Elizabeth Hartwell Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Fairfax County, VA, and Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge, Prince William County, VA, 59153-59155 [2011-24552]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Notices
59153
FISCAL YEAR 2011 FUNDING AWARDS FOR THE SECTION 4 CAPACITY BUILDING FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND
AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM
Recipient
State
Enterprise Community Partners, Inc .........................................................................................................................
Local Initiatives Support Corporation ........................................................................................................................
Habitat for Humanity International .............................................................................................................................
MD ...........
NY ............
GA ...........
$19,727,792
22,173,386
7,499,822
Total ....................................................................................................................................................................
.............
49,401,000
Davis Highway, Woodbridge, VA
22191–2716.
[FR Doc. 2011–24395 Filed 9–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R5–R–2011–N128; BAC–4311–K9–S3]
Elizabeth Hartwell Mason Neck
National Wildlife Refuge, Fairfax
County, VA, and Featherstone National
Wildlife Refuge, Prince William County,
VA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: final
comprehensive conservation plan and
finding of no significant impact.
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our final comprehensive
conservation plan (CCP) and finding of
no significant impact (FONSI) for
Elizabeth Hartwell Mason Neck (Mason
Neck) and Featherstone National
Wildlife Refuges (NWRs; refuges). In
this final CCP, we describe how we will
manage these refuges for the next 15
years.
You may view or obtain
copies of the final CCP and FONSI by
any of the following methods. You may
request a hard copy or a CD–ROM.
Agency Web site: Download a copy of
the document at https://www.fws.gov/
northeast/planning/
MasonNeck_Featherstone/
ccphome.html.
E-mail: Send requests to
northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include
‘‘Mason Neck and Featherstone Refuges
CCP’’ in the subject line of your e-mail.
Mail: Nancy McGarigal, Natural
Resource Planner, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center
Drive, Hadley, MA 01035.
Fax: Attention: Nancy McGarigal,
413–253–8468.
In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call
703–490–4979 to make an appointment
during regular business hours at the
Potomac River NWR Complex
headquarters office, 14344 Jefferson
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
ADDRESSES:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:41 Sep 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg
Weiler, Refuge Manager, Potomac River
NWR Complex, 14344 Jefferson Davis
Highway, Woodbridge, VA 22191–2716;
phone: 703–490–4979; fax: 703–490–
5631; e-mail: fw5rw_msnnwr@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP
process for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs. We started this
process through a notice of intent in the
Federal Register (72 FR 28066) on May
18, 2007. We released the draft CCP/
environmental assessment (EA) to the
public, announcing and requesting
comments in a notice of availability in
the Federal Register (76 FR 582) on
January 5, 2011.
Mason Neck and Featherstone NWRs,
together with Occoquan Bay NWR,
comprise the Potomac River NWR
Complex, which is headquartered in
Woodbridge, Virginia. Mason Neck
NWR was established in 1969 as the
first NWR specifically created to protect
a Federally listed species. The refuge
was created under the authority of the
Endangered Species Preservation Act of
1966, the precursor to the Endangered
Species Act of 1973. The bald eagle
(Haliaeetus leucocephalus), which was
Federally listed as threatened in 1969,
was, and continues to be, the focal
species of concern on the refuge. Due to
successful recovery efforts throughout
its range, the bald eagle was officially
removed from the Federal List of
Endangered and Threatened Wildlife
(50 CFR 17.11(h)) in 2007. It continues
to be protected, however, under other
Federal laws and State law in Virginia.
Mason Neck NWR encompasses 2,277
acres of forest, marsh, and riverine
habitat along Occoquan Bay and the
mainstem of the tidal Potomac River.
Refuge visitors engage in wildlife
observation and photography,
environmental education and
interpretation, and deer hunting.
Featherstone NWR was established in
1979 with land acquired from the
District of Columbia. It was further
expanded in 1992 with lands donated
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Amount
by Prince William County. It presently
encompasses 325 acres of marsh and
forested riverine habitat along the
southwest edge of Occoquan Bay. Its
wetlands are important habitat for bald
eagles, wading birds, waterbirds, and
waterfowl, as well as other native
species of conservation concern. The
refuge has been closed to public use and
access since its establishment because
there is no public parking available or
safe access across active railroad tracks,
which lie along the length of the
refuge’s western boundary.
