[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39890-39893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17014]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2011-N053; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge, FL; Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for St. Johns National Wildlife
Refuge (NWR) in Brevard County, Florida, for public review and comment.
In this Draft CCP/EA, we describe the alternative we propose to use to
manage this refuge for the 15 years following approval of the final
CCP.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
by August 8, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Mr.
Bill Miller, via U.S. mail at Merritt Island NWR Complex, P.O. Box
2683, Titusville, FL 32781, or via e-mail at William_G_Miller@fws.gov, or St. Johns CCP@fws.gov. Alternatively, you may
download the document from our Internet Site at http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/ under ``Draft Documents.'' Summit comments on the
Draft CCP/EA to the above postal address or e-mail addresses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bill Miller, at 561/715-0023
(telephone) or William_G_Miller@fws.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for St. Johns NWR. We
started the process through a Federal Register notice on December 14,
2009 (74 FR 66147). Please see that notice for more about the refuge
and its purposes.
The St. Johns NWR is a unit of and administered through the Merritt
Island NWR Complex.
St. Johns NWR was established in August 1971, to provide protection
for threatened and endangered species and native diversity. Its primary
purpose relates to threatened and endangered species and applies to all
lands and waters managed as part of St. Johns NWR. The refuge contains
two units that combine for approximately 6,422 acres. The southern or
``Bee Line'' unit occurs approximately 1 mile west of the city of Port
St. John, Florida, while the northern or ``State Road 50'' unit occurs
approximately 5 miles to the north, roughly 5 miles west of the city of
Titusville, Florida. St. Johns NWR is closed to public use, but for
those permitted through the special use permit process.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Administration Act), as amended by the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to develop
a CCP for each national wildlife refuge. The purpose in developing a
CCP is to provide refuge managers with a 15-year plan for achieving
refuge purposes and contributing toward the mission of the National
Wildlife Refuge System, consistent 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, wildlife photography, and
environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update
the CCP at least every 15 years in accordance with the Administration
Act.
Significant issues addressed in this Draft CCP/EA include: (1)
Managing for wildlife diversity and prioritizing habitat management for
secretive marsh birds; (2) expanding the approved acquisition boundary
by 459 acres to enable us to enter into land acquisition agreements
with willing sellers for lands that connect the refuge to a regional
network of publicly managed lands; (3) protecting our interests from
illicit uses; (4) opening select areas to unsupervised visitation; (5)
evaluating the effectiveness of cattle grazing as a habitat management
tool; (6) evaluating the compatibility of feral hog and white-tailed
deer hunting as a visitor service; and (7) adding permanent staff.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for managing the refuge and chose
``Alternative C'' as the proposed alternative. A full description of
each alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative
below.
[[Page 39891]]
Alternative A: Current Management (No Action)
Alternative A continues management activities and programs at
present levels. We would continue the prescribed fire program to
maintain open habitat conditions that would generally favor many native
birds, including black and king rails, wading birds, and eastern
meadowlarks. Secretive marsh bird surveys would continue to be
conducted although infrequently. The lack of firm data on the mix of
wintering birds using the refuge would continue. There would be no
active management of wood storks or State-listed wading birds. We would
continue to reduce the impacts from off-site runoff and facilitate
infiltration; however, there would be no active management of water
quality. Still, we would continue to protect emergent wetlands that
buffer and filter the St. Johns River. We would not actively collect
data related to climate change trends and their effects on the refuge.
Periodic detection and control of invasive plant species would
continue. We would also continue to monitor for the presence and
abundance of invasive species such as the feral hog, continuing to use
a hog trapper and staff to control these animals occasionally and
opportunistically.
Boundaries would not change under this alternative, and the lack of
a functional management boundary would continue to be problematic. In
particular, effective resource protection would continue to be hindered
by the fragmented ownership, and the unmarked, unfenced boundaries of
the checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit. In addition, there would be
no active management of rights-of-way.
Under this alternative, we would continue to provide law
enforcement support through the Merritt Island NWR. We would continue
to collaborate with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
(FWC), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and local
law enforcement agencies in trying to protect resources from illegal
activities, such as trespass and unauthorized use of all-terrain and
off-road vehicles. We would continue to provide protection for cultural
and archaeological resources.
The refuge would remain closed to the public, with certain limited
exceptions, such as an occasional guided tour. The refuge would
continue to be managed part time by Merritt Island NWR Complex staff as
a collateral duty. We would continue to count on three or four
volunteers from the community to conduct occasional special guided
educational tours and to control exotic plants under staff supervision.
