[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 98 (Friday, May 21, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28643-28647]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-12213]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[FWS-R4-R-2010-N051; 40136-1265-0000-S3]
Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee
National Wildlife Refuges, Lee and Charlotte Counties, FL
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of availability: draft comprehensive conservation plan
and environmental assessment; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We, the Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), announce the
availability of a draft comprehensive conservation plan and
environmental assessment (Draft CCP/EA) for Pine Island, Matlacha Pass,
Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee National Wildlife Refuges (NWRs) for
public review and comment. In the Draft CCP/EA, we describe the
alternative we propose to use to manage these four refuges for the 15
years following approval of the final CCP.
DATES: To ensure consideration, we must receive your written comments
by June 21, 2010.
ADDRESSES: You may obtain a copy of the Draft CCP/EA by contacting Ms.
Cheri M. Ehrhardt, via U.S. mail at J.N. ``Ding'' Darling National
Wildlife Refuge Complex, 1 Wildlife Drive, Sanibel, FL 33957, or via e-
mail at [email protected]. Alternatively, you may download the
document from our Internet Site at http://southeast.fws.gov/planning
under ``Draft Documents.'' Submit comments on the Draft CCP/EA to the
above postal address or e-mail address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Cheri M. Ehrhardt, Natural
Resource Planner, telephone: 321/861-2368; or Mr. Paul Tritaik, Refuge
Manager, telephone: 239/472-1100.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Introduction
With this notice, we continue the CCP process for Pine Island,
Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs. We started the
process through a notice in the Federal Register on June 27, 2007 (72
FR 35254), and extended the comment period in a notice in the Federal
Register on April 2, 2008 (73 FR 17991). For more about the refuges,
their purposes, and our CCP process, please see those notices.
Background
The CCP Process
The National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act of 1966 (16
U.S.C. 668dd-668ee), as amended by the National Wildlife Refuge System
Improvement Act of 1997, requires us to develop a CCP for each national
wildlife refuge. The purpose for developing a CCP is to provide refuge
managers with a 15-year strategy 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.
Totaling approximately 1,201 acres, the four refuges were
established ``as a preserve and breeding ground for native birds'' and
are managed as part of the J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR Complex (Complex).
Predominantly mangrove swamp, these four refuges provide for native
wildlife and habitat diversity through a mix of habitats, including
mangrove islands and shorelines, saltwater marshes and ponds, tidal
flats, and upland hardwood forests. They also provide protection for 12
Federal-listed and 25 State-listed species, as well as for wading
birds, waterbirds, raptors and birds of prey, neotropical migratory
birds, shorebirds, and seabirds. Although all four refuges are closed
to public access to protect their sensitive resources, they exist in an
estuarine system and are all viewable from the water.
The priority management issues facing these four refuges are
addressed in the Draft CCP/EA, including: (1) Increasing and changing
human population, development of the landscape, recreational uses and
demands, and associated impacts; (2) issues and impacts associated with
water quality, water quantity, and timing; (3) invasion and spread of
exotic, invasive, and nuisance species; (4) climate change impacts; (5)
need for long-term protection of important resources; (6) declines in
and threats to rare, threatened, and endangered species; (7)
insufficient baseline wildlife and habitat data and lack of
[[Page 28644]]
comprehensive habitat management plan; and (8) insufficient resources
to address refuge needs.
CCP Alternatives, Including Our Proposed Alternative
We developed four alternatives for managing the Complex 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.
Alternative A (Current Management, No Action)
Alternative A would continue management activities and programs at
levels similar to past management, providing a baseline for the
comparison of the action alternatives.
Under Alternative A, wildlife and habitat management activities for
the Complex would continue to be limited. The rare, threatened, and
endangered species of management concern would continue to be wood
storks, roseate spoonbills, roseate terns, black skimmers, American
oystercatchers, snowy and piping plovers, and bald eagles. We would
continue to coordinate with the partners to survey rookeries, monitor
black skimmer nesting, survey for snowy plovers, and restore mangroves
on four islands, as well as address exotic, invasive, and nuisance
species through the Southwest Florida Cooperative Invasive Species
Management Area (SWFL CISMA). Since wintering critical habitat for the
piping plover has been designated on the Terrapin Creek Tract at
Matlacha Pass NWR, we would continue to protect this area and limit
human disturbances. We would continue to work with the partners to
address water quality, quantity, and timing concerns associated with
the refuges' watersheds, including Lake Okeechobee regulatory releases,
the Caloosahatchee Basin and Cape Coral drainages, and local runoff
issues. Several climate change models have included these refuges,
helping us to begin to develop an understanding of the impacts of
climate change on these resources.
