[Federal Register: September 9, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 173)]
[Notices]
[Page 46456-46458]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09se09-82]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2008-N198; 50133-1265-XENP-S3]
Eastern Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Kent County, MD
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: draft comprehensive conservation plan
and draft environmental assessment; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announces the
availability of the draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
draft environmental assessment (EA) for Eastern Neck National Wildlife
Refuge (NWR), located in Kent County, Maryland, with its office in Rock
Hall, Maryland. The draft CCP/EA describes three alternatives,
including our Service-preferred alternative B, for managing this refuge
for the next 15 years. Also available for public review and comment are
the draft compatibility determinations, which are included as appendix
B in the draft CCP/EA.
DATES: To ensure our consideration of your written comments, please
send them by October 9, 2009. We will also hold a public meeting in
Rock Hall, Maryland. We will announce and post details of the public
meeting in local news media, via our project mailing list, and on our
Regional planning Web site, http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/
eastern%20neck/ccphome.html.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments or requests for copies of the draft CCP/
EA by one of the following methods.
U.S. 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.
E-mail: northeastplanning@fws.gov. Please put the words ``Eastern
Neck NWR CCP'' in the subject line of your e-mail.
Agency Web site: View or download the draft document on the Web at
http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/eastern%20neck/ccphome.html.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Suzanne Baird, Project Leader,
Chesapeake Marshlands National Wildlife Refuge Complex, 2145 Key
Wallace Drive, Cambridge, MD 21613; phone 410-228-2692, extension 101;
fax 410-228-3261; or e-mail at fw5rw_bwnwr@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
This notice continues the CCP process for Eastern Neck NWR, which
is one of the four refuges that comprise the Chesapeake Marshlands NWR
Complex. The other three are Blackwater, Martin, and Susquehanna NWRs.
We prepared the draft CCP in compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act of 1969, as amended (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), and the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966
(Administration Act), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (Improvement Act), which requires us to develop
a CCP for each national wildlife refuge. We published our original
notice of intent to prepare a CCP in the Federal Register on June 11,
2002 (67 FR 40002). Due to changes in budget and staffing priorities,
the project was put on hold in 2003. We subsequently announced we were
restarting the process by publishing another notice in the Federal
Register on January 22, 2007 (72 FR 2709).
Eastern Neck NWR is a 2,285-acre island that lies at the confluence
of the Chester River and the Chesapeake Bay in Kent County, Maryland.
Established in 1962 to protect migratory birds, the refuge is
recognized regionally as a major feeding and resting place for a wide
variety of migrating and wintering waterfowl. Its habitats are highly
diverse, and include tidal marsh, open water, and woodland. Its managed
croplands also contribute to the quality of its habitats by providing a
ready source of high-energy food for wintering waterfowl when their
reserves are low. The moist soil units and green tree reservoirs on the
refuge also are managed to enhance habitats for
[[Page 46457]]
migratory birds. Thousands of Atlantic population Canada geese and
black ducks winter here, as do large rafts of ruddy ducks, canvasbacks,
and greater and lesser scaups. Of particular note are the wintering
tundra swans that use the adjacent shallow waters. A small number of
the federally listed endangered Delmarva fox squirrel (Sciurus niger
cinereus) occur on the refuge, as do breeding bald eagles and more than
60 migratory bird species of conservation concern.
Although conserving wildlife and habitat is the refuge's first
priority, the public can observe and photograph wildlife, fish, hunt,
or participate in environmental education and interpretation programs.
To facilitate those activities, we maintain self-guiding trails,
fishing and observation platforms, and photography blinds. School
groups come throughout the year for our educational and interpretive
programs. An annual deer hunt and youth turkey hunt are also very
popular activities on the refuge. All programs benefit from the active
involvement of the Friends of Eastern Neck and refuge volunteers.
Background
The CCP Process
The Improvement Act requires us to develop a CCP for each national
wildlife refuge. The purpose for developing those CCPs is to provide
refuge managers with 15-year plans for achieving refuge purposes and
the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System (NWRS), in
conformance with sound principles of fish and wildlife management and
conservation, legal mandates, and Service policies. In addition to
outlining broad management direction on conserving wildlife and their
habitats, CCPs identify opportunities for wildlife-dependent recreation
available to the public, which includes opportunities for hunting,
fishing, observing and photographing wildlife, and participating in
environmental education and interpretation programs. We will review and
update each CCP at least every 15 years, in accordance with the
Improvement Act.
Public Outreach
In conjunction with our first Federal Register notice in June 2002,
we distributed a newsletter to more than 600 State agencies,
organizations, and individuals on our project mailing list, asking
about their interest in the refuge and whether they had issues or
concerns they would like us to address. At that time, we also held
public scoping meetings. In January 2007, along with the release of the
newsletter announcing that we were restarting the planning process, we
held a public meeting in Rock Hall, Maryland. The purpose of that
meeting was to share updated information on the planning process,
review the 2002 scoping results, and solicit new management issues and
concerns. Throughout the process, we have conducted additional outreach
via participation in community meetings, events, and other public
forums, and requested public input on managing the refuge and its
programs.
Some of the key issues in the public comments include:
The need to identify the most effective strategies for
enhancing habitats for migrating and wintering waterfowl,
Determining what other species and habitats should be
management priorities,
Deciding how we can best control invasive plants, and
How to work best with partners to minimize shoreline
erosion and the degradation of shallow water habitats.
