[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 188 (Thursday, September 27, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59412-59414]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-23799]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2012-N126; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Great Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Rockingham County, NH; Final
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Finding of No Significant Impact
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of the final comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for Great Bay National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR, refuge) in Newington, New Hampshire, which
includes the Karner blue butterfly conservation easement in Concord,
New Hampshire. Great Bay NWR is administered by Parker River NWR in
Newburyport, Massachusetts. In this final CCP, we describe how we will
manage the refuge and Karner blue butterfly conservation easement for
the next 15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by
[[Page 59413]]
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/Great%20bay/ccphome.html.
Email: Send requests to northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include ``Great
Bay Refuge CCP'' in the subject line of your email.
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 978-465-5753 to make an
appointment during regular business hours at the Parker River NWR
office, 6 Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA 01950.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Graham Taylor, Refuge Manager, Parker
River NWR, 6 Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA 01950; 978-465-5753
(phone); 978-465-2807 (fax); fw5rw_prnwr@fws.gov (email).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for Great Bay NWR. We
started this process through a notice of intent in the Federal Register
(74 FR 28722) on June 17, 2009. We announced the release of the draft
CCP/environmental assessment (EA) to the public and requested comments
in a notice of availability in the Federal Register (77 FR 7176) on
February 10, 2012.
The Service established Great Bay NWR in 1992 to protect the
natural diversity of fish, wildlife, and plants within its boundaries,
protect federally listed species, preserve and enhance water quality
and aquatic habitats, and fulfill the United State's international
treaty obligations relating to fish and wildlife resources. The refuge
is located in the town of Newington in southeastern New Hampshire, on
the eastern shore of the tidally influenced Great Bay Estuary. Prior to
its establishment, refuge lands were part of the former Pease Air Force
Base. The 1,103-acre refuge is the largest parcel of protected land on
Great Bay Estuary, and includes a rich diversity of habitat types
including oak-hickory forests, grasslands, shrub thickets, freshwater
and saltwater wetlands, open water, and rocky shoreline.
Great Bay NWR also includes the Karner blue butterfly conservation
easement in Concord, New Hampshire. The 29-acre conservation easement
is managed for the federally endangered Karner blue butterfly, and also
supports other rare moths and butterflies. It primarily consists of a
mix of open pitch pine/scrub oak, pine-hardwood, and other shrubland
habitat.
We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the
final CCP for Great Bay NWR in accordance with National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) 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 Great Bay NWR
for the next 15 years. Alternative B, as described for the refuge 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-68ee) (Refuge 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 to 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.
CCP Alternatives, Including the Selected Alternative
Our draft CCP/EA (77 FR 7176) addressed several key issues,
including:
Managing a diversity of habitat types, including
grasslands, shrublands, wetlands, and forest to benefit Federal and
State species of concern.
Protecting the water quality of the Great Bay Estuary.
Providing more public access opportunities on Great Bay
NWR.
Balancing the protection of historic resources with
wildlife and habitat conservation.
To address these issues and develop a plan based on the refuge's
establishing purposes, vision, and goals, we evaluated three
alternatives for Great Bay NWR in the draft CCP/EA. These alternatives
have some actions in common, such as controlling invasive species,
monitoring wildlife diseases, protecting the rocky shore, reducing
impacts from climate change, protecting cultural resources, and
distributing refuge revenue sharing payments to the town of Newington,
New Hampshire. 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 Great Bay
alternatives evaluated in the draft CCP/EA.
Management Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by NEPA
(42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). It describes 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 continue to emphasize our current biological program
priorities, including maintaining impoundments for migratory birds and
managing grasslands for grassland-dependent species of concern. The
refuge would remain unstaffed and we would continue to rely on
volunteers to help with seasonal activities. Our visitor services
program would continue to focus on wildlife observation and
photography, and we would continue to provide a 2-day fall deer hunt.
On the Karner blue butterfly easement, we would continue to actively
manage habitat for Karner blue butterflies in partnership with New
Hampshire Fish and Game (NHFG).
Alternative B (Habitat Diversity and Focal Species Emphasis)
This is the Service-preferred alternative. It combines the actions
we believe would best achieve the refuge's purposes, vision, and goals,
and is consistent with 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
benefit species of conservation concern in the Great Bay area and
coastal New Hampshire. In particular, we would emphasize habitat for
priority species such as migratory waterfowl, wading birds, forest-
dependent songbirds, New
[[Page 59414]]
England cottontails, and forest bats. We would also manage estuarine
and aquatic species of concern, including shellfish and migratory fish.
We would also remove the Lower Peverly Pond Dam to restore
approximately 1,100 feet of stream habitat, while maintaining the dams
at Upper Peverly Pond and Stubbs Pond to benefit a range of fish and
wildlife species of conservation concern. We would also expand our
conservation, research, and management partnerships to help restore and
conserve the Great Bay estuarine ecosystem.
This alternative would enhance our visitor services programs. We
would improve our trails, create new interpretive materials, expand on
the existing volunteer program, and offer visitors more opportunities
to learn about the refuge's history, its resources, and its surrounding
area. We would also evaluate an expansion of hunting opportunities to
include wild turkey and a fall bow season for deer. These expanded
programs would be possible through increased staffing and a new refuge
headquarters/visitor contact facility.
On the Karner blue butterfly easement, we would enhance our
partnership with NHFG to help manage habitat on the easement to support
this species' recovery. We would also expand the easement's visitor
services program by installing new interpretive signs and trails,
offering guided walks, and updating our Web site.
Alternative C (Emphasis on Natural Processes)
Alternative C primarily relies on ecosystem processes, such as
natural disturbances, to affect the diversity and integrity of refuge
habitats. In particular, we would no longer maintain much of the
grasslands and shrublands on the refuge, allowing them to naturally
transition to forest. We would remove all three of the refuge's
impoundments on Peverly Brook and restore these areas to native stream
habitat. We would also expand our visitor services program by creating
new trails and opening up more of the refuge to public use. Under this
alternative, management of the Karner blue butterfly easement would be
similar to alternative B.
Comments
We solicited comments on the draft CCP/EA for Great Bay NWR from
February 10 to March 19, 2012 (77 FR 7176). During the comment period,
we received 25 written responses. We evaluated all of the substantive
comments we received, and include a summary of those comments and our
responses to them, as appendix K in the final CCP.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we received on our draft CCP/EA, we
have made several minor changes to alternative B, including adding or
revising several management strategies. These changes are described in
the FONSI (appendix L in the final CCP) and in our response to public
comments (appendix K in the final CCP).
We have selected alternative B to implement for Great Bay NWR, with
these minor changes, for several reasons. Alternative B comprises a mix
of actions that, in our professional judgment, work best towards
achieving the refuge's purposes, vision, and goals, NWRS policies, and
the goals of other State and regional conservation plans. We also
believe that alternative B most effectively addresses key issues raised
during the planning process. The basis of our decision is detailed in
the FONSI (appendix L in the final CCP).
Public Availability of Documents
You can view or obtain the final CCP, including the FONSI, as
indicated under ADDRESSES.
Dated: August 29, 2012.
Deborah Rocque,
Acting Regional Director, Northeast Region.
[FR Doc. 2012-23799 Filed 9-26-12; 8:45 a.m.]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P