We would maintain one tool and equipment storage shed, which houses a
small cache of fire-fighting equipment. We would maintain perimeter
fencing, gates, culverts, and 10-12 miles of unpaved access roads.
Alternative B: Management for Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
In general, Alternative B represents an expansion of the management
efforts of Alternative A, emphasizing on rare, threatened, and
endangered species. Management would primarily occur through prescribed
burning and hydrologic restoration. Utilizing ecological indicators, we
would promote a fire return interval to maintain early successional
habitat on behalf of these species and would shift prescribed burning
events to summer/early fall. In addition, we would determine the size,
seasonality, and frequency of prescribed fires to benefit rail species.
We would develop a monitoring program for secretive marsh birds and
adapt management based on species response. We would work to restore
the hydrologic setting to benefit marsh birds and determine the role of
the refuge in regional and national species conservation plans,
particularly with regard to rare, threatened, and endangered species.
Management of wood storks and State-listed wading birds, including the
snowy egret, tri-colored heron, and little blue heron, would expand. We
would conduct nesting surveys and opportunistically remove fill and
dike features of the State Road 50 unit borrow ponds to provide
additional artificial islands.
On behalf of the northern crested caracara, Alternative B would
maintain open habitat with a minimum of woody vegetation, including wax
myrtle. We would also evaluate the use of mowing, cattle grazing, and/
or other forms of vegetation maintenance to benefit this species on the
Bee Line unit.
We would stay abreast of Cape Sable seaside sparrow reintroduction
and introduction discussions within the State. We would work with our
South Florida Ecological Services Field Office and the FWC to evaluate
the suitability of the refuge as a potential introductory site to
support recovery of this species.
An exotic plant database would be maintained, and exotic plants
would be controlled at maintenance levels. We would increase control of
invasive/feral animals and would use permittees and partners for the
feral hog control effort.
We would proactively address climate change, particularly with
regard to its potential to impact rare species.
In pursuit of more functional refuge boundaries, we would cooperate
with partners to consolidate and secure ownership in the checkerboard
area of the Bee Line unit to create functional refuge management areas.
We would consider fee-title acquisitions, land swaps, management
agreements, conservation easements, and other measures based on a
willing-seller approach to protect these sites. We would also work with
Brevard County to abandon the county's historic rights-of way. We would
pursue the implementation of a minor expansion proposal, approximately
459 areas, of the approved acquisition boundary to connect lands and
develop corridors proximal to the State Route 50 unit for dispersal and
movement of wildlife. We would increase our law enforcement staff and
coordinate with governmental partners and landowners to increase the
number of patrols and level of enforcement to deter and prevent
unpermitted activities. With regard to cultural, historical, and
archaeological resources, we would continue to provide protection for
these resources.
Under Alternative B, visitor services and public use would be
similar to current management direction, with certain minor expansions.
In general, the refuge would remain closed to the public, except for
occasional guided tours arranged in advance. Outreach would be expanded
and focused on threatened, endangered, and rare species. We would work
with partners to develop a curriculum-based environmental education
program.
Administrative capacity would expand somewhat. We would share a law
enforcement officer and maintenance worker with Merritt Island NWR
Complex. We would hire a full-time biological technician/biologist. We
would utilize volunteers for increased environmental education and
interpretation activities, surveys of threatened and endangered
species, boundary identification, expanded exotics control, and refuge
cleanups. We would continue to maintain our current facilities and add
one to two vehicles and equipment for exotic plant control activities.
Alternative C: Enhanced Wildlife and Habitat Diversity (Proposed
Alternative)
This alternative would focus on enhancing all native wildlife and
habitat diversity. With respect to marsh birds, this alternative would
expand on Alternative B. We would determine our role in regional and
national species
[[Page 39892]]
conservation plans. Based on ecological indicators targeting marsh bird
and habitat responses, we would utilize prescribed fire to maintain and
restore early successional habitats. Concerning the suite of resident,
wintering, and summering birds on the refuge, Alternative C would
represent an expansion of Alternative A. Through prescribed burning, we
would promote an ecologically based fire return interval to maintain
early successional ecological stages of all fire-maintained habitats.
In addition, the hydrologic setting would be restored to as near as
possible pre-drainage conditions to benefit wildlife.
