Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, 27327-27328 [E7-9281]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 15, 2007 / Notices
and (2) ‘‘* * * for any other
management purpose, for migratory
birds.’’
Dated: March 30, 2007.
Elliott Sutta,
Acting Regional Director, Region 6, Denver,
Colorado.
[FR Doc. E7–9280 Filed 5–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the
Draft Revised Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental
Assessment for Kanuti National Wildlife
Refuge; request for comments;
announcement of public meetings.
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service, we) announce
that the Draft Revised Comprehensive
Conservation Plan (CCP) and
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge is
available for public comment. We
prepared this CCP pursuant to the
Alaska National Interests Land
Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA), the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (Refuge
Administration Act), as amended by the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (Refuge
Improvement Act), and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969
(NEPA). In this plan, we describe how
the Service proposes to manage this
refuge over the next 15 years.
DATES: We must receive your comments
on or before July 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: To provide written
comments or to request a paper copy or
compact disk of the Draft CCP/EA,
contact: Peter Wikoff, Planning Team
Leader, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service,
1011 East Tudor Rd., MS. 231,
Anchorage, Alaska 99503, or at
fw7_kanuti_planning@fws.gov, or at
907–786–3837. You may view or
download a copy of the Draft CCP/EA
at: https://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/planning/
plans.htm. Copies of the Draft CCP/EA
may be viewed at the Kanuti Refuge
Office in Fairbanks, Alaska; at local
libraries; and at the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service Regional Office in
Anchorage, Alaska.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Peter Wikoff at the above address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
National Wildlife Refuge System
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:50 May 14, 2007
Jkt 211001
Administration Act of 1966, as amended
by the Refuge Improvement Act of 1997
(16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), requires each
refuge to develop and implement a CCP.
The purpose of developing CCPs is to
provide refuge managers with a 15-year
strategy for achieving refuge purposes
and contributing toward the mission of
the National Wildlife Refuge System,
consistent with sound principles of fish
and wildlife science, conservation, legal
mandates, and Service policies. In
addition to outlining broad management
direction on conserving wildlife and
their habitats, the CCPs identify
wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities available to the public,
including opportunities for hunting,
fishing, wildlife observation and
photography, and environmental
education and interpretation. We will
review and update these CCPs at least
every 15 years. The original CCP for the
Kanuti Refuge was approved in 1987.
After reviewing that plan, we decided to
revise it to comply with current policies
and to provide more complete
management direction.
Background: The Kanuti National
Wildlife Refuge was established on
December 2, 1980 by ANILCA. The
purposes for which the Kanuti National
Wildlife Refuge was established
include:
1. To conserve fish and wildlife
populations and habitats in their natural
diversity including, but not limited to,
white-fronted geese and other waterfowl
and migratory birds, moose, caribou
(including participation in coordinated
ecological studies and management of
the Western Arctic caribou herd), and
furbearers;
2. to fulfill the international treaty
obligations of the United States with
respect to fish and wildlife and their
habitats;
3. to provide, in a manner consistent
with the purposes set forth in 1 and 2
above, the opportunity for continued
subsistence uses by local residents; and
4. to ensure, to the maximum extent
practicable and in a manner consistent
with the purposes set forth in 1 above,
water quality and necessary water
quantity within the refuge.
The refuge is roadless and lies on the
Arctic Circle about 150 miles northwest
of Fairbanks. It is situated in a broad
basin formed by the Koyukuk and
Kanuti rivers between the Brooks Range
and the Ray Mountains. The Dalton
Highway and Alyeska pipeline lie
within eight miles of its eastern
boundary. The refuge consists of nearly
1.3 million acres of Federal lands within
an external boundary that encompasses
approximately 1.6 million acres of
Federal, State, and private lands. The
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
27327
landscape consists primarily of rolling
hills, wetlands, ponds, and streams.
Elevations range from 500 feet to over
3,000 feet. The major natural resources
are wildlife, fisheries, and their
associated habitats.
Issues and Alternatives: Conservation
of the natural, unaltered character of the
refuge: During scoping, many people
expressed a desire that the refuge
remain in a natural, wild state. They
wanted minimal intrusion on natural
systems and for the refuge to remain
wild for the future. This was true for
people from both urban and rural
backgrounds. The Kanuti Refuge is one
of the few refuges in Alaska that is both
roadless and without permanent villages
or towns. These characteristics help to
maintain the natural wild state with
minimal intrusion that people expressed
a desire for during the scoping process.
