[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 79 (Wednesday, April 23, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21978-21979]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-8760]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2008-N0006; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge, Volusia and Lake
Counties, FL
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: Draft comprehensive conservation plan
and environmental assessment; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for the Lake Woodruff National
Wildlife Refuge for public review and comment. In this Draft CCP/EA, we
describe alternatives, including our proposed action to manage this
refuge for the 15 years following approval of the Final CCP. Also
available for review and comment are draft compatibility
determinations.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
by May 23, 2008.
ADDRESSES: To provide written comments or to obtain a copy of the Draft
CCP/EA, please contact Cheri Ehrhardt, Area Planner, Merritt Island
National Wildlife Refuge, P.O. Box 6504, Titusville, FL 32782; or you
may e-mail: [email protected]. A copy of the Draft CCP/EA is
available on compact diskette or hard copy. The Draft CCP/EA may also
be accessed and downloaded from the Service's Internet site: http://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cheri Ehrhardt; Telephone: 321/861-
0667.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for the Lake Woodruff
National Wildlife Refuge. We started this process through a notice in
the Federal Register on July 26, 2006 (71 FR 42412).
Lake Woodruff National Wildlife Refuge was established in 1964.
This 21,500-acre refuge is comprised of approximately 11,100 acres of
freshwater marsh; 7,200 acres of hardwood swamps; 2,400 acres of
uplands; and more than 800 acres of lakes, streams, and canals. The
refuge also has an additional 652 acres of conservation easement lands
on two tracts. The primary purpose of the refuge is for the protection
of migratory birds.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Improvement Act), which amended the National
Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, 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 Improvement Act.
Public scoping began in July 2006. Issues identified by the public,
intergovernmental partners, and the Service include: Impacts of human
population growth and increased development adjacent to the refuge
boundary; threats and impacts to listed species and migratory birds;
lack of a comprehensive habitat management program; spread of exotic,
invasive, and nuisance species; lack of baseline data and coordinated
research; need for enhanced interagency coordination; need for
cooperative management agreements with the State for navigable (State-
owned) waterways on the refuge; and lack of sufficient access onto
refuge properties.
CCP Actions We Are Considering, Including Proposed Action
We developed four alternatives for managing the refuge and chose
Alternative D as the proposed action. A full description of each
alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative
below:
Under Alternative A, current management of the refuge would
continue. The refuge would continue to survey, maintain habitats, and
limit disturbance to threatened and endangered species. The refuge
would survey, monitor, and maintain habitat to benefit migratory birds,
including waterfowl, shorebirds, wading birds, marsh birds, and
landbirds. It would coordinate with other agencies to control aquatic
weeds in the navigable waters. There would be incidental feral hog
control as part of the deer hunting program. Forest management
activities would maintain upland pine and bottomland hardwood habitats.
The refuge would manage 450 acres of impoundments and 11,000 acres of
freshwater marshes. Upland sheet flow restoration efforts would
continue. Under this alternative, resource protection would not change.
Limited archaeological surveys would be conducted as part of timber
sales. The refuge would continue to increase safety at the main access
railroad crossing and maintain the access road. The visitor services'
program would not be expanded. Deer and feral hog hunting opportunities
would be maintained at current levels. Turkey surveys would be
conducted to determine population status. Fishing opportunities would
be maintained. As part of wildlife and photography, the refuge would
maintain an observation tower, interpretive trails, hiking trails, and
a photo-blind. Horseback riding would continue on the Volusia Tract,
and commercial guided boat tours would be conducted via special use
permits. The refuge would conduct 15 environmental and interpretive
programs annually. Friends group membership and volunteer levels would
remain the same. Refuge administration would remain the same with the
following six employees: refuge manager, biologist, fire specialist,
engineering equipment operator, and forestry technician (2 career-
seasonal employees).
Under Alternative B, wildlife and habitat management would
increase. The refuge would evaluate the expansion of impoundments to
provide more habitats for waterfowl, shorebirds, and wading birds. The
refuge would limit public access to certain areas to decrease
disturbance. It would intensively survey and monitor migratory birds.