We announce our decision and the
availability of the FONSI for the final
CCP for Mason Neck and Featherstone
NWRs in accordance with National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40
CFR 1506.6(b)) requirements. We
completed a thorough analysis of
impacts on the human environment,
which we included in the draft CCP/EA.
The CCP will guide us in managing
and administering Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs for the next 15
years. Alternative B, as described for
both refuges in the draft CCP/EA, and
with the modifications described below,
is the foundation for the final CCP.
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 NWR. 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 (NWRS), 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 and photography,
and environmental education and
interpretation. We will review and
update the CCP at least every 15 years
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
59154
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Notices
in accordance with the Administration
Act.
CCP Alternatives, Including the
Selected Alternative
Our draft CCP/EA (76 FR 582)
addressed several key issues, including:
• Managing forested habitat to benefit
bald eagles, great blue heron, other
migratory birds of conservation concern,
and other native wildlife species;
• Protecting wetland habitat to
benefit waterbirds, waterfowl, and
migratory fish;
• Expanding and enhancing wildlifedependent recreational opportunities;
and
• Providing public access to
Featherstone NWR.
To address these issues and develop
a plan based on each refuge’s
establishing purposes, vision, and goals,
we evaluated three alternatives for
Mason Neck NWR and two alternatives
for Featherstone NWR in the draft CCP/
EA. The alternatives for both Mason
Neck and Featherstone NWRs have
some actions in common, such as
controlling invasive species, monitoring
wildlife diseases, encouraging research
that benefits our resource decisions,
protecting cultural resources, and
distributing refuge revenue sharing
payments to Fairfax and Prince William
Counties.
There are other actions that differ
among the alternatives. The draft CCP/
EA describes each alternative in detail
and relates them to the issues and
concerns that arose during the planning
process. Below, we provide summaries
for the three Mason Neck NWR
alternatives evaluated in the draft CCP/
EA, followed by summaries for the two
Featherstone NWR alternatives.
Mason Neck Refuge Alternatives
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ‘‘No Action’’
alternative required by NEPA.
Alternative A defines our current
management activities, including those
planned, funded, or underway, and
serves as the baseline against which to
compare alternatives B and C.
Alternative A would maintain our
present refuge staffing level and our
visitor services facilities, including
existing trails and viewing platforms.
We would continue to emphasize
wildlife observation and photography
opportunities, and provide a fall deer
hunt. Our biological program priorities
would continue to be protecting the
refuge’s wetlands and upland forest for
migratory birds, with particular
emphasis on protecting nesting bald
eagles and the great blue heron rookery.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:41 Sep 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
Controlling invasive plants and forest
pests would also continue to be an
important part of our program.
Alternative B (Improved Management
for Trust Resources)
This is the Service-preferred
alternative. It combines the actions we
believe would best achieve the refuge’s
purposes, vision, and goals, and the
intent of NWRS policy on Biological
Integrity, Diversity, and Environmental
Health (601 FW 3). This alternative
would also best respond to the issues
that arose during the planning process.
Alternative B would improve our
management of refuge habitats to
support Federal trust resources and
species of conservation concern. In
particular, our priority would be to
enhance our management of the refuge’s
upland forests to benefit bald eagles,
great blue heron, and other forestdependent migratory birds through
measures that improve forest health.
Managing deer populations to minimize
overbrowsing and controlling invasive
plants and pests are actions planned.
We would also pursue actions to
improve habitat quality in the refuge’s
marsh habitat to benefit bald eagles,
waterfowl, waterbirds, and migratory
fish. These actions include working
with partners to improve water quality
and clean up debris in Great Marsh. In
Little Marsh, we would upgrade the
water control structure and alter the
water level regime to promote better
foraging opportunities for waterbirds
and bald eagles, and to improve fish
passage. In addition, we would work
with partners to evaluate shoreline
erosion risk and identify ways to
address erosion in anticipation of
climate change impacts.
