St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge, FL; Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment, 39890-39893 [2011-17014]
Download as PDF
39890
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2011 / Notices
Pseudobahia bahiifolia (Hartweg’s
golden sunburst);
Sidalcea keckii (Keck’s checkermallow);
Sidalcea oregana subsp. valida
(Kenwood Marsh checker-mallow);
Streptanthus albidus subsp. albidus
(Metcalf Canyon jewelflower);
Streptanthus niger (Tiburon
jewelflower);
Suaeda californica (California seablite);
Thlaspi californicum (Kneeland Prairie
penny-cress);
Trifolium amoenum (showy Indian
clover);
Trifolium trichocalyx (Monterey clover);
Tuctoria greenei (Greene’s tuctoria);
Tuctoria mucronata (Solano grass).
Permit No. TE–45778A
Applicant: Ellis Ecological Services
Incorporated, Estacada, Oregon.
The applicant requests a permit to
take (survey, electrofish, measure,
collect, handle, and release) the Lost
River sucker (Deltistes luxatus) and the
shortnose sucker (Chasmistes
brevirostris) in conjunction with surveys
and population monitoring at Kingsley
Field Air National Guard Base, Klamath
County, Oregon, for the purpose of
enhancing the species’ survival.
Public Comments
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
We invite public review and comment
on each of these recovery permit
applications. Comments and materials
we receive will be available for public
inspection, by appointment, during
normal business hours at the address
listed in the ADDRESSES section of this
notice.
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.
Larry Rabin,
Regional Director, Region 8, Sacramento,
California.
[FR Doc. 2011–16993 Filed 7–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Jul 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R4–R–2011–N053; 40136–1265–0000–
S3]
St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge, FL;
Draft Comprehensive Conservation
Plan and Environmental Assessment
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments.
AGENCY:
We, the Fish and Wildlife
Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive
conservation plan and environmental
assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for St. Johns
National Wildlife Refuge (NWR) in
Brevard County, Florida, 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
August 8, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of
the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Mr. Bill
Miller, via U.S. mail at Merritt Island
NWR Complex, P.O. Box 2683,
Titusville, FL 32781, or via e-mail at
William_G_Miller@fws.gov, or St. Johns
CCP@fws.gov. Alternatively, you may
download the document from our
Internet Site at https://www.fws.gov/
southeast/planning/ under ‘‘Draft
Documents.’’ Summit comments on the
Draft CCP/EA to the above postal
address or e-mail addresses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr.
Bill Miller, at 561/715–0023 (telephone)
or William_G_Miller@fws.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP
process for St. Johns NWR. We started
the process through a Federal Register
notice on December 14, 2009 (74 FR
66147). Please see that notice for more
about the refuge and its purposes.
The St. Johns NWR is a unit of and
administered through the Merritt Island
NWR Complex.
St. Johns NWR was established in
August 1971, to provide protection for
threatened and endangered species and
native diversity. Its primary purpose
relates to threatened and endangered
species and applies to all lands and
waters managed as part of St. Johns
NWR. The refuge contains two units
that combine for approximately 6,422
acres. The southern or ‘‘Bee Line’’ unit
PO 00000
Frm 00080
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
occurs approximately 1 mile west of the
city of Port St. John, Florida, while the
northern or ‘‘State Road 50’’ unit occurs
approximately 5 miles to the north,
roughly 5 miles west of the city of
Titusville, Florida. St. Johns NWR is
closed to public use, but for those
permitted through the special use
permit process.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C.
668dd–668ee) (Administration Act), as
amended by the National Wildlife
Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, requires us to develop a CCP for
each national wildlife refuge. The
purpose 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
Administration Act.
Significant issues addressed in this
Draft CCP/EA include: (1) Managing for
wildlife diversity and prioritizing
habitat management for secretive marsh
birds; (2) expanding the approved
acquisition boundary by 459 acres to
enable us to enter into land acquisition
agreements with willing sellers for lands
that connect the refuge to a regional
network of publicly managed lands; (3)
protecting our interests from illicit uses;
(4) opening select areas to unsupervised
visitation; (5) evaluating the
effectiveness of cattle grazing as a
habitat management tool; (6) evaluating
the compatibility of feral hog and whitetailed deer hunting as a visitor service;
and (7) adding permanent staff.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our
Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for
managing the refuge and chose
‘‘Alternative C’’ as the proposed
alternative. A full description of each
alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We
summarize each alternative below.
