[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 61 (Tuesday, March 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17073-17076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07356]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2015-N013]; [FXRS12650400000S3-123-FF04R02000]
Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge, Mississippi;
Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Finding of No Significant
Impact for the Environmental Assessment and Associated Step-Down Plans
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 the environmental
assessment and associated step-down plans, including the Habitat
Management Plan, Integrated Pest Management Plan, and the Visitor
Services Plan, for Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge in
Oktibbeha, Noxubee, and Winston Counties, Mississippi. In the final
CCP, we describe how we will manage the Refuge for the next 15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the CCP and FONSI by writing to:
Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge, 13723 Bluff Lake Rd.,
Brooksville, MS 39739. Alternatively, you may download the documents
from our Internet Site: http://southeast.fws.gov/planning under
``Completed CCP Documents.''
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Reagan, Project Leader, 662-323-
5548, steve_reagan@fws.gov
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for Sam D. Hamilton
Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge. We started the process through a
notice in the Federal Register on Tuesday, January 15, 2013 (78 FR
3024). For more about the process, see that notice.
Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) is
located within three counties (Noxubee, Oktibbeha, and Winston) in
east-central Mississippi, and is approximately 17 miles south-southwest
of Starkville and approximately 120 miles north-northeast of Jackson,
the capital of Mississippi. The Refuge is currently 48,219 acres. The
primary establishing legislation for the Refuge is Executive Order
8444, dated June 14, 1940. Established as Noxubee NWR in 1940, the
Refuge was subsequently renamed
[[Page 17074]]
Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee NWR by Public Law 112-279 on February 14, 2012.
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.
Comments
We made copies of the Draft CCP/EA available for a 60-day public
review and comment period via a Federal Register notice on Thursday
August 28, 2014 (79 FR 51356). We provided four hard copies of the
Draft CCP/EA to those individuals or organizations requesting a copy.
The draft CCP/EA was also accessed via the internet. A total of 37
individuals, organizations, and government agencies provided comments
on the Draft CCP/EA by U.S. Mail or email. Comments were received from
private citizens; The Humane Society of the United States; Wild South;
Mississippi State University; Safari Club International; Mississippi
Entomological Museum; Center for Biological Diversity; Florida Gulf
Coast University; Wolf River Conservancy; Oktibbeha Audubon Society;
The Nature Conservancy; Mississippi Department of Wildlife Fisheries,
and Parks; Mississippi Department of Transportation; Mississippi
Department of Archives and History; and Greenfire Law.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Preferred Alternative
We developed three alternatives for managing the Refuge
(Alternatives A, B, and C), with Alternative C selected for
implementation. This alternative will manage refuge resources to
optimize native wildlife populations and habitats under a balanced and
integrated approach, not only for federally listed species (red-
cockaded woodpeckers (RCW)) and migratory birds, but also for other
native species such as white-tailed deer, wild turkey, Northern
bobwhite, paddlefish, and forest-breeding birds.
This alternative also provides opportunities for the six priority
public uses (i.e., hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife
photography, and interpretation and environmental education) and other
wildlife-dependent activities found to be appropriate and compatible
with the purpose for which the Refuge was established.
Wildlife and Habitat
Under this alternative, the Refuge would favor management that
restores historic forest conditions while achieving Refuge purposes.
Waterfowl: This alternative would provide approximately 1 million
Duck Energy Days (DEDs) over a 110-day period yearly, through the
possible combination of managed moist soil units, planted agricultural
crops that can be flooded, aquatic vegetation and invertebrates within
Refuge lakes, and seasonally flooded green-tree reservoirs which
provide mast crops and invertebrates. Wood duck breeding opportunities
would be enhanced using wood duck nest boxes, but greater emphasis
would be placed on protecting trees with natural cavities throughout
the bottomland forests. Trees found with existing cavities and those
having unique wildlife values would be protected from timber harvest.