Management of wood storks and State-listed wading birds would
expand, as under Alternative B. On behalf of the northern crested
caracara, we would maintain open habitat with a minimum of woody
vegetation. We would also evaluate the use of mowing, grazing, and/or
other forms of vegetation control to help maintain open habitat for
this species at the Bee Line unit, while minimizing impacts to
secretive marsh birds. Under this alternative, we would stay abreast of
Cape Sable seaside sparrow reintroduction and introduction through
discussions with the State. Management of hydrology, including
groundwater, surface water, and water quality, would expand. We would
coordinate with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD)
to develop a better understanding of the hydrology of the refuge. To
help fill in the information gaps, and using experts, we would develop
a hydrologic study to understand the relationships of water quality,
water quantity, and timing of flows within and across the refuge.
Invasive plant control would be identical to that proposed under
Alternative B. Invasive animal control would expand further on the
efforts proposed under Alternative B. We would use permittees and
partners for feral hog control and possibly public hunts if, after
evaluation, hunting is determined to be an effective tool to remove or
control this species.
We would focus habitat management on maintaining and supporting a
wide array of native wildlife. Overall, the relative percentages and
composition of the major habitat types would not change; the aim would
be to increase their quality rather than quantity. We would strive to
maintain emergent marsh and open waters for a diversity of mammals,
such as the white-tailed deer and round-tailed muskrat.
With regard to climate change, we would partner with SJRWMD in
adaptive management efforts to manage habitats, ecosystems, and
wildlife affected by climate change. We would investigate opportunities
to participate in regional climate change initiatives to better
understand the role climate change may have on resources and would
adapt management based on discovery of climate change related impacts.
We would work with partners to consolidate and secure ownership in
the checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit to create functional
management areas. We would consider fee-title acquisitions, land swaps,
management agreements, conservation easements, and other measures based
on a willing-seller approach to protect these sites. We would work with
Brevard County to vacate or abandon its historic rights-of-way and
would add access to accommodate public use. Additionally, this
alternative identifies a minor expansion proposal (approximately 459
acres) of the approved acquisition boundary to connect lands and
develop natural area corridors to the State Road 50 unit. Under
Alternative C, we would increase Service law enforcement staff and
coordinate with stakeholders to increase the number of patrols and
level of enforcement to deter and prevent destructive illegal
activities. With regard to cultural, historical, and archaeological
resources, we would continue to provide protection for these resources.
In addition, we would complete and begin to implement a Cultural
Resources Management Plan over the 15-year life of the CCP.
One of the centerpieces of Alternative C includes expanding visitor
services and public use. To expand opportunities for interpretation, we
would work with partners to evaluate a range of access alternatives for
St. Johns NWR. Working with Brevard County, we would seek to develop
facilities such as a trailhead and kiosk from Fay Lake Park into the
refuge's Bee Line unit, and would consider developing an interpretive
trail and kiosk on the State Route 50 unit. We would also explore,
based on potential and varied acquisition opportunities from willing
sellers through and subject to the proposed minor expansion proposal,
opportunities to provide public access to the State Route 50 unit from
Brevard County's Fox Lake Park Sanctuary through the Fox Lake tract. We
would expand environmental education efforts by working with partners
to develop curriculum-based environmental education programs related to
wildlife and climate change. We would also work with local schools to
conduct on-site environmental education. We would open up the refuge to
wildlife observation and photography, and would provide facilities to
enhance the visitor experience (e.g., marked foot trails, kiosks at
trailheads, and a safe parking area). We would establish foot traffic
on existing dikes and roads and would evaluate potential connectivity
to regional trail networks. The refuge and any future trails would
remain subject to closure for administrative purposes. Commercial
photography and tours/guides would be available on a case-by-case
basis. Access for uses determined to be appropriate and compatible
would be walking, hiking, and bicycling. We would work with partners,
including the FWC, to evaluate the potential for primitive weapon
hunting (e.g., bow and muzzle-loader) and a youth hunt. Species to be
considered for hunts would include white-tailed deer and feral hogs.
In all respects, administration would expand under this
alternative. When fully implemented, this alternative would provide for
shared positions with Merritt Island NWR Complex, including a law
enforcement officer, maintenance worker, and a refuge ranger. A full-
time biological technician position is also proposed, for a total of
2.5 new positions. The volunteer program would also expand as we would
utilize volunteers for increased environmental education and
interpretation activities and programs, trail maintenance, outreach,
wildlife surveys, expanded exotic control, and refuge cleanups. This
alternative would provide for more facilities and equipment. We would
consider developing kiosks, trails, and associated parking to provide
safe and secure access from existing county parks to refuge lands. We
would also add one to two vehicles and equipment for exotic plant
control activities.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and
address them.
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. 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.
Authority
This notice is published under the authority of the National
Wildlife
[[Page 39893]]
Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57.
Dated: April 5, 2011.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2011-17014 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P