Acceptance and integration of new
management policies and guidelines for
refuges in Alaska into the plan:
Management of refuges in Alaska is
governed by Federal law including
ANILCA and the Refuge Administration
Act as amended by the Refuge
Improvement Act, by regulations
implementing these laws, by
intergovernmental treaties, by Service
policies, and by principles of sound
resource management, all of which
establish standards for resource
management or limit the range of
potential activities that may be allowed
on refuges. Management policies and
guidelines, described in the plan, were
developed as part of the region-wide
refuge comprehensive planning effort
and provide direction for National
Wildlife Refuges in the Alaska Region of
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
These policies and guidelines would be
applied to the Kanuti National Wildlife
Refuge. Management categories
(wilderness, wild rivers, minimal,
moderate, and intensive) are used to
describe management levels throughout
the refuges in Alaska. A management
category is a set of refuge management
directions applied to an area, in light of
its resources and existing and potential
uses, to facilitate management and the
accomplishment of refuge purposes and
goals. Two management categories,
moderate and minimal, apply to the
Kanuti Refuge.
Three alternatives for management of
the refuge are evaluated in the EA.
Alternative A (the no-action
alternative) is required by NEPA,
describes what would happen under
continuation of current management
activities, and serves as a baseline
against which to compare other
alternatives. Under this alternative,
management of the refuge would
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
cprice-sewell on PROD1PC62 with NOTICES
27328
Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 93 / Tuesday, May 15, 2007 / Notices
continue to follow the current course of
action. Private and commercial uses of
the refuge would be likely unchanged.
Currently 33 percent of the refuge is in
Moderate Management and 67 percent
of the Refuge is in Minimal
Management.
When the original plan was
developed in 1987 two areas of
Moderate Management were delineated,
roughly corresponding to two major
river drainages within the refuge. This
was to allow more intensive habitat
management activities to occur (e.g.
water level management and
mechanical manipulation of habitat).
Though originally thought to be
important to enhance the abundance of
subsistence resources, subsequent
studies showed that this level of
manipulation was not needed. That
aspect of the plan was never
implemented.
Alternative A would continue 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 be
minimal except, potentially, in
Moderate Management areas. Public
uses of the refuge employing existing
access methods would continue to be
allowed. Opportunities to pursue
traditional subsistence activities, and
recreational hunting, fishing, and other
wildlife-dependent activities, would be
maintained. Opportunities to pursue
research would be maintained.
Alternative B would convert all refuge
lands now in Moderate Management to
Minimal Management and incorporate
the new policies and guidelines for
refuges in Alaska. Management of the
refuge would generally continue to
follow the current course of action but
would adopt a vision statement and set
of goals developed in response to public
scoping, that would implement low
impact management.
Alternative B was designed to
maintain the natural, unaltered
character and ecological integrity of the
refuge with little evidence of humancaused change. Disturbance to resources
as a result of public uses, economic
activities, and facilities would be
minimized. Habitats would be allowed
to change and function through natural
processes. Because activities that could
have been allowed under Moderate
Management in the 1987 Plan were
never implemented, the public would
see little or no change under Alternative
B despite the removal of areas from the
Moderate Management category.
Alternative C (the preferred
alternative) would convert a portion of
the refuge lands now in Moderate
VerDate Aug<31>2005
13:50 May 14, 2007
Jkt 211001
Management, in the center of the refuge,
to Minimal Management and would
incorporate the new policies and
guidelines for refuges in Alaska. With
this change, 85 percent of the refuge
would be in Minimal Management and
15 percent of the refuge would remain
in Moderate Management. The areas
remaining in Moderate Management are
adjacent to private lands near the
Koyukuk River in the northwestern
portion of the refuge. Management
activities would generally continue as
with Alternative A.
Lands in Minimal Management would
be managed to maintain their natural
unaltered character and ecological
integrity with little evidence of humancaused change. Moderate Management
could allow some small-scale changes in
the environment that do not disrupt
natural processes. Though there may be
signs of human activity, the natural
landscape would remain the dominant
feature. Moderate Management would
allow more habitat manipulation than
would Minimal Management, and
permanent facilities may be constructed.
It was anticipated that this flexibility
may be needed due to the proximity of
these areas to private lands, the river,
and overland transportation routes.
Public availability of comments:
Before including your name, 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.
Dated: May 8, 2007.
Thomas O. Melius,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Anchorage, Alaska.
[FR Doc. E7–9281 Filed 5–14–07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Lake Andes National Wildlife Refuge
Complex, South Dakota
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare
comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment; request for
comments.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: This notice advises that the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service)
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
intends to gather information necessary
to prepare a comprehensive
conservation plan (CCP) and associated
environmental documents for the Lake
Andes National Wildlife Refuge
Complex (Complex), South Dakota.
The Service is furnishing this notice
in compliance with Service CCP policy
to advise other agencies and the public
of its intentions and to obtain
suggestions and information on the
scope of issues to be considered in the
planning process.
DATES: Written comments should be
received by June 14, 2007.
