[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 61 (Tuesday, March 31, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17073-17076]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07356]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service

[FWS-R4-R-2015-N013]; [FXRS12650400000S3-123-FF04R02000]


Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge, Mississippi; 
Final Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Finding of No Significant 
Impact for the Environmental Assessment and Associated Step-Down Plans

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of availability.

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

SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the 
availability of the final Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and 
Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the environmental 
assessment and associated step-down plans, including the Habitat 
Management Plan, Integrated Pest Management Plan, and the Visitor 
Services Plan, for Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge in 
Oktibbeha, Noxubee, and Winston Counties, Mississippi. In the final 
CCP, we describe how we will manage the Refuge for the next 15 years.

ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the CCP and FONSI by writing to: 
Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge, 13723 Bluff Lake Rd., 
Brooksville, MS 39739. Alternatively, you may download the documents 
from our Internet Site: http://southeast.fws.gov/planning under 
``Completed CCP Documents.''

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Steve Reagan, Project Leader, 662-323-
5548, [email protected]

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Introduction

    With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for Sam D. Hamilton 
Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge. We started the process through a 
notice in the Federal Register on Tuesday, January 15, 2013 (78 FR 
3024). For more about the process, see that notice.
    Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee National Wildlife Refuge (Refuge) is 
located within three counties (Noxubee, Oktibbeha, and Winston) in 
east-central Mississippi, and is approximately 17 miles south-southwest 
of Starkville and approximately 120 miles north-northeast of Jackson, 
the capital of Mississippi. The Refuge is currently 48,219 acres. The 
primary establishing legislation for the Refuge is Executive Order 
8444, dated June 14, 1940. Established as Noxubee NWR in 1940, the 
Refuge was subsequently renamed

[[Page 17074]]

Sam D. Hamilton Noxubee NWR by Public Law 112-279 on February 14, 2012.

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.

Comments

    We made copies of the Draft CCP/EA available for a 60-day public 
review and comment period via a Federal Register notice on Thursday 
August 28, 2014 (79 FR 51356). We provided four hard copies of the 
Draft CCP/EA to those individuals or organizations requesting a copy. 
The draft CCP/EA was also accessed via the internet. A total of 37 
individuals, organizations, and government agencies provided comments 
on the Draft CCP/EA by U.S. Mail or email. Comments were received from 
private citizens; The Humane Society of the United States; Wild South; 
Mississippi State University; Safari Club International; Mississippi 
Entomological Museum; Center for Biological Diversity; Florida Gulf 
Coast University; Wolf River Conservancy; Oktibbeha Audubon Society; 
The Nature Conservancy; Mississippi Department of Wildlife Fisheries, 
and Parks; Mississippi Department of Transportation; Mississippi 
Department of Archives and History; and Greenfire Law.

CCP Alternatives, Including Our Preferred Alternative

    We developed three alternatives for managing the Refuge 
(Alternatives A, B, and C), with Alternative C selected for 
implementation. This alternative will manage refuge resources to 
optimize native wildlife populations and habitats under a balanced and 
integrated approach, not only for federally listed species (red-
cockaded woodpeckers (RCW)) and migratory birds, but also for other 
native species such as white-tailed deer, wild turkey, Northern 
bobwhite, paddlefish, and forest-breeding birds.
    This alternative also provides opportunities for the six priority 
public uses (i.e., hunting, fishing, wildlife observation, wildlife 
photography, and interpretation and environmental education) and other 
wildlife-dependent activities found to be appropriate and compatible 
with the purpose for which the Refuge was established.

