[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 189 (Thursday, September 29, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60522-60523]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25068]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R7-R-2011-N136; 70133-1265-0000-S3]


Selawik National Wildlife Refuge, Kotzebue, AK; Revised 
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Finding of No Significant Impact 
for Environmental Assessment

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, USFWS), announce 
the availability of our revised comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) 
and finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for the Selawik National 
Wildlife Refuge (Refuge). In this revised CCP, we describe how we will 
manage the Refuge for the next 15 years.

ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the revised CCP and FONSI 
by any of the following methods. You may request a paper copy, a 
summary, or a CD-ROM containing both.
    You may request hard copies or a CD-ROM of the document.
    Agency Web Site: Download a copy of the document at http://alaska.fws.gov/nwr/planning/plans.htm.
    E-mail: [email protected]; please include ``Selawik 
National Wildlife Refuge CCP'' in the subject line of the message.
    Fax: Attn: Jeffrey Brooks, (907) 786-3965, or Lee Anne Ayres, (907) 
442-3124.
    U.S. Mail: Jeffrey Brooks, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional 
Office, 1011 E. Tudor Road Mailstop 231, Anchorage, AK 99503.
    In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call (907) 786-3357 to make an 
appointment during regular business hours at the above address; or call 
(907) 442-3799 to make an appointment during regular business hours at 
the Selawik Refuge Headquarters in Kotzebue, AK.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeffrey Brooks, Planning Team Leader, 
at the above address, by phone at (907) 786-3839, or by e-mail at 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Introduction

    With this notice, we finalize the revised CCP for Selawik National 
Wildlife Refuge. We started this process through a notice of intent in 
the Federal Register (73 FR 57143; October 1, 2008). We made available 
our draft CCP and Environmental Assessment (EA) and requested comments 
in a notice of availability in the Federal Register (75 FR 65026, 
October 21, 2010). The draft CCP and EA evaluated three alternatives 
for managing the Refuge for the next 15 years.
    The Selawik National Wildlife Refuge was established by the Alaska 
National Interest Lands Conservation Act (ANILCA) in 1980. Selawik 
Refuge straddles the Arctic Circle in northwestern Alaska, encompassing 
an area approximately the size of Connecticut. Refuge boundaries 
encompass approximately 3.2 million acres, of which approximately 2.5 
million acres are administered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 
Section 302(7)(B) of ANILCA states the purposes for which the Selawik 
Refuge was established: (1) To conserve fish and wildlife populations 
and habitats in their natural diversity; (2) to fulfill international 
treaty obligations of the United States with respect to fish and 
wildlife and their habitats; (3) to provide the opportunity for 
continued

[[Page 60523]]

subsistence use by local residents; and (4) to ensure water quality and 
necessary water quantity within the Refuge.
    Access to the Refuge is possible only by boat, float- or ski-
equipped airplane, snowmobile, or dogsled team. Snowmobile trails 
provide vital links among the Alaska Native villages of the region in 
winter and are usually passable to travelers through the end of April. 
Several of these villages are located within or near the Refuge 
boundary, including Buckland, Noorvik, Selawik, Kiana, Ambler, Kobuk, 
and Shungnak.
    The Draft CCP and EA for the Refuge were developed consistent with 
Section 304(g) of ANILCA. Based on public scoping, we identified eight 
major planning issues: (1) Protection of fish, wildlife, habitats, and 
subsistence; (2) management of access to refuge lands for community 
residents and the visiting public; (3) maintaining hunting 
opportunities; (4) addressing local public use needs; (5) maintaining 
water quality and quantity; (6) maintaining the wild character of the 
Refuge and quality visitor experiences; (7) proactively addressing the 
uncertainties of climate change; and (8) providing more outreach and 
better communication for the public. We considered and evaluated all of 
these issues through the alternatives, goals, and objectives addressed 
or described in the draft CCP and the EA.

