[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 69 (Wednesday, April 10, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21397-21398]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-08338]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-R-2012-N251; FXRS12650800000-112-FF08R0000]
Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, Alameda,
Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our final Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and
finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for the Don Edwards San
Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). In the CCP, we
describe how we will manage the Refuge for the next 15 years.
DATES: The CCP and FONSI are available now. The FONSI was signed on
October 10, 2012. Implementation of the CCP may begin immediately.
ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by
any of the following methods. You may request a hard copy or CD-ROM.
Agency Web site: Download a copy of the document(s) at http://www.fws.gov/cno/refuges/DonEdwards/DonEdwards.cfm.
Email: sfbaynwrc@fws.gov. Include ``DESFB CCP'' in the subject line
of the message.
Fax: Attn: Winnie Chan, (510) 792-5828.
Mail: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, San Francisco Bay NWR
Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555.
In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Copies of the Final CCP and FONSI may
also be viewed at the San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge
Complex, 1 Marshlands Road, Fremont, CA 94555 (510) 792-0222.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Winnie Chan, Planning Team Leader, at
(510) 792-0222 (See ADDRESSES), or Eric Mruz, Refuge Manager, at (510)
792-0222.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge was
established in 1972 pursuant to the Act Authorizing the Transfer of
Certain Real Property for Wildlife, or other purposes (16 U.S.C. 667b),
Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), and the Fish
and Wildlife Act of 1956 (16 U.S.C. 742f(b)(1)). The roughly 30,000-
acre Don Edwards San Francisco Bay National Wildlife Refuge, located in
the Alameda, Santa Clara, and San Mateo Counties of California,
consists of several noncontiguous parcels divided into four management
units that surround the southern edge of the San Francisco Bay. The
Refuge was established to preserve and enhance wildlife habitat,
protect migratory birds, and protect threatened and endangered species.
The Refuge also provides opportunities for wildlife-dependent
recreation and environmental education.
We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the
final CCP for Don Edwards San Francisco Bay in accordance with National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1506.6(b)) requirements. We
completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human environment,
which we included in the environmental assessment (EA) that accompanied
the draft CCP.
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 and photography, and
environmental education and
[[Page 21398]]
interpretation. We intend to review and update the CCP at least every
15 years in accordance with the Administration Act.
Our Draft CCP and EA were available for a 45-day public review and
comment period, which we announced via several methods, including press
releases, updates to constituents, and a Federal Register notice (77 FR
28895, May 16, 2012). The Draft CCP/EA identified and evaluated three
alternatives for managing the Refuge for the next 15 years.
Under Alternative A (no action alternative), the current management
actions, including habitat management, wildlife management, wildlife-
oriented recreation opportunities, and environmental education, would
be continued. Current staffing and funding would remain the same.
Existing restoration and management plans (e.g., Bair Island
Restoration and Management Plan and South Bay Salt Pond Restoration
Project) would continue to be implemented. We would also actively work
with partners and willing sellers to acquire the remaining lands within
the approved acquisition boundary.
Alternative B (preferred alternative) includes those actions in
Alternative A. In addition, we would moderately expand biological,
habitat management, visitor service, and environmental education
activities. Refuge staff would expand the volunteer program to recruit
new volunteers and provide additional learning opportunities to
existing volunteers. Additional staff and funding would be needed to
implement this alternative.
Under Alternative C, in addition to tasks included in Alternative A
and B, we would increase the frequency of baseline monitoring,
investigate reintroduction of listed species (e.g., the salt marsh
harvest mouse and the California clapper rail), survey for listed plant
species, and encourage additional research to benefit listed species.
Additional staff and funding would be needed to implement this
alternative.
We received eighteen letters on the Draft CCP and EA during the
review and comment period. Comments focused upon the meaning of an
``approved acquisition boundary'' and the scope of our authority within
the approved boundary, applicability of state health and safety codes
in relation to mosquito management on the Refuge, and wildlife-public
use conflicts. We incorporated comments we received into the CCP when
appropriate, and we responded to the comments in an appendix to the
CCP. In the FONSI, we selected Alternative B for implementation. The
FONSI documents our decision and is based on the information and
analysis contained in the EA.
Under the selected alternative, the Service will expand both
natural resource management and visitor services opportunities on the
Refuge. Additional biological activities would include baseline surveys
on native flora and fauna, as well as a revised predator management
program to include avian predators. Habitat would be improved along the
marsh-upland ecotone to benefit tidal marsh species as well as for the
western snowy plover and California least tern. Other habitat
management activities would include development of a comprehensive weed
management plan, addressing climate change impacts on Refuge resources,
and efforts to acquire additional lands to meet Refuge purposes. A
mosquito management plan would be implemented to improve coordination
with local mosquito abatement districts to manage the threat of
mosquito-borne disease on the Refuge. The mosquito management plan
would be developed in accordance with Service policies.
Visitor services will be expanded considerably through
interpretation and environmental education opportunities. A wildlife
photography permit system would be implemented to expand additional
wildlife photography opportunities. Dog walking would be limited
primarily to upland trails in order to further protect tidal marsh
areas. A new LEED-certified visitor center complex would be constructed
and additional interpretation activities would be provided. The
environmental education program would be updated and expanded in
several ways, such as through a LEED-certified remodel of the
Environmental Education Center, Spanish translation of materials and
curriculum, and adding programs at different sites. The volunteer
program would be expanded through improving training for volunteers and
developing permanent stewardship projects.
The selected alternative best meets the Refuges' purposes, vision,
and goals; contributes to the Refuge System mission; addresses the
significant issues and relevant mandates; and is consistent with
principles of sound fish and wildlife management. Based on the
associated environmental assessment, this alternative is not expected
to result in significant environmental impacts and therefore does not
require an environmental impact statement.
Paul B. McKim,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento,
California.
[FR Doc. 2013-08338 Filed 4-9-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P