The improvement of our current
trails, and the addition of new trails and
observation platforms, would offer
increased opportunities for wildlife
observation, photography, and
interpretation. We would also expand
our interpretive programs and outreach
efforts to inform and involve more
people in working towards refuge goals.
In addition, once administrative and
funding resources are in place, we
would offer a youth turkey hunt and
consider expanding our existing deer
hunt.
Alternative C (Enhanced Public Use
Management)
Alternative C would manage habitat
similar to alternative A, but would
expand wildlife-dependent public use
programs beyond that which is
proposed under either alternatives A or
B. We would devote more staff time and
resources to offering new or improved
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
priority public use programs. For
example, we would offer a new
muzzleloader deer hunting season,
construct additional photography
blinds, and offer more guided and selfguided wildlife observation tours and
environmental education programs.
Featherstone Refuge Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
Similar to alternative A for Mason
Neck NWR, this alternative satisfies the
NEPA requirement for a ‘‘No Action’’
alternative. It describes our current
management priorities and activities,
and serves as a baseline for comparing
and contrasting alternative B. Under
alternative A, Featherstone NWR would
continue to be closed to all public use
and access. Our priorities would be to
protect the refuge from vandalism and
trespassing, control invasive plants, and
monitor for threats to wildlife and
habitats.
Alternative B (Enhanced Management)
This is the Service-preferred
alternative. Habitat and species
management would focus on protecting
sensitive bald eagle areas from human
disturbance and improving the
monitoring and treatment of invasive
plants, pests, and pathogens to avoid
catastrophic loss or degradation of
habitat. Similar to our proposal under
alternative B for Mason Neck NWR, we
would work with partners to evaluate
shoreline erosion risk and identify ways
to address it in anticipation of climate
change impacts.
Under alternative B, we would also
continue to work with Prince William
County to secure public parking and
legal and safe pedestrian access to the
refuge, which has been an issue since
refuge establishment. Once that access
is secured, and we have the additional
staff to manage those activities, we
would provide opportunities for
wildlife observation and nature
photography on designated trails, and
fishing at designated sites.
Under alternative B, once we have
administrative and funding resources in
place, we would evaluate a proposal to
provide hunting opportunities on refuge
lands. Other alternatives, including no
action, would be considered in that
hunt program evaluation, and there
would be public involvement before
making a final decision on the types of
hunting opportunities offered.
Comments
We solicited comments on the draft
CCP/EA for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs from January 5 to
February 22, 2011 (76 FR 582). During
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 185 / Friday, September 23, 2011 / Notices
the comment period, we received 79
responses, both oral and written. All
comments we received were evaluated.
A summary of those comments, and our
responses to them, is included as
appendix G in the final CCP.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we
received on our draft CCP/EA, we have
made one modification to alternative B
for Featherstone NWR. We have decided
to allow non-motorized boaters to land
at one designated site on the refuge’s
shoreline to facilitate wildlife
observation and nature photography.
The designated landing site is a portion
of tidal beach on Farm Creek (refer to
the final CCP, chapter 4, map 4.3 for
details) and corresponds with the
proposed location of the southernmost
observation deck and fishing platform
that we presented in the draft CCP/EA
(refer to the draft CCP/EA, chapter 3,
map 3.3 for details). Visitors accessing
the refuge at this location by nonmotorized boats would be allowed to
walk approximately 0.4 miles along an
existing footpath (indicated on map 4.3
in the final CCP). Boaters would be
confined to this section of footpath until
the rest of the refuge is officially open
to public use, as was detailed in the
draft CCP/EA. Other minor changes to
alternative B for both refuges are
described in the FONSI (appendix H in
the final CCP) and in our response to
public comments (appendix G in the
final CCP).
We have selected alternative B to
implement for both Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs, with the changes
identified above, for several reasons.
