[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 120 (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36571-36573]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-15551]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R6-R-2010-N194; 60138-1265-6CCP-S3]
Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge Complex, Malta, MT;
Comprehensive Conservation Plan
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce
that our draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and environmental
assessment (EA) for Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge Complex is
available. This draft CCP/EA describes how the Service intends to
manage this refuge complex for the next 15 years.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
on the draft CCP/EA by July 25, 2011. Submit comments by one of the
methods under ADDRESSES.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments or requests for more information by any
of the following methods.
E-mail: bowdoin@fws.gov. Include ``Bowdoin NWR Complex'' in the
subject line of the message.
Fax: Attn: Laura King, Planning Team Leader, 406-644-2661.
U.S. Mail: Laura King, Planning Team Leader, c/o National Bison
Range, 58355 Bison Range Road, Moiese, MT 59824.
Information Request: A copy of the CCP/EA may be obtained by
writing to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Refuge Planning,
134 Union Boulevard, Suite 300, Lakewood, Colorado 80228; or by
download from http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/planning.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Laura King, 406-644-2211, ext. 210
(phone); 406-644-2661 (fax); or laura_king@fws.gov (e-mail); or David
C. Lucas, 303-236-4366 (phone): 303-236-4792 (fax): or david_c_lucas@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 85,713-acre Bowdoin National Wildlife
Refuge Complex (refuge complex) is part of the National Wildlife Refuge
System. It is located in the mixed-grass prairie region of north-
central Montana, within an area known as the prairie pothole region.
The refuge complex oversees management of five national wildlife
refuges: Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge and four unstaffed satellite
refuges--Black Coulee, Creedman Coulee, Hewitt Lake, and Lake Thibadeau
National Wildlife Refuges. In addition, the refuge complex also manages
the four-county Bowdoin Wetland Management District (district), which
has nine waterfowl production areas in Blaine, Hill, Phillips, and
Valley Counties along with conservation easements that protect
approximately 40,159 acres of wetlands and grasslands. While the five
national wildlife refuges and the wetland management district were
established under different authorities, the primary purpose is to
provide migration, nesting, resting, and feeding habitat for migratory
birds in their wetlands and uplands. Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge
has been designated as an important bird area through a program
administered by the National Audubon Society. The four satellite
refuges have both fee title and private lands within their boundaries.
These lands are encumbered by refuge and flowage easements giving the
Service the right to impound water, control the uses that occur on that
water, and control any hunting and trapping. Access to these privately
owned areas is by landowner permission only.
The refuge complex provides opportunities for the public to enjoy
compatible wildlife-dependent public use activities including hunting,
limited fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental
education, and interpretation. A full-time staff of five employees and
various summer temporaries manage and study the refuge habitats and
maintain visitor facilities. Domestic livestock grazing, prescribed
fire, and haying are the primary management tools used to maintain and
enhance upland habitats. Water level manipulation is used to improve
wetland habitats. Invasive and
[[Page 36572]]
nonnative plant species are controlled and eradicated. Large, intact,
native prairie communities can still be found throughout the refuge
complex providing nesting habitat for over 29 species of resident and
migratory birds. Native grazers such as pronghorn, white-tailed deer,
and mule deer browse and graze the uplands. Four wetland classes are
found on the refuge complex: Temporary, seasonal, semipermanent, and
permanent and include both freshwater and saline wetlands. There are
more than 10,000 acres of wetlands in the refuge complex. These
wetlands have a diverse distribution of sizes, types, locations, and
associations. The chemistry of surface waters in these wetlands tends
to be dynamic because of interactions among numerous factors, such as
the position of the wetland in relation to ground water flow systems,
chemical composition of ground water, surrounding land uses, and
climate. As part of the central flyway, this concentration of wetlands
attracts thousands of migrating shorebirds and waterfowl to the refuge
complex.