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2011 / Notices
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Alternative A: Current Management (No
Action)
Alternative A continues management
activities and programs at present
levels. We would continue the
prescribed fire program to maintain
open habitat conditions that would
generally favor many native birds,
including black and king rails, wading
birds, and eastern meadowlarks.
Secretive marsh bird surveys would
continue to be conducted although
infrequently. The lack of firm data on
the mix of wintering birds using the
refuge would continue. There would be
no active management of wood storks or
State-listed wading birds. We would
continue to reduce the impacts from offsite runoff and facilitate infiltration;
however, there would be no active
management of water quality. Still, we
would continue to protect emergent
wetlands that buffer and filter the St.
Johns River. We would not actively
collect data related to climate change
trends and their effects on the refuge.
Periodic detection and control of
invasive plant species would continue.
We would also continue to monitor for
the presence and abundance of invasive
species such as the feral hog, continuing
to use a hog trapper and staff to control
these animals occasionally and
opportunistically.
Boundaries would not change under
this alternative, and the lack of a
functional management boundary
would continue to be problematic. In
particular, effective resource protection
would continue to be hindered by the
fragmented ownership, and the
unmarked, unfenced boundaries of the
checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit.
In addition, there would be no active
management of rights-of-way.
Under this alternative, we would
continue to provide law enforcement
support through the Merritt Island
NWR. We would continue to collaborate
with Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC),
Florida Department of Environmental
Protection (FDEP), and local law
enforcement agencies in trying to
protect resources from illegal activities,
such as trespass and unauthorized use
of all-terrain and off-road vehicles. We
would continue to provide protection
for cultural and archaeological
resources.
The refuge would remain closed to
the public, with certain limited
exceptions, such as an occasional
guided tour. The refuge would continue
to be managed part time by Merritt
Island NWR Complex staff as a
collateral duty. We would continue to
count on three or four volunteers from
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Jul 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
the community to conduct occasional
special guided educational tours and to
control exotic plants under staff
supervision. We would maintain one
tool and equipment storage shed, which
houses a small cache of fire-fighting
equipment. We would maintain
perimeter fencing, gates, culverts, and
10–12 miles of unpaved access roads.
Alternative B: Management for Rare,
Threatened, and Endangered Species
In general, Alternative B represents an
expansion of the management efforts of
Alternative A, emphasizing on rare,
threatened, and endangered species.
Management would primarily occur
through prescribed burning and
hydrologic restoration. Utilizing
ecological indicators, we would
promote a fire return interval to
maintain early successional habitat on
behalf of these species and would shift
prescribed burning events to summer/
early fall. In addition, we would
determine the size, seasonality, and
frequency of prescribed fires to benefit
rail species.
We would develop a monitoring
program for secretive marsh birds and
adapt management based on species
response. We would work to restore the
hydrologic setting to benefit marsh birds
and determine the role of the refuge in
regional and national species
conservation plans, particularly with
regard to rare, threatened, and
endangered species. Management of
wood storks and State-listed wading
birds, including the snowy egret, tricolored heron, and little blue heron,
would expand. We would conduct
nesting surveys and opportunistically
remove fill and dike features of the State
Road 50 unit borrow ponds to provide
additional artificial islands.
On behalf of the northern crested
caracara, Alternative B would maintain
open habitat with a minimum of woody
vegetation, including wax myrtle. We
would also evaluate the use of mowing,
cattle grazing, and/or other forms of
vegetation maintenance to benefit this
species on the Bee Line unit.
We would stay abreast of Cape Sable
seaside sparrow reintroduction and
introduction discussions within the
State. We would work with our South
Florida Ecological Services Field Office
and the FWC to evaluate the suitability
of the refuge as a potential introductory
site to support recovery of this species.
An exotic plant database would be
maintained, and exotic plants would be
controlled at maintenance levels. We
would increase control of invasive/feral
animals and would use permittees and
partners for the feral hog control effort.
PO 00000
Frm 00081
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39891
We would proactively address climate
change, particularly with regard to its
potential to impact rare species.
