[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 242 (Monday, December 19, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-31044]


[[Page Unknown]]

[Federal Register: December 19, 1994]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------


DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
 

Notice of Record of Decision for Bayou Sauvage National Wildlife 
Refuge, Master Plan/Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), 
Orleans Parish, Louisiana

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice makes available to the public a summary of the 
Record of Decision (ROD) for the final Master Plan/FEIS for the Bayou 
Sauvage National Wildlife Refuge, located in Orleans Parish, Louisiana. 
Establishment of a 19,000-acre refuge was authorized by Congress on 
July 28, 1986. As of 1993, the refuge contained approximately 22,800 
acres under the supervision of the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service). 
There is a potential for future expansion of the refuge to include a 
total of approximately 30,000 acres. Federal funding for design, 
construction, and operation of the refuge is provided through 
appropriations by Congress. Pursuant to the Council on Environmental 
Quality regulations implementing the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA) (40 CFR 1505.2), the Service issues this ROD upon consideration 
of the FEIS prepared for the Proposed Action.
    A Notice of Availability of the FEIS was published by the 
Environmental Protection Agency in the Federal Register on September 9, 
1994.
    Factors influencing selection of the Preferred Alternative 
included: (1) Compliance with the purpose for which the Refuge was 
established, (2) adherence to the goals, objectives, and policies 
established for the refuge, (3) opinions of the public and commenting 
agencies, and (4) evaluation of the impacts of the four alternatives on 
the physical, biological, and socioeconomic environments. The Preferred 
Alternative, referred to as Alternative 2, Comprehensive Diverse 
Habitat Enhancement Alternative, contains a Management Program and a 
Facilities Program characterized by the following elements:
    1. Management Program:
a. Habitat-Wildlife
    * Habitat conservation for the five threatened and/or endangered 
species presently using the refuge.
    * Support for at least 60,000 wintering waterfowl.
    * Control of nuisance animals and exotic plants, as needed.
    * Freshwater fisheries habitat enhancement in leveed wetlands south 
of Interstate 10 (I-10).
    * Estuarine fisheries habitat enhancement in leveed wetlands north 
of I-10.
b. Environmental Management
    * Acquire all lands presently leased (i.e., The Conservation Fund 
and the city of New Orleans property).
    * Acquire additional lands from willing sellers in the refuge 
expansion zone.
    * Tidal Wetlands Management--Uncontrolled Estuarine Habitat (Units 
1, 2b, 6b, 7a, 7b, 8b).

--Stabilize and enhance shore zone (Units 1, 7a, 7b)
--Stabilize and enhance bank line (Units 7a, 7b, 6b)
--Increase diversity of estuarine habitat types (brackish marsh; sand/
shell beach; small, shallow waterbodies; and protected lagoons with 
submerged aquatics, oyster reefs)

    * Leveed Wetlands Management--Controlled Fresh Habitat (Units 5, 
6a, 9).

--Enhance bottomland hardwood forest (Units 3, 5, 8a, 9)
--Reestablish fresh emergent vegetation in Units 5 and 6a
--Maintain scrub/shrub habitat for rookeries in Unit 6a
--Protect refuge facilities and infrastructure from flooding

    * Leveed Wetlands Management--Controlled Fresh-Intermediate Habitat 
(Units 3, 4)

--Enhance the quality of and maintain a maximum number of different 
habitats for the benefit of wildlife and the enjoyment and education of 
the public
--Restore and maintain fresh-intermediate marsh vegetation
--Protect refuge facilities and infrastructure from flooding

    * Leveed Wetlands Management--Controlled Estuarine (Unit 2a)

--Restore estuarine nursery habitat inside protection levee
    2. Facilities Program:
a. User Groups
    * Public (nonconsumptive, consumptive, special use, scientific 
research).

--Protect and interpret archaeological sites
--Support fishing and nonconsumptive uses
    * Service (administration, management, maintenance).

