Red River National Wildlife Refuge, Caddo, Bossier, Desoto, Red River, and Natchitoches Parishes, LA, 20059-20061 [E8-7853]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
20059
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 72 / Monday, April 14, 2008 / Notices
training, education, support, loans,
grants, and development assistance.
The Fiscal Year 2007 competition was
announced in the Federal Register on
September 18, 2007 (72 FR 53255). The
NOFA allowed for approximately
$29.59 million for section 4 Capacity
Building grants. Applications were rated
and selected for funding on the basis of
selection criteria contained in that
Notice. For the Fiscal Year 2007
competition, HUD awarded two
competitive section 4 Capacity Building
grants totaling $26,140,000.
In accordance with section
102(a)(4)(C) of the Department of
Housing and Urban Development
Reform Act of 1989 (103 Stat. 1987, 42
U.S.C. 3545), the Department is
publishing the grantees and the amounts
of the awards in Appendix A to this
document.
Dated: April 4, 2008.
´
Nelson R. Bregon,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Community Planning and Development.
APPENDIX A—FISCAL YEAR 2007 FUNDING AWARDS FOR THE SECTION 4 CAPACITY BUILDING FOR COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM
Recipient
State
Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. ..........................................................................................................................
Local Initiatives Support Corporation ..........................................................................................................................
MD
NY
$13,070,000
13,070,000
............
$26,140,000
Total ......................................................................................................................................................................
Tina
Chouinard; Telephone: 731/780–8208;
or Fax: 731/772–7839.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
[FR Doc. E8–7834 Filed 4–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Introduction
Fish and Wildlife Service
With this notice, we continue the CCP
process for Red River National Wildlife
Refuge. We started the process through
a notice in the Federal Register on
March 13, 2006 (71 FR 12710).
The Red River National Wildlife
Refuge is a unit of the North Louisiana
National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The
refuge was signed into existence on
October 13, 2000, with the passage of
the Red River National Wildlife Refuge
Act. With land acquisition, the refuge
was formally established in August
2002. There are three purposes of the
refuge, as stated in the Red River
National Wildlife Refuge Act. These are
to: (1) Provide for the restoration and
conservation of native plants and
animal communities on suitable sites in
the Red River basin, including
restoration of extirpated species; (2)
provide habitat for migratory birds; and
(3) provide technical assistance to
private landowners in the restoration of
their lands for the benefit of fish and
wildlife.
According to legislation, the refuge is
approved for up to approximately
50,000 acres of Federal lands and waters
along that section of the Red River
between Colfax, Louisiana, and the
Arkansas State line, a distance of
approximately 120 miles. The refuge
growth will be strategically planned
within five focus areas that will each
have a management unit of the Red
River National Wildlife Refuge. These
focus areas are: Lower Cane River
(Natchitoches Parish); Spanish Lake
Lowlands (Natchitoches Parish); Bayou
Pierre Floodplain (Desoto and Red River
[FWS–R4–R–2008–N0028; 40136–1265–
0000–S3]
Red River National Wildlife Refuge,
Caddo, Bossier, Desoto, Red River,
and Natchitoches Parishes, LA
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: draft
comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment; request for
comments.
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive
conservation plan and environmental
assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Red River
National Wildlife Refuge for public
review and comment. In this Draft CCP/
EA, we describe the alternative we
propose to 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
May 14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the
Draft CCP/EA should be addressed to:
Tina Chouinard, Natural Resource
Planner, Fish and Wildlife Service, 6772
Highway 76 South, Stanton, Tennessee
38069. The Draft CCP/EA may also be
accessed and downloaded from the
Service’s Internet Site: https://
southeast.fws.gov/planning. Comments
on the Draft CCP/EA may be submitted
to the above address or via electronic
mail to: tina_chouinard@fws.gov.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:09 Apr 11, 2008
Jkt 214001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Amount
Parishes); Headquarters Site (Bossier
Parish); and Wardview (Caddo Parish).