ADDRESSES: Comments and requests for
more information regarding the
Complex should be sent to Bernardo
Garza, Planning Team Leader, Division
of Refuge Planning, 134 Union
Boulevard, Suite 300, Lakewood, CO
80228.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bernardo Garza, 303–236–4377, or John
F. Esperance, 303–236–4369.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
Service has initiated the CCP for the
Complex with headquarters in Lake
Andes, South Dakota.
Each unit of the National Wildlife
Refuge System, including this Complex,
has specific purposes for which it was
established. Those purposes are used to
develop and prioritize management
goals and objectives within the National
Wildlife Refuge System mission and to
guide which public uses will occur on
the Complex. The planning process is a
way for the Service and the public to
evaluate management goals and
objectives for the best possible
conservation efforts of this important
wildlife habitat, while providing for
wildlife-dependent recreation
opportunities that are compatible with
each national wildlife refuge and
wetland management district’s
establishing purposes and the mission
of the National Wildlife Refuge System.
The Complex is made up of three
separate entities: Lake Andes National
Wildlife Refuge (NWR), Lake Andes
Wetland Management District (WMD),
and Karl E. Mundt NWR. Lake Andes
NWR was established in 1936 to
preserve an important piece of habitat
for waterfowl and other water birds. The
Lake Andes WMD was formed in the
1960s to protect wetland and grassland
habitat that is critical to our nation’s
duck population. In 1967, the Service
identified an area that was supporting
almost 300 endangered bald eagles each
winter; this area became the Karl E.
Mundt NWR. Hunting and wildlife
observation are the two most prevalent
public uses on the Complex.
E:\FR\FM\15MYN1.SGM
15MYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 93 (Tuesday, May 15, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27327-27328]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9281]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska
AGENCY: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability of the Draft Revised Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment for Kanuti National
Wildlife Refuge; request for comments; announcement of public meetings.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service, we) announce
that the Draft Revised Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge
is available for public comment. We prepared this CCP pursuant to the
Alaska National Interests Land Conservation Act of 1980 (ANILCA), the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (Refuge
Administration Act), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (Refuge Improvement Act), and the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). In this plan, we describe how
the Service proposes to manage this refuge over the next 15 years.
DATES: We must receive your comments on or before July 16, 2007.
ADDRESSES: To provide written comments or to request a paper copy or
compact disk of the Draft CCP/EA, contact: Peter Wikoff, Planning Team
Leader, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1011 East Tudor Rd., MS. 231,
Anchorage, Alaska 99503, or at fw7_kanuti_planning@fws.gov, or at
907-786-3837. You may view or download a copy of the Draft CCP/EA at:
https://www.r7.fws.gov/nwr/planning/plans.htm. Copies of the Draft CCP/
EA may be viewed at the Kanuti Refuge Office in Fairbanks, Alaska; at
local libraries; and at the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Regional
Office in Anchorage, Alaska.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Peter Wikoff at the above address.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, as amended by the Refuge Improvement Act of
1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd et seq.), requires each refuge to develop and
implement a CCP. The purpose of developing CCPs is to provide refuge
managers with a 15-year strategy for achieving refuge purposes and
contributing toward the mission of the National Wildlife Refuge System,
consistent with sound principles of fish and wildlife science,
conservation, legal mandates, and Service policies. In addition to
outlining broad management direction on conserving wildlife and their
habitats, the CCPs identify wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities available to the public, including opportunities for
hunting, fishing, wildlife observation and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update
these CCPs at least every 15 years. The original CCP for the Kanuti
Refuge was approved in 1987. After reviewing that plan, we decided to
revise it to comply with current policies and to provide more complete
management direction.
Background: The Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge was established on
December 2, 1980 by ANILCA. The purposes for which the Kanuti National
Wildlife Refuge was established include:
1. To conserve fish and wildlife populations and habitats in their
natural diversity including, but not limited to, white-fronted geese
and other waterfowl and migratory birds, moose, caribou (including
participation in coordinated ecological studies and management of the
Western Arctic caribou herd), and furbearers;
2. to fulfill the international treaty obligations of the United
States with respect to fish and wildlife and their habitats;
3. to provide, in a manner consistent with the purposes set forth
in 1 and 2 above, the opportunity for continued subsistence uses by
local residents; and
4. to ensure, to the maximum extent practicable and in a manner
consistent with the purposes set forth in 1 above, water quality and
necessary water quantity within the refuge.
The refuge is roadless and lies on the Arctic Circle about 150
miles northwest of Fairbanks. It is situated in a broad basin formed by
the Koyukuk and Kanuti rivers between the Brooks Range and the Ray
Mountains. The Dalton Highway and Alyeska pipeline lie within eight
miles of its eastern boundary. The refuge consists of nearly 1.3
million acres of Federal lands within an external boundary that
encompasses approximately 1.6 million acres of Federal, State, and
private lands. The landscape consists primarily of rolling hills,
wetlands, ponds, and streams. Elevations range from 500 feet to over
3,000 feet. The major natural resources are wildlife, fisheries, and
their associated habitats.
