Lower Florida Keys Refuges, Monroe County, FL, 1803-1806 [2010-447]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2010 / Notices
DATES: The request to terminate the
Environmental Impact Statement and
proceed with an Environmental
Assessment was approved by the Chief
of the NPS Environmental Quality
Division on November 4, 2009. The
draft general management plan and
Environmental Assessment is expected
to be distributed for a 30 day public
comment period early in 2011 and a
decision is expected be made in the fall
of 2011. The NPS will notify the public
by mail, Web site, and other means, and
will include information on where and
how to obtain a copy of the GMP/EA,
how to comment on the plan, and the
dates of the public comment period.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Steve Riley, Superintendent, Gila Cliff
Dwellings National Monument, HC 68
Box 100, Silver City, NM 88061.
Telephone (575) 536–9461.
In place of
the EIS, the NPS will prepare an
Environmental Assessment (EA) that
analyzes four alternatives (no-action and
three action alternatives) that look at
different ways of protecting resources,
providing appropriate visitor
experiences, and addressing joint NPS/
Forest Service operations:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
—Alternative 1 (No-Action) would
continue the present management
direction.
—Alternative 2 would emphasize and
expand high-quality visitor services
and experiences by providing more
comprehensive interpretation of the
Gila Headwaters area and its 2,000
years of human occupation.
—Alternative 3 would enhance visitor
understanding and enjoyment of the
Gila Headwaters’ natural and cultural
heritage by providing a more unified
management approach to the two
units of the monument.
—Alternative 4 would forge more
personal connections between visitors
and the ancient cultures and
wilderness character of the
monument.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Dated: November 12, 2009.
Michael D. Snyder,
Director, Intermountain Region, National
Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2010–443 Filed 1–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4312–FA–P
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Jan 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R4–R–2009–N162; 40136–1265–0000–
S3]
1803
a haven for a diversity of native flora
and fauna, including endemic,
threatened, endangered, and candidate
species.
Introduction
Key West NWR
Located west of Key West and
accessible only by boat, the refuge
consists of the Marquesas Keys and 13
other keys distributed across over 375
square miles of open water. Key West
NWR is among the first refuges
established in the United States.
President Roosevelt created the refuge
in 1908 as a preserve and breeding
ground for colonial nesting birds and
other wildlife. The refuge encompasses
208,308 acres of land and water with
only 1 percent (2,019 acres) being land.
Most islands are dominated by
mangrove plant communities.
The refuge provides habitat and
protection for Federally listed species,
including piping plovers and roseate
terns. The refuge harbors the largest
wintering population of piping plovers
and the largest colony of white-crowned
pigeons in the Florida Keys. It is a
haven for over 250 species of birds,
including 10 wading-bird species that
nest in the refuge. Other notable
imperiled species include sea turtles.
More loggerhead and green sea turtle
nests are found each year in Key West
NWR than in any area of the Florida
Keys except the Dry Tortugas. Waters
within the refuge’s administrative
boundaries are important
developmental habitat for these sea
turtle species, as well as hawksbills and
Kemp’s ridley sea turtles. In 1975,
Public Law 93–632 designated all
islands in Key West NWR, except
Ballast Key, which is privately owned,
as a part of the National Wilderness
Preservation System. These islands total
2,109 acres.
With this notice, we finalize the CCP
process for the Lower Florida Keys
Refuges. We started this process through
a notice in the Federal Register on May
9, 2003 (68 FR 25058).
The Lower Florida Keys Refuges
includes three wildlife refuges—Key
West National Wildlife Refuge (Key
West NWR), Great White Heron
National Wildlife Refuge (Great White
Heron NWR), and National Key Deer
Refuge in Monroe County, Florida.
These are a collection of low-lying,
subtropical islands between the Gulf of
Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean that
protect all the vital habitats
representative of the Florida Keys
ecosystem, including the globally
imperiled pine rockland and tropical
hardwood hammock. These geologically
and climatically distinct islands provide
Great White Heron NWR
Great White Heron NWR was
established in 1938, by Executive Order
7993 signed by President Roosevelt, as
a haven for great white herons,
migratory birds, and other wildlife. The
refuge encompasses 117,683 acres of
land and water with 6,300 acres of land,
including 1,900 land acres which were
designated Wilderness Areas in 1975,
also under Public Law 93–632. While
the islands are primarily mangroves,
some of the larger islands contain pine
rockland and tropical hardwood
hammock habitats. This vast area,
known locally as the ‘‘backcountry,’’
provides critical nesting, feeding, and
resting areas for more than 250 species
of birds. We co-manage this area with
the State through a ‘‘Management
Agreement for Submerged Lands Within
Lower Florida Keys Refuges, Monroe
County, FL
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: final
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
finding of no significant impact.
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce our
decision and the availability of the final
CCP and finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) for the Environmental
Assessment for the Lower Florida Keys
Refuges in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
requirements. We completed a thorough
analysis of impacts on the human
environment, which are included in the
Environmental Assessment (Appendix
N of the CCP). The CCP will guide us
in managing and administering the
Lower Florida Keys Refuges for the next
15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of
the CCP by writing to: Ms. Anne
Morkill, Refuge Manager, Florida Keys
National Wildlife Refuge Complex,
28590 Watson Boulevard, Big Pine Key,
FL 33043. You may also access and
download the document from the
Service’s Web site: https://
southeast.fws.gov/planning.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms.