CCP Alternatives We Considered

    The draft CCP and EA described and evaluated three alternatives for 
managing the Refuge. These alternatives followed much of the same 
general management direction. Alternative A (the No-Action 
Alternative), required under the National Environmental Policy Act 
(NEPA), described continuation of current management activities. Under 
Alternative A, management of the Refuge would have continued to follow 
direction described in the 1987 CCP and record of decision as modified 
by subsequent program-specific plans (e.g., fisheries and fire 
management plans). Alternative A would have continued to protect and 
maintain the existing wildlife values, natural diversity, and 
ecological integrity of the Refuge. Human disturbances to fish and 
wildlife habitats and populations would have been minimal. Private and 
commercial uses of the Refuge would not have changed, and public uses 
employing existing access methods would have continued to be allowed. 
Opportunities would have been maintained to pursue traditional 
subsistence activities and recreational hunting, fishing, and other 
wildlife dependent activities. Opportunities would have been maintained 
to pursue research activities.
    Alternative B (the Preferred Alternative) proposed to follow 
management direction described in the 1987 CCP and record of decision 
as modified by subsequent program-specific plans, but some of that 
management direction has been updated by changes in policy since the 
1987 Selawik CCP was approved. Alternative B identified these specific 
changes in management direction and new goals and objectives for Refuge 
management that would be adopted regardless of which alternative is 
selected. Alternative B proposed continuing the policy of not making 
some public lands, which are intermingled with private lands, available 
for use by commercial guides and transporters whose clients are big 
game hunting. Alternative B proposed that a formal partnership be 
created between the Refuge and local entities to jointly maintain a 
shared facility of one or more buildings with capacity for office, 
meeting, and storage space in a community within the refuge. 
Alternative B proposed a study of traditional access for subsistence 
purposes. Alternative B proposed that local public use and access needs 
be addressed by creating formal partnerships between the Refuge and 
various local entities.
    Alternative C would have continued to follow management direction 
described in Alternative A as modified by subsequent program-specific 
plans. Alternative C would have identified any specific changes or 
updates in management direction and adopted the new goals and 
objectives for Refuge management. Alternative C proposed that the 
Refuge manager could open or close some public lands, which are 
intermingled with private lands, to use by commercial guides and 
transporters whose clients are big game hunting. Alternative C proposed 
that the Refuge independently maintain a facility of one or more 
buildings with capacity for office, meeting, and storage space in a 
community within the refuge. Alternative C proposed the same study of 
traditional access for subsistence purposes. Alternative C would 
address local public use and access needs slightly differently from 
Alternative B by proposing to expand or improve some opportunities for 
public use and access on Refuge lands.

Changes Between Draft and Final Plan

    The preferred alternative (Alternative B) was slightly modified as 
a result of public comments on the draft Plan. Use by commercial guides 
and transporters for big game hunting is not authorized by permit 
stipulation on refuge lands that are in close proximity to or 
intermingled with private lands in the northwest portion of the refuge. 
Alternative B was modified to authorize use by commercial guides and 
transporters in an additional 68,000 acres of the refuge. In addition, 
Alternative B was modified to indicate that, on a case-by-case basis, 
the refuge manager may authorize commercial use by special use permit 
for a part of the area where guiding is not authorized upon completion 
of a compatibility determination and a subsistence evaluation as 
required by ANILCA Section 810.
    The management of shelter cabins on refuge lands in Alternative B 
was modified to include the following management. A formal partnership 
will be created among the Service, Selawik Refuge, Northwest Arctic 
Borough, NANA regional corporation, and local search and rescue 
organizations to formalize the roles and responsibilities of each 
partner in performing regular maintenance and/or replacement of shelter 
cabins on refuge lands. Members of the formal partnership will review 
the need for additional shelter cabins and appropriate location(s) for 
them, with the option of joint construction of an additional 1-2 
shelter cabins or relocation of an existing shelter cabin on refuge 
lands.

Compliance With the National Environmental Policy Act

    We are furnishing this notice to advise other agencies and the 
public of the availability of the final CCP and FONSI. Based on the 
review and evaluation of the information contained in the draft CCP and 
EA, we have determined that implementation of the final CCP does not 
constitute a major Federal action that would significantly affect the 
quality of the human environment within the meaning of Section 
102(2)(c) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Therefore, 
an Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Future site-
specific proposals discussed in the final CCP requiring additional NEPA 
compliance will be addressed in separate planning efforts with full 
public involvement.

    Dated: September 22, 2011.
Geoffrey L. Haskett,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska.
[FR Doc. 2011-25068 Filed 9-28-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P