Under Alternative A, resource protection management activities for
Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs would
continue to be very minimal. Law enforcement staff would continue to
patrol known cultural resource sites. The full extent of cultural
resources on the refuges would continue to remain unknown. Boundaries
would be reposted as possible. Violations of the closed areas would
continue to occur. Boundary discrepancies would likely continue to
exist (e.g., at Caloosahatchee NWR and Givney Key at Matlacha Pass
NWR). Caloosahatchee NWR would develop a Minor Expansion Proposal (MEP)
to include Manatee Island under refuge management, since Florida Power
and Light donated the island to the ``Ding'' Darling Wildlife Society
for future inclusion in the refuge. The Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area
would continue to remain closed with no active management.
Under Alternative A, the four refuges would remain closed to
visitors, resulting in limited visitor service activities and programs.
However, since the area around the refuges receives high use and since
the refuges are part of the Great Calusa Blueway, the refuges would
continue to be identified on maps distributed by partners, providing
limited visitor welcome and orientation. Various activities, including
fishing, canoeing, kayaking, motor boating, parasailing, windsurfing,
ski tubing, using personal watercraft, and participating in wildlife
observation and photography, would continue to occur in the State
waters adjacent to the refuges. Environmental education and
interpretation activities would continue to be conducted at the
``Ding'' Darling Education Center on Sanibel Island and at off-site
locations.
J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR staff would continue to conduct minimal
management and periodic patrols of Pine Island, Matlacha Pass, Island
Bay, and Caloosahatchee NWRs.
Alternative B (Native Wildlife and Habitat Diversity)
Alternative B would increase refuge management actions, with a
focus on native wildlife and habitat diversity.
The rare, threatened, and endangered species of management concern
to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood stork, roseate
spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American oystercatcher, snowy
plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover, bald eagle, mangrove
cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird, Florida prairie warbler,
West Indian manatee, ornate diamondback terrapin, loggerhead sea
turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea turtle, gopher tortoise,
American alligator, American crocodile, eastern indigo snake, Sanibel
Island rice rat, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased
surveying and monitoring activities, minimized disturbances to wildlife
and habitats, increased habitat management, increased intergovernmental
coordination, and increased information would enhance decision-making,
benefitting a variety of resources. The establishment of buffer zones
around known rookery locations and key foraging and resting areas would
benefit a variety of birds. In relation to the proposed widening of I-
75, we would work with the partners to identify and address wildlife
and habitat impacts associated with the proposed project, with an
emphasis on minimizing impacts to wildlife and habitat diversity.
Focusing on native diversity, we would expand exotic, invasive, and
nuisance species plant control activities with updated priority plant
lists and identification and location of new plant infestations, with
initial efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work with the
partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and nuisance animal
species and would coordinate with the partners to increase the public's
awareness of the negative impacts of these species. The refuges would
adapt management as necessary to eradicate new invasive species and
increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA. We would increase
management activities related to water quality, quantity, and timing
concerns. We would evaluate the need to expand the existing water
quality monitoring stations to cover all four refuges. We would work
with the partners to foster and conduct research to better understand
the impacts of climate change on wildlife and habitat diversity and to
refine and run appropriate climate change models to better predict sea
level change impacts on resources of the refuges. Further, we would
work with the partners to establish benchmarks to record sea level rise
and beach profiles and shoreline changes, which could potentially
impact a variety of species.
A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high native
wildlife and habitat values and would pursue completion of the approved
acquisition boundaries from willing sellers. We would pursue Western
Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network designation. To improve management
of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area, Alternative B would initiate
coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito Control
[[Page 28645]]
District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness Area
during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for
the satellite refuges.
Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges
with a focus on native diversity through coordination with the
partners, expanded environmental education and interpretation
opportunities, and increased outreach efforts and activities. Since
numerous area visitors also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR,
we would update the exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling
Education Center to highlight the satellite refuges and provide
wilderness stewardship principles. Since numerous uses occur adjacent
to these refuges, we would work with the partners to minimize the
impacts to resources of the refuges from these adjacent activities
(e.g., impacts from disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing
line, cast nets, and crab traps on birds, manatees, sea turtles, and
terrapins) and to improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users.
We would incorporate messages that focus on native wildlife and habitat
diversity, the role and importance of these refuges in the landscape,
and the importance of minimizing the impacts of human activities into
on-site (at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and off-site
curriculum-based environmental education programs, as well as into
interpretive and outreach materials developed for all refuges in the
Complex. We would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop
an annual satellite refuges event in one of the local communities.
Alternative B would create five staff positions specific to these
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer,
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and
park ranger (Environmental Education). The lead biologist at the J.N.
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at
partner sites. A key refuge administration activity would be to work to
improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities around
these refuges to build support for refuge management, including through
the development of an annual event in one of the local communities to
highlight the satellite refuges.
