Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges, Ventura, Kern, San Luis Obispo, and Tulare Counties, CA, 21797-21798 [2012-8659]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 11, 2012 / Notices
previously approved forms have been
separated into new forms that will be
completed by different classes of PHAs.
These changes also reflect
recommendations made by the public in
a previous information collection.
Specifically, this information collection
revises previously approved OMB forms
HUD–50077–SL and HUD–50077–CR;
adds Certifications of Compliance with
PHA Plans and Related Regulations
(form HUD–50077–SM–HP and HUD–
50077–ST–HCV) formerly appearing on
form HUD 50077 as separate documents;
deletes approved OMB form HUD–
50075, and replaces that form with five
new forms (form HUD–50075–5Y,
HUD–50075–ST, HUD–50075–SM–HP,
HUD–50075–HCV, and HUD–50075–
QA). Qualified PHAs no longer submit
information on discretionary programs
(demolition or disposition, HOPE VI,
Project-based vouchers, required or
voluntary conversion, homeownership,
or capital improvements, etc.) as part of
an Annual PHA Plan submission.
However, Qualified PHAs that intend to
implement these activities are still
subject to the full application and
approval processes that exist for
demolition or disposition, designated
housing, conversion, homeownership,
and other special application processes
that will no longer be tied to prior
authorization in an Annual PHA Plan
for a Qualified PHA. All PHAs,
including the PHAs identified as
Qualified PHAs under HERA, must
continue to submit any demolition or
disposition, public housing conversion,
homeownership, or other special
applications as applicable to HUD’s
Special Applications Center (SAC) in
Chicago for review and approval or to
HUD Headquarters for CFFP proposals.
It is expected that Qualified PHAs, as
a matter of good business practice,
continue to keep their residents, the
general public, and the local HUD office
apprised of any plans to initiate these
types of programs and activities.
Number of
respondents
Reporting Burden .....................................................................................
Status: Reinstatement with change of
a previously approved collection.
Authority: Section 3507 of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 35, as
amended.
Dated: April 5, 2012.
Colette Pollard,
Department Reports Management Officer,
Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2012–8760 Filed 4–10–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210–67–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R8–R–2011–N253:
FXRS12650800000S3–112–FF08R00000]
Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and
Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges,
Ventura, Kern, San Luis Obispo, and
Tulare Counties, CA
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request
for comments: draft comprehensive
conservation plan/environmental
assessment.
AGENCY:
We, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (Service) announce the
availability of a Draft Comprehensive
Conservation Plan (CCP) and
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the
Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and
Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges for
public review and comment. The CCP/
EA, prepared under the National
Wildlife Refuge System Improvement
Act of 1997, and in accordance with the
National Environmental Policy Act of
1969, describes how the Service
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:14 Apr 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
Annual
responses
4,053
1
proposes to manage the three refuges for
the next 15 years. Draft compatibility
determinations for several existing and
proposed public uses are also available
for review and public comment with the
Draft CCP/EA.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we
must receive your written comments by
June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments,
requests for more information, or
requests to be added to the mailing list
by any of the following methods.
Email: fw8plancomments@fws.gov.
Include ‘‘Hopper CCP’’ in the subject
line of the message.
Fax: Attn: Sandy Osborn, (916) 414–
6497.
U.S. Mail: Pacific Southwest Region,
Refuge Planning, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, 2800 Cottage Way, W–1832,
Sacramento, CA 95825–1846.
In-Person Drop-off: You may drop off
comments during regular business hours
at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Sandy Osborn, Planning Team Leader,
at (916) 414–6503, or Michael Brady,
Project Leader, at (805) 644–5185 or
fw8plancomments@fws.gov. Further
information may also be found at https://
www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C.
668dd-668ee), which amended the
National Wildlife Refuge System
Administration Act of 1966, requires the
Service 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
PO 00000
Frm 00077
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
21797
Hours per
response
Burden
hours
5.006
×
20,290
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 and photography,
environmental education and
interpretation.
