[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 7176-7178]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-3108]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2011-N222; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Great Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Rockingham County, NH
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 7177]]
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of the draft comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
Environmental Assessment (EA) for Great Bay National Wildlife Refuge
(NWR) for public review and comment. Great Bay NWR is located in
Newington, New Hampshire, and is administered by staff at Parker River
NWR in Newburyport, Massachusetts. The draft CCP/EA describes three
alternatives for managing Great Bay NWR for the next 15 years.
Alternative B is identified as the Service-preferred alternative. Also
available for public review and comment are the draft compatibility
determinations, which are included as appendix C in the draft CCP/EA.
DATES: To ensure our consideration of your written comments, please
send them by March 12, 2012. We will also hold public meetings. We will
announce those meetings and other opportunities for public input in
local news media, via our project mailing list, and on our Regional
planning Web site: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/Great%20bay/ccphome.html.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments or requests for copies or more
information by any of the following methods. You may request hard
copies or a CD-ROM of the documents.
Email: northeastplanning@fws.gov. Please include ``Great Bay CCP''
in the subject line of your email.
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.
In-Person Drop-off, Viewing, or Pickup: Call Parker River NWR
headquarters during regular business hours at (978) 465-5753 to make an
appointment to view the document at Great Bay NWR, 100 Merrimac Drive,
Newington, NH 03801.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Graham Taylor, Refuge Manager, Parker
River NWR, 6 Plum Island Turnpike, Newburyport, MA 01950; phone: 978-
465-5753; fax: (978) 465-2807; email: fw5rw_prnwr@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Great Bay NWR. We
published our original notice of intent to prepare a CCP in the Federal
Register on June 17, 2009 (74 FR 28722).
Great Bay NWR was established in 1992 to conserve natural
diversity, protect federally listed species and other species of
conservation concern, and preserve and enhance water quality. The
1,103-acre refuge is located on a portion of the former Pease Air Force
Base. Despite its past land uses, including active military operations
and a weapons storage area, the refuge has a diversity of habitat types
including oak-hickory forest, grasslands, shrub thickets, fresh and
saltwater wetlands, and open water habitats. The refuge also includes 7
miles of shoreline, and is the largest parcel of protected land on
Great Bay. These habitats provide important habitat for wintering
waterfowl and bald eagles, as well as shorebirds, wading birds, and
other wildlife and plant species of conservation concern.
Great Bay NWR also offers a wide range of wildlife-dependent
recreational opportunities. Two interpretive trails covering 2.5 miles
provide visitors with excellent wildlife observation and nature
photography opportunities. Additionally, the refuge offers a 2-day,
white-tailed deer hunt each fall.
The refuge also includes a 29-acre conservation easement, located
in Concord, New Hampshire, that is managed primarily for the federally
endangered Karner blue butterfly. The easement has a mix of open pitch
pine-scrub, pine hardwood, and other scrubland. Since 2008, Great Bay
NWR and the Karner blue butterfly easement have been managed by staff
located at Parker River NWR in Newburyport, Massachusetts.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Refuge 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 and
photography, and environmental education and interpretation. We will
review and update each CCP at least every 15 years, in accordance with
the Refuge Administration Act.
Public Outreach
In June 2009, we distributed a planning newsletter to several
hundred people on our project mailing list. The newsletter informed
people about the planning process and asked recipients to contact us
about issues or concerns they would like us to address. We also posted
the newsletter on our Web site for people to access electronically. In
addition, we notified the general public of our planning project, and
our interest in hearing about issues and concerns, by publishing news
releases in local newspapers. We also held afternoon and evening public
scoping meetings on June 18, 2009, in Newington, New Hampshire. The
purpose of the two meetings was to share information on the planning
process and to solicit management issues and concerns. Throughout the
process, refuge staff have conducted additional outreach via
participation in community meetings, events, and other public forums.
We have considered and evaluated all of the comments we received and
addressed them in various ways in the alternatives presented in the
draft CCP/EA.
CCP Alternatives We Are Considering
During the scoping process, which initiated work on our draft CCP/
EA, we, other governmental partners, and the public raised the
following general issues that are further detailed and addressed in the
draft CCP/EA:
Which habitats and species should be a focus for
management, and how will we manage for them on the refuge?
How can we address concerns about the biological
diversity, health, and integrity of the refuges' forests, wetlands, and
shoreline given limited staffing and budgets?