Alternative B for both refuges comprises
a mix of actions that, in our professional
judgment, work best towards achieving
each refuges’ purposes, visions, and
goals, NWRS policies, and the goals of
other State and regional conservation
plans. We also believe that alternative B
most effectively addresses the key issues
raised during the planning process. The
basis of our decision is detailed in the
FONSI, which is included as appendix
H in the final CCP.
sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Public Availability of Documents
You can view or obtain documents as
indicated under ADDRESSES.
Dated: August 22, 2011.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA 01035.
[FR Doc. 2011–24552 Filed 9–22–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:41 Sep 22, 2011
Jkt 223001
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Bureau of Land Management
[LLCAD06000, L16100000.DP0000]
Notice of Availability of South Coast
Draft Resource Management Plan
Revision and Draft Environmental
Impact Statement
AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of Availability.
SUMMARY: In accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, as amended, and the Federal Land
Policy and Management Act of 1976, as
amended, the Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) has prepared a Draft
Resource Management Plan (RMP) and
Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) for the South Coast Planning Area
(California), and by this notice is
announcing the opening of the comment
period.
DATES: To ensure comments will be
considered, the BLM must receive
written comments on the Draft RMP/EIS
within 90 days following the date the
Environmental Protection Agency
publishes its Notice of Availability of
the Draft RMP/EIS in the Federal
Register. The BLM will announce future
meetings or hearings and any other
public involvement activities at least 15
days in advance through public notices,
media news releases, and/or mailings.
ADDRESSES: You may submit written
comments related to the South Coast
Draft RMP/EIS by any of the following
methods:
• Web site: https://www.blm.gov/ca/
palmsprings.
• E-mail: Greg_Hill@blm.gov.
• Fax: (760) 833–7199.
• Mail: Bureau of Land Management,
Palm Springs-South Coast Field Office,
1201 Bird Center Drive, Palm Springs,
California 92262.
Copies of the South Coast Draft RMP/
EIS are available for review at the Palm
Springs-South Coast Field Office and
via the Internet at: https://www.blm.gov/
ca/palmsprings. Electronic (on CD–
ROM) or paper copies may also be
obtained by contacting Greg Hill at the
address and phone number below.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg
Hill; Bureau of Land Management, Palm
Springs-South Coast Field Office, 1201
Bird Center Drive, Palm Springs,
California 92262; (760) 833–7140;
Greg_Hill@blm.gov. Persons who use a
telecommunications device for the deaf
(TDD) may call the Federal Information
Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877–8339
to contact the above individual during
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
59155
normal business hours. The FIRS is
available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,
to leave a message or question with the
above individual. You will receive a
reply during normal business hours.
The South
Coast Draft RMP provides guidance for
the management of approximately
300,000 acres of BLM-administered
public lands in portions of five highly
urbanized southern California counties:
San Diego, Riverside, San Bernardino,
Orange, and Los Angeles. These public
lands include over 130,000 acres of
BLM-administered surface lands and
167,000 acres of Federal mineral
ownership where the surface is
privately owned. The Draft RMP/EIS is
a revision to the existing South Coast
RMP (1994). Since 1994, there have
been significant changes in the patterns
of urban growth; increased demands on
the resources of the public lands;
changing policies and emphasis on the
management of public lands and local
land use planning; and new data that
have led to the listing of additional
threatened or endangered species. The
Notice of Intent to prepare a land use
plan revision and associated EIS was
published in the Federal Register on
August 7, 2007 (72 FR 44173). The BLM
held public workshops and scoping
meetings in Campo, San Diego,
Temecula, and Santa Clarita in
December 2007, and invited agencies to
participate as cooperating agencies in
the planning effort. The Draft RMP/EIS
analyzes four alternatives, including a
No Action alternative, Alternative A,
and an agency Preferred Alternative,
Alternative D, designed to address
management challenges and issues
raised during scoping, including, but
not limited to Areas of Critical
Environmental Concern (ACEC),
sensitive species and other wildlife
habitat, lands with wilderness
characteristics, livestock grazing,
recreation, off highway vehicle use,
minerals management, and land use
authorizations.