We initiated the CCP/EA for the
Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and
Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges in
April 2010. At that time and throughout
the process, we requested, considered,
and incorporated public scoping
comments in numerous ways. Our
public outreach included a Federal
Register notice of intent published on
April 6, 2010 (75 FR 17430), two
planning updates, a CCP Web page
(https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/),
and three public scoping meetings. The
scoping comment period ended on May
21, 2010. Verbal comments were
recorded at the public meetings, and
written comments were received via
letters, emails, completed issues
workbooks, comment cards, meeting
evaluations, and a petition letter with
276 signatures.
Background
Hopper Mountain NWR was
established in 1974 and includes 2,471
contiguous acres in Ventura County,
California. Bitter Creek NWR was
established in 1985 and includes 14,097
acres, primarily in Kern County and
extending into San Luis Obispo and
Ventura Counties. Blue Ridge NWR was
established in 1982 and includes 897
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
21798
Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 70 / Wednesday, April 11, 2012 / Notices
acres in Tulare County in the foothills
of the Sierra Nevada Mountains. These
three refuges in the Hopper Mountain
NWR Complex (Complex) in southern
California were created under the
authority of the Federal Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16
U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), primarily to restore
the endangered California condor
population to its native range. Due to
the sensitivity of the California condor
recovery activities, the Refuges are
currently closed to the public except for
Service-led tours and volunteer
activities. Through this CCP process, we
will determine whether any areas of the
refuges can be made available to the
public for wildlife-dependent
recreational opportunities.
wreier-aviles on DSK5TPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Alternatives
The Draft CCP/EA identifies and
evaluates three alternatives for
managing Hopper Mountain, Bitter
Creek, and Blue Ridge National Wildlife
Refuges for the next 15 years. The
alternative that appears to best meet the
Refuges’ purposes is identified as the
preferred alternative. The preferred
alternative is identified based on the
analysis presented in the Draft CCP/EA,
which may be modified following the
completion of the public comment
period based on comments received
from other agencies, Tribal
governments, nongovernmental
organizations, or individuals.
Under Alternative A (no action
alternative) for each of the three refuges,
the Service would continue to manage
the Refuges as we have in the recent
past. There would be continued
maintenance of facilities and support of
the California Condor Recovery Program
(Recovery Program) activities. The three
Refuges would remain closed to the
public.
Alternatives for Hopper Mountain
NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred
alternative), the Service would increase
condor management and support
actions; collect baseline data for Refuge
resources with emphasis on special
status species; improve management of
all habitat types on the Refuge; and
increase outreach, and Service-guided
visitor and volunteer opportunities. The
Refuge would remain closed to the
public.
Under Alternative C for Hopper
Mountain NWR, the Service would
increase some condor management and
support actions, expand baseline data
collection, manage invasive plants
without using pesticides, increase
habitat protection and enhancement of
select black walnut and oak woodlands,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
15:14 Apr 10, 2012
Jkt 226001
increase some visitor services, and
consider the feasibility of providing
wildlife-dependent recreation on the
Refuge. The Refuge would remain
closed to the public.
Alternatives for Bitter Creek NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred
alternative), the Service would increase
condor management and support
actions, install a 1,000-square-foot
condor treatment facility, and collect
baseline data on Refuge resources with
emphasis on special status species. The
Service would also use grazing and
other methods to improve habitat
quality to support special status San
Joaquin Valley wildlife, and restore
some springs and drainages. We would
also expand visitor services by opening
a new interpretive trail, and developing
a new Refuge administrative office,
visitor station, and condor observation
point.
Under Alternative C for Bitter Creek
NWR the Service would improve and
expand current management by
increasing some condor management
and support actions; restoring more
habitat to support special status species;
managing invasive plants without using
pesticides; restoring more springs and
drainages; and expanding outreach,
interpretation, and visitor and volunteer
opportunities.
Alternatives for Blue Ridge NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred
alternative) the Service would improve
current management by increasing
condor management activities,
collecting baseline data for special
status species, and adding volunteer
opportunities. Portions of the Refuge
would be opened to the public.
Under Alternative C for Blue Ridge
NWR the Service would increase some
condor management actions, but to a
lesser extent than Alternative B, and
work with partners to increase some
guided visitor and volunteer
opportunities. The Refuge would remain
closed to the public.