In pursuit of more functional refuge
boundaries, we would cooperate with
partners to consolidate and secure
ownership in the checkerboard area of
the Bee Line unit to create functional
refuge management areas. We would
consider fee-title acquisitions, land
swaps, management agreements,
conservation easements, and other
measures based on a willing-seller
approach to protect these sites. We
would also work with Brevard County
to abandon the county’s historic rightsof way. We would pursue the
implementation of a minor expansion
proposal, approximately 459 areas, of
the approved acquisition boundary to
connect lands and develop corridors
proximal to the State Route 50 unit for
dispersal and movement of wildlife. We
would increase our law enforcement
staff and coordinate with governmental
partners and landowners to increase the
number of patrols and level of
enforcement to deter and prevent
unpermitted activities. With regard to
cultural, historical, and archaeological
resources, we would continue to
provide protection for these resources.
Under Alternative B, visitor services
and public use would be similar to
current management direction, with
certain minor expansions. In general,
the refuge would remain closed to the
public, except for occasional guided
tours arranged in advance. Outreach
would be expanded and focused on
threatened, endangered, and rare
species. We would work with partners
to develop a curriculum-based
environmental education program.
Administrative capacity would
expand somewhat. We would share a
law enforcement officer and
maintenance worker with Merritt Island
NWR Complex. We would hire a fulltime biological technician/biologist. We
would utilize volunteers for increased
environmental education and
interpretation activities, surveys of
threatened and endangered species,
boundary identification, expanded
exotics control, and refuge cleanups. We
would continue to maintain our current
facilities and add one to two vehicles
and equipment for exotic plant control
activities.
Alternative C: Enhanced Wildlife and
Habitat Diversity (Proposed Alternative)
This alternative would focus on
enhancing all native wildlife and habitat
diversity. With respect to marsh birds,
this alternative would expand on
Alternative B. We would determine our
role in regional and national species
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
39892
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2011 / Notices
conservation plans. Based on ecological
indicators targeting marsh bird and
habitat responses, we would utilize
prescribed fire to maintain and restore
early successional habitats. Concerning
the suite of resident, wintering, and
summering birds on the refuge,
Alternative C would represent an
expansion of Alternative A. Through
prescribed burning, we would promote
an ecologically based fire return interval
to maintain early successional
ecological stages of all fire-maintained
habitats. In addition, the hydrologic
setting would be restored to as near as
possible pre-drainage conditions to
benefit wildlife.
Management of wood storks and
State-listed wading birds would expand,
as under Alternative B. On behalf of the
northern crested caracara, we would
maintain open habitat with a minimum
of woody vegetation. We would also
evaluate the use of mowing, grazing,
and/or other forms of vegetation control
to help maintain open habitat for this
species at the Bee Line unit, while
minimizing impacts to secretive marsh
birds. Under this alternative, we would
stay abreast of Cape Sable seaside
sparrow reintroduction and
introduction through discussions with
the State. Management of hydrology,
including groundwater, surface water,
and water quality, would expand. We
would coordinate with the St. Johns
River Water Management District
(SJRWMD) to develop a better
understanding of the hydrology of the
refuge. To help fill in the information
gaps, and using experts, we would
develop a hydrologic study to
understand the relationships of water
quality, water quantity, and timing of
flows within and across the refuge.
Invasive plant control would be
identical to that proposed under
Alternative B. Invasive animal control
would expand further on the efforts
proposed under Alternative B. We
would use permittees and partners for
feral hog control and possibly public
hunts if, after evaluation, hunting is
determined to be an effective tool to
remove or control this species.
We would focus habitat management
on maintaining and supporting a wide
array of native wildlife. Overall, the
relative percentages and composition of
the major habitat types would not
change; the aim would be to increase
their quality rather than quantity. We
would strive to maintain emergent
marsh and open waters for a diversity of
mammals, such as the white-tailed deer
and round-tailed muskrat.
With regard to climate change, we
would partner with SJRWMD in
adaptive management efforts to manage
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Jul 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
habitats, ecosystems, and wildlife
affected by climate change. We would
investigate opportunities to participate
in regional climate change initiatives to
better understand the role climate
change may have on resources and
would adapt management based on
discovery of climate change related
impacts.
We would work with partners to
consolidate and secure ownership in the
checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit
to create functional management areas.
We would consider fee-title
acquisitions, land swaps, management
agreements, conservation easements,
and other measures based on a willingseller approach to protect these sites.