Anne Morkill; telephone: 305/872–2239;
or Mary Morris, Natural Resource
Planner; telephone 850/567–6202.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
1804
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
the Boundaries of Key West and Great
White Heron National Wildlife Refuges’’
(hereinafter referred to as Management
Agreement).
Great white herons are a white colorphase of great blue herons. In the United
States, nesting is restricted to extreme
south Florida including the Florida
Keys. The refuge was created to protect
great white herons from extinction since
the population was decimated by the
demand for feathered hats. Protection of
great white herons was successful, and
these magnificent birds can be observed
feeding on tidal flats throughout the
refuge. The refuge islands are also used
for nesting by 10 wading bird species,
including the reddish egret, and by
many neotropical migratory bird
species.
National Key Deer Refuge
The National Key Deer Refuge was
established on August 22, 1957, to
protect and conserve Key deer and other
wildlife resources. It comprises about
8,983 acres of land on several islands
within the authorized approved
acquisition boundary, as well as
additional parcels located outside the
boundary administered by the refuge.
These lands host diverse habitats, most
notably globally endangered tropical
hardwood hammocks and pine
rocklands. The refuge provides habitat
for hundreds of endemic and migratory
species, including 21 Federally listed
species, such as Key deer, Lower Keys
marsh rabbit, and silver rice rat. It
contains a variety of plants endemic to
the Florida Keys.
The refuge is an important stopping
point for thousands of migrating birds
each year and an important wintering
ground for many North American bird
species. Notable species include the
piping plover and peregrine falcon. The
mosaic of upland and wetland habitats
found in the Florida Keys are critical
breeding and feeding grounds for birds,
and refuge land acquisition efforts strive
to add to the lands already protected.
Loggerhead, green, hawksbill, and
Kemp’s ridley sea turtles forage in the
waters surrounding the refuge, but
nesting is limited to refuge lands on
Ohio Key, where a small number of
loggerhead nests are laid annually.
There are 2,278 acres of Wilderness
Area designated on this refuge as of
1975 per Public Law 632.
Refuge Purposes
The purposes of the refuges come
from the executive orders and
subsequent laws Congress passed as it
established each refuge. There are also
specific purposes Congress designated
for managing the Refuge System as a
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Jan 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
whole. Each of the three refuges has
different enabling legislation and
purposes. The CCP has been designed
with consideration of the distinct
purposes of each refuge. For the
purposes of each refuge, refer to a notice
in the Federal Register dated May 23,
2008 (73 FR 30139).
Alternatives, Including the Preferred
Alternative
The Service developed three
alternatives for managing the refuges
over the next 15 years and chose
Alternative B as the preferred
alternative. A description of the three
alternatives follows.
Alternative A—(Current Management—
No Action)
The Lower Florida Keys Refuges have
a high diversity of community types and
endemic species, with many threatened,
endangered, candidate, and other
imperiled species. The primary mission
of these refuges is to provide habitat for
wildlife. The refuges currently have a
small staff and funding source for the
inventorying and monitoring of natural
resources. Much effort has been put into
some resources, such as Key deer and
their habitat (pine rocklands), as a result
of cooperative partnerships with
academic and other research
organizations. Certain species, such as
great white herons, white-crowned
pigeons, and sea turtles, have been
studied over time by refuge biological
staff. Under this alternative, these
studies would continue.
Baseline data have yet to be
established for some protected species,
species suites, habitats, and cultural
resources. The effects of natural
catastrophic disturbances (e.g.,
Hurricane Wilma in 2005) on the
refuges’ resources have not been fully
assessed and the effect of climate
change (e.g., sea level rise) is not
known.
We would protect threatened and
endangered species through a variety of
management tools, such as area
closures, law enforcement, exotic plant
control, etc. Working with partners, we
would continue limited research and
monitoring of focal species, such as Key
deer, Lower Keys marsh rabbit, and
some migratory birds. The National Key
Deer Refuge’s prescribed fire
management program would continue
with the objectives to reduce fuels and
sustain the pine rockland ecosystem for
the benefit of Key deer.
As funding and willing sellers are
available, we would continue habitat
conservation through land acquisition
within the approved acquisition
boundary and through lease agreements
PO 00000
Frm 00057
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
with other agencies for non-refuge lands
that support the refuges’ missions.
Partnerships exist to promote land
conservation. Exotic plant control to
protect and maintain current habitat
would occur at existing levels by relying
on partnerships with the Nature
Conservancy, the Florida Fish and
Wildlife Conservation Commission, and
Monroe County. A predator
management program is currently under
development on National Key Deer
Refuge to reduce the effects of feral cat
predation on the endangered Lower
Keys marsh rabbit and other native
wildlife.
Most ecologically sensitive areas and
living resources are protected from
disturbance or degradation through the
use of closure areas, law enforcement,
and the implementation of the
Management Agreement. Impacts from
concentrated, non-wildlife-dependent
uses threaten a limited number of sites,
particularly islands with accessible sand
beaches. The effects of commercial
activities and public uses (both wildlifedependent and non-wildlife-dependent)
have not been fully evaluated and
visitor carrying capacities have not been
quantified.