Public Meetings
The locations, dates, and times of
public meetings will be listed in a
planning update distributed to the
project mailing list and posted on the
refuge planning Web site at https://www.
fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
Review and Comment
Copies of the Draft CCP/EA may be
obtained by writing to Sandy Osborn
(see ADDRESSES). Copies of the Draft
CCP/EA may be viewed at the same
address and local libraries. The Draft
CCP/EA will also be available for
PO 00000
Frm 00078
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
viewing and downloading online at:
https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
Comments on the Draft CCP/EA
should be addressed to Sandy Osborn
(see ADDRESSES).
At the end of the review and comment
period for this Draft CCP/EA, comments
will be analyzed by the Service and
addressed in the Final CCP/EA. Before
including your address, phone number,
email 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.
Alexandra Pitts,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest
Region, Sacramento, California.
[FR Doc. 2012–8659 Filed 4–10–12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310–55–P
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS–R9–IA–2011–0087; 96300–1671–0000
FY12–R4]
Conference of the Parties to the
Convention on International Trade in
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna
and Flora (CITES); Sixteenth Regular
Meeting: Taxa Being Considered for
Amendments to the CITES Appendices
Fish and Wildlife Service,
Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The United States, as a Party
to the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES), may propose
amendments to the CITES Appendices
for consideration at meetings of the
Conference of the Parties. The sixteenth
regular meeting of the Conference of the
Parties to CITES (CoP16) is tentatively
scheduled to be held in Thailand,
March 3–15, 2013. With this notice, we
describe proposed amendments to the
CITES Appendices (species proposals)
that the United States might submit for
consideration at CoP16 and invite your
comments and information on these
proposals.
SUMMARY:
We will consider written
information and comments we receive
by June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments
pertaining to species proposals for
DATES:
E:\FR\FM\11APN1.SGM
11APN1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 70 (Wednesday, April 11, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21797-21798]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-8659]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R8-R-2011-N253: FXRS12650800000S3-112-FF08R00000]
Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and Blue Ridge National Wildlife
Refuges, Ventura, Kern, San Luis Obispo, and Tulare Counties, CA
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability; request for comments: draft
comprehensive conservation plan/environmental assessment.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) announce the
availability of a Draft Comprehensive Conservation Plan (CCP) and
Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek,
and Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges for public review and comment.
The CCP/EA, prepared under the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997, and in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969, describes how the Service proposes to
manage the three refuges for the next 15 years. Draft compatibility
determinations for several existing and proposed public uses are also
available for review and public comment with the Draft CCP/EA.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
by June 11, 2012.
ADDRESSES: Send your comments, requests for more information, or
requests to be added to the mailing list by any of the following
methods.
Email: fw8plancomments@fws.gov. Include ``Hopper CCP'' in the
subject line of the message.
Fax: Attn: Sandy Osborn, (916) 414-6497.
U.S. Mail: Pacific Southwest Region, Refuge Planning, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, 2800 Cottage Way, W-1832, Sacramento, CA 95825-1846.
In-Person Drop-off: You may drop off comments during regular
business hours at the above address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sandy Osborn, Planning Team Leader, at
(916) 414-6503, or Michael Brady, Project Leader, at (805) 644-5185 or
fw8plancomments@fws.gov. Further information may also be found at
https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997 (16 U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), which amended the
National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966, requires
the Service 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 and
photography, environmental education and interpretation.
We initiated the CCP/EA for the Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and
Blue Ridge National Wildlife Refuges in April 2010. At that time and
throughout the process, we requested, considered, and incorporated
public scoping comments in numerous ways. Our public outreach included
a Federal Register notice of intent published on April 6, 2010 (75 FR
17430), two planning updates, a CCP Web page (https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/), and three public scoping meetings. The scoping
comment period ended on May 21, 2010. Verbal comments were recorded at
the public meetings, and written comments were received via letters,
emails, completed issues workbooks, comment cards, meeting evaluations,
and a petition letter with 276 signatures.