We would work with Brevard County to
vacate or abandon its historic rights-ofway and would add access to
accommodate public use. Additionally,
this alternative identifies a minor
expansion proposal (approximately 459
acres) of the approved acquisition
boundary to connect lands and develop
natural area corridors to the State Road
50 unit. Under Alternative C, we would
increase Service law enforcement staff
and coordinate with stakeholders to
increase the number of patrols and level
of enforcement to deter and prevent
destructive illegal activities. With regard
to cultural, historical, and
archaeological resources, we would
continue to provide protection for these
resources. In addition, we would
complete and begin to implement a
Cultural Resources Management Plan
over the 15-year life of the CCP.
One of the centerpieces of Alternative
C includes expanding visitor services
and public use. To expand
opportunities for interpretation, we
would work with partners to evaluate a
range of access alternatives for St. Johns
NWR. Working with Brevard County,
we would seek to develop facilities such
as a trailhead and kiosk from Fay Lake
Park into the refuge’s Bee Line unit, and
would consider developing an
interpretive trail and kiosk on the State
Route 50 unit. We would also explore,
based on potential and varied
acquisition opportunities from willing
sellers through and subject to the
proposed minor expansion proposal,
opportunities to provide public access
to the State Route 50 unit from Brevard
County’s Fox Lake Park Sanctuary
through the Fox Lake tract. We would
expand environmental education efforts
by working with partners to develop
curriculum-based environmental
education programs related to wildlife
and climate change. We would also
work with local schools to conduct onsite environmental education. We
would open up the refuge to wildlife
PO 00000
Frm 00082
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
observation and photography, and
would provide facilities to enhance the
visitor experience (e.g., marked foot
trails, kiosks at trailheads, and a safe
parking area). We would establish foot
traffic on existing dikes and roads and
would evaluate potential connectivity to
regional trail networks. The refuge and
any future trails would remain subject
to closure for administrative purposes.
Commercial photography and tours/
guides would be available on a case-bycase basis. Access for uses determined
to be appropriate and compatible would
be walking, hiking, and bicycling. We
would work with partners, including
the FWC, to evaluate the potential for
primitive weapon hunting (e.g., bow
and muzzle-loader) and a youth hunt.
Species to be considered for hunts
would include white-tailed deer and
feral hogs.
In all respects, administration would
expand under this alternative. When
fully implemented, this alternative
would provide for shared positions with
Merritt Island NWR Complex, including
a law enforcement officer, maintenance
worker, and a refuge ranger. A full-time
biological technician position is also
proposed, for a total of 2.5 new
positions. The volunteer program would
also expand as we would utilize
volunteers for increased environmental
education and interpretation activities
and programs, trail maintenance,
outreach, wildlife surveys, expanded
exotic control, and refuge cleanups.
This alternative would provide for more
facilities and equipment. We would
consider developing kiosks, trails, and
associated parking to provide safe and
secure access from existing county parks
to refuge lands. We would also add one
to two vehicles and equipment for
exotic plant control activities.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we
will analyze the comments and address
them.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone
number, 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
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
07JYN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 130 / Thursday, July 7, 2011 / Notices
Refuge System Improvement Act of
1997, Public Law 105–57.
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
COMMISSION
Dated: April 5, 2011.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
Agency Information Collection
Activities: Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Generic Clearance
for the Collection of Qualitative
Feedback on Agency Service Delivery
[FR Doc. 2011–17014 Filed 7–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
U.S. International Trade
Commission.
ACTION: 30-Day notice of submission of
information collection approval from
the Office of Management and Budget
and request for comments.
AGENCY:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLNMP0000 L13110000.XH0000]
Notice of Public Meeting, New Mexico
Resource Advisory Council Meeting
Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of public meeting.
AGENCY:
In accordance with the
Federal Land Policy and Management
Act and the Federal Advisory
Committee Act of 1972, the U.S.
Department of the Interior, Bureau of
Land Management (BLM), Pecos District
Resource Advisory Council (RAC), will
meet as indicated below.
DATES: The meeting date is September
20, 2011, at the Bureau of Land
Management Pecos District Office, 2909
W. 2nd Street, Roswell, NM 88201, from
10 a.m.–4 p.m. The public may send
written comments to the RAC at the
above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Betty Hicks, Pecos District, Bureau of
Land Management, 2909 W. 2nd Street,
Roswell, NM 88201, 575–627–0242.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The 10member RAC advises the Secretary of
the Interior, through the Bureau of Land
Management, on a variety of planning
and management issues associated with
public land management in New
Mexico. Planned agenda items include a
welcome and introduction of new
Council members, election of officers,
overview and procedures of resource
advisory councils, issues and concerns
in BLM Pecos District and future project
work for the RAC.
