[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59153-59155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24552]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2011-N128; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Elizabeth Hartwell Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Fairfax
County, VA, and Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge, Prince William
County, VA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: final comprehensive conservation plan
and finding of no significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our final comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for Elizabeth Hartwell Mason
Neck (Mason Neck) and Featherstone National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs;
refuges). In this final CCP, we describe how we will manage these
refuges for the next 15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by
any of the following methods. You may request a hard copy or a CD-ROM.
Agency Web site: Download a copy of the document at http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/MasonNeck_Featherstone/ccphome.html.
E-mail: Send requests to northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include ``Mason
Neck and Featherstone Refuges CCP'' in the subject line of your e-mail.
Mail: Nancy McGarigal, Natural Resource Planner, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035.
Fax: Attention: Nancy McGarigal, 413-253-8468.
In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call 703-490-4979 to make an
appointment during regular business hours at the Potomac River NWR
Complex headquarters office, 14344 Jefferson Davis Highway, Woodbridge,
VA 22191-2716.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Weiler, Refuge Manager, Potomac
River NWR Complex, 14344 Jefferson Davis Highway, Woodbridge, VA 22191-
2716; phone: 703-490-4979; fax: 703-490-5631; e-mail: fw5rw_msnnwr@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs. We started this process through a notice of intent
in the Federal Register (72 FR 28066) on May 18, 2007. We released the
draft CCP/environmental assessment (EA) to the public, announcing and
requesting comments in a notice of availability in the Federal Register
(76 FR 582) on January 5, 2011.
Mason Neck and Featherstone NWRs, together with Occoquan Bay NWR,
comprise the Potomac River NWR Complex, which is headquartered in
Woodbridge, Virginia. Mason Neck NWR was established in 1969 as the
first NWR specifically created to protect a Federally listed species.
The refuge was created under the authority of the Endangered Species
Preservation Act of 1966, the precursor to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), which was Federally
listed as threatened in 1969, was, and continues to be, the focal
species of concern on the refuge. Due to successful recovery efforts
throughout its range, the bald eagle was officially removed from the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)) in
2007. It continues to be protected, however, under other Federal laws
and State law in Virginia. Mason Neck NWR encompasses 2,277 acres of
forest, marsh, and riverine habitat along Occoquan Bay and the mainstem
of the tidal Potomac River. Refuge visitors engage in wildlife
observation and photography, environmental education and
interpretation, and deer hunting.
Featherstone NWR was established in 1979 with land acquired from
the District of Columbia. It was further expanded in 1992 with lands
donated by Prince William County. It presently encompasses 325 acres of
marsh and forested riverine habitat along the southwest edge of
Occoquan Bay. Its wetlands are important habitat for bald eagles,
wading birds, waterbirds, and waterfowl, as well as other native
species of conservation concern. The refuge has been closed to public
use and access since its establishment because there is no public
parking available or safe access across active railroad tracks, which
lie along the length of the refuge's western boundary.
We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the
final CCP for Mason Neck and Featherstone NWRs in accordance with
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1506.6(b))
requirements. We completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human
environment, which we included in the draft CCP/EA.
The CCP will guide us in managing and administering Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs for the next 15 years. Alternative B, as described
for both refuges in the draft CCP/EA, and with the modifications
described below, is the foundation for the final CCP.
Background
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 NWR. 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
[[Page 59154]]
in accordance with the Administration Act.
CCP Alternatives, Including the Selected Alternative
Our draft CCP/EA (76 FR 582) addressed several key issues,
including:
Managing forested habitat to benefit bald eagles, great
blue heron, other migratory birds of conservation concern, and other
native wildlife species;
Protecting wetland habitat to benefit waterbirds,
waterfowl, and migratory fish;
Expanding and enhancing wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities; and
Providing public access to Featherstone NWR.
To address these issues and develop a plan based on each refuge's
establishing purposes, vision, and goals, we evaluated three
alternatives for Mason Neck NWR and two alternatives for Featherstone
NWR in the draft CCP/EA. The alternatives for both Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs have some actions in common, such as controlling
invasive species, monitoring wildlife diseases, encouraging research
that benefits our resource decisions, protecting cultural resources,
and distributing refuge revenue sharing payments to Fairfax and Prince
William Counties.
There are other actions that differ among the alternatives. The
draft CCP/EA describes each alternative in detail and relates them to
the issues and concerns that arose during the planning process. Below,
we provide summaries for the three Mason Neck NWR alternatives
evaluated in the draft CCP/EA, followed by summaries for the two
Featherstone NWR alternatives.
Mason Neck Refuge Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by NEPA.
Alternative A defines our current management activities, including
those planned, funded, or underway, and serves as the baseline against
which to compare alternatives B and C. Alternative A would maintain our
present refuge staffing level and our visitor services facilities,
including existing trails and viewing platforms. We would continue to
emphasize wildlife observation and photography opportunities, and
provide a fall deer hunt. Our biological program priorities would
continue to be protecting the refuge's wetlands and upland forest for
migratory birds, with particular emphasis on protecting nesting bald
eagles and the great blue heron rookery. Controlling invasive plants
and forest pests would also continue to be an important part of our
program.