Approximately 25,000 people visit the refuge annually. A 15-mile
interpreted auto tour route and nature trail on the Bowdoin National
Wildlife Refuge account for the majority of visitor use. Fishing is
only open on McNeil Slough and Beaver Creek WPAs. The remaining complex
waters do not support a sport fishery due to high salinity levels or
shallow water depth. Excluding Holm WPA, the remaining complex is open
to limited hunting of waterfowl and upland game birds. The four
satellite refuges (with landowner permission) and the remaining eight
WPAs are also open to big game hunting, according to state regulations
and seasons.
This draft CCP/EA includes the analyses of three different sets of
alternatives including three alternatives for managing the refuge
complex, two alternatives to evaluate the divestiture of Lake
Thibadeau, and five alternatives for addressing the salinity and
blowing salts issue on Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge.
Alternatives for the Overall Management of the Refuge Complex
Alternative A, Current Management (No Action). Funding, staff
levels, and management activities at the refuge complex would not
change. The current staff of five Service employees would continue to
manage Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge Complex primarily for migratory
birds. The Service would continue to manipulate native grasslands using
various management techniques including prescribed fire, haying, and
grazing. Approximately 10 percent of the uplands would be grazed
annually, and there would be minimal monitoring of response. As
resources become available, cropland on waterfowl production areas
would be restored to native grasses and forbs; however, dense nesting
cover would continue to be seeded on highly erodible lands in the
wetland management district. The Service would continue to use
mechanical and chemical methods to control existing and new
infestations of Russian olive. Larger infestations of invasive species
such as crested wheatgrass would continue to be given little to no
attention due to the extent of infestation and the lack of resources
and staff.
The Service would continue to attempt to mimic natural conditions
on managed wetlands to meet the needs of migratory waterbirds. The 19
ground water wells on and around Bowdoin Refuge would be monitored to
collect water quality data for the refuge and the Beaver Creek
Waterfowl Production Area. Lake Bowdoin and Dry Lake would continue to
be managed as closed basins. Visitor services programs including
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, photography, environmental
education, and interpretation would remain at current levels.
Alternative B, the Proposed Action. The Service would conserve
natural resources by restoring, protecting, and enhancing native mixed-
grass prairie and maintaining high-quality wetland habitat for target
migratory and resident birds within the Bowdoin National Wildlife
Refuge Complex. Invasive and nonnative plants that are causing habitat
losses and fragmentation would be controlled or eradicated. Research
would be conducted to control crested wheatgrass and restore treated
areas. Enhanced wetlands would be managed to mimic natural conditions
for wetland-dependent migratory birds during spring and fall migrations
and during the breeding and nesting season.
Visitor services programs would be enhanced, providing additional
opportunities for staff- and volunteer-led programs to provide a
greater understanding of the purposes of the refuge complex, importance
of conserving migratory birds and the unique mixed-grass prairie and
wetlands, and an awareness of the mission of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service and the National Wildlife Refuge System. A sanctuary area would
be created for waterfowl on the east 60 percent of the Bowdoin National
Wildlife Refuge during the hunting season, closing this to all foot
traffic. A new wildlife observation site would be added on the auto
tour route. The Service would investigate the need and consequences of
offering a big game hunt at Bowdoin Refuge. The success of these
additional efforts and programs would depend on added staff, research,
and monitoring programs, including additional operations funding,
infrastructure, and new and expanded partnerships.
Alternative C. This alternative includes most of the elements in
Alternative B. In addition, the Service would increase the water
management infrastructure (for example, water delivery systems, dikes,
and levees to manipulate individual wetlands) to create a more diverse
and productive wetland complex. Biological staff would monitor the
level of sedimentation occurring in natural wetlands and plan for its
removal to restore the biological integrity of these wetlands. Through
partnerships, the Service would increase the acres of invasive species
treated annually with an emphasis on preventing further encroachment of
crested wheatgrass and Russian olive trees into native grassland. The
Service would investigate the feasibility of offering a limited,
archery-only, big game hunt at Bowdoin Refuge. The refuge complex would
serve as a conservation learning center for the area. Public access
would be improved to Creedman Coulee Refuge.