Currently, the Service has acquired
9,787 acres, with 40,213 acres remaining
to be purchased. The lands within the
five areas will be acquired through a
combination of fee title purchases from
willing sellers and conservation
easements, leases, and/or cooperative
agreements from willing landowners.
Currently, fee title lands have been
purchased within portions of all the
focus areas, with the exception of
Wardview.
Historically, the Red River Valley was
forested with bottomland hardwoods,
cypress sloughs, and shrub swamps;
however, for the last three decades, the
Red River Valley has been utilized
extensively for agricultural production,
and, as a result, has lost almost all of its
forest cover. The river itself was very
turbid, and its wildlife and fishery
habitat was poor compared to other
parts of the State. After completion of
the Red River Waterway Project in 1994,
water levels in the river became higher
and more constant, greatly reducing its
turbidity. Water quality improved and
with seasonal retention of water levels,
a rich diversity of aquatic flora and
fauna has developed.
Increased water levels on the river
also improved some adjacent habitats.
Flooded timber and farm fields with wet
depressions are now common,
providing habitat for migratory birds.
The refuge has been involved in several
reforestation projects and has improved
moist-soil habitat. With management of
this refuge in its infancy, the planning
process will define priorities for current
and future refuge resources and
management.
Wildlife species found on the refuge
are typical of forested wetlands and
fields. The Red River is a historic
migration corridor for migratory birds
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
20060
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 72 / Monday, April 14, 2008 / Notices
that use the Central and Mississippi
Flyways on their journey to the Gulf
Coast. Examples of priority species for
conservation include the swallow-tailed
kite, Swainson’s warbler, yellow-billed
cuckoo, and several species of
waterfowl. Wading birds and shorebirds
use the numerous sandbars, shallow
flooded fields, and mudflats. Listed
species include the interior least tern,
which nests on riverine sandbars; the
piping plover; and the possibility of the
transient Louisiana black bear. Resident
game and furbearer species are the
typical variety of white-tailed deer, gray
and fox squirrels, mink, and beaver. A
variety of nongame mammals,
amphibians, and reptiles are also
present.
Background
The CCP Process
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
The National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C.
668dd-668ee), which amended the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, requires us
to develop a CCP for each national
wildlife refuge. The purpose in
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 wildlifedependent 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 and NEPA.
Significant issues addressed in the
Draft CCP/EA include: management of
white-tailed deer, invasive species,
waterfowl, and bottomland hardwood
forests; refuge access; land acquisition
to include a minor boundary expansion;
visitor services; visitor center;
watershed protection; and cultural
resource protection.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our
Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for
managing the refuge and chose
Alternative C as the proposed
alternative.
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:09 Apr 11, 2008
Jkt 214001
Alternatives
A full description of each alternative
is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize
each alternative below.
Alternative A—No Action Alternative
Red River National Wildlife Refuge is
part of the Lower Mississippi River
Ecosystem and is considered to be in the
West Gulf Coastal Plain Bird
Conservation Area. As such, it is a
component of many regional and
ecosystem conservation-planning
initiatives. Under Alternative A, the No
Action Alternative, present management
of the refuge would continue at its
current level of participation in these
initiatives throughout the 15-year
duration of the CCP. Current approaches
to managing wildlife and habitats,
protecting resources, and allowing for
public use would remain unchanged.
The main habitat types on the refuge
are bottomland hardwood forests,
managed wetlands, agriculture, and
moist-soil units. Under Alternative A,
management would continue to work
with electric utilities and partners to
restore bottomland hardwood forest
habitat through the ‘‘Carbon
Sequestration Program.’’ The refuge
would continue to provide habitat for
thousands of wintering waterfowl and
year-round habitat for wood ducks. It
would also maintain the current habitat
mix for the benefit of other migratory
birds, shorebirds, marsh birds, and
landbirds. Staff would continue existing
surveys and monitor long-term
population trends and health of resident
species.