A half-hour public comment period
during which the public may address
the Council is scheduled to begin at 2:30
p.m. on September 20. All RAC
meetings are open to the public.
Depending on the number of
individuals wishing to comment and
time available, the time for individual
oral comments may be limited.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
Douglas J. Burger,
District Manager.
[FR Doc. 2011–16995 Filed 7–6–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–VA–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:26 Jul 06, 2011
Jkt 223001
As part of a Federal
Government-wide effort to streamline
the process to seek feedback from the
public on service delivery, the U.S.
International Trade Commission has
submitted a Generic Information
Collection Request (Generic ICR):
‘‘Generic Clearance for the Collection of
Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service
Delivery’’ to OMB for approval under
the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) (44
U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
DATES: Comments must be submitted
August 8, 2011.
ADDRESSES: Written comments should
be directed to the Office of Management
and Budget, Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Room 10102 (Docket
Library), Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: Docket Librarian. Copies of
any comments should be provided to
Andrew Martin, Chief Information
Officer, U.S. International Trade
Commission, 500 E Street, SW.,
Washington, DC 20436, who is the
Commission’s designated Senior Official
under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Persons with mobility impairments who
will need special assistance in gaining
access to the Commission should
contact the Secretary at 202–205–2000.
Hearing impaired individuals are
advised that information on this matter
can be obtained by contacting our TDD
terminal (telephone no. 202–205–1810).
Also, general information about the
Commission can be obtained from its
Internet server (https://www.usitc.gov).
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To
request additional information, please
contact Jeremy Wise at 202–205–3190.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Title: Generic Clearance for the
Collection of Qualitative Feedback on
Agency Service Delivery.
Abstract: The information collection
activity will garner qualitative customer
and stakeholder feedback in an efficient,
timely manner, in accordance with the
Administration’s commitment to
improving service delivery. Qualitative
feedback is meant to provide useful
SUMMARY:
PO 00000
Frm 00083
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
39893
information and insights on perceptions
and opinions, but does not yield
quantitative data that can be generalized
to the overall population, such as that
which results from statistical surveys.
This feedback will provide insights into
customer or stakeholder perceptions,
experiences, and expectations; provide
an early warning of issues with service;
or focus attention on areas where
communication, training, or changes in
operations might improve delivery of
products or services. These collections
will allow for ongoing, collaborative,
and actionable communications
between the Commission and its
customers and stakeholders. It will also
allow feedback to contribute directly to
the improvement of program
management.
Feedback collected under this generic
clearance will provide useful
information, but it will not yield data
that can be generalized to the overall
population. This type of generic
clearance for qualitative information
will not be used for quantitative
information collections that are
designed to yield reliably actionable
results, such as monitoring trends over
time or documenting program
performance. Such data uses require
more rigorous designs that address: The
target population to which
generalizations will be made, the
sampling frame, the sample design
(including stratification and clustering),
the precision requirements or power
calculations that justify the proposed
sample size, the expected response rate,
methods for assessing potential nonresponse bias, the protocols for data
collection, and any testing procedures
that were or will be undertaken prior to
fielding the study. Depending on the
degree of influence the results are likely
to have, such collections may still be
eligible for submission for other generic
mechanisms that are designed to yield
quantitative results.
The U.S. International Trade
Commission received no comments in
response to the 60-day notice published
in the Federal Register of December 22,
2010 (75 FR 80542).
Below we provide the U.S.
International Trade Commission’s
projected average estimates for the next
three years: 1
1 The 60-day notice included the following
estimate of the aggregate burden hours for this
generic clearance Federal-wide:
Average Expected Annual Number of Activities:
25,000.
Average Number of Respondents per Activity:
200.
Annual Responses: 5,000,000.
Frequency of Response: Once per Request.
E:\FR\FM\07JYN1.SGM
Continued
07JYN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 130 (Thursday, July 7, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 39890-39893]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-17014]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2011-N053; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
St. Johns National Wildlife Refuge, FL; Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan and Environmental Assessment
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for St. Johns National Wildlife
Refuge (NWR) in Brevard County, Florida, 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 August 8, 2011.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Mr.