Active manipulation of habitats and populations would occur as
necessary to maintain biological integrity, diversity, and
environmental health. Silvicultural treatments within bottomland
hardwood habitats would receive low priority, but may be used to
promote recruitment of red oak species within the overstory of those
flooded forested habitats used by waterfowl. The Refuge would attempt
to increase brood survival of waterfowl by managing shallow water
aquatic habitats to produce and sustain protective shrub-scrub cover
with fringe area of the Refuge's lakes. Manipulation of water level
would be the primary tool used to produce the desired shrub-scrub
cover.
The Refuge would participate in wood duck banding programs and try
to obtain Refuge quotas as assigned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service's national Migratory Bird program, and limit human access to
key areas used by waterfowl to reduce disturbance during critical life
cycle stages.
Forest Breeding Birds: Forest-breeding bird populations would be
enhanced through improved nesting, brooding, and foraging opportunities
by application of active habitat manipulation techniques within
bottomland hardwood forested habitats and streamside management zones.
Even and uneven aged silviculture, including selective thinning, patch
cuts, group tree selections, shelterwoods, irregular shelterwoods,
clearcuts, timber stand improvements, wildlife stand improvements,
chemical treatments, and other methods, could be used to ensure
hardwood species diversity, red oak recruitment into the overstory, and
forest structure for the benefit of a diversity of wildlife.
Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW): The number of RCW clusters would be
based on continuous pine habitat as defined by historic conditions and
the optimal partition size of 300 acres based on a loblolly forest
stand surviving to at least 100 years of age. Based on a spatial
analysis accounting for locations and size of pine stands and the
current locations of active RCW groups, the Refuge is expected to be
able to manage for 49 partitions. All RCW partitions would be managed
according to the RCW Recovery Plan and, where sufficient habitat
exists, to provide long-term good-quality foraging habitat.
Habitat manipulations used to benefit RCWs could include
silvicultural practices (e.g., active forest management, including but
not limited to manual or mechanized pre-commercial thinning, commercial
biomass thinning, mulching, firewood cutting, timber stand
improvements, herbicide, irregular shelterwood, shelterwood, seedtree,
patch cuts, afforestation, reforestation, and free thinning),
prescribed fire, raking, mowing, creation of new artificial cavities,
maintenance of suitable cavities, midstory reduction (chemical and/or
mechanical control), integrated pest management, use of restrictor
plates on cavities, snake exclusion devices, and kleptoparasite
control.
In order to sustain forest resources for future RCW habitat,
harvesting of existing mature forests as part of regeneration efforts
within present and future partitions may occur. No additional, non-
historic pine habitats outside currently active partitions would be
maintained or converted for support of the RCW. Refuge staff and
possibly contractors would continue to scientifically monitor RCWs
through observation and nest and fledge checks.
Monitoring: Additional quantitative monitoring of a broad suite of
wildlife and their habitats will be sought
[[Page 17075]]
through the participation of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs),
universities, and volunteers in the Refuge System's Inventory and
Monitoring program for development of standardized survey methods,
cataloging and analyzing Refuge information.
Invasive and Exotic Species: Efforts would be made to prevent the
establishment of exotic invasive species and pest species.
Bluff Lake: Deep water habitats within Bluff Lake would be created
through dirt excavation to ensure consistency in recreational fisheries
resources (i.e., crappie, bass, and sunfish). Excavated soil from the
creation of the deep water habitat would be used to create islands
within the lake to serve as bird rookery sites. Other existing water
control structures on Bluff Lake and in areas upstream of the lake may
also be modified or removed to allow fish passage. Paddlefish and Gulf
Coast Walleye could benefit from the restoration. Additional ephemeral
pools for amphibians would be artificially created throughout the
Refuge through excavation in areas where excess water impedes road
maintenance or threatens sedimentation of streams.
Morgan Hill Prairie: The Morgan Hill Prairie Demonstration Area
would remain but be reduced by more than 50 percent in size, and the
remaining area would be restored into habitats similar to that
indicated by historic conditions.
Fields: Existing old fields that would not be a direct benefit to
federally protected species or waterfowl would continue to be managed
as old field sites for the benefit of native grassland species. Old
fields that would be a direct benefit to federally protected species or
waterfowl would be restored to historical species compositions through
natural regeneration or the manual planting of trees. No new field
sites would be created.