Currently, there are few public use
and environmental education programs
on the refuge. The refuge would
continue to serve the public without
being guided by a Visitor Services’
Management Plan, relying instead on
experience, general Service mandates
and practices, and guidance and advice
from recreation staff in the Regional
Office. A new Headquarters/Visitor
Center has been budgeted and would be
constructed. The staff would continue to
consist of one employee, the refuge
manager.
Alternative B—Minimize Management
and Visitor Services
Under Alternative B, there would be
less management of habitat and wildlife
and a reduced public use program.
Biological inventorying and monitoring
would be intensified and enhanced with
management programs developed that
could be implemented less frequently,
yet still accomplish the objectives.
Extensive baseline inventorying and
monitoring programs would be
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
conducted with several partners to
provide a solid foundation for the
current condition of refuge habitats and
wildlife, while monitoring for changes
in trends.
Additional research projects would be
implemented through granting and
partnership opportunities with other
agencies and universities. An intensive
inventory of bottomland hardwood
forests to define current conditions and
monitor natural successional changes
would be implemented. Management in
the bottoms would be limited so that the
forest would go through natural
succession, as defined in a revised
Habitat Management Plan. Open fields
would be allowed to go through natural
succession to bottomland hardwood
forests and moist-soil units would not
be maintained. Management of invasive
species would become a priority to
establish baseline information on
location and density. Partnerships
would continue to be fostered for
several biological programs, hunting
regulations, law enforcement issues, and
research projects.
Public use would be limited with
custodial-level maintenance. Public use
would be monitored for impacts to
wildlife. An extensive survey for
monitoring the deer population and its
association with habitat conditions
would be implemented. Fishing and
hunting would continue as currently
managed. Environmental education,
wildlife observation, and wildlife
photography would be accommodated
at present levels with the addition of a
Visitor Center; but access would be
limited to July–October and February–
April to minimize disturbance to
migratory birds. Staffing would increase
by five positions [e.g., wildlife biologist,
maintenance worker, equipment
operator, administrative officer, and a
park ranger (law enforcement)] to
handle the increase in biological
inventory and monitoring and control of
invasive species.
Alternative C—Optimize Biological
Program and Visitor Services (Proposed)
Under Alternative C, the proposed
alternative, the refuge would strive to
optimize both its biological program and
visitor services program. As explained
in the Draft CCP/EA, Louisiana’s Red
River Valley is one of the most heavily
degraded ecosystems in the State. The
greatest habitat type lost was
bottomland hardwood forest; therefore,
bottomland hardwood forest habitat
restoration and management would
continue to be an important goal under
this alternative. Under this alternative,
the refuge would continue to participate
in the Carbon Sequestration Program as
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
jlentini on PROD1PC65 with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 73, No. 72 / Monday, April 14, 2008 / Notices
described in the Draft CCP/EA. Any
lands within the acquisition boundary
of the refuge that have had their forest
cover removed prior to 1990, would be
targeted for acquisition and
reforestation.
The refuge would continue to benefit
resident wildlife species and would aim
to increase its knowledge base about
migratory birds by developing and
implementing monitoring programs. It
would continue to provide habitats for
waterfowl, shorebirds, marsh birds,
nesting colonial waterbirds, and
landbirds. Resources would be used to
create and/or maintain a variety of
habitats compatible with historic habitat
types of the Red River Valley. These
would include the above-mentioned
bottomland hardwood forest habitat, as
well as moist prairie. Prior farming
practices on lands acquired by the
refuge have left, in place, a number of
water control structures. These water
control structures would be maintained
and enhanced to control water levels on
several thousand acres of refuge lands.
Efforts to control invasive species would
increase.