We considered all of these comments, and incorporated many of them into
the varied alternatives in the draft CCP/EA.
CCP Actions We Are Considering, Including the Service-Preferred
Alternative
We developed three management alternatives based on the purposes
for establishing the refuge; its vision and goals; and the issues and
concerns of the public, State agencies, and the Service that arose
during the planning process. The alternatives share some actions in
common, such as protecting and restoring the refuge shoreline and tidal
marsh habitats, protecting nesting bald eagles and the federally listed
Delmarva fox squirrel, controlling invasive plants, encouraging
research that benefits our resource decisions, protecting cultural
resources, distributing refuge revenue sharing payments to Kent County,
supporting the Friends of Eastern Neck, and promoting the refuge
volunteer program.
Other actions distinguish the alternatives. The draft CCP/EA
describes the alternatives in detail, and relates them to the issues
and concerns. Highlights follow.
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by NEPA.
Alternative A defines our current management activities, and serves as
the baseline for comparing the other alternatives. We would continue to
focus our habitat management on protecting the refuge shoreline and
restoring tidal marsh habitats in partnership with others. We would
also manage cropland on 557 acres, moist soil units on 28 acres, and
green tree reservoirs on 38 acres. We would continue to protect 708
acres of mature mixed forest and treat invasive plants as our funding
and staffing allow. Our biological monitoring and inventory program
would continue at its current levels, focusing on surveys of breeding
and wintering birds.
Our visitor services programs would not change; we would continue
to facilitate opportunities for fishing, hunting, observing and
photographing wildlife, and participating in environmental education
and interpretation programs. We would maintain, but not expand, the
facilities to support those activities. The seasonal closures in some
areas would continue to protect nesting or wintering birds. We would
continue to station three permanent staff at Eastern Neck NWR, and
access to all refuge complex staff would continue to be available as
needed.
Alternative B (Emphasis on Tidal Wetlands and Waterfowl; the Service-
Preferred Alternative)
This alternative is the one we propose as the best way to manage
Eastern Neck NWR over the next 15 years. It includes an array of
management actions that, in our professional judgment, works best
toward achieving the refuge purposes, our vision and goals, and the
goals of other State and regional conservation plans. We also believe
it most effectively addresses the key issues raised during the planning
process.
The highest priority of the biological program in alternative B
would be to protect the refuge shoreline and tidal marsh. We plan to
work with partners to create additional breakwaters and restore 108
acres of native tidal marsh. We would consolidate our cropland
management program into 372 acres in fewer, larger fields to increase
their use by waterfowl. We would also improve migratory habitat for
waterfowl, shorebirds, and marsh birds by creating up to four new moist
soil units on 21 acres. As in alternative A, we would continue to
monitor refuge forests and wetlands for invasive plants, and make
treating them a priority. We would expand our biological monitoring and
inventory program, and regularly evaluate its results to help us better
understand the implications of our management actions and identify ways
to improve their effectiveness. We would expand our support of
compatible research programs, and
[[Page 46458]]
would encourage the use of the refuge to demonstrate restoration and
best adaptive management practices.
We would enhance opportunities for all six priority public uses,
and emphasize two of them--wildlife observation and photography. We
would seek new partnerships, such as those with environmental
educators, to encourage their use of the refuge as a living laboratory
and help us improve our programs. The seasonal closures in some areas
would continue to protect nesting or wintering birds. Outreach and
Service visibility on the refuge and in the local community would
improve. We would station two additional staff at Eastern Neck NWR,
but, as in alternative A, access to all refuge complex staff would
continue to be available as needed.
Alternative C (Emphasis on Tidal Wetlands and Forest Habitat)
As in alternatives A and B, the highest priority in alternative C
is to protect and restore the refuge shoreline and tidal marsh.
However, its emphasis on managing forest habitat in the refuge uplands
to benefit forest-dependent species distinguishes it from alternatives
A and B. We would eliminate the cropland program, and would not
construct new moist soil units. Instead, we would allow those lands to
revert through natural succession to forest, and intervene with
treatments when necessary to ensure that a native, healthy, diverse
forest results.
We would not begin any other significant new inventorying or
monitoring, except established protocols when required by mandates on
Federal trust species or when recommended by the Regional biologist. We
would permit compatible research programs requested by our partners on
refuge lands, but would limit our involvement. As in alternative B, we
would encourage the use of the refuge to demonstrate restoration and
best adaptive management practices.
Under alternative C, we would offer more visitor services programs
and build more infrastructure than in alternatives A or B. We would
open for public access the areas previously closed to protect wintering
waterfowl. The suitability of those areas for waterfowl would diminish
greatly as they revert to forest. We would improve our programs for
environmental education, interpretation, and wildlife observation and
photography. We would hold teacher workshops, become actively involved
in developing local school programs using the refuge, and promote
senior education programs. We would consider a new trail and boat
launch at the south end of the island, and would expand the turkey hunt
by opening it to adult hunters for a limited time. As in alternative B,
we would improve Service outreach and visibility, and station two new
staff at the refuge.
Public Meetings
We will give the public opportunities to provide input at one
public meeting in Rock Hall, Maryland. You can obtain the schedule from
the project leader or natural resource planner (see addresses or FOr
Further Information CONTACT, above). You may also submit comments at
any time during the planning process, by any means shown in the
ADDRESSES section.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comments, 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.
Dated: August 7, 2009.
Salvatore M. Amato,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA
01035.
[FR Doc. E9-21737 Filed 9-8-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P