Bill Miller, via U.S. mail at Merritt Island NWR Complex, P.O. Box
2683, Titusville, FL 32781, or via e-mail at William_G_Miller@fws.gov, or St. Johns CCP@fws.gov. Alternatively, you may
download the document from our Internet Site at https://www.fws.gov/southeast/planning/ under ``Draft Documents.'' Summit comments on the
Draft CCP/EA to the above postal address or e-mail addresses.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Bill Miller, at 561/715-0023
(telephone) or William_G_Miller@fws.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for St. Johns NWR. We
started the process through a Federal Register notice on December 14,
2009 (74 FR 66147). Please see that notice for more about the refuge
and its purposes.
The St. Johns NWR is a unit of and administered through the Merritt
Island NWR Complex.
St. Johns NWR was established in August 1971, to provide protection
for threatened and endangered species and native diversity. Its primary
purpose relates to threatened and endangered species and applies to all
lands and waters managed as part of St. Johns NWR. The refuge contains
two units that combine for approximately 6,422 acres. The southern or
``Bee Line'' unit occurs approximately 1 mile west of the city of Port
St. John, Florida, while the northern or ``State Road 50'' unit occurs
approximately 5 miles to the north, roughly 5 miles west of the city of
Titusville, Florida. St. Johns NWR is closed to public use, but for
those permitted through the special use permit process.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee) (Administration Act), as amended by the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to develop
a CCP for each national wildlife refuge. The purpose 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 Administration
Act.
Significant issues addressed in this Draft CCP/EA include: (1)
Managing for wildlife diversity and prioritizing habitat management for
secretive marsh birds; (2) expanding the approved acquisition boundary
by 459 acres to enable us to enter into land acquisition agreements
with willing sellers for lands that connect the refuge to a regional
network of publicly managed lands; (3) protecting our interests from
illicit uses; (4) opening select areas to unsupervised visitation; (5)
evaluating the effectiveness of cattle grazing as a habitat management
tool; (6) evaluating the compatibility of feral hog and white-tailed
deer hunting as a visitor service; and (7) adding permanent staff.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative
We developed three alternatives for managing the refuge and chose
``Alternative C'' as the proposed alternative. A full description of
each alternative is in the Draft CCP/EA. We summarize each alternative
below.
[[Page 39891]]
Alternative A: Current Management (No Action)
Alternative A continues management activities and programs at
present levels. We would continue the prescribed fire program to
maintain open habitat conditions that would generally favor many native
birds, including black and king rails, wading birds, and eastern
meadowlarks. Secretive marsh bird surveys would continue to be
conducted although infrequently. The lack of firm data on the mix of
wintering birds using the refuge would continue. There would be no
active management of wood storks or State-listed wading birds. We would
continue to reduce the impacts from off-site runoff and facilitate
infiltration; however, there would be no active management of water
quality. Still, we would continue to protect emergent wetlands that
buffer and filter the St. Johns River. We would not actively collect
data related to climate change trends and their effects on the refuge.
Periodic detection and control of invasive plant species would
continue. We would also continue to monitor for the presence and
abundance of invasive species such as the feral hog, continuing to use
a hog trapper and staff to control these animals occasionally and
opportunistically.
Boundaries would not change under this alternative, and the lack of
a functional management boundary would continue to be problematic. In
particular, effective resource protection would continue to be hindered
by the fragmented ownership, and the unmarked, unfenced boundaries of
the checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit. In addition, there would be
no active management of rights-of-way.
Under this alternative, we would continue to provide law
enforcement support through the Merritt Island NWR. We would continue
to collaborate with Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
(FWC), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and local
law enforcement agencies in trying to protect resources from illegal
activities, such as trespass and unauthorized use of all-terrain and
off-road vehicles. We would continue to provide protection for cultural
and archaeological resources.
The refuge would remain closed to the public, with certain limited
exceptions, such as an occasional guided tour. The refuge would
continue to be managed part time by Merritt Island NWR Complex staff as
a collateral duty. We would continue to count on three or four
volunteers from the community to conduct occasional special guided
educational tours and to control exotic plants under staff supervision.
We would maintain one tool and equipment storage shed, which houses a
small cache of fire-fighting equipment. We would maintain perimeter
fencing, gates, culverts, and 10-12 miles of unpaved access roads.
Alternative B: Management for Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species
In general, Alternative B represents an expansion of the management
efforts of Alternative A, emphasizing on rare, threatened, and
endangered species. Management would primarily occur through prescribed
burning and hydrologic restoration. Utilizing ecological indicators, we
would promote a fire return interval to maintain early successional
habitat on behalf of these species and would shift prescribed burning
events to summer/early fall. In addition, we would determine the size,
seasonality, and frequency of prescribed fires to benefit rail species.