Forest Management: Active forest management, including
silvicultural treatments, prescribed fire, and chemical and/or
mechanical midstory reduction, would occur throughout the Refuge's
habitats to achieve desired historic forest conditions, greater habitat
diversity and greater forest structure to benefit RCW, forest interior
birds, and a wider range of native wildlife. Upland forests would be
managed for historic conditions and, when applicable, management would
emphasize providing the needed habitat for federally listed species. If
needed to support federally listed species, active forest management
would occur using a variety of techniques, including timber harvest,
prescribed fire, and chemical and/or mechanical midstory reduction.
Resource Protection
Cultural Resources: To protect cultural resources, completing a
comprehensive, Refuge-wide survey of archeological sites would be the
goal as well as individual cultural resource surveys as needed for
specific projects or sites. Partnerships would be developed with other
agencies, institutions, Tribes, and other cultural groups, to seek
ideas and possibly share staff positions. The Refuge would improve
management and interpretation of the Refuge's cultural resources.
Land Acquisition: Conservation partnerships would be developed with
neighboring landowners to have the greatest impact on maintaining or
restoring the biological integrity of the local community. Fee title
acquisition from willing sellers will focus on lands within the
existing approved acquisition boundary that will most efficiently
assist the Refuge in meeting the purposes for which it was established
and the mission of the Service.
Research Natural Areas (RNA): Under this alternative the two RNAs
would no longer remain under this designation and would be managed as
part of the larger surrounding units of similar type and managed for
their historic conditions.
Staff: A second wildlife law enforcement officer would be
established, in combination with possible collateral duty officer
positions to assist in protecting natural and cultural resources, along
with public safety.
Visitor Services
The current level of visitor services programs would be expanded
for the general public, and attempts made to provide more access for
users with disabilities and youth. This alternative would establish a
``Connecting People with Nature'' area to consolidate activities and
users requiring greater support to enjoy wildlife dependent activities.
All existing wildlife-dependent uses and the supporting facilities
would be maintained and, if resources are available, enhanced through
possible increase and better maintenance in overlooks, boardwalks, and
trails. An effort would be made to increase visitor safety and
enjoyment through establishment of parking areas, improved management
of vehicle flow, creation of paved walking and biking trails, and
roadside bike lanes along Bluff Lake and Loakfoma Roads. Refuge
regulatory and informational signs would receive priority.
Public activities found compatible include bicycle, boating, and
picnicking in association with wildlife-dependent activities,
geocaching for environmental education, recreational fishing and
hunting, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental
education and interpretation.
Hunting: the Service would develop a weeklong large game (turkey
and deer) hunt program to provide increased opportunities for disabled
hunters in exchange for a one-week reduction in the general gun deer
and turkey seasons. Deer hunting opportunities overall would be
increased. The Service would work with the Mississippi Department of
Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks to develop family hunting and fishing
opportunities.
Fishing: Fishing opportunities would be expanded to include year-
round designated bank fishing areas on Bluff Lake's south shore.
Fees: Alternative funding mechanisms, such as a general user fee
under the Fee Program, would be used to spread costs of programs across
all users. This alternative would continue participation in the
existing Fee Program. Changes within the program would include
establishment of a general access pass for all users to assist in the
maintenance and development of public use programs and facilities
(e.g., Daily Pass, Weekly Pass, or Annual Pass). Current Federal duck
stamps and other congressionally authorized entrance fee passes would
be accepted as a Refuge access pass. This additional fee would allow
the Refuge to fully support and improve the Refuge's public use
programs to better meet public interest. Without additional fees, the
current level of public use would not be sustainable based on base
funding alone.
Partnerships: Partnerships to conduct environmental education and
off-site activities and increase volunteer involvement in all Refuge
programs would be established. More effort would be placed toward
developing cooperative programs sponsored through the Refuge's Friends
group.
Staff: The current staff of 9 employees would be reorganized, with
a goal of reaching 13 staff; this is still less than the optimal staff
level of 18 as recommended within the 2008 Final Report for the
Staffing Model for Field Stations.
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.).
[[Page 17076]]
Dated: February 27, 2015.
Mike Oetker,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2015-07356 Filed 3-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P