Land acquisition, reforestation, and
resource protection would be intensified
from the level now maintained in the
No Action Alternative. The refuge
would expand the approved acquisition
boundary to incorporate 1,413 acres in
the Spanish Lake Lowlands Unit, 87
acres in the Headquarters Unit, and
1,938 acres in the Lower Cane Unit. In
the refuge’s Private Lands Program, staff
would work with private landowners on
adjacent tracts to manage and improve
habitats. The refuge would develop and
begin to implement a Cultural Resources
Management Plan (CRMP). Until such
time as the CRMP is completed and
implemented, the refuge would follow
standard Service protocol and
procedures in conducting cultural
resource surveys by qualified
professionals as needed.
Wildlife-dependent visitor services
would increase under this alternative.
Within three years of CCP completion,
the refuge would develop a Visitor
Services’ Plan to be used in expanding
public use facilities and opportunities
on the refuge. This step-down
management plan would provide
overall, long-term direction and
guidance in developing and running a
larger public use program at Red River
Refuge. Federal funds are now available
to construct a Refuge Headquarters/
Visitor Center at the Headquarters Unit.
The new visitor center would include a
small auditorium for use in talks,
meetings, films, videos, and other
audio-visual presentations. Alternative
C would also increase opportunities for
VerDate Aug<31>2005
18:09 Apr 11, 2008
Jkt 214001
visitors by adding facilities such as
photo-blinds, observation sites, and
trails. Over the 15-year life of the CCP,
more emphasis would be placed on
environmental education and
interpretation to increase the public’s
understanding of the importance of
habitats and resources of the Red River
Valley. Within five years of CCP
approval, the refuge would prepare a
Fishing Plan that would outline and
expand permissible fishing
opportunities within the refuge. A
fishing pier would be constructed at the
Headquarters Unit. Staff would
investigate opportunities for expanding
hunting possibilities.
Alternative C would provide an
assistant manager, a full-time law
enforcement officer, an equipment
operator, a maintenance worker, a
wildlife biologist, an administrative
assistant, and an outdoor recreational
specialist.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them in the form of a final CCP and
Finding of No Significant Impact.
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.
Authority: This notice is published under
the authority of the National Wildlife Refuge
System Improvement Act of 1997, Public
Law 105–57.
Dated: February 8, 2008.
Cynthia K. Dohner,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. E8–7853 Filed 4–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
20061
SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR
2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an
appealable decision approving lands for
conveyance pursuant to the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act will be
issued to Bering Straits Native
Corporation for lands located in the
vicinity of Wales and Saint Michael,
Alaska. Notice of the decision will also
be published four times in the Nome
Nugget.
DATES: The time limits for filing an
appeal are:
1. Any party claiming a property
interest which is adversely affected by
the decision shall have until May 14,
2008 to file an appeal.
2. Parties receiving service of the
decision by certified mail shall have 30
days from the date of receipt to file an
appeal.
Parties who do not file an appeal in
accordance with the requirements of 43
CFR Part 4, Subpart E, shall be deemed
to have waived their rights.
ADDRESSES: A copy of the decision may
be obtained from:Bureau of Land
Management, Alaska State Office, 222
West Seventh Avenue, #13,Anchorage,
Alaska 99513–7504.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: The
Bureau of Land Management by phone
at 907–271–5960, or by e-mail at
ak.blm.conveyance@ak.blm.gov. Persons
who use a telecommunication device
(TTD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–
8330, 24 hours a day, seven days a
week, to contact the Bureau of Land
Management.
Dina L. Torres,
Land Transfer Resolution Specialist,
Resolution Branch.
[FR Doc. E8–7839 Filed 4–11–08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–$$–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[AA–6655–D, AA–6655–G, AA–6655–H, AA–
6655–A2; AK–964–1410–KC–P]
Alaska Native Claims Selection
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[F–21964, AA–10702, AA–10703, AA–10704,
AA–11791; AK–962–1410–HY–P]
Alaska Native Claims Selection
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of decision approving
lands for conveyance.
AGENCY:
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of decision approving
lands for conveyance.
