[Federal Register: July 23, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 140)]
[Notices]
[Page 36500-36502]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23jy09-66]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2008-N0189; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Rappahannock River Valley National Wildlife Refuge, Caroline,
Essex, King George, Lancaster, Middlesex, Richmond, and Westmoreland
Counties, VA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of draft comprehensive conservation plan
and environmental assessment; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of the draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
draft environmental assessment (EA) for Rappahannock River Valley
National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) for a 30-day public review and comment
period. In this draft CCP/EA, we describe three alternatives, including
our Service-preferred Alternative B, for managing this refuge for the
next 15 years. Also available for public review and comment are the
draft compatibility determinations, which are included as Appendix B in
the draft CCP/EA.
DATES: To ensure our consideration of your written comments, we must
receive them by August 24, 2009. We will also hold public meetings in
Warsaw and Richmond, Virginia, during the 30-day review period to
receive comments and provide information on the draft plan. We will
announce and post details about public meetings in local news media,
via our project mailing list, and on our regional planning Web site,
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/rappahannock/ccphome.html.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments or requests for copies of the draft CCP/
EA by any of the following methods. You may also drop off comments in
person at Rappahannock River Valley NWR headquarters, located at 336
Wilna Road in Warsaw, Virginia.
U.S. Mail: Nancy McGarigal, Natural Resource Planner, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, Massachusetts
01035.
Fax: Attention: Nancy McGarigal, 413-253-8468.
E-mail: northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include ``Rappahannock NWR CCP''
in the subject line of your e-mail.
Agency Web site: View or download the draft document at http://
www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/Rappahannock.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Joseph McCauley, Project Leader,
Eastern Virginia Rivers NWR Complex, 336 Wilna Road, P.O. Box 1030,
Warsaw, VA 22572-1030; (804) 333-1470 (phone); 804-333-3396 (fax);
fw5rw_evrnwr@fws.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Rappahannock
River Valley NWR, which was started with the notice of intent we
published in the Federal Register (70 FR 65931) on November 1, 2005. We
prepared the draft CCP in compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969 and the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997. This refuge is the newest of the four
refuges that comprise the Eastern Virginia Rivers NWR Complex. The
other three are the James River, Plum Tree Island, and Presquile NWRs.
Rappahannock River Valley NWR, currently 7,711 acres, was
established in 1996 to conserve and protect fish and wildlife
resources, including endangered and threatened species, and wetlands.
Refuge habitats include freshwater tidal marsh, forested swamp, upland
deciduous forest, mixed pine forest, and managed grassland. Two
Federally listed species are found on the refuge, the endangered
shortnose sturgeon (Acipenser brevirostrum) and threatened Sensitive
joint-vetch (Aeschynomene virginica). The State of Virginia's largest
wintering population of bald eagles is located within the refuge
boundary. Neotropical migratory songbirds, shorebirds, raptors, and
marsh birds also rely on the Rappahannock River corridor during
[[Page 36501]]
their spring and fall migrations. With help from partners and
volunteers, we are restoring native grasslands and riparian forests
along the river and its tributary streams to provide additional habitat
for these important species.
Although wildlife and habitat conservation is the refuge's first
priority, the public can observe and photograph wildlife, fish, hunt,
or participate in environmental education and interpretation on several
units of the refuge. The refuge contains three sites on the Virginia
Birding and Wildlife Trail. The Wilna Unit, located in Richmond County,
offers accessible fishing, excellent wildlife observation
opportunities, and accessible nature trails. Other units of the refuge
are open for visits by reservation.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Improvement Act), which amended the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, requires us to
develop a CCP for each national wildlife refuge. The purpose for
developing CCPs is to provide refuge managers with 15-year plans for
achieving refuge purposes and the mission of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, in conformance with sound principles of fish and
wildlife management, conservation, legal mandates, and our policies. In
addition to outlining broad management direction on conserving wildlife
and their habitats, CCPs identify wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities available to the public, including opportunities for
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update
each CCP at least every 15 years, in accordance with the Improvement
Act.
Public Outreach
In conjunction with our November 2005, Federal Register notice
announcing our intent to begin the CCP process, we distributed a
newsletter to more than 300 State agencies, organizations, and
individuals on our project mailing list, asking about their interest in
the refuge and whether they had issues or concerns they would like us
to address. We distributed another newsletter in December 2005,
providing more detailed information on the refuge and the planning
process. In that newsletter, we also asked people to share their vision
for the future of the refuge and provide us with feedback or comments
on its management. Also in December 2005, we held three public scoping
meetings, in Richmond, Port Royal, and Warsaw, Virginia. We asked those
who attended to identify issues and concerns they would like us to
address and to comment on the draft vision, goals and objectives we had
at that time. Forty-five people attended those meetings. In 2006, we
sponsored a survey of 1,200 local residents, randomly selected, asking
specific questions about their recreation on the Rappahannock River,
their preferences for future wildlife-dependent recreation on the
refuge, and whether they knew about refuge opportunities. Throughout
the process, we have conducted additional outreach via newsletters and
participation in meetings, community events and other public forums,
and continued to request public input on refuge management and
programs.
Some of the key issues identified include the amount of grassland
to manage, other priority habitat types to conserve, land protection
and conservation priorities, improving the visibility of the Service
and refuge, providing desired facilities and activities, and ways to
improve opportunities for public use while ensuring the restoration and
protection of priority resources.