We have an active volunteer program
to assist in all facets of refuge
management. Partnerships for these
purposes and for research are
encouraged and maintained. Under this
alternative, the existing level of
administrative resources (e.g., staffing,
facilities and assets, funding, and
partnerships) would be maintained.
This means some positions may not be
filled when vacated if funds need to be
reallocated to meet rising costs or new
priorities.
Alternative B—(Preferred Alternative)
This alternative assumes a slow-tomoderate growth of refuge resources
over the 15-year implementation period
of the CCP. It proposes a proactive and
adaptive ecosystem-management
approach for the enhancement of
wildlife populations. It will promote a
natural diversity and abundance of
habitats for native plants and animals,
especially Keys’ endemic, trust, and
keystone imperiled species. Many of the
objectives and strategies are designed to
maintain and restore native
communities. Active management
strategies will be applied particularly
within the globally imperiled pine
rockland, salt marsh transition, and
freshwater wetland habitats, and island
beach berm communities. We will
initiate research and long-term
monitoring to expand the collection of
baseline data and measure variables of
ecosystem health. We will promote
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2010 / Notices
cooperative studies to monitor and
model the immediate and/or long-term
effects of natural catastrophic events
(e.g., hurricanes, wildfire) and global
climate change, particularly sea level
rise.
Current ongoing and proposed
programs and efforts focus on
threatened, endangered, and candidate
species of plants and animals. The need
for more comprehensive inventorying
and long-term monitoring is addressed
in this alternative, particularly for
priority imperiled species and their
habitats within the refuges. The
feasibility of managing the core
population of Key deer to minimize the
effects of over-browsing on native plants
will be considered in accordance with
the Endangered Species Act.
Habitat enhancement for critically
imperiled species, such as the Lower
Keys marsh rabbit and Key tree cactus,
will occur to ensure the long-term
sustainability of these species.
Opportunities for land acquisition will
focus more strategically on protecting
environmentally sensitive habitat by
contacting specific property owners to
determine their willingness to sell, with
a particular emphasis on enhancing
habitat connectivity and protecting
marsh rabbit habitat. Off-refuge nursery
propagation of the Key tree cactus will
be implemented for later translocation
to suitable refuge habitats. Cooperative
partnerships with nurseries and
botanical gardens will be developed to
secure seed and plant material of rare
and endemic plant species to ensure
genetically viable sources for future
restoration needs. Research will be
initiated to identify causal reasons for
the marked, long-term decline in the
great white heron nesting population
and to evaluate the potential impacts of
sea level rise on the ecology of wading
birds.
Since a primary purpose of the
refuges is to provide sanctuary for
nesting and migratory birds, we will
provide greater protection from human
disturbance, particularly at colonial
nesting bird rookeries and at beach
habitats in the backcountry islands.
Additional limitations to public use
may be implemented in sensitive beach
areas important for shorebirds, terns, sea
turtles, and butterflies.
Strategies are proposed to enhance the
biological diversity and resiliency of the
fire-dependent pine rocklands and also
to enhance fire-adapted habitat features
in salt marsh transition and freshwater
wetlands that benefit priority species in
the National Key Deer Refuge.
Prescribed fire and mechanical or
manual vegetation treatments will be
used as habitat management tools to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Jan 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
reduce wildland fuels and restore
desirable habitat features where
appropriate. Predictive modeling and
fire effects monitoring will be used on
all prescribed-fire treatments in an
adaptive management approach to
develop site-specific burn prescriptions
and to determine whether objectives
were met. We will conduct research on
fire behavior, fuel response, and fire
history. The fire management step-down
plan will be revised and implemented
accordingly in conjunction with the
development of a habitat management
step-down plan.
We will continue exotic plant control
as an ongoing operation within the
refuges to maintain native habitats and
prevent new infestations. Cooperative
efforts will be sought with private
property owners and homeowners
associations to control seed sources
from private lands. Existing
partnerships will be reinforced to
increase coordinated mapping and
monitoring of treated areas with known
infestations and ongoing control needs.
Management of non-native exotic
predators will be implemented as
directed by the South Florida MultiSpecies Recovery Plan for the benefit of
threatened and endangered species. An
early detection and rapid response
program will be implemented in
cooperation with Federal, State, and
local authorities to address the
increasing invasion by and potential
establishment of exotic snakes, lizards,
and other non-native animals in the
Florida Keys.
A primary focus of the visitor services
program, as proposed, is to enhance
environmental education and outreach
efforts substantially to reach larger
numbers of residents, students,
educators, and visitors. This alternative
also focuses on increasing public
awareness, understanding, and support
for the refuges’ conservation mission. It
places priority on wildlife-dependent
uses, such as photography and wildlife
observation. A new visitor center on
U.S. Highway 1 on Big Pine Key and
enhanced visitor facilities at existing
sites (e.g., Blue Hole and WatsonMannillo Nature Trails) are proposed.
Non-wildlife-dependent forms of
recreation will be limited or restricted
in sensitive areas and awareness efforts
will be stepped-up to inform visitors
about protecting wilderness areas. A
Visitor Services step-down plan will
specify program details consistent with
the Service’s visitor service program
standards.
