[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 92 (Friday, May 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27792-27793]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-11393]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2012-N080; FXRS12650400000S3-123-FF04R02000]
Chassahowitzka 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 Chassahowitzka National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in Citrus and Hernando Counties, 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 June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Mr.
Michael Lusk via U.S. mail at Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge,
1502 SE. Kings Bay Drive, Crystal River, Florida 34429. Alternatively,
you may download the document from our Internet Site at http://southeast.fws.gov/planning under ``Draft Documents.'' Comments on the
Draft CCP/EA may be submitted to the above postal address or by email
to: ChassCCP@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Mary Morris at 850/567-6202
(telephone); or via email at: ChassCCP@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Chassahowitzka
NWR started through a notice in the Federal Register on June 8, 2009
(74 FR 27173). For more about the refuge and our CCP process, please
see that notice.
Located about 60 miles north of Tampa, the 30,843-acre
Chassahowitzka NWR was established by authority of the Migratory Bird
Conservation Act on June 15, 1943, as ``an inviolate sanctuary'' for
wintering waterfowl and other migratory birds. In 1976, Congress
designated roughly three-quarters of the refuge (23,579 acres) as
wilderness under the Wilderness Act of 1964 (16 U.S.C. 1131-1136).
The refuge's diverse ecosystems, including prime, estuarine
habitat, hosts a myriad and abundance of flora and fauna. The
marshlands, swamplands, shallow bays, and tidal streams provide both
the quantity and quality of aquatic plant and animal life required to
support thousands of wintering waterfowl, marsh and waterbirds,
shorebirds, fishes, and a variety of animal species that depend on a
marine environment. The refuge also has 2,560 acres of hardwood
swamplands and 250 acres of upland forest. Notable imperiled species
include Florida manatees and an experimental population of whooping
cranes introduced to the marsh habitats over a decade ago by means of a
partnership.
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 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, 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.
Priority resource issues addressed in the Draft CCP/EA include: (1)
Priority imperiled species (e.g., manatees and whooping crane); (2)
determining the habitat needs of migratory birds and the cause of
waterfowl population declines on the refuge since the 1970s; (3)
evaluating the external threats of potential loss of water quality and
quantity; (4) controlling invasive plant and pest animal species; (5)
documenting climate change effects on refuge resources (6) protecting
natural, cultural and wilderness resources; (7) limited accessibility
issues; (8) administrative resources; and (9) partnerships.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for managing the refuge
(Alternatives A, B, and C), with Alternative C as our proposed
alternative. A full description of each alternative is in the Draft
CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative below.
Alternative A: Current Management (No Action)
This refuge is closer to pristine and has much less public use than
most areas of Florida, so the goal under all three alternatives is to
maintain its resources. To date, this has been done with minimal
management by a small staff. Under this alternative, ongoing programs
would continue. Species of Federal responsibility, such as threatened
and endangered species and migratory birds, would continue to be
monitored at present levels. High-profile, imperiled species, such as
manatees and whooping cranes, would remain the focus. Additional
species monitoring would occur as opportunistic events when contacts
outside our staff offer support. Current habitat management, including
prescribed fire, would continue (to improve crane habitat and to
address fuel loads in uplands). Management of exotic, invasive, and
nuisance animal and plant species would continue to be opportunistic.
The public use programs of hunting, fishing, wildlife observation,
wildlife photography, and environmental education and interpretation
and other existing uses would continue at present levels. Acquisition
of inholding lands into the refuge would occur as willing sellers and
funding become available. There is no staff dedicated exclusively to
this refuge; instead, refuge staff draws from the staff assigned to the
Crystal River NWR Complex (Complex), which also includes the Tampa Bay
Refuges. This includes mostly the manager, deputy manager, wildlife
biologist, and three park rangers (i.e., two wildlife officers and one
visitor services staff). Alternative A presents the baseline upon which
the other two alternatives
[[Page 27793]]
are expanded, but with differing management approaches.
Alternative B: Increased Research and Management via Partnerships
Alternative B proposes increased research and management
capability, primarily through the use of cooperative partnerships and
outside funding, with a modest increase of staff (three positions for
the Complex). Research would be enhanced beyond priority, high-profile
imperiled species. Because much baseline data are needed beyond the
current surveying and monitoring protocols, this alternative would seek
to initiate studies of a broader suite of species and to document noted
declines of refuge habitat and species (waterfowl) and climate-change
impacts. Since the refuge is accessible mostly by water from off-site,
non-Service-owned ramps, we would provide more complete information to
help the public locate the refuge via water. Studies would be conducted
to assess visitor and commercial use effects on refuge resources;
further, in Citrus County, commercial uses would require a special use
permit issued by the refuge. A volunteer coordinator position is
proposed to expand the volunteer corps and programs and to train and
use volunteers to promote interpretation, voluntary compliance with
refuge regulations, and the new environmental education programs of the
refuge.
Alternative C: Adaptive Management (Proposed Alternative)
Alternative C would also heavily rely on our extensive partnerships
and promote some new ones. We would rely on and use a volunteer corps
for every program area and investigate the use of prison crews for
maintenance work. This alternative assumes Service funding above
current levels for research studies and facilities development and
proposes additional staffing (eight positions for the Complex), to
provide optimal resource protection and management capability. Research
would include a broader suite of species, as well as habitat studies to
adaptively manage for wildlife populations. The impacts of commercial
and visitor use and external threats to the refuge would be studied and
the results of those studies applied to refuge management and public
use. Upland uses would be promoted though the development of improved
facilities and access, and an observation platform and kayak landing
would be added to the Dog Island facility, accessed by boat. The
addition of key positions, such as a law enforcement officer, a
volunteer coordinator, and biological and computer-mapping technicians,
would allow for greater resource study, mapping, data analysis, and
enforcement. The hiring of a wildlife refuge specialist and office
assistant would support staff and provide a dedicated outreach
coordinator. Refuge facilities would be improved for both visitor
services and personnel, including projects to replace the headquarters
office (to reduce flooding potential) and build a pole barn and make
other smaller improvements to the maintenance area and shop. For all
alternatives, ``green'' options, materials, and energy efficiency would
be included in the design and construction of new facilities and in
equipment replacement.
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, email 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 Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et
seq.).
Dated: April 17, 2012.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-11393 Filed 5-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P