[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 148 (Tuesday, August 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46317-46320]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-19503]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2009-N184; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Nantucket National Wildlife Refuge, Nantucket, MA; Draft
Comprehensive Conservation Plan, Land Protection Plan, and
Environmental Assessment
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP),
including a land protection plan (LPP), and environmental assessment
(EA) for Nantucket National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) for public review and
comment. The draft CCP/EA describes our proposal for managing the
refuge for the next 15 years.
DATES: To ensure consideration, please send your written comments by
September 1, 2011. We will hold at least one public meeting in
Nantucket, MA, during the public comment period to receive comments and
provide information on the draft plan. We will also announce
opportunities for public input in local news media, our project mailing
list, and on our regional planning Web site: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/nantucket/ccphome.html.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments or requests for copies or more
information by any one of the following methods. You may request hard
copies or a CD-ROM of the documents.
E-mail: northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include ``Nantucket NWR draft
CCP/EA'' in the subject line of the message.
Fax: Attention: Carl Melberg, 978-443-2898.
U.S. Mail: Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex, 73 Weir Hill Road,
Sudbury, MA 01776.
In-Person Drop-off, Viewing, or Pickup: Call 978-443-4661 to make
an
[[Page 46318]]
appointment (necessary for view/pickup only) during regular business
hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Carl Melberg, Planning Team Leader,
978-443-4661, extension 32 (phone); northeastplanning@fws.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Nantucket NWR, on
Nantucket Island in the Town of Nantucket, Massachusetts. We started
this process through a notice in the Federal Register (73 FR 18806;
April 7, 2008).
Nantucket NWR was established in 1973, under an Act Authorizing the
Transfer of Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other Purposes (16
U.S.C. 667b, Pub. L. 80-537), which authorized the U.S. Coast Guard
(USCG) to transfer the property to the Service, because of ``its
particular value in carrying out the Migratory Bird Act.'' The USCG
currently maintains ownership of a 1-acre inholding on the refuge that
contains the Great Point Lighthouse. Nantucket NWR lies at the northern
tip of a narrow peninsula that forms the northernmost point of
Nantucket Island. The tip is known locally as ``Great Point,'' and the
peninsula is known as the ``Coskata-Coatue Peninsula.'' The only way
visitors can access the refuge by land is via a road through The
Trustees of Reservations' (TTOR) Coskata-Coatue Refuge and Nantucket
Conservation Foundation (NCF) properties, both of which lie due south
of the refuge on the peninsula.
The refuge erodes and accretes constantly, but averages 20 acres in
size. The refuge is a barrier beach system, where two longshore
currents meet to form a rip current and dynamically erode and/or build
the spit. The refuge is composed of beach and dune habitat that serves
the needs of a wide diversity of water and land birds of conservation
concern, including seabirds, colonial nesting birds such as common and
roseate terns, shorebirds such as piping plover and oystercatcher, and
marine mammals such as gray seals. Nantucket NWR is one of eight
refuges in the Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Refuge 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 for
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 (NWRS), 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 and
photography, and environmental education and interpretation. We will
review and update the CCP at least every 15 years in accordance with
the Refuge Administration Act.
Public Outreach
The extensive planning history for this refuge began with the
publication of a notice in the Federal Register (64 FR 9166; February
24, 1999) announcing we were preparing a CCP and environmental impact
statement (EIS) for all eight refuges in what was then known as the
Great Meadows NWR Complex. In 2001, we determined it was not feasible
to prepare a single CCP for all eight refuges, and thus prepared
another notice in the Federal Register (66 FR 10506; February 15,
2001), to indicate that a CCP/EIS would be prepared for Monomoy,
Nantucket, and Nomans Land Island NWRs. However, no work was initiated
on the plan at that time. In 2008, because of the different issues
facing the refuges, the Service determined it was more efficient to
proceed through the CCP process for each refuge separately, and
published a notice in the Federal Register (73 FR 18806; April 7, 2008)
to begin a separate CCP/EA process for Nantucket NWR. At that time, and
throughout the process, we requested public comments and considered and
incorporated them in numerous ways.