CCP Actions We Are Considering, Including the Service-Preferred
Alternative
We developed three management alternatives based on the purposes
for establishing the refuge, its vision and goals, and the issues and
concerns the public, State agencies, and the Service identified during
the planning process. The alternatives have some actions in common,
such as protecting and monitoring Federally listed species and the
regionally significant bald eagle population, controlling invasive
plants and wildlife diseases, encouraging research that benefits our
resource decisions, protecting cultural resources, continuing to
acquire land from willing sellers within our approved refuge boundary,
and distributing refuge revenue sharing payments to counties.
Other actions distinguish the alternatives. The draft CCP/EA
describes the alternatives in detail, and relates them to the issues
and concerns we identified. Highlights follow.
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4347, as
amended). Alternative A defines our current management activities, and
serves as the baseline against which to compare the other alternatives.
Our habitat management focus on the 700 acres of grasslands and old
fields would continue, and we would continue to use tools such as
prescribed fire, mowing, herbicides and disking to keep them in an
early stage of succession and increase plant diversity. We intend to
phase out our cooperative farming program on another 200 acres over the
next 5 years and convert to grasslands. We would continue to monitor
our forests and wetlands for invasive plants and disease, and treat
them if we have available funding and staffing. Our biological
monitoring and inventory program would continue at its current levels,
focusing on surveys of breeding and wintering birds.
Our visitor services programs would not change; we would conduct
most of the activities on the Wilna Unit. The Wilna Unit is the only
refuge unit open 7 days a week, from sunrise to sunset. The other units
are open by reservation only. Wildlife observation and photography,
white-tailed deer hunting, and fishing are the most popular activities.
Our staffing and facilities would remain the same. Seven staff
positions for the refuge complex would remain in place, and the
headquarters would remain at the historic Wilna House.
Alternative B (Enhanced Habitat Diversity and the Service-Preferred
Alternative)
This alternative is the one we propose as the best way to manage
this refuge over the next 15 years. It includes an array of management
actions that, in our professional judgment, works best toward achieving
the refuge purposes, our vision and goals, and the goals of other State
and regional conservation plans. We also believe it most effectively
addresses the key issues raised during the planning process.
Our habitat management program would expand to include up to 1,200
acres of managed grasslands and old fields, primarily through new
acquisitions from willing sellers within our approved refuge boundary.
We would use all the tools identified under Alternative A. We would
also phase out our cooperative farming program within 5 years and
convert it to grasslands, although we may maintain a minimal number of
acres if we determine it would be useful in our interpretation program,
or would provide benefits for other programs. We would manage our
existing planted pine stands through thinning, to facilitate their
growth into a healthy, mature, mixed forest. As in Alternative A, we
would continue to
[[Page 36502]]
monitor our forests and wetlands for invasive plants and disease, and
treat them to the extent our funding allows. Protecting and enhancing
riparian and wetlands habitat would be a priority. We would also
continue our monitoring and inventory program, but regularly evaluate
the results to help us better understand the implications of our
management actions and identify ways to improve their effectiveness.
We would expand opportunities for all six priority public uses. We
would seek partnerships to help us achieve any new or expanded
programs, including interpretive trails construction, adding a self-
guided canoe trail, and leading environmental education programs using
the refuge as a living laboratory. We plan to further evaluate
opportunities for waterfowl and turkey hunting. We would also improve
and expand access for freshwater fishing. If we can secure permanent
funding, we would fill up to four new staff positions to provide depth
to our programs and achieve our goals and objectives. We also propose
to construct a new, Service-standard small refuge headquarters and
visitor contact facility on the Hutchinson tract to increase our
visibility and improve public access to refuge land.
Alternative C (Forest Management Emphasis)
This alternative resembles Alternative B in its refuge
administration, facilities, and visitor services programs, but differs
in its habitat management.
Under Alternative C, we would allow grasslands, old fields, and
croplands to revert to shrub and forest, supplementing that process
with such activities as plantings, applying herbicides, and cutting or
brush-hogging (mowing) as necessary to achieve the desired results. As
in Alternative B, we would protect and enhance riparian and wetlands
habitats as a priority. We also propose to manage our existing planted
pine stands as in Alternative B, and continue to monitor our forests
and wetlands for invasive plants and disease and treat them to the
extent funding allows. Protecting and enhancing riparian and wetland
habitats would also be a priority. Compared to Alternative B, we would
conduct a more intensive, focused monitoring and inventory program
designed to address more specific questions about habitat quality and
the response of wildlife populations. In the near term, monitoring
would be aimed specifically at documenting the transition from
grasslands, old fields, and croplands to shrub and young forest. Under
Alternative C, our public use programs would be similar to those
proposed under Alternative B, including our plans to pursue a new
headquarters and visitor contact facility.
Public Meetings
We will give the public opportunities to provide input at two
public meetings in Warsaw and Richmond, Virginia. You can obtain the
schedule from the project leader or natural resource planner (see
addresses or FOr Further Information CONTACT, above). You may also
submit comments at any time during the planning process by any means
shown in the ADDRESSES section.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comments, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time. While you can
ask us in your comment to withhold your personal identifying
information from public review, we cannot guarantee that we will be
able to do so.
Dated: May 8, 2009.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA
01035.
[FR Doc. E9-17546 Filed 7-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P