Wildlife and Habitat

    Under this alternative, the Refuge would favor management that 
restores historic forest conditions while achieving Refuge purposes.
    Waterfowl: This alternative would provide approximately 1 million 
Duck Energy Days (DEDs) over a 110-day period yearly, through the 
possible combination of managed moist soil units, planted agricultural 
crops that can be flooded, aquatic vegetation and invertebrates within 
Refuge lakes, and seasonally flooded green-tree reservoirs which 
provide mast crops and invertebrates. Wood duck breeding opportunities 
would be enhanced using wood duck nest boxes, but greater emphasis 
would be placed on protecting trees with natural cavities throughout 
the bottomland forests. Trees found with existing cavities and those 
having unique wildlife values would be protected from timber harvest.
    Active manipulation of habitats and populations would occur as 
necessary to maintain biological integrity, diversity, and 
environmental health. Silvicultural treatments within bottomland 
hardwood habitats would receive low priority, but may be used to 
promote recruitment of red oak species within the overstory of those 
flooded forested habitats used by waterfowl. The Refuge would attempt 
to increase brood survival of waterfowl by managing shallow water 
aquatic habitats to produce and sustain protective shrub-scrub cover 
with fringe area of the Refuge's lakes. Manipulation of water level 
would be the primary tool used to produce the desired shrub-scrub 
cover.
    The Refuge would participate in wood duck banding programs and try 
to obtain Refuge quotas as assigned by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 
Service's national Migratory Bird program, and limit human access to 
key areas used by waterfowl to reduce disturbance during critical life 
cycle stages.
    Forest Breeding Birds: Forest-breeding bird populations would be 
enhanced through improved nesting, brooding, and foraging opportunities 
by application of active habitat manipulation techniques within 
bottomland hardwood forested habitats and streamside management zones. 
Even and uneven aged silviculture, including selective thinning, patch 
cuts, group tree selections, shelterwoods, irregular shelterwoods, 
clearcuts, timber stand improvements, wildlife stand improvements, 
chemical treatments, and other methods, could be used to ensure 
hardwood species diversity, red oak recruitment into the overstory, and 
forest structure for the benefit of a diversity of wildlife.
    Red-cockaded woodpecker (RCW): The number of RCW clusters would be 
based on continuous pine habitat as defined by historic conditions and 
the optimal partition size of 300 acres based on a loblolly forest 
stand surviving to at least 100 years of age. Based on a spatial 
analysis accounting for locations and size of pine stands and the 
current locations of active RCW groups, the Refuge is expected to be 
able to manage for 49 partitions. All RCW partitions would be managed 
according to the RCW Recovery Plan and, where sufficient habitat 
exists, to provide long-term good-quality foraging habitat.
    Habitat manipulations used to benefit RCWs could include 
silvicultural practices (e.g., active forest management, including but 
not limited to manual or mechanized pre-commercial thinning, commercial 
biomass thinning, mulching, firewood cutting, timber stand 
improvements, herbicide, irregular shelterwood, shelterwood, seedtree, 
patch cuts, afforestation, reforestation, and free thinning), 
prescribed fire, raking, mowing, creation of new artificial cavities, 
maintenance of suitable cavities, midstory reduction (chemical and/or 
mechanical control), integrated pest management, use of restrictor 
plates on cavities, snake exclusion devices, and kleptoparasite 
control.
    In order to sustain forest resources for future RCW habitat, 
harvesting of existing mature forests as part of regeneration efforts 
within present and future partitions may occur. No additional, non-
historic pine habitats outside currently active partitions would be 
maintained or converted for support of the RCW. Refuge staff and 
possibly contractors would continue to scientifically monitor RCWs 
through observation and nest and fledge checks.
    Monitoring: Additional quantitative monitoring of a broad suite of 
wildlife and their habitats will be sought

[[Page 17075]]

through the participation of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), 
universities, and volunteers in the Refuge System's Inventory and 
Monitoring program for development of standardized survey methods, 
cataloging and analyzing Refuge information.
    Invasive and Exotic Species: Efforts would be made to prevent the 
establishment of exotic invasive species and pest species.
    Bluff Lake: Deep water habitats within Bluff Lake would be created 
through dirt excavation to ensure consistency in recreational fisheries 
resources (i.e., crappie, bass, and sunfish). Excavated soil from the 
creation of the deep water habitat would be used to create islands 
within the lake to serve as bird rookery sites. Other existing water 
control structures on Bluff Lake and in areas upstream of the lake may 
also be modified or removed to allow fish passage. Paddlefish and Gulf 
Coast Walleye could benefit from the restoration. Additional ephemeral 
pools for amphibians would be artificially created throughout the 
Refuge through excavation in areas where excess water impedes road 
maintenance or threatens sedimentation of streams.
    Morgan Hill Prairie: The Morgan Hill Prairie Demonstration Area 
would remain but be reduced by more than 50 percent in size, and the 
remaining area would be restored into habitats similar to that 
indicated by historic conditions.
    Fields: Existing old fields that would not be a direct benefit to 
federally protected species or waterfowl would continue to be managed 
as old field sites for the benefit of native grassland species. Old 
fields that would be a direct benefit to federally protected species or 
waterfowl would be restored to historical species compositions through 
natural regeneration or the manual planting of trees. No new field 
sites would be created.
    Forest Management: Active forest management, including 
silvicultural treatments, prescribed fire, and chemical and/or 
mechanical midstory reduction, would occur throughout the Refuge's 
habitats to achieve desired historic forest conditions, greater habitat 
diversity and greater forest structure to benefit RCW, forest interior 
birds, and a wider range of native wildlife. Upland forests would be 
managed for historic conditions and, when applicable, management would 
emphasize providing the needed habitat for federally listed species. If 
needed to support federally listed species, active forest management 
would occur using a variety of techniques, including timber harvest, 
prescribed fire, and chemical and/or mechanical midstory reduction.