Alternative C (Migratory Birds, Proposed Action)
Alternative C would propose actions and activities that focus
management on the needs of migratory birds. This alternative addresses
the management needs of all birds covered under the Migratory Bird
Treaty Act, including resident species of native birds that are found
using the refuge year-round.
The needs of migratory birds would be prioritized in all management
and restoration plans. The rare, threatened, and endangered species of
management concern to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood
stork, roseate spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American
oystercatcher, snowy plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover,
bald eagle, mangrove cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird,
Florida prairie warbler, West Indian manatee, ornate diamondback
terrapin, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea
turtle, gopher tortoise, American alligator, American crocodile,
eastern indigo snake, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased
and improved surveying and monitoring activities, minimized
disturbances to wildlife and habitats, increased habitat creation and
management, increased intergovernmental coordination, and increased
information would enhance decisionmaking, benefitting a variety of
resources. We would work with the partners to evaluate the Turtle Bay
area of Island Bay NWR for designation as a Manatee Sanctuary, since it
is an important manatee natality area within Charlotte Harbor. The
establishment of buffer zones around known rookery locations and key
foraging and resting areas would benefit a variety of birds. In
relation to the proposed widening of I-75, we would work with the
partners to identify and address wildlife and habitat impacts
associated with the proposed project, with an emphasis on minimizing
impacts to migratory birds. Focusing on the needs of migratory birds,
we would expand exotic, invasive, and nuisance plant species control
activities with a focus on migratory birds with updated lists of
priorities and identification and location of new plant infestations
with initial efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work
with the partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and
nuisance animals and would coordinate with the partners to increase the
public's awareness of the negative impacts of these species. In all
these efforts, we would adapt management as necessary to eradicate new
invasive species and increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA.
We would increase management activities related to water quality,
quantity, and timing concerns with a focus on migratory birds. We would
evaluate the need to expand the existing water quality monitoring
stations to cover all four refuges. We would work with the partners to
foster and conduct research to better understand the impacts of climate
change on migratory birds and to refine and run appropriate climate
change models to better predict sea level change impacts on resources
of the refuges. Further, we would work with the partners to establish
benchmarks to record sea level rise and beach profiles and shoreline
changes, which could potentially impact a variety of species.
A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high values for
migratory birds and would pursue completion of the approved acquisition
boundaries from willing sellers. We would pursue the designation of
lands and waters within the current management boundaries of Pine
Island and Matlacha Pass NWRs for inclusion in the Western Hemisphere
Shorebird Reserve Network and of all four refuges as RAMSAR Wetlands of
International Importance, as part of the application for J.N. ``Ding''
Darling NWR. To improve management of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness
Area, we would initiate coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito
Control District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness
Area during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for
the satellite refuges.
[[Page 28646]]
Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges
with a focus on migratory birds through coordination with the partners,
expanded environmental education and interpretation opportunities, and
increased outreach efforts and activities. Since numerous area visitors
also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR, we would update the
exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center to
highlight the satellite refuges and provide wilderness stewardship
principles. Since numerous uses occur adjacent to these refuges, we
would work with the partners to minimize the impacts to resources of
the refuges from these adjacent activities (e.g., impacts from
disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing line, cast nets,
and crab traps on birds, manatees, sea turtles, and terrapins) and to
improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users. We would
incorporate messages that focus on migratory birds, the role and
importance of these refuges in the landscape, and the importance of
minimizing the impacts of human activities into on-site (at the
``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and off-site curriculum-based
environmental education programs, as well as into interpretive and
outreach materials developed for all refuges in the Complex. The
Complex would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop
an annual satellite refuge event in one of the local communities.
Alternative C would create five staff positions specific to these
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer,
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and
park ranger (environmental education). The lead biologist at the J.N.
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at
partner sites. And, we would expand existing partnerships and develop
new partnerships. A key refuge administration activity would be to work
to improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities
around these refuges to build support for refuge management, including
through the development of an annual event in one of the local
communities to highlight the satellite refuges.
Alternative D (Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species)
Alternative D would focus on increasing refuge management actions
that promote the recovery of rare, threatened, and endangered species
occurring within the four refuges.