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: As required by 43 CFR
2650.7(d), notice is hereby given that an
appealable decision approving lands for
conveyance pursuant to the Alaska
Native Claims Settlement Act will be
issued to Chignik River Limited. The
lands are in the vicinity of Chignik
Lake, Alaska, and are located in:
E:\FR\FM\14APN1.SGM
14APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 72 (Monday, April 14, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20059-20061]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-7853]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2008-N0028; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
Red River National Wildlife Refuge, Caddo, Bossier, Desoto, Red
River, and Natchitoches Parishes, LA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: draft comprehensive conservation plan
and environmental assessment; 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 Red River National Wildlife
Refuge for public review and comment. In this Draft CCP/EA, we describe
the alternative we propose to 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 May 14, 2008.
ADDRESSES: Requests for copies of the Draft CCP/EA should be addressed
to: Tina Chouinard, Natural Resource Planner, Fish and Wildlife
Service, 6772 Highway 76 South, Stanton, Tennessee 38069. The Draft
CCP/EA may also be accessed and downloaded from the Service's Internet
Site: https://southeast.fws.gov/planning. Comments on the Draft CCP/EA
may be submitted to the above address or via electronic mail to: tina_
chouinard@fws.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Tina Chouinard; Telephone: 731/780-
8208; or Fax: 731/772-7839.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Red River
National Wildlife Refuge. We started the process through a notice in
the Federal Register on March 13, 2006 (71 FR 12710).
The Red River National Wildlife Refuge is a unit of the North
Louisiana National Wildlife Refuge Complex. The refuge was signed into
existence on October 13, 2000, with the passage of the Red River
National Wildlife Refuge Act. With land acquisition, the refuge was
formally established in August 2002. There are three purposes of the
refuge, as stated in the Red River National Wildlife Refuge Act. These
are to: (1) Provide for the restoration and conservation of native
plants and animal communities on suitable sites in the Red River basin,
including restoration of extirpated species; (2) provide habitat for
migratory birds; and (3) provide technical assistance to private
landowners in the restoration of their lands for the benefit of fish
and wildlife.
According to legislation, the refuge is approved for up to
approximately 50,000 acres of Federal lands and waters along that
section of the Red River between Colfax, Louisiana, and the Arkansas
State line, a distance of approximately 120 miles. The refuge growth
will be strategically planned within five focus areas that will each
have a management unit of the Red River National Wildlife Refuge. These
focus areas are: Lower Cane River (Natchitoches Parish); Spanish Lake
Lowlands (Natchitoches Parish); Bayou Pierre Floodplain (Desoto and Red
River Parishes); Headquarters Site (Bossier Parish); and Wardview
(Caddo Parish).
Currently, the Service has acquired 9,787 acres, with 40,213 acres
remaining to be purchased. The lands within the five areas will be
acquired through a combination of fee title purchases from willing
sellers and conservation easements, leases, and/or cooperative
agreements from willing landowners. Currently, fee title lands have
been purchased within portions of all the focus areas, with the
exception of Wardview.
Historically, the Red River Valley was forested with bottomland
hardwoods, cypress sloughs, and shrub swamps; however, for the last
three decades, the Red River Valley has been utilized extensively for
agricultural production, and, as a result, has lost almost all of its
forest cover. The river itself was very turbid, and its wildlife and
fishery habitat was poor compared to other parts of the State. After
completion of the Red River Waterway Project in 1994, water levels in
the river became higher and more constant, greatly reducing its
turbidity. Water quality improved and with seasonal retention of water
levels, a rich diversity of aquatic flora and fauna has developed.
Increased water levels on the river also improved some adjacent
habitats. Flooded timber and farm fields with wet depressions are now
common, providing habitat for migratory birds. The refuge has been
involved in several reforestation projects and has improved moist-soil
habitat. With management of this refuge in its infancy, the planning
process will define priorities for current and future refuge resources
and management.
