harvest of wildlife on Alaska Refuges that are in conflict with these mandates. More effectively engage the public by broadening notification and outreach methods, ensuring consultation with Tribes and the State, providing for increased transparency in our decision-making, and allowing for additional opportunity for public input.

Who do these Proposed Regulations apply to? Proposed changes under the refuge hunting and trapping regulations would apply only to State regulated general sport hunting and trapping and intensive management activities on Alaska National Wildlife Refuges. These proposed regulations would NOT apply to Federally qualified subsistence users hunting or trapping under Federal Subsistence Regulations.

Where would these regulations apply? Only on National Wildlife Refuges in Alaska (highlighted in purple)

Timeline for Proposed Rule Process Now — Continued outreach and scoping, internal review of proposed rule and EA. January 2016 — Publish proposed rule and EA and start of public comment period. Hearings scheduled around the state for January and February of More information coming soon! March - April 2016 — Review public comments, update and finalize proposed rule. May 2016 — Publish final rule

Questions?

Proposed changes are based on existing mandates US Fish & Wildlife Service Mission: Working with others to conserve, protect and enhance fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats for the continuing benefit of the American people. National Wildlife Refuge System Mission: To administer a national network of lands and waters for the conservation, management, and where appropriate, restoration of the fish, wildlife, and plant resources and their habitats within the United States for the benefit of present and future generations of Americans.

Proposed changes are based on existing mandates ANILCA “... to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity” “... to provide the opportunity for continued subsistence use by rural residents (Title VIII and establishment purposes), as long as this use is not in conflict with the conservation of fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity or fulfillment of treaty obligations.” “... to preserve wilderness resource values and related recreational opportunities including....hiking, canoeing, fishing and sport hunting”

Proposed changes are based on existing mandates Refuge System Administration Act (1966), as amended by Improvement Act (1997) Manage national wildlife refuges so as “to ensure that... biological integrity, biological diversity, and environmental health are maintained” Fishing, hunting, wildlife observation, and environmental education in national wildlife refuges are generally compatible uses, when managed in accordance with principles of sound fish and wildlife management A compatible wildlife-dependent recreational use on a refuge should be facilitated, subject to such restrictions or regulations as may be necessary, reasonable, and appropriate.

Definitions Biological Diversity - the variety of life and its processes, including living organisms, genetic differences, and communities and ecosystems. Biological Integrity - Biotic compositions, structure, and functioning (including natural processes) at genetic, organism, and community level comparable with historic conditions. Environmental Health - Composition, structure, and functioning (including natural processes) of soil, water, air, and other abiotic features comparable with historic conditions Historic Conditions - Composition, structure, and functioning of ecosystems resulting from natural processes that we believe, based on sound professional judgment, were present prior to substantial human related changes to the landscape.

ANILCA “Natural Diversity” Intent Congressional Representative Udall – “to conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their natural diversity.... In summary, it is the intent of the above language to direct the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to the best of its ability to conserve, protect and manage all fish and wildlife populations within a particular wildlife refuge system unit in the natural ‘mix’ as occurring now and not to emphasize management activities favoring some species to the detriment of others... ” December 11, 1980, 126 Cong. Rec. H

Why not use other processes? This is the process used to update regulations for refuges. Proposed regulations are relevant to and would apply on all Alaska refuges BOG and RAC/FSB processes are specific to State and Federal Subsistence regulations and would apply more broadly.