The rare, threatened, and endangered species of management concern
to the refuges would be expanded to include the wood stork, roseate
spoonbill, roseate tern, black skimmer, American oystercatcher, snowy
plover, Wilson's plover, red knot, piping plover, bald eagle, mangrove
cuckoo, black-whiskered vireo, gray kingbird, Florida prairie warbler,
West Indian manatee, Sanibel Island rice rat, ornate diamondback
terrapin, loggerhead sea turtle, green sea turtle, Kemp's ridley sea
turtle, gopher tortoise, American alligator, American crocodile,
eastern indigo snake, Gulf sturgeon, and smalltooth sawfish. Increased
and improved survey and monitoring activities, minimized disturbances
to wildlife and habitats, increased habitat creation and management,
increased intergovernmental coordination, and increased information
would enhance decision-making, benefitting a variety of resources and
helping serve recovery goals. We would work with the partners to
evaluate the Turtle Bay area of Island Bay NWR for designation as a
Manatee Sanctuary, since it is an important manatee natality area
within Charlotte Harbor. The establishment of buffer zones around known
rookery locations and key foraging and resting areas would benefit a
variety of rare, threatened, and endangered species. In relation to the
proposed widening of I-75, we would work with the partners to identify
and address wildlife and habitat impacts associated with the proposed
project with an emphasis on minimizing impacts to rare, threatened, and
endangered species. The refuges would expand exotic, invasive, and
nuisance plant species control activities with a focus on rare,
threatened, and endangered species, with updated lists of priorities
and identification and location of new plant infestations with initial
efforts focused on elimination. Further, we would work with the
partners to control and eradicate exotic, invasive, and nuisance
animals and would coordinate with the partners to increase the public's
awareness of the negative impacts of these species. In all these
efforts, we would adapt management as necessary to eradicate new
invasive species and increase active participation in the SWFL CISMA.
We would increase management activities related to water quality,
quantity, and timing concerns with a focus on rare, threatened, and
endangered species. We would evaluate the need to expand the existing
water quality monitoring stations to cover all four refuges. We would
work with the partners to foster and conduct research to better
understand the impacts of climate change on rare, threatened, and
endangered species and to refine and run appropriate climate change
models to better predict sea level change impacts on resources of the
refuges. Further, we would work with the partners to establish
benchmarks to record sea level rise and beach profiles and shoreline
changes, which could potentially impact a variety of species.
A complete archaeological and historical survey of the satellite
refuges would be conducted, allowing for the protection of any newly
identified sites. To resolve boundary and ownership discrepancies, we
would conduct legal boundary surveys and historical research. To serve
the purposes of the refuges and wildlife and habitat management goals
and objectives, we would work with the partners to develop agreements
to establish closed area buffers to protect key resources. We would
prioritize acquisition efforts for those sites with high values for
rare, threatened, and endangered species and would pursue completion of
the approved acquisition boundaries from willing sellers. We would
pursue Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network designation. To
improve management of the Island Bay NWR Wilderness Area, we would
initiate coordination with the Charlotte County Mosquito Control
District to eliminate the use of larvicides in the Wilderness Area
during mosquito control activities. To increase understanding and
awareness regarding the Wilderness Area, we would incorporate Island
Bay NWR Wilderness Area into programs and materials delivered at the
``Ding'' Darling Education Center and at the proposed annual event for
the satellite refuges.
Although the refuges would likely remain closed throughout the life
of the CCP, we would expand the Visitor Services program of the refuges
through coordination with the partners, expanded environmental
education and interpretation opportunities, and increased outreach
efforts and activities. Visitor services programs and activities would
be focused on rare, threatened, and endangered species. Since numerous
area visitors also visit the nearby J.N. ``Ding'' Darling NWR, we would
update the exhibits and activities at the ``Ding'' Darling Education
Center to highlight the satellite refuges and
[[Page 28647]]
provide wilderness stewardship principles. Since numerous uses occur
adjacent to these refuges, we would work with the partners to minimize
the impacts to resources of the refuges from these adjacent activities
(e.g., impacts from disturbance and from abandoned monofilament fishing
line, cast nets, and crab traps on rare, threatened, and endangered
species) and to improve the ethical outdoor behavior of area users. We
would incorporate messages that focus on rare, threatened, and
endangered species, the role and importance of these refuges in the
landscape, and the importance of minimizing the impacts of human
activities into on-site (at the ``Ding'' Darling Education Center) and
off-site curriculum-based environmental education programs, as well as
into interpretive and outreach materials developed for all refuges in
the Complex. We would train volunteers, teachers, and staff to conduct
educational and interpretive programs; increase outreach efforts and
activities to the local communities; and work with partners to develop
an annual satellite refuge event in one of the local communities.
Alternative D would create five staff positions specific to these
refuges: Biological science technician, law enforcement officer,
wildlife refuge specialist (assistant refuge manager), hydrologist, and
park ranger (Environmental Education). The lead biologist at the J.N.
``Ding'' Darling NWR would continue to design and oversee the
biological program and activities at the satellite refuges. We would
work with the partners to evaluate and install interpretive signage at
partner sites. We would expand existing partnerships and develop new
partnerships. A key refuge administration activity would be to work to
improve the visibility and image of the Service in communities around
these refuges to build support for refuge management, including through
the development of an annual event in one of the local communities to
highlight the satellite refuges.
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 Refuge System Improvement Act of 1997, Pub. L.
105-57.
Dated: April 14, 2010.
Mark J. Musaus,
Acting Regional Director.
[FR Doc. 2010-12213 Filed 5-20-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P