Wildlife species found on the refuge are typical of forested
wetlands and fields. The Red River is a historic migration corridor for
migratory birds
[[Page 20060]]
that use the Central and Mississippi Flyways on their journey to the
Gulf Coast. Examples of priority species for conservation include the
swallow-tailed kite, Swainson's warbler, yellow-billed cuckoo, and
several species of waterfowl. Wading birds and shorebirds use the
numerous sandbars, shallow flooded fields, and mudflats. Listed species
include the interior least tern, which nests on riverine sandbars; the
piping plover; and the possibility of the transient Louisiana black
bear. Resident game and furbearer species are the typical variety of
white-tailed deer, gray and fox squirrels, mink, and beaver. A variety
of nongame mammals, amphibians, and reptiles are also present.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), which amended the National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, requires us to develop a CCP for each
national wildlife refuge. The purpose in 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 and NEPA.
Significant issues addressed in the Draft CCP/EA include:
management of white-tailed deer, invasive species, waterfowl, and
bottomland hardwood forests; refuge access; land acquisition to include
a minor boundary expansion; visitor services; visitor center; watershed
protection; and cultural resource protection.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for managing the refuge and chose
Alternative C as the proposed alternative.
Alternatives
A full description of each alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We
summarize each alternative below.
Alternative A--No Action Alternative
Red River National Wildlife Refuge is part of the Lower Mississippi
River Ecosystem and is considered to be in the West Gulf Coastal Plain
Bird Conservation Area. As such, it is a component of many regional and
ecosystem conservation-planning initiatives. Under Alternative A, the
No Action Alternative, present management of the refuge would continue
at its current level of participation in these initiatives throughout
the 15-year duration of the CCP. Current approaches to managing
wildlife and habitats, protecting resources, and allowing for public
use would remain unchanged.
The main habitat types on the refuge are bottomland hardwood
forests, managed wetlands, agriculture, and moist-soil units. Under
Alternative A, management would continue to work with electric
utilities and partners to restore bottomland hardwood forest habitat
through the ``Carbon Sequestration Program.'' The refuge would continue
to provide habitat for thousands of wintering waterfowl and year-round
habitat for wood ducks. It would also maintain the current habitat mix
for the benefit of other migratory birds, shorebirds, marsh birds, and
landbirds. Staff would continue existing surveys and monitor long-term
population trends and health of resident species.
Currently, there are few public use and environmental education
programs on the refuge. The refuge would continue to serve the public
without being guided by a Visitor Services' Management Plan, relying
instead on experience, general Service mandates and practices, and
guidance and advice from recreation staff in the Regional Office. A new
Headquarters/Visitor Center has been budgeted and would be constructed.
The staff would continue to consist of one employee, the refuge
manager.
Alternative B--Minimize Management and Visitor Services
Under Alternative B, there would be less management of habitat and
wildlife and a reduced public use program. Biological inventorying and
monitoring would be intensified and enhanced with management programs
developed that could be implemented less frequently, yet still
accomplish the objectives. Extensive baseline inventorying and
monitoring programs would be conducted with several partners to provide
a solid foundation for the current condition of refuge habitats and
wildlife, while monitoring for changes in trends.
Additional research projects would be implemented through granting
and partnership opportunities with other agencies and universities. An
intensive inventory of bottomland hardwood forests to define current
conditions and monitor natural successional changes would be
implemented. Management in the bottoms would be limited so that the
forest would go through natural succession, as defined in a revised
Habitat Management Plan. Open fields would be allowed to go through
natural succession to bottomland hardwood forests and moist-soil units
would not be maintained. Management of invasive species would become a
priority to establish baseline information on location and density.
Partnerships would continue to be fostered for several biological
programs, hunting regulations, law enforcement issues, and research
projects.
Public use would be limited with custodial-level maintenance.