Pursuant to 43 CFR 1610.7–2(b), this
notice announces a concurrent public
comment period on proposed ACECs.
The Draft RMP/Draft EIS proposes
changes to ACEC designations and
elimination of ACECs within
wilderness. The Preferred Alternative,
Alternative D, includes 9 ACECs
comprising of a total of 26,627 acres, or
20 percent of the planning area’s surface
acres. This is in contrast with
Alternative A, the No Action Alternative
of 7 ACECs with 14,539 acres, or 11
percent of surface acres. The proposed
ACECs and resource use limitations
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\23SEN1.SGM
23SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 185 (Friday, September 23, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 59153-59155]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-24552]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R5-R-2011-N128; BAC-4311-K9-S3]
Elizabeth Hartwell Mason Neck National Wildlife Refuge, Fairfax
County, VA, and Featherstone National Wildlife Refuge, Prince William
County, VA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: final comprehensive conservation plan
and finding of no significant impact.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of our final comprehensive conservation plan (CCP) and
finding of no significant impact (FONSI) for Elizabeth Hartwell Mason
Neck (Mason Neck) and Featherstone National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs;
refuges). In this final CCP, we describe how we will manage these
refuges for the next 15 years.
ADDRESSES: You may view or obtain copies of the final CCP and FONSI by
any of the following methods. You may request a hard copy or a CD-ROM.
Agency Web site: Download a copy of the document at https://www.fws.gov/northeast/planning/MasonNeck_Featherstone/ccphome.html.
E-mail: Send requests to northeastplanning@fws.gov. Include ``Mason
Neck and Featherstone Refuges CCP'' in the subject line of your e-mail.
Mail: Nancy McGarigal, Natural Resource Planner, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 300 Westgate Center Drive, Hadley, MA 01035.
Fax: Attention: Nancy McGarigal, 413-253-8468.
In-Person Viewing or Pickup: Call 703-490-4979 to make an
appointment during regular business hours at the Potomac River NWR
Complex headquarters office, 14344 Jefferson Davis Highway, Woodbridge,
VA 22191-2716.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Greg Weiler, Refuge Manager, Potomac
River NWR Complex, 14344 Jefferson Davis Highway, Woodbridge, VA 22191-
2716; phone: 703-490-4979; fax: 703-490-5631; e-mail: fw5rw_msnnwr@fws.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we finalize the CCP process for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs. We started this process through a notice of intent
in the Federal Register (72 FR 28066) on May 18, 2007. We released the
draft CCP/environmental assessment (EA) to the public, announcing and
requesting comments in a notice of availability in the Federal Register
(76 FR 582) on January 5, 2011.
Mason Neck and Featherstone NWRs, together with Occoquan Bay NWR,
comprise the Potomac River NWR Complex, which is headquartered in
Woodbridge, Virginia. Mason Neck NWR was established in 1969 as the
first NWR specifically created to protect a Federally listed species.
The refuge was created under the authority of the Endangered Species
Preservation Act of 1966, the precursor to the Endangered Species Act
of 1973. The bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), which was Federally
listed as threatened in 1969, was, and continues to be, the focal
species of concern on the refuge. Due to successful recovery efforts
throughout its range, the bald eagle was officially removed from the
Federal List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife (50 CFR 17.11(h)) in
2007. It continues to be protected, however, under other Federal laws
and State law in Virginia. Mason Neck NWR encompasses 2,277 acres of
forest, marsh, and riverine habitat along Occoquan Bay and the mainstem
of the tidal Potomac River. Refuge visitors engage in wildlife
observation and photography, environmental education and
interpretation, and deer hunting.
Featherstone NWR was established in 1979 with land acquired from
the District of Columbia. It was further expanded in 1992 with lands
donated by Prince William County. It presently encompasses 325 acres of
marsh and forested riverine habitat along the southwest edge of
Occoquan Bay. Its wetlands are important habitat for bald eagles,
wading birds, waterbirds, and waterfowl, as well as other native
species of conservation concern. The refuge has been closed to public
use and access since its establishment because there is no public
parking available or safe access across active railroad tracks, which
lie along the length of the refuge's western boundary.