--Enforce refuge regulations
--Close selected portions of refuge seasonally to protect migratory 
waterfowl and bald eagles from human disturbances
--Protect refuge facilities and infrastructure from flooding
b. Facilities Program
    * Visitor/Interpretive Center is southeast quadrant of I-10/Turtle 
Bayou interchange (Unit 3).
    * Environmental Educational Center south of U.S. Highway No. 11 and 
U.S. Highway No. 90 intersection (Unit 5).
    * Administration/Maintenance Center near southeast quadrant of the 
I-10/Michoud Boulevard interchange (Unit 9).
    * Trails and Trail Heads (Units 1, 2a, 3, 4, 5a, 8b, and 9).
    Three other alternatives evaluated in detail included:
    (1) No Build Alternative
    (2) Minimal Diverse Habitat Enhancement
    (3) Comprehensive Estuarine Habitat Enhancement
    These alternatives were developed by the Service with input 
obtained from the public and review agencies during the review and 
comment process. Issues raised in comments included, but are not 
limited to: Expansion of the refuge, hunting, trapping, commercial 
fishing, public access, locations of visitor center, habitat management 
objectives, mosquito control, and monitoring of management programs to 
achieve program objectives. All substantive issues raised during the 
public and agency review process have been addressed to the 
satisfaction of the Service either through revisions incorporated into 
the FEIS text or in responses contained in Section 9.0 of the FEIS. 
These responses are incorporated by reference into the ROD. One comment 
was received on the FEIS.
    Findings and Decision: Based upon a thorough analysis and 
consideration of the impacts identified in the FEIS, results of the 
research and investigations conducted in conjunction with the Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and FEIS, comments received in 
connection with the public information hearings and review of the DEIS, 
public review of management programs already approved for the refuge, 
and other relevant factors, including the purposes for which the refuge 
was established by Congress and statutory and regulatory guidance for 
funding such projects, the Service finds as follows:
    (1) The preferred alternative is Alternative 2. Alternative 2 
consists of the Management and Facilities Programs discussed 
previously.
    (2) The Preferred Alternative best fulfills the Public Use Goal for 
environmental education, wildlife and habitat interpretation, wildlife/
wildlands-oriented recreation, and scientific research.
    (3) Consistent with economic, social, and other essential 
considerations, to the maximum extent practicable, potential adverse 
environmental effects identified in the FEIS will be minimized or 
avoided by incorporating mitigative measures as conditions of Federal 
funding approval and permit issuance. The potential impacts and 
mitigative measures are described in Section 4.0 and 5.0 of the FEIS.
    (4) Only 45 acres of jurisdictional wetlands, out of the presently 
supervised area of approximately 22,800 acres, are estimated to be 
impacted by construction of facilities on the refuge. Specific details 
regarding mitigation plans for site-specific projects will be developed 
on a case-by-case basis as part of the Section 404 permit process. 
However, under the Preferred Alternative, habitat management measures 
implemented on other areas of the refuge for the purpose of increasing 
the quality and quantity of emergent and submergent aquatic vegetation 
and scrub/shrub vegetation are expected to be more than adequate to 
serve as mitigation for wetlands impacted by facility construction.
    (5) The Preferred Alternative is designed to conserve and/or 
enhance existing habitat for the presently listed threatened and 
endangered species using the refuge. No State or federally listed 
endangered or threatened species or their critical habitats are known 
to be adversely affected by implementation of the Preferred 
Alternative.
    (6) No historic properties listed in or eligible for listing in the 
National Register of Historic Places are know to be adversely affected 
by implementation of the Preferred Alternative. Detailed cultural 
resources investigations will be conducted for site-specific projects 
on a case-by-case basis as part of the Section 404 permit process.
    (7) Statutory authority for the Service to fund and implement, and 
for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to permit, the Preferred 
Alternative exists.
    (8) The requirements of NEPA and the implementing regulations (40 
CFR Parts 1500-1508) have been satisfied.
    For further information, contact:

Name: Howard Poitevant
Address: 1010 Gause Blvd., Bldg. 936, Slidell, Louisiana 70458
Phone: 504/646-7555.

    Dated: December 8, 1994.
Jerome M. Butler,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 94-31044 Filed 12-16-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-M