The basic administrative and
operational needs of the refuges have
been addressed. Essential new staffing is
proposed through the addition and
PO 00000
Frm 00058
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
1805
funding of five permanent, full-time
employees. Daily operation of the
refuges will be guided by the CCP and
the development and implementation of
19 projects and 11 step-down
management plans. Wilderness and
cultural resource protection objectives
and strategies will be incorporated
within the appropriate step-down
management plans. The modest growth
in administrative resources will be used
for wildlife monitoring and habitat
enhancement to better serve the refuges’
purposes and the CCP’s vision. With the
exception of a new Visitor Center that
is proposed, the existing number of
facilities will be maintained. Energy
efficiency standards will be applied
wherever feasible during facility
maintenance, repair, or renovation
projects. Existing vehicles will be
replaced with alternative fuel vehicles
to increase fuel efficiency and reduce
carbon emissions.
Alternative C
This alternative assumes a moderateto-substantial growth of refuge resources
from internal or external sources. It
would more fully realize the refuges’
missions and address the large number
of threatened, endangered, and
candidate species along with other
imperiled species and habitat types.
While Alternative C contains many of
the provisions to protect and restore
habitats similar to Alternative B, it
emphasizes a broader suite of priority
species, assuming the addition of
several new staff positions and
increased funding. The long-term
inventorying and monitoring plan
would be expanded to cover more
species and species suites. Additional
studies on some species would be
undertaken and additional biological
staffing would be required. The use of
captive, off-refuge sources of some
species facing potential extirpation (e.g.,
Lower Keys marsh rabbit) would be
explored for reintroduction after a
natural catastrophe, such as a major
hurricane. In certain habitats, some
alternative habitat management
techniques would be studied and
applied. Fire management efforts would
emphasize fire suppression and the
reduction of hazardous fuels by
mechanical or manual means to protect
private properties, and the use of
prescribed fire would be reduced or
eliminated. Under this alternative, the
CCP anticipates shifts in the Visitor
Services program in order to increase
visitation and public use. A refuge
ranger position is proposed to
coordinate and enhance volunteerism,
to foster expanded relationships with
the Friends and Volunteers of Refuges
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
1806
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 8 / Wednesday, January 13, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
(FAVOR), and to establish new
partnerships for environmental
education and outreach programs.
Resource protection and visitor safety
would be greatly enhanced through this
alternative, with the addition of two law
enforcement officers. This would allow
for more patrol and enforcement of
closures and sensitive areas protection,
especially of wilderness areas or
cultural resource sites. New areas of the
backcountry would be closed to public
access to protect wildlife resources. We
would seek expanded management
authority to regulate public and
commercial activities in nearshore
waters and submerged lands under the
Management Agreement. A cultural
resources field investigation and
inventory would be conducted.
Implementation of Alternative C
would also occur through the
development of 11 step-down
management plans. New staffing would
be proposed through the addition of 6
permanent, full-time employees. The
positions would be in addition to the 5
full-time positions proposed in
Alternative B, for a total of 11 full-time
positions in Alternative C. New
maintenance and government housing
facilities would be proposed along with
new vehicles and boats to accommodate
the staff increases. While Alternative C
would promote our vision for these
refuges, the resources available to
implement it would not likely be
forthcoming in the current economic
environment as compared to when first
proposed.
Background
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 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
every15 years in accordance with the
Administration Act.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:51 Jan 12, 2010
Jkt 220001
Comments
Notices of availability of the Draft
Comprehensive Conservation Plan and
Environmental Assessment (Draft CCP/
EA) were sent to 200 persons on the
mailing list and copies were made
available for a 30-day public review
period as announced in the Federal
Register on May 23, 2008 (73 FR 30139).
At least 47 persons attended two public
meetings held on the Draft CCP/EA
during the open comment period. We
received 25 comment letters by mail or
e-mail from 16 persons and 11 nongovernmental organizations. Comments
were received from 4 government
agencies and 1 Tribal government. The
Draft CCP/EA was circulated through
the Florida State Clearinghouse to 8
State, regional, and local governments.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we
received, and based on the professional
judgment of the planning team, we
selected Alternative B to implement the
CCP. It promotes the enhancement of
wildlife populations by maintaining and
enhancing a diversity and abundance of
habitats for native plants and animals,
especially imperiled species that are
only found in the Florida Keys. Many of
the objectives and strategies are
designed to maintain and restore native
plant communities and ensure the
biological integrity across the landscape.
Strategies are designed to restore and
maintain the fire-dependent pine
rocklands and to enhance habitat
features of selected salt marsh transition
and freshwater wetland communities
that benefit priority species in the
National Key Deer Refuge. Research and
monitoring will provide essential
information for implementing an
adaptive management approach to
strategic landscape conservation,
providing flexibility in management
strategies in order to incorporate new
information and changing
environmental conditions. The CCP also
provides for obtaining baseline data and
monitoring indicator species to detect
changes in ecosystem diversity and
integrity related to climate change.
Since a primary purpose of the
refuges is to provide sanctuary for
nesting and migratory birds, protection
from human disturbance will be
enhanced, particularly at colonial
nesting bird rookeries and at beach
habitats in the backcountry islands of
the Key West and Great White Heron
NWRs. Ongoing research to identify
causal reasons for the marked, long-term
decline in the great white heron nesting
population, as well as studies on the
PO 00000
Frm 00059
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
impacts of sea level rise on wading
birds, will be expanded.