The CCP planning team consisted of Service staff from refuges,
planning, visitor services, migratory bird, and endangered species, as
well as representatives from the Massachusetts Division of Fisheries
and Wildlife, the Wampanoag Tribe of Gay Head (Aquinnah) (WTOGHA), and
the Mashpee Wampanoag Tribe (MWT). Partner and public meetings were
held during October 2008. Attendees to the partner and public meetings
included the Service, WTOGHA, MWT, TTOR, NCF, Massachusetts Audubon,
Nantucket Anglers Club, Maria Mitchell Association, Nantucket Civic
League, Nantucket Land Council, Nantucket Wetlands Board, and numerous
unaffiliated individuals.
Issues from the public comment period focused on maintaining a
balance between resource protection and beach access, increasing
education and interpretation of the resources, increasing
communications about management decisions, and cooperating in land
management with adjacent land managers. Other issues included potential
effects on public recreation by the presence of seals, staffing and
enforcement needs, determining compatibility for recreational uses,
creating a protocol for cultural resource protection, and planning for
future land acquisition opportunities. We have considered and evaluated
all of these comments, and have addressed many of them by incorporating
them into the various alternatives in the draft CCP/EA.
CCP Alternatives We Are Considering
Our draft CCP/EA includes a full description of each issue noted
above. To address these issues, we developed and evaluated the
following alternatives in the draft CCP/EA, summarized below.
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by the
National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). Alternative
A defines our current management activities, and serves as the baseline
against which to compare the other alternatives. This alternative
describes current refuge programs on approximately 20 acres for habitat
management, fish and wildlife inventories and monitoring,
administrative infrastructure and staffing, and visitor services. Under
this alternative, TTOR would continue to provide on-site management of
Nantucket NWR, and the Service would continue its passive management
role and minimal presence on the refuge. The remote location of the
refuge, along with limited staffing and funding resources, restricts
our ability to maintain a consistent presence, or to actively oversee
and implement management actions. Instead, we would continue to
coordinate with TTOR for installing symbolic fencing and implementing
beach closures to protect breeding and staging birds and seal haulout
sites on the refuge.
Under alternative A, the Service would maintain oversight, but
visitor services programs would continue to be implemented primarily by
partners, such as TTOR. The Service's role has not been visible, and
many visitors are unaware that the tip of Great Point is a NWR.
Priority public uses, such as wildlife observation, photography,
[[Page 46319]]
environmental education, interpretation, and fishing, are currently
allowed on the refuge and would continue where beach access is
permitted. Hunting is the only priority public use that is not allowed
on the refuge due to the refuge's small size and types of habitat.
In this alternative, refuge staffing would remain at current levels
stationed at the Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex headquarters in
Sudbury, Massachusetts. We would continue discussions to pursue a
partnership agreement with TTOR, which would include resource
management, visitor use, and shared funding sources to help contribute
to refuge operations.
Alternative B (Enhanced Wildlife and Visitor Services) (Service-
Preferred Alternative)
Alternative B is the alternative our planning team proposes to
recommend to our Regional Director for implementation. It includes an
array of management actions that, in our professional judgment, work
best towards achieving the refuge's purposes, vision, and goals, and
would make an important contribution to conserving Federal trust
resources of concern. This alternative provides the most appropriate
level and type of management for Service staff managing the eight
refuges in the Eastern Massachusetts NWR Complex. We believe this is
the most reasonable, feasible, and practicable alternative.
This alternative describes increased Service management and
presence over the next 15 years on the 20-acre refuge, and on the
additional 1,790 acres proposed for Service acquisition from willing
sellers in fee or easement, as funding and staffing levels permit.
Additionally, it strives to provide a balance between habitat and
species conservation and public use and access. We would increase our
presence on the refuge to both implement and monitor habitat management
actions, and provide higher quality opportunities for the five priority
public uses currently allowed. It would also enhance partnerships with
local conservation organizations and civic groups.