We announce our decision and the availability of the FONSI for the
final CCP for Mason Neck and Featherstone NWRs in accordance with
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (40 CFR 1506.6(b))
requirements. We completed a thorough analysis of impacts on the human
environment, which we included in the draft CCP/EA.
The CCP will guide us in managing and administering Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs for the next 15 years. Alternative B, as described
for both refuges in the draft CCP/EA, and with the modifications
described below, is the foundation for the final CCP.
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 NWR. 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
(NWRS), 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 and photography, and
environmental education and interpretation. We will review and update
the CCP at least every 15 years
[[Page 59154]]
in accordance with the Administration Act.
CCP Alternatives, Including the Selected Alternative
Our draft CCP/EA (76 FR 582) addressed several key issues,
including:
Managing forested habitat to benefit bald eagles, great
blue heron, other migratory birds of conservation concern, and other
native wildlife species;
Protecting wetland habitat to benefit waterbirds,
waterfowl, and migratory fish;
Expanding and enhancing wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities; and
Providing public access to Featherstone NWR.
To address these issues and develop a plan based on each refuge's
establishing purposes, vision, and goals, we evaluated three
alternatives for Mason Neck NWR and two alternatives for Featherstone
NWR in the draft CCP/EA. The alternatives for both Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs have some actions in common, such as controlling
invasive species, monitoring wildlife diseases, encouraging research
that benefits our resource decisions, protecting cultural resources,
and distributing refuge revenue sharing payments to Fairfax and Prince
William Counties.
There are other actions that differ among the alternatives. The
draft CCP/EA describes each alternative in detail and relates them to
the issues and concerns that arose during the planning process. Below,
we provide summaries for the three Mason Neck NWR alternatives
evaluated in the draft CCP/EA, followed by summaries for the two
Featherstone NWR alternatives.
Mason Neck Refuge Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
This alternative is the ``No Action'' alternative required by NEPA.
Alternative A defines our current management activities, including
those planned, funded, or underway, and serves as the baseline against
which to compare alternatives B and C. Alternative A would maintain our
present refuge staffing level and our visitor services facilities,
including existing trails and viewing platforms. We would continue to
emphasize wildlife observation and photography opportunities, and
provide a fall deer hunt. Our biological program priorities would
continue to be protecting the refuge's wetlands and upland forest for
migratory birds, with particular emphasis on protecting nesting bald
eagles and the great blue heron rookery. Controlling invasive plants
and forest pests would also continue to be an important part of our
program.
Alternative B (Improved Management for Trust Resources)
This is the Service-preferred alternative. It combines the actions
we believe would best achieve the refuge's purposes, vision, and goals,
and the intent of NWRS policy on Biological Integrity, Diversity, and
Environmental Health (601 FW 3). This alternative would also best
respond to the issues that arose during the planning process.
Alternative B would improve our management of refuge habitats to
support Federal trust resources and species of conservation concern. In
particular, our priority would be to enhance our management of the
refuge's upland forests to benefit bald eagles, great blue heron, and
other forest-dependent migratory birds through measures that improve
forest health. Managing deer populations to minimize overbrowsing and
controlling invasive plants and pests are actions planned. We would
also pursue actions to improve habitat quality in the refuge's marsh
habitat to benefit bald eagles, waterfowl, waterbirds, and migratory
fish. These actions include working with partners to improve water
quality and clean up debris in Great Marsh. In Little Marsh, we would
upgrade the water control structure and alter the water level regime to
promote better foraging opportunities for waterbirds and bald eagles,
and to improve fish passage. In addition, we would work with partners
to evaluate shoreline erosion risk and identify ways to address erosion
in anticipation of climate change impacts.
The improvement of our current trails, and the addition of new
trails and observation platforms, would offer increased opportunities
for wildlife observation, photography, and interpretation. We would
also expand our interpretive programs and outreach efforts to inform
and involve more people in working towards refuge goals. In addition,
once administrative and funding resources are in place, we would offer
a youth turkey hunt and consider expanding our existing deer hunt.