Issues and Alternatives: Conservation of the natural, unaltered
character of the refuge: During scoping, many people expressed a desire
that the refuge remain in a natural, wild state. They wanted minimal
intrusion on natural systems and for the refuge to remain wild for the
future. This was true for people from both urban and rural backgrounds.
The Kanuti Refuge is one of the few refuges in Alaska that is both
roadless and without permanent villages or towns. These characteristics
help to maintain the natural wild state with minimal intrusion that
people expressed a desire for during the scoping process. Acceptance
and integration of new management policies and guidelines for refuges
in Alaska into the plan: Management of refuges in Alaska is governed by
Federal law including ANILCA and the Refuge Administration Act as
amended by the Refuge Improvement Act, by regulations implementing
these laws, by intergovernmental treaties, by Service policies, and by
principles of sound resource management, all of which establish
standards for resource management or limit the range of potential
activities that may be allowed on refuges. Management policies and
guidelines, described in the plan, were developed as part of the
region-wide refuge comprehensive planning effort and provide direction
for National Wildlife Refuges in the Alaska Region of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service. These policies and guidelines would be applied to the
Kanuti National Wildlife Refuge. Management categories (wilderness,
wild rivers, minimal, moderate, and intensive) are used to describe
management levels throughout the refuges in Alaska. A management
category is a set of refuge management directions applied to an area,
in light of its resources and existing and potential uses, to
facilitate management and the accomplishment of refuge purposes and
goals. Two management categories, moderate and minimal, apply to the
Kanuti Refuge.
Three alternatives for management of the refuge are evaluated in
the EA.
Alternative A (the no-action alternative) is required by NEPA,
describes what would happen under continuation of current management
activities, and serves as a baseline against which to compare other
alternatives. Under this alternative, management of the refuge would
[[Page 27328]]
continue to follow the current course of action. Private and commercial
uses of the refuge would be likely unchanged. Currently 33 percent of
the refuge is in Moderate Management and 67 percent of the Refuge is in
Minimal Management.
When the original plan was developed in 1987 two areas of Moderate
Management were delineated, roughly corresponding to two major river
drainages within the refuge. This was to allow more intensive habitat
management activities to occur (e.g. water level management and
mechanical manipulation of habitat). Though originally thought to be
important to enhance the abundance of subsistence resources, subsequent
studies showed that this level of manipulation was not needed. That
aspect of the plan was never implemented.
Alternative A would continue 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 be minimal except, potentially, in Moderate
Management areas. Public uses of the refuge employing existing access
methods would continue to be allowed. Opportunities to pursue
traditional subsistence activities, and recreational hunting, fishing,
and other wildlife-dependent activities, would be maintained.
Opportunities to pursue research would be maintained.
Alternative B would convert all refuge lands now in Moderate
Management to Minimal Management and incorporate the new policies and
guidelines for refuges in Alaska. Management of the refuge would
generally continue to follow the current course of action but would
adopt a vision statement and set of goals developed in response to
public scoping, that would implement low impact management.
Alternative B was designed to maintain the natural, unaltered
character and ecological integrity of the refuge with little evidence
of human-caused change. Disturbance to resources as a result of public
uses, economic activities, and facilities would be minimized. Habitats
would be allowed to change and function through natural processes.
Because activities that could have been allowed under Moderate
Management in the 1987 Plan were never implemented, the public would
see little or no change under Alternative B despite the removal of
areas from the Moderate Management category.
Alternative C (the preferred alternative) would convert a portion
of the refuge lands now in Moderate Management, in the center of the
refuge, to Minimal Management and would incorporate the new policies
and guidelines for refuges in Alaska. With this change, 85 percent of
the refuge would be in Minimal Management and 15 percent of the refuge
would remain in Moderate Management. The areas remaining in Moderate
Management are adjacent to private lands near the Koyukuk River in the
northwestern portion of the refuge. Management activities would
generally continue as with Alternative A.
Lands in Minimal Management would be managed to maintain their
natural unaltered character and ecological integrity with little
evidence of human-caused change. Moderate Management could allow some
small-scale changes in the environment that do not disrupt natural
processes. Though there may be signs of human activity, the natural
landscape would remain the dominant feature. Moderate Management would
allow more habitat manipulation than would Minimal Management, and
permanent facilities may be constructed. It was anticipated that this
flexibility may be needed due to the proximity of these areas to
private lands, the river, and overland transportation routes.
Public availability of comments: Before including your name,
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.
Dated: May 8, 2007.
Thomas O. Melius,
Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Anchorage, Alaska.
[FR Doc. E7-9281 Filed 5-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P