Public use would be monitored for impacts to wildlife. An extensive
survey for monitoring the deer population and its association with
habitat conditions would be implemented. Fishing and hunting would
continue as currently managed. Environmental education, wildlife
observation, and wildlife photography would be accommodated at present
levels with the addition of a Visitor Center; but access would be
limited to July-October and February-April to minimize disturbance to
migratory birds. Staffing would increase by five positions [e.g.,
wildlife biologist, maintenance worker, equipment operator,
administrative officer, and a park ranger (law enforcement)] to handle
the increase in biological inventory and monitoring and control of
invasive species.
Alternative C--Optimize Biological Program and Visitor Services
(Proposed)
Under Alternative C, the proposed alternative, the refuge would
strive to optimize both its biological program and visitor services
program. As explained in the Draft CCP/EA, Louisiana's Red River Valley
is one of the most heavily degraded ecosystems in the State. The
greatest habitat type lost was bottomland hardwood forest; therefore,
bottomland hardwood forest habitat restoration and management would
continue to be an important goal under this alternative. Under this
alternative, the refuge would continue to participate in the Carbon
Sequestration Program as
[[Page 20061]]
described in the Draft CCP/EA. Any lands within the acquisition
boundary of the refuge that have had their forest cover removed prior
to 1990, would be targeted for acquisition and reforestation.
The refuge would continue to benefit resident wildlife species and
would aim to increase its knowledge base about migratory birds by
developing and implementing monitoring programs. It would continue to
provide habitats for waterfowl, shorebirds, marsh birds, nesting
colonial waterbirds, and landbirds. Resources would be used to create
and/or maintain a variety of habitats compatible with historic habitat
types of the Red River Valley. These would include the above-mentioned
bottomland hardwood forest habitat, as well as moist prairie. Prior
farming practices on lands acquired by the refuge have left, in place,
a number of water control structures. These water control structures
would be maintained and enhanced to control water levels on several
thousand acres of refuge lands. Efforts to control invasive species
would increase.
Land acquisition, reforestation, and resource protection would be
intensified from the level now maintained in the No Action Alternative.
The refuge would expand the approved acquisition boundary to
incorporate 1,413 acres in the Spanish Lake Lowlands Unit, 87 acres in
the Headquarters Unit, and 1,938 acres in the Lower Cane Unit. In the
refuge's Private Lands Program, staff would work with private
landowners on adjacent tracts to manage and improve habitats. The
refuge would develop and begin to implement a Cultural Resources
Management Plan (CRMP). Until such time as the CRMP is completed and
implemented, the refuge would follow standard Service protocol and
procedures in conducting cultural resource surveys by qualified
professionals as needed.
Wildlife-dependent visitor services would increase under this
alternative. Within three years of CCP completion, the refuge would
develop a Visitor Services' Plan to be used in expanding public use
facilities and opportunities on the refuge. This step-down management
plan would provide overall, long-term direction and guidance in
developing and running a larger public use program at Red River Refuge.
Federal funds are now available to construct a Refuge Headquarters/
Visitor Center at the Headquarters Unit. The new visitor center would
include a small auditorium for use in talks, meetings, films, videos,
and other audio-visual presentations. Alternative C would also increase
opportunities for visitors by adding facilities such as photo-blinds,
observation sites, and trails. Over the 15-year life of the CCP, more
emphasis would be placed on environmental education and interpretation
to increase the public's understanding of the importance of habitats
and resources of the Red River Valley. Within five years of CCP
approval, the refuge would prepare a Fishing Plan that would outline
and expand permissible fishing opportunities within the refuge. A
fishing pier would be constructed at the Headquarters Unit. Staff would
investigate opportunities for expanding hunting possibilities.
Alternative C would provide an assistant manager, a full-time law
enforcement officer, an equipment operator, a maintenance worker, a
wildlife biologist, an administrative assistant, and an outdoor
recreational specialist.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and
address them in the form of a final CCP and Finding of No Significant
Impact.
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.
Authority: This notice is published under the authority of the
National Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law
105-57.
Dated: February 8, 2008.
Cynthia K. Dohner,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. E8-7853 Filed 4-11-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
