Step D: Develop and Analyze Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action
The alternatives should contain different sets of objectives and strategies for achieving the purposes, vision, and goals of the refuge, fulfilling the mission of the Refuge System, and resolving issues.
1. No-Action Alternative—Usually a continuation of current objectives and management strategies, either with no changes or with changes that would have occurred without the CCP.
2. Range of Alternatives —The planning team will develop a range of alternatives consisting of different sets of objectives and strategies for managing the refuge.
3. Proposed Action—In the NEPA document, the team will recommend a proposed action: the alternative that best achieves the purposes, vision, and goals of the refuge; fulfills the mission of the Refuge System; maintains and, where appropriate, restores the ecological integrity of each refuge and the Refuge System; addresses significant issues and mandates; and conforms to the principles of sound fish and wildlife management. For all practical purposes, the proposed action is the draft CCP for the refuge.
4. Objective Development—To address each goal, the team will develop objectives appropriate for specific refuge habitat types, management units, key species (for example, migratory birds and threatened or endangered species), wildlife-dependent recreation, monitoring populations of fish, wildlife, and plants and their habitats, and other areas of management. Objectives also may deal with refuge information needs (for example, the development of baseline data), administrative needs, and any other issues we need to address to meet the goals of the refuge.
5. Strategy Development—The team will develop strategies to identify the specific actions, tools, or techniques that are necessary to accomplish each objective.
6. Environmental ConsequencesThe team will assess the direct, indirect, and cumulative environmental consequences of implementing each alternative. Those consequences predict the foreseeable adverse and beneficial impacts of implementing each alternative on fish, wildlife, plants, and their habitats; any threatened or endangered species; cultural resources; the local economy; our ability to provide opportunities for compatible wildlife-dependent recreational uses; conflicts between priority uses and other uses; and other issues identified earlier in the planning process.