Under this alternative, the Service would take a more active role
in habitat and species management on the refuge, targeting the
protection of dynamic coastal beach and dune systems and the avian and
mammalian species that rely on them for critical nesting, resting,
foraging, and staging habitat. The additional protection proposed would
likely result in access restrictions and/or closures on the refuge
during certain seasons or in some years. Species management would
follow Federal piping plover recovery guidelines and State plover and
tern guidelines, and would benefit other species such as nesting
American oystercatchers. In the late summer/early fall, we would
provide additional habitat protection for staging terns from vehicular
and pedestrian disturbance. We would also continue to work closely with
TTOR, NCF, and our other partners to accomplish these management
actions with an emphasis on landscape-level conservation and more
consistent management between peninsula partners.
The Service would pursue acquisition of Federal (excess and
surplus) land, including the old USCG Long Range Navigation and Federal
Aviation Administration facilities, as well as easements and
acquisitions from willing sellers on key parcels on the Coskata-Coatue
Peninsula on or near Nantucket Island, to further enhance landscape-
level conservation. A draft LPP, which requires Director's approval
before it can be implemented, is included as Appendix G.
Under alternative B, we would also increase priority public-use
opportunities, with an emphasis on fishing, wildlife observation,
environmental education, and interpretation, which would be
accomplished by working with partners. Subject to funding availability,
we would conduct a study to evaluate alternative means of transporting
people to the refuge without the use of individual vehicles. A
primitive foot trail is proposed from the lighthouse to the refuge's
eastern beach for pedestrian and fishing access. We would also explore
the opportunity to install a webcam on the lighthouse, and facilitate
outreach opportunities and activities for visitors and residents of
Nantucket Island to highlight the Service's role as a steward of
natural resources.
Under alternative B, we propose a level of staffing that meets the
minimum requirements for a refuge of this complexity by adding a part-
time, year-round visitor services specialist and a full-time biologist
stationed on Nantucket Island, and a new law enforcement officer
stationed at Monomoy NWR in Chatham, Massachusetts.
Alternative C (Wildlife Diversity and Natural Processes Emphasis)
This alternative would focus on managing for wildlife diversity and
natural coastal processes. It would emphasize species and habitat
protection on the refuge through actions such as not allowing over-sand
vehicles (OSV) over most of the refuge during April 1 through September
15. This would be implemented to minimize disturbance to nesting and
migrating birds, and to reduce the impacts on macroinvertebrates,
vegetative communities, and dune structure and function. Staff would
monitor and evaluate nesting success and productivity for priority bird
species of conservation concern.
Alternative C includes expansion of current management and staffing
over the next 15 years on the refuge. It would also involve targeted
fee and easement acquisition of excess and surplus Federal lands and
other key conservation properties on Nantucket Island as opportunities
arise.
Visitor services would be the same as under alternative B, except
for the longer, more restrictive OSV closure zones from April 1 through
September 15 each year. Also, the Service would collaborate with
partners to disseminate information on this seasonal OSV restriction on
the refuge.
Similar to alternative B, this alternative proposes a joint visitor
facility with TTOR and NCF, a kiosk and interpretive panels, and a
trail through the refuge with a viewing platform and/or photo blind.
Also similar to alternative B, we would explore the opportunity to
install a webcam on the lighthouse, and facilitate outreach
opportunities and activities for visitors and residents of Nantucket
Island to highlight the Service's role as a steward of natural
resources.
Public Availability of Documents
In addition to any methods in ADDRESSES, you can view or obtain
documents on our regional planning Web site: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/nantucket/ccphome.html.
Public Meetings
We will hold at least one public meeting during the public comment
period. For more information on the meeting schedule, contact the
person under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Next Steps
After this comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and
address them in the form of a final CCP and finding of no significant
impact.
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
[[Page 46320]]
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 20, 2011.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Hadley, Massachusetts.
[FR Doc. 2011-19503 Filed 8-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P