Which invasive species should be a priority for control on
refuge lands, and what specific techniques will we use to control them?
How can the refuge work with partners to address regional-
scale conservation concerns, such as climate change, water quality, and
habitat fragmentation?
What are the appropriate types and levels of wildlife-
dependent uses to offer on the refuge? What partnership opportunities
exist and what staffing levels are needed to enhance and expand our
public use programs?
How will we preserve, protect, and interpret cultural
resources on refuge lands? How should we address historical structures
on the refuge?
How will we address environmental contaminants resulting
from past land uses and from offsite activities?
We developed three management alternatives in the draft CCP/EA for
[[Page 7178]]
Great Bay NWR to address these issues and to achieve the refuge's
establishment purposes, and the vision and goals we developed. The full
description of the alternatives is presented in the draft CCP/EA. The
alternatives identify several actions in common. All alternatives
include measures to protect the rocky shoreline habitat, control
invasive species, protect cultural resources, monitor for climate
change impacts, distribute refuge revenue sharing payments, and
continue participation in conservation and education partnerships.
There are also several actions that are common to both alternatives B
and C. These include constructing a new joint administrative office and
visitor contact station, and evaluating the need for additional land
protection.
There are other actions that differ among the alternatives. The
draft CCP/EA describes each alternative in detail and relates it to the
issues and concerns that arose during the planning process. Below, we
provide summaries for the three alternatives.
Great Bay NWR Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by the
National Environmental Policy Act. 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. Under alternative A, Great Bay NWR would remain unstaffed, and we
would not change our current visitor services facilities, including
existing trails and viewing platforms. Our biological program
priorities would continue to be managing impoundments for migratory
birds, managing grasslands for upland sandpipers and other grassland-
dependent species of concern, and inventorying and controlling invasive
plants. We would continue to provide wildlife observation and
photography opportunities on two trails, and implement a 2-day, fall
deer hunt in partnership with the New Hampshire Fish and Game
Department (NHFG).
Management on the Karner blue butterfly easement would not change.
We would continue to cooperate with NHFG to implement habitat
management. One undeveloped trail would provide access, with limited
information about the butterfly and management posted on a kiosk.
Alternative B (Habitat Diversity and Focal Species Emphasis; Service-
Preferred Alternative)
Alternative B is the Service-preferred alternative. It combines the
actions we believe would best achieve the refuge's purposes, vision,
and goals and respond to public issues. Under alternative B, we would
emphasize the management of specific refuge habitats to support focal
species whose habitat needs would benefit other species of conservation
concern that are found in the Great Bay region. Focal species include
migrating and wintering waterfowl, migratory songbirds, breeding upland
sandpiper, and rare and declining species, such as the New England
cottontail and Karner blue butterfly. Habitat restoration work on
refuge lands would also benefit forest-dwelling bats and migratory
fish. 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, which
have been limited under current management due to lack of staff. On
Great Bay NWR, our improvements would include new interpretive
materials, more programs for visitors to learn about the refuge and the
surrounding landscape, and an extension to an existing trail that
provides opportunities for wildlife observation and photography. We
would also evaluate opportunities to expand the hunting program to
include turkey hunting and a bow season for deer. On the Karner blue
butterfly easement, we propose to install new interpretive signs, offer
guided interpretive walks, and enhance our Web site with updated
information.
Alternative C (Enhanced Public Use Management)
Alternative C would rely primarily on ecosystem processes and
natural disturbances to restore the biological integrity, diversity,
and ecological health of the refuge. All grassland and shrubland
habitat on Great Bay NWR would be allowed to naturally succeed to
forest. All three refuge impoundments would be removed, restoring
Peverly Brook to stream habitat and returning Stubbs Pond to salt
marsh. We would also remove all remaining structures in the former
weapons storage area.
Under this alternative, we would expand the refuge visitor services
program and public access. We would construct two new trails, and after
shrubland and grassland habitats transition to forest, we would open up
larger portions of the refuge to public use. The management of the
Karner blue butterfly easement would be the same as that proposed under
alternative B.
Public Availability of Documents
In addition to any methods in ADDRESSES, you can view or obtain
documents from the agency Web site at: http://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/Great%20bay/ccphome.html.
Next Steps
After this comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and
address them in the form of a final CCP and finding of no significant
impact.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, electronic 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: January 20, 2012.
Wendi Weber,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-3108 Filed 2-9-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P