Alternatives for Lake Thibadeau National Wildlife Refuge
Using a divestiture model, developed by the Mountain-Prairie Region
of the Service, the habitat quality and ability of Lake Thibadeau
National Wildlife Refuge to meet its purposes and support the goals of
the National Wildlife Refuge System, were evaluated. The Service owns
less than 1 percent of the lands within the 3,868-acre approved
acquisition boundary; the remaining area is private lands encumbered by
refuge and flowage easements. These easements give the Service the
right to manage the impoundments and the uses that occur on that water
and to control hunting and trapping, but these easements do not
prohibit development, grazing, or agricultural uses. Due to upstream
development in the watershed, the impoundments do not receive adequate
water supplies and are often dry enough to be farmed; the surrounding
upland areas are also farmed or heavily grazed. This loss or lack of
habitat has resulted in the Service's proposed action to divest this
refuge. The Service completed an environmental analysis of two
alternatives to address the situation at the Lake Thibadeau Refuge:
[[Page 36573]]
(1) Lake Thibadeau Refuge Alternative 1--Current management (no
action);
(2) Lake Thibadeau Refuge Alternative 2--Divestiture (proposed
action).
Alternatives for Salinity and Blowing Salts on Bowdoin National
Wildlife Refuge
The principle sources of water for the Bowdoin National Wildlife
Refuge are precipitation, floodwater from Beaver Creek, ground-water
seepage, water deliveries from the Milk River Project, and irrigation
return flows. The last three sources of water add dissolved solids
(salinity) to the refuge waters, particularly Lake Bowdoin, a closed
basin. In addition, the refuge and adjoining lands are underlain by
glacial till and shale containing high concentrations of soluble salts.
The Milk River Project water rights for Bowdoin refuge are limited and
insufficient to improve wetland water quality. As water evaporates from
Lake Bowdoin, salts have become concentrated and water salinity has
increased. Historically, two methods have been used to improve Lake
Bowdoin's water quality and reduce salinity levels: (1) Discharges of
saline water into Beaver Creek; and (2) managing Dry Lake as an
evaporation basin for Lake Bowdoin's water. Neither of these methods is
acceptable due to impacts from windblown salts and saline water
discharge. As a consequence, evaporation has continued to increase
salinity levels in Lake Bowdoin to levels that will eventually
negatively impact the diversity of aquatic vegetation and
invertebrates. Waterfowl production will also be negatively affected,
particularly if more suitable freshwater areas are not available or
significantly reduced during the breeding season.
The Service hopes to address the salinity and blowing salts issue
by developing a water management system on Bowdoin National Wildlife
Refuge Complex that would protect the environment and mitigate current
and future salt-dust-blowing concerns for neighboring properties, while
providing quality water and wildlife habitat for migratory birds. A
benchmark for achieving this goal would be to meet the Service's
salinity objective of sustaining a brackish water quality level of
approximately 7,000 mg/L of total dissolved solids (salts) in Lake
Bowdoin. The Service developed and analyzed five alternatives to
address the salinity and blowing salts issue for Lake Bowdoin in the
Bowdoin National Wildlife Refuge including (1) current management (no
action), (2) Evaporation ponds and removal of salt residue, (3)
Flushing by Beaver Creek, (4) Underground injection and flushing by
Beaver Creek (proposed action), and (5) Pumping to the Milk River. The
Service has identified salinity and blowing salts alternative 4 as the
best option (proposed action) for addressing this issue based on the
effectiveness of treatment, environmental and social consequences, and
cost.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, you should be
aware that your entire comment--including your personal identifying
information--may be made publicly available at any time.
The environmental review of this project will be conducted in
accordance with the requirements of the National Environmental Policy
Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); NEPA
Regulations (40 CFR parts 1500-1508); other appropriate Federal laws
and regulations; Executive Order 12996; the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997; and Service policies and procedures for
compliance with those laws and regulations.
Dated: August 25, 2010.
Hugh Morrison,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2011-15551 Filed 6-21-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P