A primary focus of the visitor services
program is to enhance environmental
education and outreach efforts through
existing venues and expanded
partnerships to reach a diversity of local
residents, businesses, students,
educators, and visitors. This plan
focuses on increasing public awareness,
understanding, and support for the
refuges’ conservation mission. It places
priority on wildlife-dependent
recreational uses, such as wildlife
observation and photography. Nonwildlife dependent forms of recreation,
such as beach picnicking and
sunbathing, will be limited or restricted
in sensitive areas. Awareness efforts
will be expanded to inform visitors
about protecting wilderness values.
The compatibility determinations for
(1) Environmental education and
interpretation; (2) hiking/daypacking,
jogging, and walking (National Key Deer
Refuge only); (3) bicycling (National Key
Deer Refuge only); (4) wildlife
observation and photography; (5)
fishing; (6) beach use (National Key
Deer Refuge only); (7) public use on
wilderness and backcountry islands; (8)
research and monitoring; (9) mosquito
management (National Key Deer Refuge
and Great White Heron NWR only); and
(10) horseback riding (National Key
Deer Refuge only) are available in
Appendix F of the CCP.
Authority
This notice is published under the
authority of the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, Public Law 105–57.
Dated: August 24, 2009.
Patrick Leonard,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2010–447 Filed 1–12–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
National Park Service
Draft General Management Plan and
Environmental Impact Statement, New
River Gorge National River, WV
AGENCY: National Park Service,
Department of the Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability of the
Draft General Management Plan and
Environmental Impact Statement for
New River Gorge National River.
SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park
Service announces the availability of the
E:\FR\FM\13JAN1.SGM
13JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1803-1806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-447]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2009-N162; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
Lower Florida Keys Refuges, Monroe County, FL
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: final Comprehensive Conservation Plan
and finding of no significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce our
decision and the availability of the final CCP and finding of no
significant impact (FONSI) for the Environmental Assessment for the
Lower Florida Keys Refuges in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements. We completed a thorough
analysis of impacts on the human environment, which are included in the
Environmental Assessment (Appendix N of the CCP). The CCP will guide us
in managing and administering the Lower Florida Keys Refuges for the
next 15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the CCP by writing to: Ms. Anne
Morkill, Refuge Manager, Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuge Complex,
28590 Watson Boulevard, Big Pine Key, FL 33043. You may also access and
download the document from the Service's Web site: https://southeast.fws.gov/planning.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Anne Morkill; telephone: 305/872-
2239; or Mary Morris, Natural Resource Planner; telephone 850/567-6202.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for the Lower Florida
Keys Refuges. We started this process through a notice in the Federal
Register on May 9, 2003 (68 FR 25058).
The Lower Florida Keys Refuges includes three wildlife refuges--Key
West National Wildlife Refuge (Key West NWR), Great White Heron
National Wildlife Refuge (Great White Heron NWR), and National Key Deer
Refuge in Monroe County, Florida. These are a collection of low-lying,
subtropical islands between the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean
that protect all the vital habitats representative of the Florida Keys
ecosystem, including the globally imperiled pine rockland and tropical
hardwood hammock. These geologically and climatically distinct islands
provide a haven for a diversity of native flora and fauna, including
endemic, threatened, endangered, and candidate species.
Key West NWR
Located west of Key West and accessible only by boat, the refuge
consists of the Marquesas Keys and 13 other keys distributed across
over 375 square miles of open water. Key West NWR is among the first
refuges established in the United States. President Roosevelt created
the refuge in 1908 as a preserve and breeding ground for colonial
nesting birds and other wildlife. The refuge encompasses 208,308 acres
of land and water with only 1 percent (2,019 acres) being land. Most
islands are dominated by mangrove plant communities.
The refuge provides habitat and protection for Federally listed
species, including piping plovers and roseate terns. The refuge harbors
the largest wintering population of piping plovers and the largest
colony of white-crowned pigeons in the Florida Keys. It is a haven for
over 250 species of birds, including 10 wading-bird species that nest
in the refuge. Other notable imperiled species include sea turtles.
More loggerhead and green sea turtle nests are found each year in Key
West NWR than in any area of the Florida Keys except the Dry Tortugas.
Waters within the refuge's administrative boundaries are important
developmental habitat for these sea turtle species, as well as
hawksbills and Kemp's ridley sea turtles. In 1975, Public Law 93-632
designated all islands in Key West NWR, except Ballast Key, which is
privately owned, as a part of the National Wilderness Preservation
System. These islands total 2,109 acres.
Great White Heron NWR
Great White Heron NWR was established in 1938, by Executive Order
7993 signed by President Roosevelt, as a haven for great white herons,
migratory birds, and other wildlife. The refuge encompasses 117,683
acres of land and water with 6,300 acres of land, including 1,900 land
acres which were designated Wilderness Areas in 1975, also under Public
Law 93-632. While the islands are primarily mangroves, some of the
larger islands contain pine rockland and tropical hardwood hammock
habitats. This vast area, known locally as the ``backcountry,''
provides critical nesting, feeding, and resting areas for more than 250
species of birds. We co-manage this area with the State through a
``Management Agreement for Submerged Lands Within
[[Page 1804]]
the Boundaries of Key West and Great White Heron National Wildlife
Refuges'' (hereinafter referred to as Management Agreement).