Background
Hopper Mountain NWR was established in 1974 and includes 2,471
contiguous acres in Ventura County, California. Bitter Creek NWR was
established in 1985 and includes 14,097 acres, primarily in Kern County
and extending into San Luis Obispo and Ventura Counties. Blue Ridge NWR
was established in 1982 and includes 897
[[Page 21798]]
acres in Tulare County in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
These three refuges in the Hopper Mountain NWR Complex (Complex) in
southern California were created under the authority of the Federal
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.),
primarily to restore the endangered California condor population to its
native range. Due to the sensitivity of the California condor recovery
activities, the Refuges are currently closed to the public except for
Service-led tours and volunteer activities. Through this CCP process,
we will determine whether any areas of the refuges can be made
available to the public for wildlife-dependent recreational
opportunities.
Alternatives
The Draft CCP/EA identifies and evaluates three alternatives for
managing Hopper Mountain, Bitter Creek, and Blue Ridge National
Wildlife Refuges for the next 15 years. The alternative that appears to
best meet the Refuges' purposes is identified as the preferred
alternative. The preferred alternative is identified based on the
analysis presented in the Draft CCP/EA, which may be modified following
the completion of the public comment period based on comments received
from other agencies, Tribal governments, nongovernmental organizations,
or individuals.
Under Alternative A (no action alternative) for each of the three
refuges, the Service would continue to manage the Refuges as we have in
the recent past. There would be continued maintenance of facilities and
support of the California Condor Recovery Program (Recovery Program)
activities. The three Refuges would remain closed to the public.
Alternatives for Hopper Mountain NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred alternative), the Service would
increase condor management and support actions; collect baseline data
for Refuge resources with emphasis on special status species; improve
management of all habitat types on the Refuge; and increase outreach,
and Service-guided visitor and volunteer opportunities. The Refuge
would remain closed to the public.
Under Alternative C for Hopper Mountain NWR, the Service would
increase some condor management and support actions, expand baseline
data collection, manage invasive plants without using pesticides,
increase habitat protection and enhancement of select black walnut and
oak woodlands, increase some visitor services, and consider the
feasibility of providing wildlife-dependent recreation on the Refuge.
The Refuge would remain closed to the public.
Alternatives for Bitter Creek NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred alternative), the Service would
increase condor management and support actions, install a 1,000-square-
foot condor treatment facility, and collect baseline data on Refuge
resources with emphasis on special status species. The Service would
also use grazing and other methods to improve habitat quality to
support special status San Joaquin Valley wildlife, and restore some
springs and drainages. We would also expand visitor services by opening
a new interpretive trail, and developing a new Refuge administrative
office, visitor station, and condor observation point.
Under Alternative C for Bitter Creek NWR the Service would improve
and expand current management by increasing some condor management and
support actions; restoring more habitat to support special status
species; managing invasive plants without using pesticides; restoring
more springs and drainages; and expanding outreach, interpretation, and
visitor and volunteer opportunities.
Alternatives for Blue Ridge NWR
Under Alternative B (preferred alternative) the Service would
improve current management by increasing condor management activities,
collecting baseline data for special status species, and adding
volunteer opportunities. Portions of the Refuge would be opened to the
public.
Under Alternative C for Blue Ridge NWR the Service would increase
some condor management actions, but to a lesser extent than Alternative
B, and work with partners to increase some guided visitor and volunteer
opportunities. The Refuge would remain closed to the public.
Public Meetings
The locations, dates, and times of public meetings will be listed
in a planning update distributed to the project mailing list and posted
on the refuge planning Web site at https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
Review and Comment
Copies of the Draft CCP/EA may be obtained by writing to Sandy
Osborn (see ADDRESSES). Copies of the Draft CCP/EA may be viewed at the
same address and local libraries. The Draft CCP/EA will also be
available for viewing and downloading online at: https://www.fws.gov/hoppermountain/.
Comments on the Draft CCP/EA should be addressed to Sandy Osborn
(see ADDRESSES).
At the end of the review and comment period for this Draft CCP/EA,
comments will be analyzed by the Service and addressed in the Final
CCP/EA. Before including your address, phone number, email 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.
Alexandra Pitts,
Acting Regional Director, Pacific Southwest Region, Sacramento,
California.
[FR Doc. 2012-8659 Filed 4-10-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