Alternative B (Improved Management for Trust Resources)
This is the Service-preferred alternative. It combines the actions
we believe would best achieve the refuge's purposes, vision, and goals,
and the intent of NWRS policy on Biological Integrity, Diversity, and
Environmental Health (601 FW 3). This alternative would also best
respond to the issues that arose during the planning process.
Alternative B would improve our management of refuge habitats to
support Federal trust resources and species of conservation concern. In
particular, our priority would be to enhance our management of the
refuge's upland forests to benefit bald eagles, great blue heron, and
other forest-dependent migratory birds through measures that improve
forest health. Managing deer populations to minimize overbrowsing and
controlling invasive plants and pests are actions planned. We would
also pursue actions to improve habitat quality in the refuge's marsh
habitat to benefit bald eagles, waterfowl, waterbirds, and migratory
fish. These actions include working with partners to improve water
quality and clean up debris in Great Marsh. In Little Marsh, we would
upgrade the water control structure and alter the water level regime to
promote better foraging opportunities for waterbirds and bald eagles,
and to improve fish passage. In addition, we would work with partners
to evaluate shoreline erosion risk and identify ways to address erosion
in anticipation of climate change impacts.
The improvement of our current trails, and the addition of new
trails and observation platforms, would offer increased opportunities
for wildlife observation, photography, and interpretation. We would
also expand our interpretive programs and outreach efforts to inform
and involve more people in working towards refuge goals. In addition,
once administrative and funding resources are in place, we would offer
a youth turkey hunt and consider expanding our existing deer hunt.
Alternative C (Enhanced Public Use Management)
Alternative C would manage habitat similar to alternative A, but
would expand wildlife-dependent public use programs beyond that which
is proposed under either alternatives A or B. We would devote more
staff time and resources to offering new or improved priority public
use programs. For example, we would offer a new muzzleloader deer
hunting season, construct additional photography blinds, and offer more
guided and self-guided wildlife observation tours and environmental
education programs.
Featherstone Refuge Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
Similar to alternative A for Mason Neck NWR, this alternative
satisfies the NEPA requirement for a ``No Action'' alternative. It
describes our current management priorities and activities, and serves
as a baseline for comparing and contrasting alternative B. Under
alternative A, Featherstone NWR would continue to be closed to all
public use and access. Our priorities would be to protect the refuge
from vandalism and trespassing, control invasive plants, and monitor
for threats to wildlife and habitats.
Alternative B (Enhanced Management)
This is the Service-preferred alternative. Habitat and species
management would focus on protecting sensitive bald eagle areas from
human disturbance and improving the monitoring and treatment of
invasive plants, pests, and pathogens to avoid catastrophic loss or
degradation of habitat. Similar to our proposal under alternative B for
Mason Neck NWR, we would work with partners to evaluate shoreline
erosion risk and identify ways to address it in anticipation of climate
change impacts.
Under alternative B, we would also continue to work with Prince
William County to secure public parking and legal and safe pedestrian
access to the refuge, which has been an issue since refuge
establishment. Once that access is secured, and we have the additional
staff to manage those activities, we would provide opportunities for
wildlife observation and nature photography on designated trails, and
fishing at designated sites.
Under alternative B, once we have administrative and funding
resources in place, we would evaluate a proposal to provide hunting
opportunities on refuge lands. Other alternatives, including no action,
would be considered in that hunt program evaluation, and there would be
public involvement before making a final decision on the types of
hunting opportunities offered.
Comments
We solicited comments on the draft CCP/EA for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs from January 5 to February 22, 2011 (76 FR 582).
During
[[Page 59155]]
the comment period, we received 79 responses, both oral and written.
All comments we received were evaluated. A summary of those comments,
and our responses to them, is included as appendix G in the final CCP.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we received on our draft CCP/EA, we
have made one modification to alternative B for Featherstone NWR. We
have decided to allow non-motorized boaters to land at one designated
site on the refuge's shoreline to facilitate wildlife observation and
nature photography. The designated landing site is a portion of tidal
beach on Farm Creek (refer to the final CCP, chapter 4, map 4.3 for
details) and corresponds with the proposed location of the southernmost
observation deck and fishing platform that we presented in the draft
CCP/EA (refer to the draft CCP/EA, chapter 3, map 3.3 for details).
Visitors accessing the refuge at this location by non-motorized boats
would be allowed to walk approximately 0.4 miles along an existing
footpath (indicated on map 4.3 in the final CCP). Boaters would be
confined to this section of footpath until the rest of the refuge is
officially open to public use, as was detailed in the draft CCP/EA.
Other minor changes to alternative B for both refuges are described in
the FONSI (appendix H in the final CCP) and in our response to public
comments (appendix G in the final CCP).
We have selected alternative B to implement for both Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs, with the changes identified above, for several
reasons. Alternative B for both refuges comprises a mix of actions
that, in our professional judgment, work best towards achieving each
refuges' purposes, visions, and goals, NWRS policies, and the goals of
other State and regional conservation plans. We also believe that
alternative B most effectively addresses the key issues raised during
the planning process. The basis of our decision is detailed in the
FONSI, which is included as appendix H in the final CCP.
Public Availability of Documents
You can view or obtain documents as indicated under ADDRESSES.
Dated: August 22, 2011.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA
01035.
[FR Doc. 2011-24552 Filed 9-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P