Great white herons are a white color-phase of great blue herons. In
the United States, nesting is restricted to extreme south Florida
including the Florida Keys. The refuge was created to protect great
white herons from extinction since the population was decimated by the
demand for feathered hats. Protection of great white herons was
successful, and these magnificent birds can be observed feeding on
tidal flats throughout the refuge. The refuge islands are also used for
nesting by 10 wading bird species, including the reddish egret, and by
many neotropical migratory bird species.
National Key Deer Refuge
The National Key Deer Refuge was established on August 22, 1957, to
protect and conserve Key deer and other wildlife resources. It
comprises about 8,983 acres of land on several islands within the
authorized approved acquisition boundary, as well as additional parcels
located outside the boundary administered by the refuge. These lands
host diverse habitats, most notably globally endangered tropical
hardwood hammocks and pine rocklands. The refuge provides habitat for
hundreds of endemic and migratory species, including 21 Federally
listed species, such as Key deer, Lower Keys marsh rabbit, and silver
rice rat. It contains a variety of plants endemic to the Florida Keys.
The refuge is an important stopping point for thousands of
migrating birds each year and an important wintering ground for many
North American bird species. Notable species include the piping plover
and peregrine falcon. The mosaic of upland and wetland habitats found
in the Florida Keys are critical breeding and feeding grounds for
birds, and refuge land acquisition efforts strive to add to the lands
already protected. Loggerhead, green, hawksbill, and Kemp's ridley sea
turtles forage in the waters surrounding the refuge, but nesting is
limited to refuge lands on Ohio Key, where a small number of loggerhead
nests are laid annually. There are 2,278 acres of Wilderness Area
designated on this refuge as of 1975 per Public Law 632.
Refuge Purposes
The purposes of the refuges come from the executive orders and
subsequent laws Congress passed as it established each refuge. There
are also specific purposes Congress designated for managing the Refuge
System as a whole. Each of the three refuges has different enabling
legislation and purposes. The CCP has been designed with consideration
of the distinct purposes of each refuge. For the purposes of each
refuge, refer to a notice in the Federal Register dated May 23, 2008
(73 FR 30139).
Alternatives, Including the Preferred Alternative
The Service developed three alternatives for managing the refuges
over the next 15 years and chose Alternative B as the preferred
alternative. A description of the three alternatives follows.
Alternative A--(Current Management--No Action)
The Lower Florida Keys Refuges have a high diversity of community
types and endemic species, with many threatened, endangered, candidate,
and other imperiled species. The primary mission of these refuges is to
provide habitat for wildlife. The refuges currently have a small staff
and funding source for the inventorying and monitoring of natural
resources. Much effort has been put into some resources, such as Key
deer and their habitat (pine rocklands), as a result of cooperative
partnerships with academic and other research organizations. Certain
species, such as great white herons, white-crowned pigeons, and sea
turtles, have been studied over time by refuge biological staff. Under
this alternative, these studies would continue.
Baseline data have yet to be established for some protected
species, species suites, habitats, and cultural resources. The effects
of natural catastrophic disturbances (e.g., Hurricane Wilma in 2005) on
the refuges' resources have not been fully assessed and the effect of
climate change (e.g., sea level rise) is not known.
We would protect threatened and endangered species through a
variety of management tools, such as area closures, law enforcement,
exotic plant control, etc. Working with partners, we would continue
limited research and monitoring of focal species, such as Key deer,
Lower Keys marsh rabbit, and some migratory birds. The National Key
Deer Refuge's prescribed fire management program would continue with
the objectives to reduce fuels and sustain the pine rockland ecosystem
for the benefit of Key deer.
As funding and willing sellers are available, we would continue
habitat conservation through land acquisition within the approved
acquisition boundary and through lease agreements with other agencies
for non-refuge lands that support the refuges' missions. Partnerships
exist to promote land conservation. Exotic plant control to protect and
maintain current habitat would occur at existing levels by relying on
partnerships with the Nature Conservancy, the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission, and Monroe County. A predator management
program is currently under development on National Key Deer Refuge to
reduce the effects of feral cat predation on the endangered Lower Keys
marsh rabbit and other native wildlife.
Most ecologically sensitive areas and living resources are
protected from disturbance or degradation through the use of closure
areas, law enforcement, and the implementation of the Management
Agreement. Impacts from concentrated, non-wildlife-dependent uses
threaten a limited number of sites, particularly islands with
accessible sand beaches. The effects of commercial activities and
public uses (both wildlife-dependent and non-wildlife-dependent) have
not been fully evaluated and visitor carrying capacities have not been
quantified.
We have an active volunteer program to assist in all facets of
refuge management. Partnerships for these purposes and for research are
encouraged and maintained. Under this alternative, the existing level
of administrative resources (e.g., staffing, facilities and assets,
funding, and partnerships) would be maintained. This means some
positions may not be filled when vacated if funds need to be
reallocated to meet rising costs or new priorities.