We would develop a monitoring program for secretive marsh birds and
adapt management based on species response. We would work to restore
the hydrologic setting to benefit marsh birds and determine the role of
the refuge in regional and national species conservation plans,
particularly with regard to rare, threatened, and endangered species.
Management of wood storks and State-listed wading birds, including the
snowy egret, tri-colored heron, and little blue heron, would expand. We
would conduct nesting surveys and opportunistically remove fill and
dike features of the State Road 50 unit borrow ponds to provide
additional artificial islands.
On behalf of the northern crested caracara, Alternative B would
maintain open habitat with a minimum of woody vegetation, including wax
myrtle. We would also evaluate the use of mowing, cattle grazing, and/
or other forms of vegetation maintenance to benefit this species on the
Bee Line unit.
We would stay abreast of Cape Sable seaside sparrow reintroduction
and introduction discussions within the State. We would work with our
South Florida Ecological Services Field Office and the FWC to evaluate
the suitability of the refuge as a potential introductory site to
support recovery of this species.
An exotic plant database would be maintained, and exotic plants
would be controlled at maintenance levels. We would increase control of
invasive/feral animals and would use permittees and partners for the
feral hog control effort.
We would proactively address climate change, particularly with
regard to its potential to impact rare species.
In pursuit of more functional refuge boundaries, we would cooperate
with partners to consolidate and secure ownership in the checkerboard
area of the Bee Line unit to create functional refuge management areas.
We would consider fee-title acquisitions, land swaps, management
agreements, conservation easements, and other measures based on a
willing-seller approach to protect these sites. We would also work with
Brevard County to abandon the county's historic rights-of way. We would
pursue the implementation of a minor expansion proposal, approximately
459 areas, of the approved acquisition boundary to connect lands and
develop corridors proximal to the State Route 50 unit for dispersal and
movement of wildlife. We would increase our law enforcement staff and
coordinate with governmental partners and landowners to increase the
number of patrols and level of enforcement to deter and prevent
unpermitted activities. With regard to cultural, historical, and
archaeological resources, we would continue to provide protection for
these resources.
Under Alternative B, visitor services and public use would be
similar to current management direction, with certain minor expansions.
In general, the refuge would remain closed to the public, except for
occasional guided tours arranged in advance. Outreach would be expanded
and focused on threatened, endangered, and rare species. We would work
with partners to develop a curriculum-based environmental education
program.
Administrative capacity would expand somewhat. We would share a law
enforcement officer and maintenance worker with Merritt Island NWR
Complex. We would hire a full-time biological technician/biologist. We
would utilize volunteers for increased environmental education and
interpretation activities, surveys of threatened and endangered
species, boundary identification, expanded exotics control, and refuge
cleanups. We would continue to maintain our current facilities and add
one to two vehicles and equipment for exotic plant control activities.
Alternative C: Enhanced Wildlife and Habitat Diversity (Proposed
Alternative)
This alternative would focus on enhancing all native wildlife and
habitat diversity. With respect to marsh birds, this alternative would
expand on Alternative B. We would determine our role in regional and
national species
[[Page 39892]]
conservation plans. Based on ecological indicators targeting marsh bird
and habitat responses, we would utilize prescribed fire to maintain and
restore early successional habitats. Concerning the suite of resident,
wintering, and summering birds on the refuge, Alternative C would
represent an expansion of Alternative A. Through prescribed burning, we
would promote an ecologically based fire return interval to maintain
early successional ecological stages of all fire-maintained habitats.
In addition, the hydrologic setting would be restored to as near as
possible pre-drainage conditions to benefit wildlife.
Management of wood storks and State-listed wading birds would
expand, as under Alternative B. On behalf of the northern crested
caracara, we would maintain open habitat with a minimum of woody
vegetation. We would also evaluate the use of mowing, grazing, and/or
other forms of vegetation control to help maintain open habitat for
this species at the Bee Line unit, while minimizing impacts to
secretive marsh birds. Under this alternative, we would stay abreast of
Cape Sable seaside sparrow reintroduction and introduction through
discussions with the State. Management of hydrology, including
groundwater, surface water, and water quality, would expand. We would
coordinate with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD)
to develop a better understanding of the hydrology of the refuge. To
help fill in the information gaps, and using experts, we would develop
a hydrologic study to understand the relationships of water quality,
water quantity, and timing of flows within and across the refuge.