Alternative C (Enhanced Public Use Management)
Alternative C would manage habitat similar to alternative A, but
would expand wildlife-dependent public use programs beyond that which
is proposed under either alternatives A or B. We would devote more
staff time and resources to offering new or improved priority public
use programs. For example, we would offer a new muzzleloader deer
hunting season, construct additional photography blinds, and offer more
guided and self-guided wildlife observation tours and environmental
education programs.
Featherstone Refuge Alternatives
Alternative A (Current Management)
Similar to alternative A for Mason Neck NWR, this alternative
satisfies the NEPA requirement for a ``No Action'' alternative. It
describes our current management priorities and activities, and serves
as a baseline for comparing and contrasting alternative B. Under
alternative A, Featherstone NWR would continue to be closed to all
public use and access. Our priorities would be to protect the refuge
from vandalism and trespassing, control invasive plants, and monitor
for threats to wildlife and habitats.
Alternative B (Enhanced Management)
This is the Service-preferred alternative. Habitat and species
management would focus on protecting sensitive bald eagle areas from
human disturbance and improving the monitoring and treatment of
invasive plants, pests, and pathogens to avoid catastrophic loss or
degradation of habitat. Similar to our proposal under alternative B for
Mason Neck NWR, we would work with partners to evaluate shoreline
erosion risk and identify ways to address it in anticipation of climate
change impacts.
Under alternative B, we would also continue to work with Prince
William County to secure public parking and legal and safe pedestrian
access to the refuge, which has been an issue since refuge
establishment. Once that access is secured, and we have the additional
staff to manage those activities, we would provide opportunities for
wildlife observation and nature photography on designated trails, and
fishing at designated sites.
Under alternative B, once we have administrative and funding
resources in place, we would evaluate a proposal to provide hunting
opportunities on refuge lands. Other alternatives, including no action,
would be considered in that hunt program evaluation, and there would be
public involvement before making a final decision on the types of
hunting opportunities offered.
Comments
We solicited comments on the draft CCP/EA for Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs from January 5 to February 22, 2011 (76 FR 582).
During
[[Page 59155]]
the comment period, we received 79 responses, both oral and written.
All comments we received were evaluated. A summary of those comments,
and our responses to them, is included as appendix G in the final CCP.
Selected Alternative
After considering the comments we received on our draft CCP/EA, we
have made one modification to alternative B for Featherstone NWR. We
have decided to allow non-motorized boaters to land at one designated
site on the refuge's shoreline to facilitate wildlife observation and
nature photography. The designated landing site is a portion of tidal
beach on Farm Creek (refer to the final CCP, chapter 4, map 4.3 for
details) and corresponds with the proposed location of the southernmost
observation deck and fishing platform that we presented in the draft
CCP/EA (refer to the draft CCP/EA, chapter 3, map 3.3 for details).
Visitors accessing the refuge at this location by non-motorized boats
would be allowed to walk approximately 0.4 miles along an existing
footpath (indicated on map 4.3 in the final CCP). Boaters would be
confined to this section of footpath until the rest of the refuge is
officially open to public use, as was detailed in the draft CCP/EA.
Other minor changes to alternative B for both refuges are described in
the FONSI (appendix H in the final CCP) and in our response to public
comments (appendix G in the final CCP).
We have selected alternative B to implement for both Mason Neck and
Featherstone NWRs, with the changes identified above, for several
reasons. Alternative B for both refuges comprises a mix of actions
that, in our professional judgment, work best towards achieving each
refuges' purposes, visions, and goals, NWRS policies, and the goals of
other State and regional conservation plans. We also believe that
alternative B most effectively addresses the key issues raised during
the planning process. The basis of our decision is detailed in the
FONSI, which is included as appendix H in the final CCP.
Public Availability of Documents
You can view or obtain documents as indicated under ADDRESSES.
Dated: August 22, 2011.
Wendi Weber,
Acting Regional Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Hadley, MA
01035.
[FR Doc. 2011-24552 Filed 9-22-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P