Alternative B--(Preferred Alternative)
This alternative assumes a slow-to-moderate growth of refuge
resources over the 15-year implementation period of the CCP. It
proposes a proactive and adaptive ecosystem-management approach for the
enhancement of wildlife populations. It will promote a natural
diversity and abundance of habitats for native plants and animals,
especially Keys' endemic, trust, and keystone imperiled species. Many
of the objectives and strategies are designed to maintain and restore
native communities. Active management strategies will be applied
particularly within the globally imperiled pine rockland, salt marsh
transition, and freshwater wetland habitats, and island beach berm
communities. We will initiate research and long-term monitoring to
expand the collection of baseline data and measure variables of
ecosystem health. We will promote
[[Page 1805]]
cooperative studies to monitor and model the immediate and/or long-term
effects of natural catastrophic events (e.g., hurricanes, wildfire) and
global climate change, particularly sea level rise.
Current ongoing and proposed programs and efforts focus on
threatened, endangered, and candidate species of plants and animals.
The need for more comprehensive inventorying and long-term monitoring
is addressed in this alternative, particularly for priority imperiled
species and their habitats within the refuges. The feasibility of
managing the core population of Key deer to minimize the effects of
over-browsing on native plants will be considered in accordance with
the Endangered Species Act.
Habitat enhancement for critically imperiled species, such as the
Lower Keys marsh rabbit and Key tree cactus, will occur to ensure the
long-term sustainability of these species. Opportunities for land
acquisition will focus more strategically on protecting environmentally
sensitive habitat by contacting specific property owners to determine
their willingness to sell, with a particular emphasis on enhancing
habitat connectivity and protecting marsh rabbit habitat. Off-refuge
nursery propagation of the Key tree cactus will be implemented for
later translocation to suitable refuge habitats. Cooperative
partnerships with nurseries and botanical gardens will be developed to
secure seed and plant material of rare and endemic plant species to
ensure genetically viable sources for future restoration needs.
Research will be initiated to identify causal reasons for the marked,
long-term decline in the great white heron nesting population and to
evaluate the potential impacts of sea level rise on the ecology of
wading birds.
Since a primary purpose of the refuges is to provide sanctuary for
nesting and migratory birds, we will provide greater protection from
human disturbance, particularly at colonial nesting bird rookeries and
at beach habitats in the backcountry islands. Additional limitations to
public use may be implemented in sensitive beach areas important for
shorebirds, terns, sea turtles, and butterflies.
Strategies are proposed to enhance the biological diversity and
resiliency of the fire-dependent pine rocklands and also to enhance
fire-adapted habitat features in salt marsh transition and freshwater
wetlands that benefit priority species in the National Key Deer Refuge.
Prescribed fire and mechanical or manual vegetation treatments will be
used as habitat management tools to reduce wildland fuels and restore
desirable habitat features where appropriate. Predictive modeling and
fire effects monitoring will be used on all prescribed-fire treatments
in an adaptive management approach to develop site-specific burn
prescriptions and to determine whether objectives were met. We will
conduct research on fire behavior, fuel response, and fire history. The
fire management step-down plan will be revised and implemented
accordingly in conjunction with the development of a habitat management
step-down plan.
We will continue exotic plant control as an ongoing operation
within the refuges to maintain native habitats and prevent new
infestations. Cooperative efforts will be sought with private property
owners and homeowners associations to control seed sources from private
lands. Existing partnerships will be reinforced to increase coordinated
mapping and monitoring of treated areas with known infestations and
ongoing control needs. Management of non-native exotic predators will
be implemented as directed by the South Florida Multi-Species Recovery
Plan for the benefit of threatened and endangered species. An early
detection and rapid response program will be implemented in cooperation
with Federal, State, and local authorities to address the increasing
invasion by and potential establishment of exotic snakes, lizards, and
other non-native animals in the Florida Keys.
A primary focus of the visitor services program, as proposed, is to
enhance environmental education and outreach efforts substantially to
reach larger numbers of residents, students, educators, and visitors.
This alternative also focuses on increasing public awareness,
understanding, and support for the refuges' conservation mission. It
places priority on wildlife-dependent uses, such as photography and
wildlife observation. A new visitor center on U.S. Highway 1 on Big
Pine Key and enhanced visitor facilities at existing sites (e.g., Blue
Hole and Watson-Mannillo Nature Trails) are proposed. Non-wildlife-
dependent forms of recreation will be limited or restricted in
sensitive areas and awareness efforts will be stepped-up to inform
visitors about protecting wilderness areas. A Visitor Services step-
down plan will specify program details consistent with the Service's
visitor service program standards.
The basic administrative and operational needs of the refuges have
been addressed. Essential new staffing is proposed through the addition
and funding of five permanent, full-time employees. Daily operation of
the refuges will be guided by the CCP and the development and
implementation of 19 projects and 11 step-down management plans.
Wilderness and cultural resource protection objectives and strategies
will be incorporated within the appropriate step-down management plans.
The modest growth in administrative resources will be used for wildlife
monitoring and habitat enhancement to better serve the refuges'
purposes and the CCP's vision. With the exception of a new Visitor
Center that is proposed, the existing number of facilities will be
maintained. Energy efficiency standards will be applied wherever
feasible during facility maintenance, repair, or renovation projects.
Existing vehicles will be replaced with alternative fuel vehicles to
increase fuel efficiency and reduce carbon emissions.