Invasive plant control would be identical to that proposed under
Alternative B. Invasive animal control would expand further on the
efforts proposed under Alternative B. We would use permittees and
partners for feral hog control and possibly public hunts if, after
evaluation, hunting is determined to be an effective tool to remove or
control this species.
We would focus habitat management on maintaining and supporting a
wide array of native wildlife. Overall, the relative percentages and
composition of the major habitat types would not change; the aim would
be to increase their quality rather than quantity. We would strive to
maintain emergent marsh and open waters for a diversity of mammals,
such as the white-tailed deer and round-tailed muskrat.
With regard to climate change, we would partner with SJRWMD in
adaptive management efforts to manage habitats, ecosystems, and
wildlife affected by climate change. We would investigate opportunities
to participate in regional climate change initiatives to better
understand the role climate change may have on resources and would
adapt management based on discovery of climate change related impacts.
We would work with partners to consolidate and secure ownership in
the checkerboard area of the Bee Line unit to create functional
management areas. We would consider fee-title acquisitions, land swaps,
management agreements, conservation easements, and other measures based
on a willing-seller approach to protect these sites. We would work with
Brevard County to vacate or abandon its historic rights-of-way and
would add access to accommodate public use. Additionally, this
alternative identifies a minor expansion proposal (approximately 459
acres) of the approved acquisition boundary to connect lands and
develop natural area corridors to the State Road 50 unit. Under
Alternative C, we would increase Service law enforcement staff and
coordinate with stakeholders to increase the number of patrols and
level of enforcement to deter and prevent destructive illegal
activities. With regard to cultural, historical, and archaeological
resources, we would continue to provide protection for these resources.
In addition, we would complete and begin to implement a Cultural
Resources Management Plan over the 15-year life of the CCP.
One of the centerpieces of Alternative C includes expanding visitor
services and public use. To expand opportunities for interpretation, we
would work with partners to evaluate a range of access alternatives for
St. Johns NWR. Working with Brevard County, we would seek to develop
facilities such as a trailhead and kiosk from Fay Lake Park into the
refuge's Bee Line unit, and would consider developing an interpretive
trail and kiosk on the State Route 50 unit. We would also explore,
based on potential and varied acquisition opportunities from willing
sellers through and subject to the proposed minor expansion proposal,
opportunities to provide public access to the State Route 50 unit from
Brevard County's Fox Lake Park Sanctuary through the Fox Lake tract. We
would expand environmental education efforts by working with partners
to develop curriculum-based environmental education programs related to
wildlife and climate change. We would also work with local schools to
conduct on-site environmental education. We would open up the refuge to
wildlife observation and photography, and would provide facilities to
enhance the visitor experience (e.g., marked foot trails, kiosks at
trailheads, and a safe parking area). We would establish foot traffic
on existing dikes and roads and would evaluate potential connectivity
to regional trail networks. The refuge and any future trails would
remain subject to closure for administrative purposes. Commercial
photography and tours/guides would be available on a case-by-case
basis. Access for uses determined to be appropriate and compatible
would be walking, hiking, and bicycling. We would work with partners,
including the FWC, to evaluate the potential for primitive weapon
hunting (e.g., bow and muzzle-loader) and a youth hunt. Species to be
considered for hunts would include white-tailed deer and feral hogs.
In all respects, administration would expand under this
alternative. When fully implemented, this alternative would provide for
shared positions with Merritt Island NWR Complex, including a law
enforcement officer, maintenance worker, and a refuge ranger. A full-
time biological technician position is also proposed, for a total of
2.5 new positions. The volunteer program would also expand as we would
utilize volunteers for increased environmental education and
interpretation activities and programs, trail maintenance, outreach,
wildlife surveys, expanded exotic control, and refuge cleanups. This
alternative would provide for more facilities and equipment. We would
consider developing kiosks, trails, and associated parking to provide
safe and secure access from existing county parks to refuge lands. We
would also add one to two vehicles and equipment for exotic plant
control activities.
Next Step
After the comment period ends, we will analyze the comments and
address them.
Public Availability of Comments
Before including your address, phone number, 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
[[Page 39893]]
Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Public Law 105-57.
Dated: April 5, 2011.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2011-17014 Filed 7-6-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P