Resource Protection

    Cultural Resources: To protect cultural resources, completing a 
comprehensive, Refuge-wide survey of archeological sites would be the 
goal as well as individual cultural resource surveys as needed for 
specific projects or sites. Partnerships would be developed with other 
agencies, institutions, Tribes, and other cultural groups, to seek 
ideas and possibly share staff positions. The Refuge would improve 
management and interpretation of the Refuge's cultural resources.
    Land Acquisition: Conservation partnerships would be developed with 
neighboring landowners to have the greatest impact on maintaining or 
restoring the biological integrity of the local community. Fee title 
acquisition from willing sellers will focus on lands within the 
existing approved acquisition boundary that will most efficiently 
assist the Refuge in meeting the purposes for which it was established 
and the mission of the Service.
    Research Natural Areas (RNA): Under this alternative the two RNAs 
would no longer remain under this designation and would be managed as 
part of the larger surrounding units of similar type and managed for 
their historic conditions.
    Staff: A second wildlife law enforcement officer would be 
established, in combination with possible collateral duty officer 
positions to assist in protecting natural and cultural resources, along 
with public safety.

Visitor Services

    The current level of visitor services programs would be expanded 
for the general public, and attempts made to provide more access for 
users with disabilities and youth. This alternative would establish a 
``Connecting People with Nature'' area to consolidate activities and 
users requiring greater support to enjoy wildlife dependent activities.
    All existing wildlife-dependent uses and the supporting facilities 
would be maintained and, if resources are available, enhanced through 
possible increase and better maintenance in overlooks, boardwalks, and 
trails. An effort would be made to increase visitor safety and 
enjoyment through establishment of parking areas, improved management 
of vehicle flow, creation of paved walking and biking trails, and 
roadside bike lanes along Bluff Lake and Loakfoma Roads. Refuge 
regulatory and informational signs would receive priority.
    Public activities found compatible include bicycle, boating, and 
picnicking in association with wildlife-dependent activities, 
geocaching for environmental education, recreational fishing and 
hunting, wildlife observation, wildlife photography, and environmental 
education and interpretation.
    Hunting: the Service would develop a weeklong large game (turkey 
and deer) hunt program to provide increased opportunities for disabled 
hunters in exchange for a one-week reduction in the general gun deer 
and turkey seasons. Deer hunting opportunities overall would be 
increased. The Service would work with the Mississippi Department of 
Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks to develop family hunting and fishing 
opportunities.
    Fishing: Fishing opportunities would be expanded to include year-
round designated bank fishing areas on Bluff Lake's south shore.
    Fees: Alternative funding mechanisms, such as a general user fee 
under the Fee Program, would be used to spread costs of programs across 
all users. This alternative would continue participation in the 
existing Fee Program. Changes within the program would include 
establishment of a general access pass for all users to assist in the 
maintenance and development of public use programs and facilities 
(e.g., Daily Pass, Weekly Pass, or Annual Pass). Current Federal duck 
stamps and other congressionally authorized entrance fee passes would 
be accepted as a Refuge access pass. This additional fee would allow 
the Refuge to fully support and improve the Refuge's public use 
programs to better meet public interest. Without additional fees, the 
current level of public use would not be sustainable based on base 
funding alone.
    Partnerships: Partnerships to conduct environmental education and 
off-site activities and increase volunteer involvement in all Refuge 
programs would be established. More effort would be placed toward 
developing cooperative programs sponsored through the Refuge's Friends 
group.
    Staff: The current staff of 9 employees would be reorganized, with 
a goal of reaching 13 staff; this is still less than the optimal staff 
level of 18 as recommended within the 2008 Final Report for the 
Staffing Model for Field Stations.

    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.).


[[Page 17076]]


    Dated: February 27, 2015.
Mike Oetker,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2015-07356 Filed 3-30-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P