Alternative C
This alternative assumes a moderate-to-substantial growth of refuge
resources from internal or external sources. It would more fully
realize the refuges' missions and address the large number of
threatened, endangered, and candidate species along with other
imperiled species and habitat types. While Alternative C contains many
of the provisions to protect and restore habitats similar to
Alternative B, it emphasizes a broader suite of priority species,
assuming the addition of several new staff positions and increased
funding. The long-term inventorying and monitoring plan would be
expanded to cover more species and species suites. Additional studies
on some species would be undertaken and additional biological staffing
would be required. The use of captive, off-refuge sources of some
species facing potential extirpation (e.g., Lower Keys marsh rabbit)
would be explored for reintroduction after a natural catastrophe, such
as a major hurricane. In certain habitats, some alternative habitat
management techniques would be studied and applied. Fire management
efforts would emphasize fire suppression and the reduction of hazardous
fuels by mechanical or manual means to protect private properties, and
the use of prescribed fire would be reduced or eliminated. Under this
alternative, the CCP anticipates shifts in the Visitor Services program
in order to increase visitation and public use. A refuge ranger
position is proposed to coordinate and enhance volunteerism, to foster
expanded relationships with the Friends and Volunteers of Refuges
[[Page 1806]]
(FAVOR), and to establish new partnerships for environmental education
and outreach programs.
Resource protection and visitor safety would be greatly enhanced
through this alternative, with the addition of two law enforcement
officers. This would allow for more patrol and enforcement of closures
and sensitive areas protection, especially of wilderness areas or
cultural resource sites. New areas of the backcountry would be closed
to public access to protect wildlife resources. We would seek expanded
management authority to regulate public and commercial activities in
nearshore waters and submerged lands under the Management Agreement. A
cultural resources field investigation and inventory would be
conducted.
Implementation of Alternative C would also occur through the
development of 11 step-down management plans. New staffing would be
proposed through the addition of 6 permanent, full-time employees. The
positions would be in addition to the 5 full-time positions proposed in
Alternative B, for a total of 11 full-time positions in Alternative C.
New maintenance and government housing facilities would be proposed
along with new vehicles and boats to accommodate the staff increases.
While Alternative C would promote our vision for these refuges, the
resources available to implement it would not likely be forthcoming in
the current economic environment as compared to when first proposed.
Background
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 every15 years in accordance with the Administration
Act.
Comments
Notices of availability of the Draft Comprehensive Conservation
Plan and Environmental Assessment (Draft CCP/EA) were sent to 200
persons on the mailing list and copies were made available for a 30-day
public review period as announced in the Federal Register on May 23,
2008 (73 FR 30139). At least 47 persons attended two public meetings
held on the Draft CCP/EA during the open comment period. We received 25
comment letters by mail or e-mail from 16 persons and 11 non-
governmental organizations. Comments were received from 4 government
agencies and 1 Tribal government. The Draft CCP/EA was circulated
through the Florida State Clearinghouse to 8 State, regional, and local
governments.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we received, and based on the
professional judgment of the planning team, we selected Alternative B
to implement the CCP. It promotes the enhancement of wildlife
populations by maintaining and enhancing a diversity and abundance of
habitats for native plants and animals, especially imperiled species
that are only found in the Florida Keys. Many of the objectives and
strategies are designed to maintain and restore native plant
communities and ensure the biological integrity across the landscape.
Strategies are designed to restore and maintain the fire-dependent pine
rocklands and to enhance habitat features of selected salt marsh
transition and freshwater wetland communities that benefit priority
species in the National Key Deer Refuge. Research and monitoring will
provide essential information for implementing an adaptive management
approach to strategic landscape conservation, providing flexibility in
management strategies in order to incorporate new information and
changing environmental conditions. The CCP also provides for obtaining
baseline data and monitoring indicator species to detect changes in
ecosystem diversity and integrity related to climate change.
Since a primary purpose of the refuges is to provide sanctuary for
nesting and migratory birds, protection from human disturbance will be
enhanced, particularly at colonial nesting bird rookeries and at beach
habitats in the backcountry islands of the Key West and Great White
Heron NWRs. Ongoing research to identify causal reasons for the marked,
long-term decline in the great white heron nesting population, as well
as studies on the impacts of sea level rise on wading birds, will be
expanded.
A primary focus of the visitor services program is to enhance
environmental education and outreach efforts through existing venues
and expanded partnerships to reach a diversity of local residents,
businesses, students, educators, and visitors. This plan focuses on
increasing public awareness, understanding, and support for the
refuges' conservation mission. It places priority on wildlife-dependent
recreational uses, such as wildlife observation and photography. Non-
wildlife dependent forms of recreation, such as beach picnicking and
sunbathing, will be limited or restricted in sensitive areas. Awareness
efforts will be expanded to inform visitors about protecting wilderness
values.
The compatibility determinations for (1) Environmental education
and interpretation; (2) hiking/daypacking, jogging, and walking
(National Key Deer Refuge only); (3) bicycling (National Key Deer
Refuge only); (4) wildlife observation and photography; (5) fishing;
(6) beach use (National Key Deer Refuge only); (7) public use on
wilderness and backcountry islands; (8) research and monitoring; (9)
mosquito management (National Key Deer Refuge and Great White Heron NWR
only); and (10) horseback riding (National Key Deer Refuge only) are
available in Appendix F of the CCP.
Authority
This notice is published under the authority of the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57.
Dated: August 24, 2009.
Patrick Leonard,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-447 Filed 1-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P