Manipulation of water levels in the impoundments would favor native
plant species, and the refuge would focus exotic plant control to
support migratory birds. Feral hog and coyote management would be the
same as under Alternative A. Habitats would be restored to support
migratory birds through prescribed fire and forest
[[Page 21979]]
thinning. The refuge would work with partners to ensure water quality,
quantity, minimum flows and levels, and natural hydrology to support
migratory birds. The refuge would work to develop cooperative
management agreements with the State for the navigable waters on the
refuge. It would conduct a refuge boundary survey. Under Alternative B,
resource protection would increase. Archaeological resources would be
managed the same as under Alternative A. The refuge would evaluate the
need to improve the access road. Alternative B would expand visitor
services. Hunting and fishing opportunities would be increased, but the
refuge would ensure that these activities do not impact migratory
birds. The refuge would seasonally close key areas to the public to
limit disturbance to migratory birds and eliminate horseback riding. It
would incorporate migratory bird themes into commercial guided tour
messages. The refuge would develop on- and off-site education and
interpretive programs with messages focused on migratory birds and the
minimization of human impacts. It would train staff, volunteers,
teachers, and tour operators to incorporate interpretive themes into
programs. Refuge administration would expand under Alternative B. In
addition to the 6 positions listed under Alternative A, the following
positions would be added for a total of 15 positions: Wildlife
specialist (assistant refuge manager), office assistant, biologist,
biological science technician (2), maintenance worker (2), law
enforcement officer, and park ranger.
Under Alternative C, management would focus on the needs of rare,
threatened, and endangered species. More areas on the refuge would be
seasonally closed to limit disturbance to priority species. Management
of migratory birds would be decreased as the impoundment acreage would
decline to support certain listed species. Exotic species control would
benefit listed species. Upland and bottomland forest management would
focus on the needs of listed species. The refuge would work with
partners to conduct herpetological and fish surveys and to protect
water resources to support listed species. Archaeological resources
would be managed as under Alternative A. The refuge would evaluate the
need to improve the access road. It would work with partners to protect
wildlife crossing the railroad tracks. Under Alternative C, visitor
services would be reduced. The refuge would ensure that hunting and
fishing do not impact listed species. The refuge would seasonally close
key areas to the public to limit disturbance to listed species and
would eliminate horseback riding. It would incorporate listed species
conservation themes into commercial guided tour messages. The refuge
would develop on- and off-site education and interpretive programs with
messages focused on listed species and the minimization of human
impacts. It would train staff, volunteers, teachers, and tour operators
to incorporate interpretive themes into programs. Friends and volunteer
levels and efforts would be increased and focused on the needs of
listed species. Refuge administration would expand under Alternative C.
In addition to the 6 positions listed under Alternative A, the
following positions would be added for a total of 18 positions:
Wildlife specialist (assistant refuge manager), office assistant,
biologist (2), biological science technicians (2), non-fire forestry
technician, maintenance worker (2), law enforcement officer (2), and
park ranger.
Under Alternative D, the proposed alternative, wildlife and habitat
diversity would be emphasized. This alternative would expand wildlife
and habitat management efforts on the refuge. Some key areas would be
seasonally closed to the public to limit disturbance to rare,
threatened, and endangered species, as well as to protect vulnerable
habitats. For migratory birds, the refuge would intensively survey,
monitor, and manage the impoundments for multi-species use. Exotic
species control efforts would be similar to Alternatives B and C in the
level of effort but the focus would be on maintaining biodiversity. The
refuge would work with the State to determine the impacts of coyotes.
If feral hog control measures become necessary, trapping would be
considered. Upland habitats would be managed for biodiversity.
Herpetological and fish surveys and monitoring efforts would increase.
The refuge would work with the State to develop appropriate cooperative
management agreements for the navigable waters on the refuge. A refuge
boundary survey would be conducted. The refuge would conduct a complete
archaeological survey, and develop a regular patrol and enforcement
program. With regards to the railroad, the refuge would work with
partners to protect wildlife movement across the railroad tracks. It
would evaluate the need to improve the road and determine alternative
access routes onto the refuge. Visitor services would expand under this
alternative but the refuge would ensure that hunting and fishing do not
impact wildlife and habitat diversity. It would evaluate the potential
for turkey hunting. It would continue to allow horseback riding on the
Volusia Tract through special use permits. Biodiversity themes would be
incorporated into commercial guided tour messages. The refuge would
develop on- and off-site education and interpretive programs, with
messages focused on biodiversity and the minimization of human impacts.
The refuge would train staff, volunteers, teachers, and tour operators
to incorporate interpretive themes into programs. It would increase
Friends group and volunteer efforts to support wildlife and habitat
diversity. As part of refuge administration, the refuge would include
maintenance programs in support of biodiversity and biological
integrity. In addition to the 6 positions listed under Alternative A,
the following positions would be added for a total of 11 positions:
Wildlife specialist (assistant refuge manager), biological science
technician, maintenance worker, law enforcement officer, and park
ranger.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, e-mail address, or
other personal identifying information in your comment, 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.
Next Step
After the comment period ends for the Draft CCP/EA, we will analyze
the comments and address them in the form of a Final CCP and Finding of
No Significant Impact.
Authority: This notice is published under the authority of the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law
105-57.
Dated: February 13, 2008.
Cynthia K. Dohner,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. E8-8760 Filed 4-22-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P