[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 133 (Wednesday, July 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 40893-40895]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-16891]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R4-R-2012-N108: FXRS12650400000S3-123-FF04R02000]


Desecheo National Wildlife Refuge, PR; Draft Comprehensive 
Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability, request for comments.

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

SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announce the 
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and 
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for the Desecheo National 
Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in the municipality of Mayag[uuml]ez, Puerto 
Rico, for public review and comment. In this Draft CCP/EA, we describe 
the alternative we propose to

[[Page 40894]]

use to manage this refuge for the 15 years following approval of the 
final CCP.

DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments 
by August 10, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Ms. 
Susan Silander, via U.S. mail at P.O. Box 510, Boquer[oacute]n, PR 
00622. Alternatively, you may download the document from our Internet 
Site at http://southeast.fws.gov/planning under ``Draft Documents.'' 
Comments on the Draft CCP/EA may be submitted to the above postal 
address or by email to [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Susan Silander at 787/851-7258 
(telephone).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction

    Desecheo NWR is a 360-acre island located in the Mona Passage, 
approximately 12 miles west of Rinc[oacute]n, Puerto Rico. With this 
notice, we continue the CCP process for Desecheo NWR. We started the 
process through a notice in the Federal Register on December 19, 2008 
(73 FR 77828). For more about the refuge and our CCP process, please 
see that notice.

Background

The CCP Process

    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, wildlife photography, and 
environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update 
the CCP at least every 15 years in accordance with the Administration 
Act.

Issues

    During the development of the Draft CCP/EA, we identified issues 
that we felt were most significant to the refuge and the public. These 
issues included: (1) Control of introduced species (e.g., monkeys, 
goats, rats, and plants); (2) illegal activities (e.g., smuggling of 
aliens and drugs and poaching); (3) cleanup of military ordnance; (4) 
restoration of habitat; (5) potential for opening the refuge to limited 
public uses and development of ecotourism projects; (6) providing boat 
access; (7) coordinating activities with Marine Reserve planning 
efforts; (8) permitting periodic access for ham radio operators; and 
(9) camping.

CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative

    We developed three alternatives for managing the refuge 
(Alternatives A, B, and C), with Alternative C as our proposed 
alternative. A full description of each alternative is in the Draft 
CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative below.

Alternative A: Current Management (No Action)

    We would continue with periodic surveys and management of seabirds 
and endemic reptiles, sea turtles, migratory landbirds, and the 
federally threatened Higo Chumbo cactus.
    Removal of invasive animal species would also continue, and we 
would begin the monitoring of 10 established vegetation plots to 
evaluate success of forest restoration. There would be no active 
monitoring of climate change.
    We would continue cooperation with partnering agencies to provide 
surveillance and enforcement that protects refuge resources from 
illegal activities, such as poaching and drug trafficking.
    Environmental education and interpretation would continue through 
the refuge Web site and factsheets, and staff would continue to give 
presentations to mainland communities and local schools.
    We would continue to work with cooperating agencies and partners to 
clean up unexploded ordnance to increase safety on the refuge. For the 
foreseeable future, the refuge would continue to be closed to protect 
the public from this hazard. No staff would be specifically assigned to 
the refuge, and it would continue to be managed from Complex 
headquarters in Boquer[oacute]n, Puerto Rico.

Alternative B: Public Use Emphasis

    We would continue periodic efforts to survey and manage seabirds 
and endemic reptiles. We would also continue opportunistic surveys for 
hawksbill turtles, migratory landbirds, and the federally threatened 
Higo Chumbo cactus.
    We would continue our efforts to remove invasive animal species and 
would implement efforts to avoid introduction of new invasive species 
from increased public visitation. We would begin to monitor 10 
established vegetation plots across the island to determine the success 
of restoration efforts. As with Alternative A, there would be no active 
monitoring of climate change.
    We would continue cooperating with partnering agencies to provide 
surveillance and enforcement to protect refuge resources from illegal 
activities, such as poaching and drug trafficking.
    Under this alternative, we would increase the level of off-site 
environmental education and outreach opportunities to mainland 
communities and schools. We would provide additional interpretive 
materials, such as brochures and fact sheets. Subject to safety 
concerns, we would provide on-site interpretive materials and 
opportunities for wildlife observation and photography. We would also 
allow for appropriate and compatible non-wildlife-dependent uses on the 
refuge by means of special use permits.
    As portions of the refuge are cleared of unexploded ordnance and as 
other safety issues are addressed, appropriate sites might be opened to 
the public. We would acquire an open-water boat capable of reaching the 
island to provide for extended visits. This alternative would add a 
half-time public use or park ranger position to the refuge.

Alternative C: Habitat and Wildlife Restoration and Limited Public Use 
(Proposed Alternative)

    Over the 15-year life of the CCP, we would provide the conditions 
for reestablishment of nesting seabird colonies. Routine monitoring and 
life-history studies of terrestrial reptiles would be conducted and 
habitat improvements would be made. We would continue periodic surveys 
of turtles and implement seasonal surveys of migratory landbirds. We 
would pursue opportunities for propagation, reintroduction, and removal 
of threats to the Higo Chumbo cactus.
    We would increase monitoring and, if necessary, efforts to remove 
invasive species. The number of vegetation plots and frequency of 
monitoring would be increased to improve restoration efforts. Over the 
15-year life of the CCP, we would complete the removal of all invasive 
animal species. We would also develop and implement a plan for 
monitoring and mitigating the effects of climate change on the refuge.

[[Page 40895]]

    Under this alternative, the levels of surveillance and enforcement 
with partners would be increased, and we would also provide additional 
equipment to improve enforcement capabilities on the refuge.
    We would increase off-site environmental education and outreach to 
mainland communities and schools, and we would increase the 
availability of interpretive materials, such as brochures and fact 
sheets. Subject to safety concerns being met, we would increase on-site 
interpretation through signage and brochures and provide limited 
opportunities for refuge-guided wildlife observation and photography. 
We would continue to respond to special requests for non-wildlife-
dependent uses that are appropriate and compatible.
    We would continue to work with cooperating agencies and partners to 
increase safety on the refuge through the removal of unexploded 
ordnance. Safety would be ensured by only permitting controlled, 
refuge-guided activities in cleared areas. We would acquire an open-
water boat capable of reaching the island to provide for extended 
visits.
    This alternative would add a half-time public use or park ranger 
position and a half-time manager position to be shared with the Complex 
headquarters.

Next Step

    After the comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and 
address them.

Public Availability of Comments

    Before including your address, phone number, email 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.

Authority

    This notice is published under the authority of the National 
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et 
seq.).

    Dated: May 16, 2012.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-16891 Filed 7-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P